Skarr

Thanks, Moonlapse. It's been a long, rocky road to get this published. I feel that I'm still at the very beginning as this needs to now translate into book sales. Hopefully, it will do well.

Check out the new cover to my novel, which will be out in print soon after the publisher goes through the final edits. You can click on the site listed under my signature to view the cover!

I have the entire DVD set of I,Claudius and for any Roman history buff, this is a must have in your collection. I did see "Cleopatra" starring Billy Zane and it is more like a rich fantasy. I guess the real Cleopatra wasn't a sexy babe either, contrary to Hollywood's standard take. However, she was rich, she was incredibly powerful and for generals like Caesar and Antony, that would be more than enough attraction as power acts like an aphrodisiac. After all, these generals could buy the best slaves whenever they chose, why would mere physical beauty seduce them? Caesar had the best Gallic women always sent to his tent and went out of his way to prove his 'manhood' especially after the scurrilous rumor spread about him after his Bithynian adventure in his youth. That man was a known homosexual and I think the Roman men did not mind if Caesar had an affair with him, provided he was the 'pitcher'. Caesar was always a threat as he was everything that Roman men aspired to and he had no equal, as he was an extremely talented, intelligent man with the world at his feet. Also, he was loved by not only his own tough soldiers, as he was always ready to live like them, do any task along with them but also the people of Rome, who genuinely loved him, as they considered him one of their own. After all, he did live in the Subura. I wish they would make a movie about Caesar focusing on only his early life. The young Caesar and the arrogant Pompey - that would be a real clash of wills that I would like to see on screen, including Caesar's tough decision to compromise with him by offering up his own daughter. Although it was a set up, I think Pompey did genuinely love Caesar's daughter and grieved a lot when she died.

Can you post them ? I'm really interested now after seeing this post. Time is a real problem with all of us and I wish I had the time as I want to definitely visit Ostia now and spend a few days there. I hate the tourist buses for this reason alone [ the lack of time they give you to really see a place and study it in detail and try to absorb its atmosphere is so annoying!]. Well, I guess I'll have to wait for now. In the meantime, would appreciate if you could post just a few pictures.

I have recently volunteered my services as a reviewer to help out a newly launched site (July 19 2005), which aims to serve as a Resource site for authors of historical ebooks or historical works of fiction that can be submitted for review in an electronic format. You can check this out at : http://greatebooks.blogspot.com The publisher is not only looking for authors to submit their works to be featured / showcased on this site for a week (with a review and links to their author page or selling outlet), but also reviewers who are willing to volunteer their services. Reviewers will earn some exposure (as a link will be provided to their web site and a brief bio, including the works they have published already will be provided on the site) if they are accepted. The site also has a link to tips and other information that may useful to new writers or writers thinking of writing a novel or a work of historical fiction. This is something I've put together for the site, based on my own experiences as a writer. I also plan to include a section later on how you can publish and then market your book, once it has been written and edited. Ebooks of new, established or even unknown writers will be featured / showcased for a week, provided they meet the Submission Guidelines outlined on the site and are accepted for review by the publisher, who will then pass along this to me for review. I have offered to review books set in ancient Rome or Greece but I don't think I'm qualified to review books set in other time periods. In case any of you writers out there are familiar with other time periods, please contact the publisher directly [ links to his email are available on the site] The most important thing is that all of this is free and is available to any author, as long as the work being featured or showcased on the site is of a historical nature and can be submitted electronically for review.

