Germanicus

I though of you guys when I saw this, you probably already know about it. http://www.theage.com.au/world/gladiator-school-a-sensational-find-20110906-1jvrw.html Germanicus

Could you advise some sources for information/evidence on Roman use of the cretan Archers and the Numidian elephant herd during the Macedonian wars ? Thanks

I too am very busy, but can't complain.

I was a bit freaked out by all the actors giving speeches at his inauguration, Marisa Tomei for christs sake. These people are actors...The Romans had the right attitude to their kind. Still...I guess she could string two words together which was an improvement on "it's going to take time to restore Chaos" GW Bush.

...I think it could have been any religion, it just happened that Christianity contained within in teachings encouraging forgiveness of others, and of turning the other cheek etc etc. All very useful for population control by an autocracy. The promise of a glowing afterlife as reward for compliant suffering in the present life was used to great effect in other instances as has been stated before in Buddhism. Don't worry about your status, the fact that you are a slave, you don't have enough to eat or that you can loose your life at the whim of the local official, you'll be sweet in the next life. Can the rise of these kind of teachings and their adoption by various states as official religion not be seen as a direct function of growth in population. As a means to control greater territory and the many disparate groups within those territories ? It is very interesting Neil, nice topic.

Sorry about that - Here it is

Gulf of Aden Pirates

Is Caesar referring to arrows from archers when he speaks of darts being used by Gauls ? He makes reference to his own "darts" as well which leads me to think he's describing pila or spears and scorpion bolts. While looking at these references I realised he also mentioned Gauls using the Testudo in seige operations which was interesting:- Book 2, chapter 6 The Gallic Wars (online classics archive translation)

I must admit that I tend to go along with global warming as a man made phenomenon, mostly due to seeing Al Gores inconvenient truth. Also every scientist I see on TV or read about in the paper confirms that what is happening is predominantly man made, and those eggheads know way more about this than me. I also figure that what the hey, even if it is bullshit and it's just a natural phenomenon, what do I have to lose by doing my bit....and what do we have to lose by finding alternate non polluting energy supplies and making them viable. I live in a city, and carbon monoxide really sux. Cutting down our dependance on meat and that massive amount of greenhouse gas the increased livestock pumps into the atmosphere, and the unsustainable farming practices associated would also be a good thing. Sadly, any small individual effort I make tends to be canceled out by the massive industrial powerhouse continuing to re-invent itself in China, every time I decide not to drive a car, they put another 200 on the road.

Bribery, propaganda and subterfuge were the norm in the murky swamp of late republican politics, and obviously on into the principate. As has already been stated we can be reasonably sure of the basic events in the lives and careers of both Pompey and Caesar, but when dealing with a master of political spin like Caesar, and Augustus after him, best not to take any stated motives put forth by Caesar in the Gallic Wars or the Civil wars at face value. Personally, I think Pompey was a great organiser, and obviously engendered some measure of loyalty in his troops, and much faith in his abilities from the Senate. Caesar however, at least in a military sense was well ahead of the curve. In the case of these two men I tend to remember who was the victor, regardless of the history subsequently written by him and his partisans.

As individuals a large part of our development comes from situations we can only remember. We remember and apply the experience we gained to a current situation(which of course is not ever exactly the same). Sometimes this learning is not at all useful to us, but it certainly can be. I feel the same is true on a collective, societal level.

I am wanting a word that indicates a rule of law I suppose. Or more importantly that that rule is based on some universal idea of good as opposed to evil. I am making this artwork, across which will be some text. ideally one four letter word. The work itself speaks of Utopian ideals and their problems, and I want the word to highlight that any utopian vision has it's basis in someones assumption that there is in fact a "right" or a universal idea of "good" for all. I was thinking I would use "Boni" as in good men, but then I just don't like the look of the word that much. I want to use latin to tie the idea to multiple historical epochs, sort of a myth of progress thing. I hope this gives more of a context or what I want the word to be about. Thanks Doc

Thanks, this is great.

Shakespeare probably did the most to popularize Caesar. The play is a tragedy after all, introducing Caesar to the masses once again and spinning the line that his death was a terrible loss, his flaws have been lovingly overlooked ever since....being required reading in many a high school english class probably contributed to this. I like the idea of a "Greatest Roman Bastard" category, and I'm voting for Gaius Marius. A prize bastard in the end, and yet also an over achiever - All those consulships, all that military reform, saving the republic from thousands of Germanic invaders.....which brings us back to bastard, so many of those reforms and subsequent abuses paving the road to a busted republic and a military dictatorship.

Can anyone point me in the direction of any contemporary references to Roman military standards. In all the pictures I have seen of reproductions, and some of those in Roman reliefs there are discs, and half moon shapes, and the hand seems particularly prominent also. I am not so interested in the aquila as it's significance and comming into general use during the Marian reforms is well attested, but am extremely interested in those other symbols and their origins and meaning. Are the discs akin to medals ? The greater the number the more awarded a century, cohort or legion by a general ? Are there in fact historical references to these ?

I wonder what the the correct translations are for the following words:- Good Right Correct Vote If anyone can help it would be greatly appreciated.

Methinks you might be interested in reading "Empire" by Antonio Negri and Michael Hardt. Written in the 1990s, it attempts to define the concept of Empire and draws some interesting links between the Roman, and Globalisation/UN/Nato style conglomerates, rather than individual nation states.

I see what you mean. While his definition of Invasion is not the same as mine, or yours, his view is not completely in conflict with either Pantagathus, who postulates trade and recon or Bryaxis Hecatee, who asserts that there was never a conquest, exactly the point the author of the article makes when he says "Let us not fall into the error of understanding invasion to be synonymous with national conquest or incorporation into Empire, or that all the persons involved were Italians." The weakness of the article lies essentially in his blurry definition of a Roman invasion, which for him could just mean some British tribal men with some Roman training launching a smale scale raid. Your first point about the forced analogy is well made.

Yes, that's a good way of putting it. Perhaps invasion was on the minds of some British governors, like Agricola for instance, but they learnt (if we believe Tacitus) not to shine too brightly. The only person who could triumph or conquer at least in name was now the Emperor. Then later we have Hadrian establishing borders and ending expansion in that part of the Empire. There is also the possibility that Ireland was detirmed to be not worth invading.

There is some debate about the speed at which the republican divisions were reorganized, but no doubt the process began with Marius, and soon there were no more Hastati, Triarii etc, and no real distiction in terms of weaponry carried, accept between foot and horse. You can find a complete breakdown of rank and organization of the post reform legion on UNRV - here

Here is a thought provoking essay on the subject.

Okay Caesar137, so it's really a thread about the nature of Roman Law, and yes, people throughout the republican period sometimes acted outside of that law and violated it. That's my only point, that there was a law, and they broke it, hence their actions were "illegal". It's not a matter of perspective in my opinion. The US Government commits murder by executing convicted murderers, just because they too commit the act of murder, does not make the law against homocide invalid. It's still a law.

The thread pertains to Caesar, and the legality of his march on Rome. As has been stated, marching an army from your province against Rome was illegal. No one is saying that illegal actions had not happened before in the Republic.

Penguin Classics are good for me.

Caligula gets my vote, that is if Psychopaths are considered nutty.