Melvadius

Thanks for sharing these Maladict. They may seem 'pretty bad' to you but considering they are the first I have seen anywhere on the web that show the actual standing remains of the original amphitheatre at El Djem rather than simple line drawings of the paln I think they are well worth seeing. The pictures showing the internal structural walls are especially interesting as is the final shot showing the larger amphitheatre in the background as it gives a very good idea of the differences in scale between them.

If you intend saying that five legions were involved in the campaign then you are probably on safe ground but saying that five legions were lost is in all likelihood well past 'over-egging the pudding' The perenial problem is that if a legion was lost in such a way that the Roman authorities disbanded them then you would expect the archaeological evidence for the use of the legion stamps on roof tiles or other marterial to all stop together. As far as I am aware this doesn't seem to have happened after Domitian's Dacian adventures - even the 'Lark's' disappearance according to Keppie( and a few others) cannot be definately linked to that late a date. The evidence however is probably 'fluid' enough that you could pin their disappearance on that campaign along with the loss of a standard praetorian or otherwise.

Strictly speaking the large Stone-built amphitheatre is the third at El Djem. The original amphitheatres site is actually across the railway just opposite the museum as I only found out just before we left the museum to go to the main amphithreatre thus I only got the chance for a 'very' long-distance shot of it just before we left to go to the main amphitheatre. Wikipedia does have a plan of what they term the 'small' amphitheatre although they don't seem to have realised there were two phases to its construction. The orignal amphitheatre was dug into a small hill then expanded slightly in its second phase before being abandonded for the main amphitheatre site.

Lawrence Keppie in his 1984 book 'The Making of the Roman Army' has this to say about the destruction or disbanding of the V Alaudae: Keppie also makes the point that

On a more serious note as far as Turkey is concerned I understand it to be a totally secular state which really does divorce religion from state functions. For which reasoon providing no-one wears overt religious symbols or clothing inside public buildings there shouldn't be any major problems in tourist areas. Irrespective of the recent attack on the Peace Convoy there probably is more risk of getting caught in an earthquake in Turkey than suffering any adverse reaction because of a specific religion. If in doubt seek advice from your equivalent of the Foreigh Ofice/ Foreign Department.

Any individual comment on a series as 'not very good' is always on person's opinion. Personally I tried a couple of the SPQR series touted by Pearse as 'starting dreadfully but improving' and they hit the bottom of the stairs on the way out of the house. I do know that several people here have said they also like them and cannot wait for the next in the series so it tends to be 'buyers' choice. As far as Lindsey Davis' Falco stories are concerned we have bought all of them. One or two were possibly a bit weaker than others but overall I have found the stories fairly consistent good reads and worth the time invested in them. Admittedly because of pressures of time over the last year or so my fiction reading fell to almost zero and I haven't gotten around to reading the last two in the series but my wife has and generally seemed to have enjoyed them. I really don't know what Roger Pearse's complaint about the series is even though I have read past the point he gave up on it.

The Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland have brought out a 1:25000 scale map of the Antonine Wall which may also be of interest. I am sure that there must be maps available from other parts of the Roman Limes eg there is an on-line (although simplified) version showing the Upper German-Raetian Limes (Obergermanisch-R

If you are involved with any long established Re-enactment group whether in the States or Europe they will normally be able to provide you with a similar list of suppliers they trust. In case it is useful as I suspect from some of your postings that you may be based in the States I have included a link to the 'suppliers' section of the American Legio XXIV site as they include a handy list of suppliers to avoid as well as ones they trust.

Seutonius (never one to dip his stylus in balm when there was vitriol to be had) has very little to say about the Dacian campaign except in Domitian VI N.B. the footnotes state: Tac Agr 39 says that his unjustified triumph over the Germans (and Dacians) was a laughing stock.

Tacitus doesn't seem to have anything surviving from that period in Roman history so with the exception of the limited amount in Cassius Dio I don't know what other sources could have been used by Jones et al for any comments they have made on the campaign.

I suspect the link got shortened when it was posted as sometimes happens, therefore doesn't work properly. With luck this one will. [Edit - alternatively Romanarmy.com has both an image of the stele as well as an English translation of the inscription here]

Several of the on-line websites dealing with Domitian's campaign in Dacia seem somewhat confused about the number of legions as well as other units involved. From what I have read from several searches and not just the 'Wikigod' there were at least two stages to the inital campaign after the first of which Domitian felt he could return to Rome and claim a 'victory'. It is possible the loss of 'the Larks' occured as a separate action later in the first year of the campaign so the five or six legions could be the total involved initially rather than those decimated although there also seems to be a suggestion that the Praetorian's lost their battle standard as well. There does seem an indication from some sites I browsed that more information may be buried in Tacitus but it wasn't directly referenced most 'Wikipedia' related quote a 1981 work by Jones as their main source and I haven't had a chance to check Tacitus myself so far - maybe tonight.