I think the concept of slavery was a little different in Caesar's time than the more modern, exploitative version. Slaves did have a greater degree of freedom (although subject to their master's will, of course) than a slave in the American South, who was no more than a beast of burden. There were also many classes of slaves and some of the slaves (especially the learned Greek slaves) enjoyed a degree of respect that would be hard to understand by today's standards. In most rich households, the children were brought up by pedagogues, many of whom were learned men from Greece. Some of the slaves were also wealthy and even had their own businesses, which enabled them to buy their freedom more quickly. I think they could not, of course, aspire to political office and do many other things but they definitely had some choices. There were, of course, many cruel masters and many Roman men actually frowned upon or condemned the ill treatment of slaves. The great changes to Rome primarily came about after their conquest of Carthage, Greece / Macedonia, which resulted in sudden, large influx of slave labor. There were also exploitative farms, the latifundium where slaves were used like cattle on these giant farms, as Rome kept expanding its armies and recruited hundreds of farmers into their legions while their plots of land were aggregated into latifundium. The Gracchi brothers tried to introduce land reforms and also revise the restrictive citizenship laws. However, patricians and senators (Caesar did belong primarily to this class) were opposed to such reforms and while Caesar was certainly motivated by his own personal dignitas or sense of honor, I don't think he wanted to end slavery or anything like that, as that would have upset the balance too much. The slaves had their one chance with Spartacus and he almost succeeded, as he managed to destroy one army after the next that Rome threw at him, before Crassus finally ended the threat after an infamous 'decimation' [ curious practice, rarely used ]. Crassus was an interesting figure and because of his wealth, was courted by Caesar as well as others like Pompey. I think there's a lesson here. As the Republic expanded, it grew in power, wealth and status and men like Caesar and Pompey saw themselves as 'rulers' because of the armies and legions they commanded. It's human nature and a proper end to Caesar would have been his exile or banishment. Maybe the Republic would have survived, but civil wars would have continued. Who knows ? Maybe nothing would have changed. I had speculated that maybe the Republic would have endured in some form. However, the greed and ego of men for power is hard to overcome and maybe Empire was inevitable. It is remarkable, however, that the Republic did endure for many years until the conquest of Carthage, Greece and other territories and the expansion of the armies. Don't grant too much power to any one man is the moral of the story.

Dignitas was possibly more important than we can imagine by today's standards / definitions. I think it is one of those words which is indefinable as it represented the sum of a man's worth, what he personally stood for as a man. A man could bear the loss of anything but his dignitas, as his entire life would seem worthless. I'm not really sure how I can really define this and it sure meant a lot to a Roman man, especially during the Republic. The worst thing that one man could do to another was rob him of his dignitas or make him worthless. With regard to honor, I think Shakespeare said it best in a speech by the famous fat rogue Falstaff in Henry IV Part I. Read it - it's priceless and full of humor and wit as Falstaff ponders honor when compared to his own life in the thick of battle.

I apologize if I offended anyone's sensibilities here ... some of my comments were probably out of line if taken out of context, as evident here, as these comments weren't directed at specific individuals. Having said that, I'm not against any religion or sect per se. In fact, I'm in favor of anything you really believe in, provided it meets certain criteria which I hold dear to my own beliefs in various things - some of them based on observable scientific facts, the others based on my own experiences / observations. In any case, I believe strongly in certain things and while I do not wish to convert everyone to all of my beliefs, I think I just threw a few points out there - points to ponder, debate and disagree upon, that's all.

Roman men were primarily taught to dominate and exercise their will over others. In the Republic, even non homosexual acts which involved some form of submission (especially with weaker classes - women, slaves etc.) was looked down upon and seen as a sign of weakness. The highest virtue that a Roman man could display apart from being the dominant one in all relationships, sexual or otherwise, was restraint or the perception of restraint. It's like saying - I can do this whenever I want but I am superior to you and am voluntarily restraining myself from doing this or that act. Anyway, with so many dominant men running around vying for power, it's just amazing how one short little period of history produced giants like Pompey, Caesar, Crassus and others. I think the Republic killed itself when they resorted to assassination instead of traditional methods like disgrace, exile etc. Caesar had become too much of a threat and had to go, leading many like Cassius, Brutus et al to pursue this extreme method of getting rid of him. I wonder what would have happened if Caesar hadn't been assassinated. I don't think we would have seen the rapid spread of Christianity either as Nero's and the others excessive targeting actually brought more to the faith and had the opposite effect. I think the Republicans would have just ignored it and this would have probably become a minor sect along with the hundreds of pagan religions that were destroyed / lost in history.

