GhostOfClayton

There was an article on QI a few months (or was it years?) back that suggested that, statistically speaking, everyone in the western world is a descendant of Charlemagne.

The good thing about running storylines past the members of this forum is that they're all beautifully pedantic . . . and proud of it (I know I am!) . . . so things like that can get picked up early on. However, as I keep saying, there should be less pedant's in the world!

I've download your book to iBooks, and am reading through it. One of my many, many jobs is proofreading, so I've tried not to read it with that hat on (though search for "few few"). I'll give you some feedback at the end, though unfortunately, the kids in the OfClayton clan are either too old or too young. I spotted something in there that I'd like to use, in order to hijack this thread, (if you don't mind.) You say that Marcus says "Ar-Vay". I'd always thought it would have been "Ar-Way" (or even "Ar-way-tay"). I'd love to hear some of the proper Latinists views on that.

From no reference, expertise, sources . . . in fact totally guessing, I would say the term started when the man in charge of a cannon crew gave the order to apply 'fire' to the fuse. Roman archers possibly responded to a whistle or a manual signal. Both have been suggested as methods for giving battlefield commands. Apparently, Roman helmets impeded verbal commands (can a reenactor confirm this?), and also narrowed the field of vision, so a whistle may be more liklely.

Try "The Roman Army: Instrument of Power" by Don Nardo. I'm not sure it's called "The Line Relief System" in there, though, so you may have to dig. Also, if you have HBO Rome, try watching the first battle scene in the first episode with the All Roads Lead to Rome feature turned on, they discuss the tactic in brief, but sometimes do cite sources. Vegetius is quite a good source to search as well: "Epitoma rei militaris". Someone here may already have read it and be able to say whether it is or isn't in there.

You may have to a bit of digging on this (or go there) to confirm, but I'm sure from my visit to Wroxeter, it had a seperate market. If Wroxeter did, Londinium surely would have.

Keep up the good work!

Darn good article, Caldrail. I've been eschewing reading it until I had the time. Glad I didn't leave it too long. It has given me (and I'm sure the other readers) a much greaater understanding of the mindset of the Roman military man. Thanks for your hard work and research.

I think (at UNRV) we tend to pick fault with the historical accuracy of these things recreationally. Like the old ladies who supposedly took their knitting along on an afternoon to watch Madame Guilotine do her grizzly work. Especially the Brits. There's nothing Brits like better than to have a good old winge! I love it.

I've waded my way through much of this now. Here's my opinion for what it's worth: Pros There's a LOT of it. It's SOOO cheap. I'm yet to spot any factual innacuracies with the commentry. There are good range of well qualified historians, whose opinions are interesting and informative. Lanista, there's an episode on the Dacian wars (Domtian and Trajan). It doesn't go into the kind of detail you need, though I think you'd be interested in the Historians' views. PM me if you'd like a copy. Cons There only seem to be two different Legionary uniforms (one for regulars, one for auxillaries, which were used from Marius' time, and onwards to the bitter end (though the helmets may have changed.) Locations are limited (I'm sure the same river doubled for the Rubicon and the Thames). With no dialogue being used, the acting isn't convincing. The enacted military tactics don't ring true, though when described by the historians, it's all spot on. In summary, excellent value for money as long as you don't expect too much.

They already had soap. They just didn't wash with it...apart from maybe sometimes their hair, and (mixed with urine) clothes. Can't remember where I read that, so no citation available, I'm afraid.

For completenesses sake, here's a link to the main one.

Your question is moot, Lord Caldrail. Whilst you're out at the library/job centre/other bit of Swindon, the bedroom door is both in a state of rattling AND in a state of having been fixed. It will resolve itself to one or the other only when you return home and observe it.

LOL. I certainly feel pretty religious towards Ordance Survey Explorer Maps, but the frequenters of this forum tend not to be fellow O.S.ophiles. Fortunately, there are plenty of fora out there that cater for us!

If we could do that, it would make 'Time Team' a really interesting programme.

. . . and as if by magic, this thread appears.

Lots of you have Profile names that remain an enigma to me. I'd love you to explain them. Even if the meaning of the name is apparent (like a historical character), there's probably an interesting reason why you chose that particular character. And also, just becasue that character is well known to you, doesn't mean I (or others on UNRV) know anything about them. Please enlighten us all. We'd love to know. I will start the ball rolling. Some of you may know that my area of expertise (I love pretending) is Hadrian's Wall, and a few years ago I discovered Augustus Ceasar's "Hadrian's Wall" website, and its forum. I wanted to ask a question, so I registered, calling myself 'Centurion'. Now all I needed was an avatar. One of the little lectures I give my clients on the Hadrian's Wall tour is all about a 19th Century antiquarian by the name of John Clayton, who is responsible for much of the preservation of Hadrian's Wall. My avatar is from a painting of a Centurion supervising construction work on Hadrian's Wall and (nice touch this) the artist has painted the centurion with John Clayton's face. I chose this avatar as the first image of a Centurion that came to mind. A short while later, I joined UNRV and, to my peevement, found that 'Centurion' was already taken. I already had the avatar with John Clayton's face. Hence, Ghost of Clayton. QED. Your turn.

