sylla

Thanks DDickey, UNRV and NewBooksInHistory for the chance of hearing this wonderful interview; thanks, Maty for the advice. On Mr. Poe, I must agree with Ursus. As expected, Mr. Goldsworthy didn

It depends on what is meant by "Christianity". I seriously doubt the movement crystallized into a separate religion until the advent of Paul of Tarsus. Whatever writings we have available, both biblical and extra biblical, indicate that the early following of Jesus were pious Jews who followed the Mosaic Law, worshiped and sacrificed in the Temple, and were seen as fellow Jews by their own countrymen. That is, until the cataclysmic events of the 60s and the final fall of Masada. The school of thought adhered to by Paul, with its apolitical world view and its disregard for the Law and the Prophets, was the natural survivor of these happenings and finally metamorphosed into a bona fide religion. In fact, the more conservative Christian groups (those still at least partially observing the Mosaic law) were progressively alienated after the council of Jerusalem, until being openly considered heretics (Ebionites) at least since the middle II century.

If we are talking about Caesar's account from his Comentarii (Book II, ch. 32), that psychological description was not on the legionaries but on the Gauls (more especifically, the Aedui).

I agree. The Jews as a whole were seen as a pretty unreliable and troublesome group thorough the first century AD, and minor factions would undoubtedly have been considered particularly problematic if the native authorities were unable to deal with them. The Christians were identifed as Jews by the Romans for a long time, and for a good reason; they were so, at least up to the council of Jerusalem (still not considered Ecumenical); even so, the schism was not completed at least up to the Bar Kochba rebellion, when Christians and orthodox Jews openly clashed. It seems that even after Pliny Minor (at least up to Cassius Dio), Christians and Jews were frequently considered together by our sources; so when the Romans complained about Jewish proselitism, it's quite likely that at least some of them would have actually been Christians.

Q. Hortensius was the first dicatator who died in office, in 287/6 . That was a nice finding. I suspect MPC was looking for administrative precedents relevant to 44 BC; unfortunately, as far as I'm aware, there are no detailed accounts on Hortensius' aftermath. In any case, it seems no substitute was appointed, maybe because his legal mission had already finished.

Just out of curiosity, where does it say that they were were crucified? Just out of curiosity, should I infer you didn't find any documentary evidence on the Roman indications for crucifixion?

Thanks; after reading your post and listening to the audio interview linked by DDickey, it's clear to me how mistaken I was. On the other hand, from Mr. Poe's commentary (same site): "In Goldsworthy

This thread deals with (and probably sometimes mixes up) two brutalities of quite different kind, even if both are not mutually exclusive and both have been fundamentally universal up to the present day. The first one is included within the inherent and legally entitled use of force by any state to preserve law and order; naturally, the definitions of "force" and "law and order" vary. Any conquest has required the use of terror to try to dissuade any opposition. The other one is the public use of violence for entertainment; ie, socially sanctioned sadism.

Indeed, if you can show me the documentary evidence that indicates and defines exactly which infactions of the peregrini, the slaves and the barbarians were susceptible of being punished by crucifixion, we may not need to speculate. You mean in that moment; no less than four apostles (Peter, Andrew, Bartholomew and Philip) were eventually crucified.

Octavius was in Greece for educational purposes, maybe even waiting for a chance to join the projected Parthian expedition; there's no evidence that security was an issue here. After all, most of Caesar's family (including his Egyptian mistress and his purported son) were perfectly accessible to the Liberatores. Besides, most of the Roman soldiers in Greece eventually sided with Brutus. In 44 BC, even under Caesar's dictatorship for life, I'm not aware of any evidence that the senate, the army or anyone else would have even remotely considered the eventuality of the Roman Res Publica being granted to any individual as heirdom; in all likelihood, not even by Caesar himself.

Crucifixion was for the filth of the filth; and not just in Rome. Romans reserved it for non-Romans; barbarians, peregrini and especially slaves (servile supplicium). When Cicero accused Varro of crucifying Roman citizens, the latter did it in the pretension that they were fugitive slaves. The rationale was clearly dissuasive; a public, disgraceful, painful dead. The Romans were very well aware they lived permanently on the verge of potentially dangerous slave rebellions, long before and long after the Servile Wars. Its application in the context of Judea 33 AD is certainly compatible with the punishment of political rebels; however, almost any crime (especially the violent ones) could have been punished in the same way. The only thing that all crucified victims had in common was the ostensible lack of respect from their executioners. My impression is that its use by the Roman authorities over such kind of social scoria (even regular brigands) was entirely discretional.