The very thought that anyone in his right mind could even consider immaculate conception as a remote possibility is something that is not only baffling but also exhibits a level of stupidity that is simply astounding in this day and age. Even the idea of God and attributing human qualities to a God is an exercise in stupidity. The Earth is more than 4.5 billion years old. Mankind came along only recently, a mere speck of dust in the cosmos and pretends to know something. Man will one day become extinct, consumed by his own stupidity, which is often a product of arrogance in himself (or herself) - I should say humankind instead of Man. Sometimes, I think humans were born to destroy. There are so many good things humans do but overall, as a mass of beings, they are nothing but destructive, as most humans are inherently selfish. That's why you have so many countries, so many religions, so many races, cultures, etc. etc. From space, all you see is one planet - Earth. Anyway, our lives are all short and let each man or woman go in peace, as the mystery of life will never be solved ! If it does get solved, none of us will be here alive to witness it. This may sound very cynical but I think truth is always hard, even cynical. Face it, there's nothing out there, there are no answers waiting to be found. Everytime someone makes another great discovery, there's a pandora's box also being opened. This is with respect to all the scientific advances, especially those connected with the theories on the origin of the universe. String theory is the newest here and doesn't explain anything except postulate multiple dimensions! Religions which claim to have answers are the worst offenders as those who claim to know something in their hierarchy know nothing or next to nothing! All they can do is quote from books that anyone could have written or made up as it is nothing but a hodge podge of writings, much of it lost in translation. True discovery lies within the human being's mind and what you call soul (which is basically a big black hole or the unknown - everything you don't know can be lumped together as the soul), will remain that - unknown, unseen, unheard and untouched. We're all dreamers and perhaps as Julius Caesar once said (quoting Shakespeare), we should "Leave him, he's a dreamer" If you want to know anything at all about the human mind, thought, God etc. see an old movie - "Solaris" where humans encounter a non typical alien. Here, the alien is not a creature on the surface of a planet but the planet itself, as it is sentient and is aware of its own mortality! Can you even begin to compare a human's mind with a planet's mind. Consider this also - each human being is actually made up of billions of tiny creatures. To each of those creatures, our body must seem like a planet or solar system. When those creatures cross from our body to another (what we call disease), this could be their intergalactic journey. At the sub atomic level, what is matter but empty space. Who has the answers to that one. Most solid objects only appear to be solid. At its heart, everything is empty space and even the atom looks like a microscopic model of our own planet. Who is to say whether what we are seeing outside (planets, stars, the earth, whatever) is not an illusion and a reflection of what is going on within our own bodies and souls ? Do we all exist in a multi dimensional universe, each unique and therefore, each human being, when he dies, also kills the entire universe in that dimension in which he or she exists. By this theory, there could theoretically be billions of universes, which are born and which die. Time is itself a relative concept and may not exist at all. After all, we perceive time only in relation to something else. However, absolute time .. does it really exist or not ? How can this be proved, if at all. My 2 c... on this topic which has nothing to do with Rome or Roman history. [ Sorry for the rambling but this sort of religious BS always gets my ire as I see that there are so many ignorant and stupid people in the world]

Spartacus makes the top of my list, not only for the splendid performances by Olivier, Laughton and Ustinov but also the authentic recreation of the gladiatorial fight sequences. Kubrick was a stickler for accuracy and spent a few months filming the fight between Graba and Spartacus, after poring over paintings, murals and other historical information that was available on the specific techniques used. Kirk Douglas whined a lot and complained but I still think the final cut that made it to film was one of the best, ever. I was very disappointed by the fight sequences in Gladiator and it wasn't really clear, with a lot of fast cutting and close ups. Russell Crowe may be a good actor but he's no gladiator. I have the Criterion edition on laserdisc and the transfer is just stunning, much better than the DVD version. Of course, you need a good top of the line LD player too like the CLD 99 or something similar to appreciate its quality. The "I'm Spartacus" sequence is also unforgettable, absolutely brilliant. I read the novel by Howard Fast and it's interesting upto the point where the gladiators escape from the school in Capua and after that, it's a pretty boring book.

