Germanicus

P Clodius for example

Onosander, I found the Vindolanda Tablets gave me a better understanding of the way things worked in those kind of forts. They were written by the soldiers and officers and wives and slaves of the ninth cohort of Batavians and the first cohort of Tungrians, both Auxiliary units located at the fort, immediatly below Hadrians wall in the 1st and 2nd centuries. You could do some reading at "Vindolanda Tablets online" link below. http://vindolanda.csad.ox.ac.uk/

The Antonine wall is beyong Hadrians wall

What you think Romans never impaled ?

With regard to Aviricum, I don't think Caesar necassarily had total control over his troops in terms of the slaughter. It was a difficult seige, at many stages without corn. Forage had cost lives due to Vercingetorix followers camped nearby ambushing the foragers, the Romans were opposed in their seige works at every stage by the besieged. Caesar himself mentions the fatigue of the Seige as a catalyst for the slaughter. "Thus, being excited by the massacre at Genabum and the fatigue of the siege, they spared neither those worn out with years, women, or children" With regard to Alesia, the non-combatants were just expendable, and Vercingetorix needed all food for his soldiers, not wanting to launch a major assault when the relief army was yet to arrive, at least I don't think they'd arrived ?

I don't see whats so impossible about it. It fits in with evolution just as much as creation too. Ever looked at family tree ? You've got a couple at the top, and depending on offspring, more and more descedants as the generations roll on.

The Iberian peninsular - Spain

Its a dramatic Thriller - set in 1880 - a kangaroo western if you will.

I just mean that after Spain, their next combat posting was Gaul and they faught numerous battles - subduing many tribes - wasn't going to run through the list as there were so many.

Not sure, but I'd say that in Caesars time it was probably Gergovia, considering the near disaster there. After Caesar I'd say they probably suffered some major casualties during the seige of Jerusalem.

What did the term "banned from water and fire" mean as a punishment ?

Forgot to ask you Tobias, would you agree that it's kind of the first Australian feature film made that deals in an uncompromising way with some of these issues ? I think it is, and I also think it's good for Australians to be confronted with it in a graphic depiction.

Hi Viggen, Yeah, there are Brits as well. But the Aussies in it you would know are :- David Whenam (played Faramir in Lord of the Rings) and Guy Pearce (Of LA Confidential and Momento).

It will get a US and UK release. And here I was thinking we were citizens of the world.

I saw it last night and really enjoyed it. An Australian film, the screen play is written by Nick Cave, the photography was awesome, and while a very violent little film, I thought it justified. It's set in the late 19th Century in a nowhere outback Australian town.

Yes, Herman did inflict a major defeat on Augustan Rome, before he was killed by his own people shortly after being soundly defeated by a Roman force under Germanicus in 14AD. The Romans had great respect for Germanic fighting prowess and physical strength, that's why they started employing them so often in their legions. That's why Roman Emperors used German bodyguards. Rome did not conquer because they hated northern Europeans. If this was the case why did they let so many Gauls and Spanish Celts into the Senate.....indeed, why did they elevate some to the highest office ? (Trajan). One question for you - Were Germanic incursions accross the Rhine into Gaul prior to Roman Occupation, and the rapes, murders etc that those Germanic invaders inflicted on Gallic peoples racially based ?

Favonius is simply commenting (As a lot of Romanophiles would) That the Calgacus that Viggen mentions was a bleeding heart, and should have known when he was conquered. Favonius is on the Romans side, not the "barbarians". Understand ?

I think the republic was over long before that, people just didn't realise it. (Sulla, Pompey etc had all put their nails in the coffin). With regard to Octavian, It's something I often wonder about - he was a great Politician and manipulator, who's to say what he would have done without being Caesars heir. I agree, it would have been extreemly difficult for him to take and hold any sort of supreme power, guess we'll never know. On another note, I think the fact that Octavians rule went for 40 years and garunteed that when he died, next to no one was alive to remember living in a republic went a long way to ensuring that the concept never rose again in Roman politics. I like to think that Sulla, Pompey, the Oligarchs, and Caesar all put nails in the republics coffin, and then Octavian/Augustus, buried it.

Thanks for answering that PP, I believe we are talking in terms of at least 1000 men who would have seen and done all in the list. You've got to remember also that after the initial enlistment term of 16 years was over, a large proportion of troops decided to go for a second, even a third enlistment. There are records of a centurion stationed on the Rhine that was 63 years old at his death, still under the colors.

This was a great book for learning about Legions and their enlistment dates, structure, who served where etc. I post this here just because there is one particular passage which I can't quote verbatim as I don't have the book with me but it's something like:- When the 10th came to fight Pompey the younger at the conclusion of the Civil War, a large number of the troops in the 10th had :- 1)-Fought and vanquished Lusitanians in Spain 2)-Moved onto Gaul and fought all the way, crossed the Rhine 3)-Headed over to Britain to subdue a few tribes (twice) 4)-Completed the final conquest of Gaul at Alesia 5)-Met up with Caesar again in Greece for the Civil war 6)-Held pride of place at Pharsalus 7)-Hung out back at Rome and got involved in Mutiny 8)-Agreed to go to Africa with Caesar after he called them "Citizens" 9)-Fought in Africa It just slightly amazed me that here were some guys who were blooded with Caesar in Spain and then did all this before retirement. Lot to tell the grand kiddies !

Thanks for the responses, I remain undecided. This wasn't my point - I just used the Gauis Germania thing as an example of a child witnessing slaughter, but thanks. Ursus is onto what I meant - IE - things people actually witnessed, like travelling up the Appian way after the crucifiction of 5000 slaves, witnessing a guy being scourged to death outside the Colline gate, witnessing someone being thrown from the Tarpeien Rock SPLAT! I totally agree. Its something thats really hard to do with the ancient resources we have.

Yes, good point. People must have had a different perspective from a very young age. No doubt your parents would raise you differently in a society where life was cheap. It's really hard to arrive at a difinative answer, but I guess one could use children growing up on the West Bank or Gaza as a modern example ? I'm sure there are studies into the mental health of these children, haven't seen any though. I must emphasise that I am not interested in this from a moral perspective. I don't see it as either right or wrong, just interested in the facts.

A good theory ? Bad ? Done to death ? Come on, give me something !

I think Hadrian just re instituted an Augustan Policy. But was overall a good General. He instituted huge training programs, the troops loved him, he trained with them in person, rewarded those who deserved it, enforced strict discipline and the army was not in decline under him, or his successors (Pius/Aurelius). Worst General - Varus or Crassus (don't know a lot about the later or eastern empire so can't comment). Worst Politician - Depends on your definition of worst. I would say Cato for singlehandedly caused the final collapse of the republic.

I would be a slave trader, and would sell to you at the brothel Violentilla.