He probably went 'pop' as in the 'old' nursery rhyme Just to confirm GoC's comments about the tally's being of uneven sizes this was the habit with English tally sticks issued by the Exchequer as stated on the National Archive website Although this is not always the case with Tally's issued in other parts of the woprld and other periods Wikipedia has an interesting image showing a selection of differently shaped tallys from the Swiss Alps

Gaiseric, Amazon UK currently has several Hardcover copies of the Bennet booklisted as second hand but there also appears to be a link to the full price copies as well at

Many Happy returns of the day - hope you have a good one

[For those unable to listen to the BBC iplayer here are a couple of written items which eplain the situation further: An article written by Mike Pitts in the Guardian dated 10 October

I also would like to pass on my thanks to Viggen for obtaining the very inciteful synopsis of his Archimedes presentations from Cesare Rossi, I suspect I missed it during my annual excavation work last year. I somehow suspect that unfortunately Cesare's presentation will not figure highly, if at all, in the Mythbusters programme as it would completely short-circuit their investigation. On a general note with a few of their investigations I have heard it suggested that there may be more than one item with the same or similar name or else items made with earlier formulae but the 'Mythbusters' appear to have investigated accidently or otherwise the wrong one in association with particualr 'myths'. The sycronised marching machine is a case in point as the original 'myth' depends heavily on what material the bridge was made out of as well as how it was constructed. They only tried one combination but really should have considered wooden as opposed to metal or stone as the base material and a single or multiple spans as opposed to arched or a suspended bridge construction etc. It would be nice if they acknowledged the lack of ancient sources for the 'mirror' method before they started but their method probably makes for a more 'entertaining' TV exposee

Well as my review probably gives away I recently finished Andrew Riches Arrows of Fury: Empire Volume Two which, like the first volume, I enjoyed. It was a real pleasure to see that some of the initially doubtful historical aspects have been resolved.

This is a very interesting article and as has been suggested will be moved to the Roman Archaeology area of the forum. As the article says at the end there is further information actually some very good photographs of the ram (and supplemenatary info on the excavations if you drill down) at the RPM Nautical Foundation site. As to the disparity of the Roman and Carthaginian fleets that is something I am currently reading in Michael Pitassi The Navies of Rome (pgs 43 et seq). Pitassi has compressed a lot of secondary and some primary sources into his work and makes the point that Rome and Carthage had had several treaties and trade relations for 300 years before the outbreak of the war which was probably driven by the expansion of Rome's fleet. He feels that Polybius claim about a shipwrecked Punic ship being the template is apocryphal as at best it would only have provided a few bits of additional intelligence to what the Romans already knew about CArthagininan warships and may in fact simnply be a variation on the story of the capture of a Rhodian blockade runner in 249BC. The Romans seem to have already established major ship building facilities and had been building up a fleet of around 100 quinquiremes and 20 triremes by 261BC. He feels that Polybuis claim for building 120 ships in two months is a mistranslation or mistranscription and actually meant they could build a single ship in two months. They probably started to increase warship production in 267BC and by 265BC had six shipyards in operation so could in effect build an average of 36 ships every year - even if it was only 24 ships a year the Roman fleet of 140 ships by 261BC seems much more plausible. Edit - Info on the Egadi Islands project for 2005/6 when the first rams were discovered is here

No this is not accidently posted in the wrong forum it really does belong here as the coins in question all date between 1854 and 1913 and are US $20 Double Eagles. The find raises more questions than it answers but I do wonder at the dating of the hoard as this may indicate burial at the outbreak of World War One with the owner possibly dying during the conflict as a combatant, accidently during the zeppelin bombing of the East End or of old age without passing on their secret. There are several reports on the net already about this including the BBC:

It is impressive although I seem to remember from when I last visited that the column has been split into two parts and you also could not get too close to it as you are confined to a walkway rather than allowed to wander about the room that it is in. Anyone who can get to Bucharest possibly has a better chance of getting a good view of individual panels as the Muzeul Naţional de Istorie a Rom

When most weaponary could be used equally with either hand it probably didn't really matter for most irregular units but once the Romans started to fight with 'close order' drill in tighht formation then having everyone using their weapons in the same way probably became essential. I have met several people over the years with stories of being forced to write right-handed as children and can sypathise with the suffering they went through much of it probably due to the perceived need probably stemming from at elast thee Victorian period onwards for boys to be taught to use the machine made and so standardised rifles which were mainly if not all designed for right-handed use. Picking up on a few of the comments in the previous thread what I do remember from my re-enactment days was the utter confusion of a very experienced left-handed fighter who joined our fight practices but as he held back slightly initially found that he couldn't beat any of the relatively novice fighters there. It took him until nearly the end of the practice session before he finally realised that both of our trainers were also left-handed, although most of the trainees right-handed, so we had actually been learning to fight against both types of fighters. Mind you once he realised why he wasn't getting far holding back it became a lot harder to beat him but we still managed it now and again.

Thanks for posting the link to the old thread Aurelia, it makes for some interesting reading due to the alternative sources quoted.

I don't know about the Greek's advising training for ambidexterousness but my copy of Vegetius: Epitome of military Science, translated by Milner, has several sections which if they are

Blaming the Gods sounds nicely Roman. Only the sceptical few could perhaps concieve of such a momentous disaster having a cause other than the Gods. I also like your solution just on a point of reference my copy of 'Greek and Roman Technology' by Humphries et al makes the point that most Greek and Roman measurements were based on readily available units on whihc measurements could be based. In the case of a 'talent' this was 'considered the load that a grown man could carry'. As Caldrail has already indicated anything above that could not easily be measured or multiplied from known measurements therefore they probably didn't have a specific word for it - we only started, sometime in the Medieval period, using tons as a weight which was originally based on the weight of liquid which could be contained within a specific tub size called a tun.