Thanks, Primus. Appreciate your interest in my work. Well, my publisher and I are currently reviewing the content and while he indicated that he has become a fan of my book after reading it, he did mention that the content was a little strong in parts. However, while I deliberately included this in the novel to convey the true sense of shock the conservative Romans felt, I did try and present it in a matter of fact manner, something which was quite ordinary to the characters themselves. In fact, it becomes unimportant after a while, even to the Romans, like anything else which we become accustomed to. I think the novel in print may not be as 'racy' as the unexpurgated ebook! In any case, we are dealing with a time 2,000 years ago and it would be inappropriate to attach post Christian views on morality to the times. I am sure that each reader will have his or her own private view and I would leave it to their judgment on whether or not it is in keeping with the tenor of the novel, its characters and the story line. All I can say is that I wrote this with passion, with a definite sense of purpose and in keeping with the overall theme of the series. The first novel is a kind of prelude to the series, as it ends at the gates of Rome. The second novel will bring in the real flavor of the series and I'm sure any fan of ancient Rome would be absolutely thrilled by it. I really enjoyed writing it and had a lot of fun. I hate editing though and if anyone is really interested in editing my second novel, send me your credentials via email as I'm looking for an editor.

This is an insightful observation, Augustus. Many of the clothes the Romans wore were 'manufactured' at home under the supervision of the Roman women, who were kept prisoner by their husbands at home. It is appalling to think about their condition by modern standards and life must have been very difficult for the average woman, as they were denied everything, from basic education to the freedom we take for granted in modern society. However, in some respects, certain high born ladies, especially those lucky enough to have property of their own, also enjoyed a level of comfort and freedom within their homes which would be also hard to duplicate today. Anyway, who is to say which is better? These days, it is even difficult to take the subway or the bus without worrying about getting killed. The horrific blasts today in London are a grim reminder that modern times certainly confer more freedom but also force citizens to pay a great price, as long as there are senseless fanatics around, who purport to serve their 'religion' by killing innocent people at random. TC '

There are as many gods / religions / sects etc. etc. as there are people, since each individual is unique. As Lewis Black, the famous comedian said, "We are all like snowflakes". Religion evolved into the hodge podge it has become today starting with simple worship of the natural beauty of the world. Most of the ancient people worshipped and venerated familiar objects from a favorite rock or mountain or a shady tree that also provided fruit and sustenance. As men and women became less engaged in the daily task of gathering food and abandoned their nomadic ways, they began to look skyward and began to worship the sun and the moon. Even today, in most religions, some form of sun / moon worship is prevalent ( a remnant from the past nature oriented beliefs, which primarily venerated life and creation, especially the birth of a human being in the womb of a mother, or what became an iconic mother goddess). Most religious celebrations in the past were centered around the worship of the goddess, a symbol for the fertility of the earth, which produced the things that humankind needed to survive - from crops and fruit, to life giving rivers, fresh clean air and enough game. People prayed for rain to arrive so that their harvest would be successful. The Egyptians believed that without prayer, the sun would not return the following morning and so on. Of course, we don't have an exact record of the practices and all we can do is guess and make deductions based on what records exist in the form of papyrii or hieroglyphics on various tomb walls and monuments. As humankind became more comfortable with the Earth and the need to placate its anger (earthquakes, volcanoes, storms and the like) by building shelters, cities and even understanding things about how to look for storm warnings, navigate the oceans and so on, religion not only became more spiritual in terms of asking who we are and where do we all come from and why does life exist in the first place, it also became a tool for control. Kings and others saw a way of maintaining power over large sections of the populace as humankind began settling in cities, abandoning their small camp like, nomadic settlements. If religion did not exist in some form, it would have to be invented as there was no way a king or other ruler could maintain control over the masses through sheer logic, reason and laws. You need something else, a fear of the unknown, a fear of death or what happens to your soul after you die, an afterlife, rebirth, reincarnation, whatever theory that could explain or attempt to answer the perennial and age old questions that people have been asking for 1,000s of years. These questions were posed 5,000 years ago, if you read an ancient Indian epic poem called the Mahabharata and these remain unanswered today. Where does everything come from ? Science tries to explain the mechanics but again, it's all vague and while everyone is more or less convinced on the big bang, what existed before the big bang is another question. Did something come out of nothing. In the beginning, everything was infinitesally small. String theory is talking about multi dimensional worlds, which is again all theory. In short, no one has any answers and I think the point is that there aren't any. If life was not a mystery, it would be dull and boring and if you knew the future, the present is not worth living and the past is irrelevant. Celebrate each moment as you live and live each moment as if it were your last. There is only the present and nothing else. The past - it's already gone, never to return. If you think about the past, you waste the present. The future ? No one knows what the future holds. Believe in yourself, believe in others and as long as you try to live a life where you live and act according to your beliefs, you help people who are in need and you can afford to and are comfortable within your own skin, what need do you have for anything else ? Religion, spirituality and other forms of belief are private, intense and personal. Anyway, all of this is my opinion. Everyone is unique and entitled to their own opinion. Who knows in the end ?? Perhaps every one of us, each human being is a universe all unto his own. Think about it, do you exist independent of everything else ? Or does everything else, the entire universe exist only because of you and does everything in it die along with you when you die ? No one can answer this age old question. Not any religion, saint, no one. I'm reminded of an old saying here - He who says he knows, does not know. He who knows, does not say. He who says he doesn't know, he is an honest and wise man. Try to be like the wise man and live in truth, that is the only religion I try to practice.