Hello, and welcome to the GhostOfClayton twice fortnightly blog. Are you sitting comfortably, then I shall begin. It's a beautiful morning here in the quiet little village of Aquis-of-the-Romans, and I'm feeling a little surprised. "Why are you feeling a little surprised?", I hear you ask. Allow me to explain. The Aquis-of-the-Romans History Society are a very active group, meeting every other month to listen to an expert talk knowledgably about one subject or another. A few meetings ago, they were short of a speaker. I had been doing some research into a rectangular earthworks called Countess Close that was situated on the edge of the village. At one time, Countess Close had been mistaken for a Roman Fort by a number of Antiquaries of the day including none less that William Stukeley, and that, combined with the known presence of an adjacent Romano-British ladder settlement along the escarpment on which Aquis-of-the-Romans stands, very much caught my interest. For completeness�s sake, I will say that Countess Close was examined by archaeologists, who subsequently discounted any Roman involvement with its construction. However, I did the lecture, and thus the Aquis-of-the-Romans History Society were saved the need to find (a) someone who knows what they're talking about, and ( a fee to pay that individual . . . and I got the opportunity to bore a captive audience about Romans, and listen to the sound of my own voice for an hour. Everybody's happy. So, crisis averted, I returned to OfClayton Towers to enjoy a cuppa and put my feet up in front of the telly. Bear with me, we're getting to the bit where I tell you why I should feel surprised. A few days ago, the History Society contacted me again. Would I give a lecture on "Using Wikipedia for Historical Research" at the November meeting? They would normally go for, as I mentioned before, an expert who can talk knowledgably. Now, I can talk knowledgably, it is my job to do so, but there is a world of difference between the ability to talk knowledgably, and being knowledgeable. Trust me! As to being an expert . . . the guest lecturers are usually professionals in their field, archaeologists, museum curators, etc. This leaves me with a question. Why did they want me, with no historical qualifications whatsoever, to lecture? Perhaps they enjoyed the last lecture I gave. I hope so. Or maybe they were short of a speaker and knew I didn't charge a fee. Weekly Stuff 112 days until "The Eagle of the Ninth" Asterix Book of the Week: Asterix in Switzerland

Sorry about the late notice on this one. Also it isn't Roman, it's Greek, but I'm sure many readers of this forum will be interested: "Gods and Monsters: Homer's Odyssey" Country: UK Channel: BBC4 Date: Monday, 8th November (and other dates/times - see link) Time: 2100 GMT for 60 mins Episodes: 1 (to be confirmed) Link: BBC4 As usual, this one will be on iPlayer for non-UK TV Licence fee payers (you guys can have this one on us. No thanks necessary, but if you see a UK TV Licence fee payer in a pub, please buy them a beer!)

You mean like this: http://www.pompeiiinpictures.com? You need the http:// at the start. Also, what version of Internet Explorer are you running? It's awkward with IE6. Better with IE8.

Hmmm . . .is it possible to ski down these mountains? This raises another question. Is it possible to combine a skiing trip with a visit to a Roman site? Maybe that's a question for another thread.

According to one of my Pompeii books, The Schola Armaturarum (Ins. 3 No. 6) is . . "A building consisting of a huge hall with decorations of military character. It was probably the meeting place of soldiers or of a military association . . " No mention of gladiators. Unfortunately, the other books (including the transcription of the audio guide) doesn't mention it.

We're talking about over 200 years after the Antonine Wall was abandoned. Certainly, at the time of the events in King Arthur, there was no military presence whatsoever. It's possible that some of the forts and fortlets may have retained a kind of use by the local populace, though it isn't likely they were still in an adequate condition. Collapsing masonry, rotting woodwork, incursion of the local flora, all that kind of thing, which would have been exacerbated by the traditional Scottish weather. There's a great video that plays at the top of the viewing tower at Segedunum (Wallsend) showing the decay of the fort over time, once abandoned to its fate. The wall itself was a turf wall (probably topped by a wooden palisade and walkway). The wooden part would be long gone, and the wall would have been a shadow of its former self. Since the replica was built at Vindolanda in the 70s, it has lost over half a metre in height, and that is without allowing trees, bushes, etc. to get a foothold in it.) Well spotted with the Avatar, by the way. The prize is a guided tour of Lindum Colonia (Lincoln) with an experienced, knowledgeable , witty, handsome and modest guide. Let me know the next time you're there and I'd be happy to show you its many Roman ruins.

Check out a few of those words on Glossa. A lacklustre and (and maybe even plagiarised) Latin website.

Plus which, the nuclear stuff tends to readily beach itself on sandbars.