This is the number of hits that we currently get if we google "United States" plus: "Roman Republic" = about 164,000; "Roman Empire" = about 1,760,000.

From what I've been able to check out, my candidate would be the extraordinary Marcus Petronius Fortunatius (an African?), who served exactly half a century. After his recruitment by Legio I Italica (Lower Moesia) as a librarius, he successively became tesserarius, optio, signifier and finally Centurion across the lapse of four years. The next 46 years he was transferred to no less than twelve additional legions: - VI Ferrata (Syria) - I Minerva (Germania) - X Gemina (Pannonia) - II Augusta (Britannia) - III Augusta (Numidia) - III Gallica (Syria) - XXX Ulpia (Germania) - VI Victrix (Britannia) - III Cyrenaica (Arabia) - XV Apollinaris (Cappadocia) - II Parthica (Italy) - I Adiutrix (Pannonia) He received a decoration in one of the Parthian campaigns, but he was never ascended again. He died in service; all these trivia come from his funerary inscription (CIL VIII.217 / ILS 2658).

No doubt the main incentives were status and economy; the net income of Calidius as a regular Centurion might very well have been ten times or more what he earned as an auxiliary Eques, and honorably discharged legionaries were recipients of juicy Praemia (bonus).

I didn't explain myself right; this inscription didn't say or imply that MAA was on active duty when he died; it's far more likely that he was a retired veteran. As most military epitaphs, RIB 490 just states in which unit this soldier served and his age at the time of death. No doubt Calidius' serving time was uncharacteristically recorded due to its exceptional extension. Another example: the epitaph of Rusticinius Errenius (RIB 363, CIL XIII), from the Legion XXX Ulpia Victrix, tells he died in Lugdunum being 90 years old.

I can't agree more; the same applies to most if not all self-comparisons with the Roman Empire/Republic or any other idealized remote past. Historians might study jingoism and chauvinism as social and political phenomena, but they should definitively never participate or promote them.

This inscription is R.I.B. 490 from Deva (Chester); Roman-Britain.org indeed states he was from Commagene, but other sources claim he was a Syrian from Osroene. The Latin Original seems to be: D(is) M(anibus) | M(arcus) Aurelius Alexand(er) | praef(ectus) cast(rorum) leg(ionis) XX | [V(aleriae) V(ictricis)] nat(ione) Syrus Os[r(oenus) | vi]x(it) an(nos) LXXII [...] c[...|...]yces et S[ The English restoration (from Roman Britain: A Sourcebook by S. Ireland): "To the spirits of the departed, Marcus Aurelius Alexander, Camp prefect (Praefectus Castrorum) of the Legion XX Valeria Victrix, a Syrian from Osroene, lived 72 years..." It seems his serving time can't be inferred from this inscription.

Yes, Calidius died while serving. BTW, he was contemporary to the Dacian Wars of Domitian and Trajan. And the risk exposure for a regular centurion on the field was significant. Honorably discharged auxilia were full Roman citizens, so in principle the same regular service term considerations detailed by Bill Thayer (GPM post) would have applied. In practice, it would have been quite unlikely (although not impossible) that a Roman soldier would have survived almost half a century of service, given their average life expectancy. No more than 50% of the legionaries survived the regular service, even in peace times; besides, the attrition rate increased exponentially with time.

@ Bryaxis Hecatee: I'll put on my to do list I managed to forget the epigraphy today as I saw a nearby aqueduct Are we even sure that 25 years was the time of service (Even as this is what I've always been taught) and what source do we have confirm it? Absolutely; this was deducted from the Roman military diplomata. In fact, it seems that the navy required an additional year (26 years).

