Favonius Cornelius

To be: Independently and modestly wealthy with my accesses cunningly hidden from public knowledge, farmer and wine producer, well away from Rome or the mainland on Sicilia or Sardinia. or Not to be: Chiurgeon. No question!

Heh, considering the educational level of what most Americans were at when the nation was founded, excluding of course a number of the leaders, I fail to see how he can make such a claim. Perhaps he is speaking of the 'upper crust' of people in the nation? I wonder if he could answer if a nation can be founded democratically by the ignorant then their later education corrupting the simple principle?

I had an idea to maybe help revitalize this section, seeing as how it does not seem to be doing much. How about starting something of a 'Mythbusters' theme, where we take some popular misconceptions and deconstruct them with fact and reasoning. It would be something we could probably mostly all agree on, and perhaps spawn a new kind of section in UNRV. As a first I suggest the theory of lead pipes leading to the fall of the Roman Empire...

We've had great big discussions on this in the past here in the forum. My view is that while it is true that the Romans and any other peoples in these times have done things like killed a bunch of people in battle, or sacked a city, it is absolutely no comparison to a systematic extinction of a people. Caesar never wanted that for the Gauls and went to great lengths to try and get them to accept the status quo. In fact Caesar infrequently sacked any Gaul towns. At worst he enslaved them, and the major killings were part of battles. As for Carthage, it was destruction of an enemy, not a race and not systematic. There were no roundups of Carthaginian peoples across the coasts of Africa and in Hispania for the sole intent of extermination. It was about destroying a power bloc, which was a city. So in the end it

I love mods of all kinds, makes things interesting. I'll try this one when they get it hammered out. It's funny though, RTR claims it's more hardcore than RTW, and now these guys are even more hardcore eh? Heh.

I think there has been a gradual increase in awareness of Roman history since the movie Gladiator. Say what you will about it, a lot of people love it and has caused them to look into the Romans. These days, I would not be suprised if some folks jaded over America's actions the past years has caused some 'fall of empire' contemplation, whatever your view on all that may be.

Depending on how deep you want to go into it, Friedrich M

Wow he had that to say back in 1940? So since that time as the educational system gotten better or worse?

I'm sure you can feel free to post about your game right here if you like. What is it called?

LOL! Usually I end up at some party for Holloween, usually in a makeshift toga. This year Lady Tania wants me to dress as Legolas though.

Interesting question MCP! At first, I thought back in the day that a Roman nose was as you say, large and straight bridged like Cato's. Later I heard from other people that the 'Roman nose' was more suppose to be the large nose but with something of bend downward in the center (aquiline as you say I guess). I've actually noticed this sort of nose on many coins of Emperors and others. I can't help but wonder if that is where the term is from. Here are some examples: http://www.historyforsale.co.uk/roman%20coins/R4.jpg http://rosenblumcoins.com/files/img/35b/0074.JPG http://dougsmith.ancients.info/hadfobr.jpg http://members.aol.com/akropolis3/VespJudaeaCaptaDen2.jpg Course, you can find just about any kind of nose on a Roman coin, but these 'Roman noses' are familiar.

I don

Already some companies do credit rating checks on job applicants, which I think is ridiculous and an invasion of privacy. I have good credit, but I know some people make mistakes in their lives, why should they be made to always pay for it? A persons spending habits is their own damn business. As far as the government is concerned, yes now they can even listen in on our conversations with impunity. I'm sure about 5% of that wire tapping has to do with terrorists.

Heh, I don't suppose anyone owns a big mansion we can all crash at? That would make things somewhat cheaper.

1. I would say firstly Las Vegas, and secondly Chicago. Both probably would have low fares and plenty to do. California has the Getty Villa, Chicago the Art Institute. 2. Hm.. drink. Talk about Romans. Go visit places. 3. Kind of low. Not that I don't value my friendships with you folks, but I barely have time to even sit down a write a decent piece for the web page. I'd still make an effort to go if something were held though, particularly if the location has other people I know also in the area.

Interesting read caldrail sounds like you know your stuff on Masada. I never head about the ramp's stone piers before, are they still there too?

I think all the maps were the most optimistic representations. For instance the Roman Empire held Mesopotamia only for a number of years.

Crassus had a well known habit of giving out money to all sorts of politicians. It's how he himself became such a powerful figure, by making so many men beholden to him with his loans. I'm sure Crassus recognized Cataline as someone who would indebt themselves considerably to him, and so like others gave him some loans. Does not suggest a closer tie or alternative motive, at least from nothing I have read before or can think of. I don't recall Cataline specifically attacking Pompey in any way to suggest such a thing. I think in the end Cataline was a corrupt man who over played his hand, then decided to go out in a blaze of glory. His lifestyle suggests a man who took risks and lived on the edge.

Israel gets special mention towards the end for some reason, as does some sort of Iranian speculation.

Ah thanks! Interesting web page.

I seriously doubt this. Caesar and Crassus had to have known that Cataline could not hope to raise an army capable of defeating one which the Republic could raise with Pompey. There is no other advantage to supporting the man that could have been gained.

Was Pyrrhus the pinnicle of Epirote history? Was it all downhill after his invasion of Italy?

Well, I don't buy the fertile land bit. China, Russia, Africa, South and North America, all these areas have their wide expanses of fertile land. Moonlapse can you summarize the book's major points that supposedly explain this dominance? I'm curious.

Throughout the Gallic Wars and the Civil War, Caesar is constantly finding himself in need of food supplies for his armies. Many notable military historians and generals (Hans Delbruck , Napoleon) have criticized this as a weakness of Caesar's. As they say, an 'army marches on its stomach.' Supply was always an ancient warfare problem, but it is fair to say that Caesar found himself in trouble with this above the norm. I've always had a hard time believing that a man so remarkably careful and calculated as Caesar was would have a problem with something like supply logistics. Therefore it is my hypothesis that (in many cases) Caesar deliberately undersupplied his men, as a method of getting them to perform super human feats of war, always with the promise that food was over the next hill, or in the camp of an enemy, or past the walls of an enemy camp. Leading the donkey on with the carrot so to speak. Thoughts?