I would disagree on incest. During the times of the Republic, the period in which my novel is set, which sparked off this post, women were held up to a pretty high standard and although there were some women who were liberal and did protest against the various laws - including covering of the head and always being accompanied by an escort, usually a slave, these were the exceptions rather than the rule. Many women were virgins until the day of their marriage and most Republican senators and knights kept a very strict control over their women. If you have any historical sources to back up your claim on incest being widely practised, please post. This was largely an Egyptian practice and one instituted by the Ptolemies to protect their bloodline and keep their Greek heritage separate and distinct from the old Egyptian pharaohs.

While I did publish a post on my new novel (already released as an ebook, pending print release by a publisher, who's accepted this and will be released soon on Amazon, Barnes & Noble, etc.), how does one get listed in the Roman Books section ?

Once you read the novel, it will be apparent why I chose to include the scenes you find described there. When I wrote this work (over ten years), I finally wound up with a gargantuan piece of work and most publishers I approached told me to split this into three volumes, as it would be difficult for them to sell this. BTW, I just got approached by a screenplay writer, who's interested in making a movie out of this. Anyway, hopefully my novel will do well (my publisher at least thinks so and so do my friends). However, this is not the opinion I'm looking for but from readers such as yourself, so that I can swallow any pride and bear any comments / criticisms and seek to improve the drafts of the second and third novels, which are undergoing final edits. [ Email me direct at skarr@budweiser.com] I wrote this novel primarily for entertainment purposes and if people have a good time and fun while reading it, I think I have fulfilled my purpose. I have always been fascinated by Rome and while I do like Colleen McCullough, I find her writing a little too dull for my taste, although she's very well informed and there's a lot you can learn from her books. However, in parts, it is like reading a history book. I think my novel combines elements of history, fantasy, adventure, eroticism etc. In any case, read it and let me know if you enjoy it. I have also published this on www.ebookad.com pending its release in print. [ I have a feeling that the erotic content will be much toned down when it's finally out in print; however, if you want to read the unexpurgated version, download the ebook].

