Formosus Viriustus

Those wicker giants that the Gauls used for making human sacrifices, according to Caesar : they are still around, I believe, or at least some descendants of them. Every self-respecting little town in Belgium has at least a few. They also have them in the south of the Netherlands and the north of France. What used to be Belgica in Caesar's time. Here you see a big parade of them. They are paraded around once or twice a year

There are several sites that have Latin quotes. Originals and funny made-up ones. You can sound really impressive if you pay them a visit every now and then. Not that I myself would have recourse to such means. F rmosus non sum qualis eram

We were talking, amongst many other things, about this quote in the chatroom : " ... within a certain vale of the mountaine Imaus, wherein are found savage and wild men, living and conversing usually among the brute beasts, who have their feet growing backward, and turned behind the calves of their legs, howbeit they run most swiftly ... " Pliny, Natural History, bk 7 ch 2 And that got me thinking :

I can't give you the odds on at least three members sharing the exact same date of birth, right now, but I can give you the odds on at least two members sharing the exact same date of birth : they are in this case about 4.42 x 10 ^ 15 to 1. In other words if all members of UNRV had been born on different dates that would be a real prodigy. Trouble is : NOBODY WOULD NOTICE. There's this story about a maths professor who comes into a class and starts counting the students. When he finds there are 24 students in the class he says :

Brasil 3 - USA 2 Well done Brasil. Deserved winners. It will be Samba Night tonight in Brasil. Yet again. A valiant effort US. But it's hopeless, isn't it ? You think you might make a chance but once they set their mind to it there's no stopping those guys. Ah, well, you only lost to the best team in the world. Or the second best at least. F rmosus

From Dutch : 'Kogge' : Frisian ship 10

If there is an interest, we are open for discussion if we should implement one or not... cheers viggen I've never been on a chat room before but I went in this one today and quite enjoyed it, Formosus was there plus another lady and we were chatting about Rome, football etc. It was pretty good to have the instant chat option. I don't know whether it would work here though, my one concern is that it might take people away from the forum and spend more time chatting instead of contributing to the board. I don't know but could it not be done on maybe a few weeks trial period, see how it goes, if it's good and doesn't dramatically affect the forum and people enjoy it then keep it, if it isn't then bin it!! I don't know how feasible this is? I enjoyed our little chat too. It was also my first time We talked about football and about Rome and about football in Rome I think we all learned some things. I certainly did. I had never heard of the goddess Angeronia which the third member of our chat brought up. To be honest, I thought for a moment : Angeronia ? Is she having us on ? Didn't sound very Roman but very made up to me. I had the good sense to check on wiki though. I also liked the easy access : no signing up or registering and all that hassle. I don't see why it should distract anyone from contributing to the forum. Some people won't care for chatting anyway and others who seldom contribute might be induced to do so a bit more often. I'm an eternal optimist, I guess. F rmosus

Thank you for your very friendly compliments, sylla, you are giving me far too much credit. I certainly wouldn't dare or even want to lay claim to the last three qualities you attribute to me. As to the use of quotes : I am not against them of course, but I have always had

To be fair, the modern way of defending is much better and the modern defenders are much better. Maldini, Cannavaro, Nesta. They would all have made far from bad forward players as well. And it's not really about injuring other people of course. But the essence of the Italian concept is still there : as long as you don't concede a goal, you can't loose the match. And you only need to score once in that case to win it. Purely defensive play as many mediocre teams practise, is very boring, but the way the Italians do it, it's an artform. Football is much more than dribbling and shooting a ball : there's only one man who won that Cup for Italy in 2006 and that was Marco Materazzi. He did score the equaliser, but much more important : he outsmarted the French. I did feel sorry for Zidane somewhat, he was one of the greatest and a very nice man off the field. It was sad his carreer had to end on such a low note, but there was no excuse for what he did, and it wasn't the first time he did such things either. Keeping a cool head and using your opponents weaknesses is essential and nobody is better at that than the Italians. There was no doubt in my mind where that Cup was going once Zidane was sent off, even though the crowd sided with the French and the commentators all thought there was everything still to play for since the scores were equal. But the French were beaten. Italy had won that Cup and they were going to take it home. And no Italian was going to miss a penalty that night. I'd easily have taken a five to one bet on that. F rmosus

I was referring to the 1948 UN Treaty on the subject. I'll admit I am a bit loose in my references from time to time but any sensible person should have understood what I'm talking about : every child knows that 'genocide' is a crime that justifies supranational prosecutions. In fact, several cases have been brought already before the Belgian courts for alleged crimes in which Belgium or Belgians had no involvement whatsoever, including one against an Israeli PM for 'genocide' on the Palestinians. I hope you don't pretend you are completely ignorant of the The Hague Court. Correct me if I am wrong but is it your intention that the conquest of America should be condemned as a 'genocide' ? So why not Cannae ? Those Romans were slaughtered on the battlefield. Does it matter much to a dead man whether he is slaughtered on the battlefield or in his home during a raid ? Those Romans were in their own country. They had a right to be there and they had a right to defend it. They were slaughtered by an enemy who had come specifically to their country to either subject then or annihilate them. If that doesn't fit the quasi all-encompassing use you give the term, what is your criterium for that than ? It is not a neutral word. It is a political word. Nothing else. Applying that word to all kinds of events going back four five centuries and further - as I predicted - is politicizing history. The 'Armenian case' as I'll call it is the perfect example. Are you denying that the application of the term 'genocide' to that event was solely politically inspired and has serious political consequences ? Yes, I had hoped to participate in the real debate somewhat, though I must admit my appetite has been spoiled somewhat. Not that I pretend to have sufficient knowledge on the subject to bring up anything really revealing. I have read both Livius and Polybius. But that was some years back already, I don't have them at hand. And looking up quotes on the internet only goes so far. If, for every single statement or suggestion 'original' sources are required then you are pretty much excluding everybody who isn't or doesn't pretend to be a professional scholar. If the only object of the forum discussions was to create some scientifically justified body of research on the subject, I coud agree with that, but I don't think that is the case. But then, I guess that would mean that the debate would inevitably deterriorate into mindless drivel, not even worthy of the History Channel, right ? And yes, there is only one human race. Nobody agrees with you more than I. I have stated that very clearly at least once somewhere else on this site rather recently, but fair enough, not everybody is to know that, so I'm glad you correct me there. I was again being a bit sloppy, using the language that is most commonly used. There is only one human race. But again, our laws proclaim that it is not so. Formosus

