Germanicus

I didn't say "nut", I said fundimentalist RELIGEOUS nut, take intelligent design for example.........It wasn't laziness, it's an opinion, which I'm entitled to. When I made it I was only thinking about the here and now, so Platonic thought didn't enter the equation. But anyway, off topic, back to the Romans and how people view them.

Everything I've looked at indicates the Romans learnt the practice from Carthage like this below from:here And this from http://ancienthistory.about.com is interesting:-

Seriously - morals change over time, so the notion of a perfect, moral set of laws that never change is redicluous, what are legislators for if not to change or create laws reacting to changes in societies they represent. I can only see that one could not consider it such, if one based ones opinion on an unchanging moral dioctrine - as in from religeon. My use of the term "nuts" was admittadly a little harsh. From the limited reading I have done regarding Plato and Aristotle, and treatments of morality, another thread should probably be started, on some other forum.

From what I understand, he originally signed as a free Agent with the Mets at 18 and played through all the minor leagues before being traded to KC for a potential spot in the majors, he's Australian so you can probably work out who he is from a few googles. From what he's told me of his minor league experience, the number of games played is just grueling, at least in the majors he got flown to play, in the minor leagues he'd play, get on a bus all night to some god forsaken place, play, train, back on the bus to sleep, play, train, etc etc for a six day week. I've only seen him play in Australia, and I guess I didn't find it boring because I was excited for him, and to be watching someone I knew play at an elite level.

Perhaps they adopted the old faithfull tactic of the Romans - hire some of the enemy you are having trouble with to fight for you. The Alans or Alani were a Sarmation tribal group, perhaps Gothic use of Alan mercenaries balanced the sarmation superiority in cavalry ?

My partners younger brother plays baseball in the States, and had his first stint in the Major leages last year, just curious - I know it's a national past time in over there, but mostly I see forum members talking football, who's into baseball and what teams ?

Didn't see this before - thanks Virgil, interesting. I'd like to see an Iraqi civilian casualty map. Unlikely though I guess.

I think only a fundamentalist religeous nut would. But it wasn't illegal in Germany, and their occupied territories was it ?, and the Nazi party would have had you believe it was a moral imperative? You seem to be indicating that your view revolves around what was legal at that point in time ? That is, legal = right, illegal = wrong, morally speaking, is that correct ?

I look like a psychotic killer in mine !

I love that term - darling of Venus, just something about it. I may have to use it in a song, it's crying out for that treatment.

I would definately think it was brilliant and innovative, but that doesn't take a moral judgement, but a technological one. I guess at the core of what you are saying lies morality:- The games by todays generally accepted standard are "bad", providing water to ones citizens to enable them to live healthy lives is "good". I have difficulty applying my modern morality to an ancient culture like the Roman one, but then I have no such difficulty with a less historic phenomenon, like Nazi Germany. Contradictory I know. This could turn into quite a discussion .

It's interesting. I don't really judge them either, which is why I thought "Judge" might be the wrong word to use. For example, if someone said to me "Imagine the depravity - all that blood and gore in the games, and people cheering it on...how disgusting of them". I could not agree with them, as I find it simply fascinating, not disgusting.

All people can't help but look at and judge things through the prism of their own experience and knowledge. It seems to me that "judge" is the wrong word here, to me it kind of implies a consequence for the judged. How should we "view" the Romans ? I suppose our views, or at least mine anyway, are based primarily on my own knowledge and experience, which includes as a matter of course things that it is assumed, or conjectured that the Romans themselves thought, or reacted to, or were shaped by, but as I'm the one expressing it, I can't possibly even hope to do so without betraying my own slant, which is the way it is because of my own life, learning, experience, society and time.

I know you would.

I'm wearing mine right now.

Lets not forget Caesars use of Germanic cavalry against the Gauls either.

I agree, I realised shortly after some of the previous threads on the subject that I could well afford to read more books than I had on the subject, and have a sizable backlog. I don't intend to get involved in any further debate on the subject however, until I can arrive properly armed, and which point I'll cross the Rubicon and hope that Cato flees Rome in a panic.

Thanks for the correction P Clodius, yes - this was what I meant.

auctorias, you can't buy that stuff.

Give Keith a break - I bet you would not look so good after 40 years of systematic substance abuse, by rights, he should be dead by now !

I have a BA with honors in fine art - painting major. It really helps with my office job as you could imagine.

I have recently been reading a fiction book called "American Gods" by Neil Gaiman. I'm really enjoying it and will post a review once done. Has anyone else read it ? It's set in the present time, mostly in "nowhere USA" small towns. The basic premise of the book is that Gods exsist, and travelled to America with settlers who bought with them their beliefs. The older gods like Odin and Kali (Indian goddess) still exsist, but due to declining numbers of the faithfull have lost much of their power. They are being challenged by new gods, gods of TV, fast food, and the internet. All these gods exsist in corporeal form in the book. It makes for an entertaining, hard to put down read. I enjoy fiction that paints a realistic picture of the world we know, but with a mythical twist, when reading it, I can't help but be carried away, it kind of reminds me a bit of Raymond E Feists "Faery Tale", but better.

Caldrail, my writing comment was not meant as a dig at you, I should have said "some people have no talent for painting".

But please try to keep to the thread topic :- Unarmed Combat Training, thanks.

I believe Cato made the initial point that most Commanders had served as Military tribunes well prior to their first command. This means they had both theoretical practice and in most cases, plenty of first had "experience". That being said, you can't teach a dog how to fly. My implication being that certainly, there were, and still are some people that have no talent for command, just as there are some with no talent for writing.