I'm an aspiring novelist and am over forty years old. I have always been fascinated with Rome and its history and am surprised to see that so many young people (below 18) are so knowledgable! I'm primarily fascinated with the Republic (before Caesar) from a historical viewpoint and my novel is set in 120 BC and features Marcus Aemilius Scaurus prominently. You can view my profile on my blog at http://romanhistoricalnovel.blogspot.com. I'm in the process of setting up a web site to promote my work and this is under construction at the moment. Will update my blog once this is up and running, for those interested. ( Update - September 14 2005 ; my new site is up and running now. Click on the link below my name to access this)

Families who were poor also exposed their children. The fathers also exposed the children of daughters who had gone astray. So, it was not merely the deformed and unhealthy children that suffered the fate, like in ancient Sparta. I don't agree about the comment on incest, which was not common and was in fact, abhorred. The Romans always held the Egyptians and Greeks in contempt for their various practices, from incest to homosexuality. It was alleged that Nero had committed incest with his mother because some slaves noticed stains on his toga after he emerged from her litter. This was the exception rather than the rule.

I have been always fascinated with Rome and Roman history. One thing which always fascinated me was the Roman attitudes towards virtue and especially the institution of the Vestal virgins, who were also in charge of cataloging and storing wills. A vestal virgin remained bound to that order until the age of thirty and I think many young girls were forced into this order by their parents. In my view, although the Roman patricians and knights insisted on morality and virtue, especially from their women, it was a means of keeping the women in check and dominating them. The Romans really dominated their women and their entire household, allowing them little freedom. In public, all women were required to cover their heads and wear a veil, when out in public. The laws against drinking of wine were ridiculous and a husband could kill his wife with impunity, if he found her imbibing any spirits. Most women, except a few, were confined to their homes, spinning yarn, cooking and doing other things, although many of the more menial tasks were performed by slaves. I really applaud those women who were defiant of the male domination like Clodia and even Messalina, who were unjustly vilified by the historians. No one knows if what was alleged in Cicero's letters about Clodia was really true or not. To me, it smacks of malice and is more politically motivated, as her brother, Clodius was despised by many. No doubt, Messalina did have many affairs but can you really blame her, being married to an insufferable bore like Claudius? I have published my first novel recently, celebrating these brave women of the Republic in a series titled "Barbarians in Rome". While the first novel takes place outside of the city of Rome and is mostly focused on a long journey to the gates of Rome by a barbarian princess, the second and third novels are set in Rome and will be published soon, after final edits. If you are interested, check out my blog at : http://romanhistoricalnovel.blogspot.com Please post here if you agree or disagree on what I've written here about Roman morality, which applied mostly to the women and the men were free to cavort as they pleased, with slaves, with courtesans, with mistresses and whoever seized their fancy. The great Julius Caesar was also a great womanizer and would purposely have affairs with the wives of his rivals. For a man, it was all about controlling and dominating his wife. If a wife had an affair with someone, the lover was rarely blamed. Instead, the husband would be rebuked, saying that he exercised no control over his wife. Divorce was sometimes difficult, particularly if the wife had her own property. In some cases, even the dowry (under contract) had to be returned to the husband. Talking about Roman morality, can anyone really excuse their open practice of female infanticide and also general infanticide. The Roman head of household or paterfamilias ruled over everyone else in the family and his power was absolute. He could kill anyone, including his own sons and daughters, if he chose to. Although rarely used, it was something that every Roman who was a paterfamilias took for granted. Exposing children at birth was a common practice and every day, babies would be found abandoned at various places, especially female babies. There is an actual incident recorded of one Roman writing casually to his wife, if it is a boy, raise him up from the earth as my son. If it is a girl, expose her. Talk about morality! How about the wonderful Lucius Mummius, who razed the city of Corinth in 146 BC and massacred thousands, including women and children. This was solely done to further Rome's commercial interests in Greece and was a senseless act of cruelty. What did the senate do when Mummius returned to Rome? He was awarded a triumph as the consul who was responsible for a great victory. There are a lot of things which I admire about Rome - their organization, their buildings and so many aspects of their government and administration, which you can see even today, in our government. Anyway, I think I must end here or I could go on and on.... Enough for now. Skarr