This is another description (and the confirmation of the identity of this relief) from the Soprintendenza Archeologica di Pompei : The marble relief on display here, which shows Dionysiac scenes, was discovered in Herculaneum on 18 February 2009. It was found in a large room with fourth-style decorations in a partly excavated luxury residence in the so-called northwest insula. It was inserted into the painted wall plaster of the east wall of the room at a height of 2 m from the floor. In 1997 a similar relief, again with a Dionysiac setting, was removed from the south wall of the same room, where it had been inserted into the wall in the same way and at the same height from the floor, Inserting marble reliefs (typoi) into wall decorations was particularly fashionable in the Roman world from the first century BC onwards. Rich and cultured patrons obtained original Greek works of art, or copies of them, from the antiquarian market and used them as prestigious ornaments in their homes. This can be seen in a passage of a letter dating to 67 BC (ad Atticum 1.10.3), in which Cicero asks a friend to purchase on his behalf two sculpted puteals (well heads) and, moreover, marble reliefs to insert in the painted decoration of his villa at Tusculum. The recent discovery has allowed the technique used for embedding a typos in a wall to be recorded in detail: the face of the opus reticulatum wall was slightly hollowed out to a depth of 5 cm and the relief was placed in this niche without using mortar. Instead support was provided by two iron cramps on the long sides (1.08 m) and a single cramp on the short sides (0.54 m) where there was no frame. Once painted plaster was added the edges were totally covered. On the right-hand side of the Greek marble relief are a dancing Maenad and a bearded male divinity, probably Dionysius. While on the left there are two female figures in front of an archaistic statue of Dionysius with a kantharos (drinking vessel). The adult woman has her hand on the shoulder of the younger one in a protective gesture. The object in the hands of the young woman is difficult to identify: a tool or a torch, perhaps related to a particular ritual. The relief was made in a neo-Attic workshop in the first half of the 1st century AD. It is not clear if there is a narrative connection between the two separate scenes, or if it is instead a pastiche where Dionysiac motifs and scenes were mixed or re-presented according to precise decisions made by the patron, who had chosen this theme for the south wall of the room as well. READ MORE

Judging from Maty's review and some extracts, it seems that Mr. Goldsworthy's core arguments, like the nature of the decline and fall and the explanation for why the West fell and the East didn't, were essentially the same of Mr. Ward-Perkins (The Fall of Rome and the End of Civilization, 2005), the last one almost verbatim. The introduction of the undefined term "superpower" doesn't seem to have contributed much to the analysis of this book; it looks more like a clinch to attract more readers, given the explicit comparison with the United States.

Especially because coffee was unknown to the Romans.

It may be this one (please correct me if I'm wrong): New treasure joins Herculaneum show (ANSA) - Naples, March 17 A new treasure from Herculaneum was unveiled in Naples on Tuesday, where it will join a major exhibition exploring life in the Ancient Roman town buried by Vesuvius in 79 AD... uncovered over the last three centuries but the new relief, uncovered by accident last month, is stirring fresh interest. The marble sculpture, dating back to the 1st century AD, apparently depicts two separate scenes centred on Dionysius, the Greek counterpart of Ancient Rome's god of wine and merrymaking, Bacchus. ''The relief is particularly fascinating for scholars as we are not yet certain exactly the tale that is being reproduced on the work,'' explained Herculaneum's excavation chief Maria Paola Guidobaldi. ''It almost certainly shows Dionysius and what appears to be one of his female followers, a Maenad, dancing. However, there are also two other figures, one with men's hair and the other wearing female clothes that aren't yet clear. ''Nor are we certain what gift is being offered to Dionysius. It was very probably some kind of offering, perhaps a thanksgiving, much as people make today to patron saints''. The Greek marble relief was uncovered by accident in Herculaneum on February 18, during regular maintenance work. It was located in a luxurious residential building on the northwest block of the town, which has only been partly excavated so far. The relief was fixed in the eastern wall of a large room, at about two metres above the ground. It appears to have been designed as a partner for another relief, located at the same level on the southern wall of the room, which was removed in 1997. ''The find is particularly important owing to the interpretation of the scene it shows, which is still an open question,'' said Pompeii Superintendent Pietro Giovanni Guzzo. ''So far no one has been able to find a connection between the two separate scenes dividing the relief, the dancer and the homage to Dionysius'' READ MORE IN www.archaeology.ws

Green Grass & High Tides - Outlaws.