Hey, we have been Red Devils for over 100 years now. But OK, if that hurts your sensitivities it's Rode Duivels / Diables Rouges / Rote Teufel from now on. I knew there was a reason I liked you Formosus. A fellow tifosa here. Wasn't that the greatest game ever ? 11 Italians, taking on the Chilean team and a 50 000 strong mad crowd and the Chilean police and army, all on the other side of the world. That took some guts. As a kid I was awestruck, I can tell you. From then on it was all 'catenaccio' for us. We thought that was Italian for 'break their legs by any means you can'. F rmosus

Webster's Seventh New College Dictionary defines genocide as :

The whole discussion seems to have split up into several threads now, but since it started here : I am very uncomfortable with the frequent use of terms such as 'fascism', 'supremacism', 'genocide' and other related ones in the context of ancient history. They are all 20

Are there any adress or details on where can we visit such interesting Tasmanian fields? (For research purposes, of course) No wonder Looney Tunes' Taz is always spinning... You sail straight on till you come to Melbourne Harbour, captain. Then turn due south. Beware of the Tasmanian Devil, though. Especially if he has just payed a visit to the poppy fields. ( I bet the Tasmanian Tourism Board is behind all this.) http://www.poppiesshop.com/poppy-flanders-...ers-fields.html In Flanders Fields the poppies blow Between the crosses, row on row That mark our place; and in the sky The larks, still bravely singing, fly Scarce heard amid the guns below John McCrae F rmosus

Yes, that's easy for you to say, isn't it ? You're in a win

Maybe they bored the Neanderthals into a terminal coma with their version of The Ring Cycle ? F rmosus

Looks like you guys are pretty proud of Vlad Dracula too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlad_the_Impaler The Germans have Arminius. We're very proud of Ambiorix over here. The first two things about history I learned were : 1 ) The Romans were The Greatest Thing Ever and 2 ) Ambiorix was The Greatest Belgian Ever. And the Old Belgians were Great Guys. Despite being illiterate and lazy no-goods who did nothing all day except drinking beer and playing dice. F rmosus

Well done USA ! Don't want to spoil your party, but .... it's only the Confederations Cup, nobody cares really. Not over here, anyway. I mean, New Zealand and Iraq ? The Real Tournament is next year. Weird statistics : Spain : fouls committed, 13 ; fouls suffered, 7 - USA : fouls committed, 9 ; fouls suffered, 13. Whom did they commit those two other fouls on ? That's really good though : shots on goal, 2 ; goals, 2. 100 % succes rate. Really Italian style. Love that. Not that fancy Brasilian and Dutch showmanship. It's all about scoring goals, nothing else. So I'll be supporting the plucky underdogs in the final. Those Brazilians, do they really need yet another cup ? Don't think so. Isn't that right, Aurelia ? F rmosus

Why the third person? Ursus is speaking as an outsider to "that business" F rmosus

Thanks, Augusta ! You've won a free violin lesson ! I imagine that playing the violin against your hand is slightly more difficult than handling a weapon that way. Or are they all naturally right-handed ? I doubt that. Do left-handed violins exist ? I've never payed any attention to that. Are all the real virtuoso soloists left-handed ? (They are far more artistically gifted, left-handers, it is generally accepted .... I mean, look at me ) I did come across an old quote somewhere about a row of mowers that also made sense.

Yes. It is. But to the Romans, it was also a consideration of someone elses emotional state. Romans didn't pair offf for love as a rule. It was either gratification or cultural tradition. For a young Roman male, to see one of his buddies hopelessly in the grip of romantic attachment would have been something laughable. There is after all a very macho, thuggish side to Roman male behaviour, evident even in their well of offspring. And it isn't today ? Why do we use it then ? Are you arguing that a figure of speech is something else from what it was 2000 years ago ? And a young dude who is completely smitten by some chick, he's not the laughing stock of his mates then ? But of course that didn't happen in Rome. Formosus

On a minor point : If being forced to obey another man was considered enslavement, then pretty much everybody was a slave. In the first place the legionaries who were expected to follow orders blindly. Objectively speaking we might even say they were indeed pretty much like slaves

p.s. i rather not mention any of those involved airports, because by now i start to believe they are out there to get me.... They are out to get you ! They know what you've been up to ! Seriously, I have to agree with you and with Ursus. I don't fly often anyway, but I sometimes think you might as well take a bus or a train. Flying fast ? Yeah, if you don't count the getting to and from the airport time and the check-in time and the endless security controls and then sitting on the runway for an hour before they finally make up their minds to take off ... But on the other hand, better safe than sorry. Once that plane takes off you are sitting in a seat a few kms up in the sky with just a thin sheet of metal surrounding you, remember ... that post of yours here ? (the link to the clip seems to be broken. I did find find it on youtube a few days back, but not anymore.) F rmosus