Northern Neil

Game them a wondeful capital called Constantinople which became the envy of the world, and a sense of Empire that lasted until 1453.

I will take on board all the sage advice thus far posted. I thought the screen shots were great and the building models were really good - although it has to be said, this game like all the others still hasnt got the concept of the large, sprawling house with peristyle / confluvium, covering an entire block. In the preview I was surprised to see the use of trebuchets in high medieval style, and groups of men milling around seemingly acting as aimlessly as confused ants. Its a shame, because more attention to authenticity with the structures has been given than with other games, but other aspects of the game just put me off it. Bargain Bin it is, I think.

I see no problem with, say, the amphitheatre and theatre being used for events/concerts etc, as long as the money goes where it should go, and the events are policed correctly. On two occasions I have been to Pompeii, and both times was staggered by the huge turnover of paying tourists. The revenue from this, and additional revenue from continuing to use the entertainment venues already in place since the 1st century, I would have thought would be ample for the preservation of the site if it was administered properly. There are other ways the site could be improved with relatively little cost. Some of the houses are quite humble affairs, without any frescoes, and are simply crumbling away with weeds growing and mortar decomposing. I am sure there is an immense pool of free labour throughout the world who would come to the site and help with the upkeep of such ordinary buildings, and all the authorities need do is to provide free basic accommodation and one meal a day. Who among us, for example, would object - in principle - to a weeks free board and lodging in Pompeii, in return for eight hours a day doing some re-pointing, gravelling and weeding? (And before there is a counter-post listing the considerable pitfalls of such a project, and the problems in administering it, I have taken these into account but I still think it would be worth considering.)

Comments on this thread debate some possible explanations: http://www.unrv.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=8546 however, Scientific theories need not cancel each other out. It is highly likely that, even if a population of Europeans did make it across the ice sheet of the North Atlantic, Siberians were making the journey from their side of the continent too.

As I type, I am listening to 'The Moral Maze' on BBC's Radio 4. It is a programme in which a panel discuss the moral aspects of modern day life, and 'Popular Culture' is currently under discussion. Michael Buerk, the presenter, asked a 'Celeb Magazine' editor about the moral aspects of dumbing down and presenting material in a trashy way. The magazine editor said that the bottom line was getting enough people interested in buying the magazine, and that often taste and accuracy were compromised in order to make money. Film makers are no different, and when it is in their interests to present material authentically, if it makes a picture more exciting, they will do it, whilst compromising authenticity in areas most of the watchership will not notice. This can happen in the same film. I will mention two films here, which nonetheless seem to follow a format which many other films also seem to follow, in which authenticity is so treated. Saving Private Ryan shows very graphic and authentic vistas of weapon effects and human suffering, because that draws an audience and most cinema goers find it enthralling. It also shows soldiers in the height of excitement shooting defeated enemies whose hands are up, because again it goes against the traditional 'John Wayne' view of the American soldier, and provokes interest and comment. What is less enthralling to audiences is that RAF typhoons and Mosquitos did all the ground attack missions in support of the D-Day invasion. Mustangs were high altitude fighter escorts - but, there are more (and therefore cheaper to hire) Mustangs around, and the Mustang is more recogniseable to most of the people watching the film. Therefore Mustangs were used in the closing scenes saving the day. Just about every commercial movie made today with a historical theme does this. In Braveheart for example, great efforts were made to render the weaponry and armour authentic for the late 1200's. Less effort is taken to point out that Wm.Wallace was actually a nobleman, who himself wore high medieval armor and rode a charger, and who as often fought with the English when his interests demanded it. Again, the real medieval Scots army was small but very effective, and its ranks did not just include peasents with spears, but highly trained armoured crossbowmen who were very good soldiers. But that would have damaged the impact of the film on a watchership with a vague sense of underdog support for the Scots, or respect for the 'noble peasant' depiction of Wallace by Gibson. Further, the 'Nation State' had virtually no meaning at that time for peasent soldiers who were depicted as being so patriotically Scottish in that movie. But that would have spoiled the movie further. Although depictions of Rome is the topic here, I believe that history generally receives this treatment from the film industry which is why I used those two movies as examples. So unfortunately this state of affairs is here to stay, because money talks.

The BBC article estimates the blast at 1'000 times that of the Hiroshima bomb. I find a yield of 14 megatons a bit difficult to believe, and there doesnt appear to have been a fireball. 1 megaton I can accept.

100 years ago yesterday 2000 square miles of Siberian forest was flattened by a mid - air explosion which was thought to have been caused by a cometary fragment entering the Earth's atmosphere. Tungus tribesmen still do not approach the area, and fallen trees are still to be seen. http://russiatoday.com/features/news/26793...CFQ8WQgodg3xitw http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7470283.stm

Ultimately yes - I keep needing to alter some of them though as I learn more. For instance, Faustus' original essay on this thread has made me re-think how to build doorways, given that the vestibule to a Domus appears to be open, and the door actually some way inside.

Hmm, definitely a matter of degree. I believe that many revolutions started out as an uprising of the people, but the successful ones (Such as French, Russian ) quickly became hijacked by middle class intelligentsia for the purposes stated by Orwell.

In peripheral provinces such as Britain, one also encounters completely detached small houses almost resembling bungalows. They were quite long, and presented the narrow end to the street. It is thought that most of them were stone/brick up to about shoulder height, then completed in timber and rendered. http://www.unrv.com/forum/index.php?autoco...si&img=2394 The peristyle house was also common in Britain - minus the water catching facilities. The Atrium was still there, but completely roofed. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think Insulae were only present in the very largest Italian cities, where space was precious. In England, Near where I live, there is a school (Westgate, Morecambe) which is built as a square round a central courtyard, and from the outside looks very Roman indeed - although I doubt that the courtyard is collonaded. Again, a Mental Health unit I once worked in was built in similar style - again, minus columns. I have not come across any private houses built in the peristyle method, I would think that the restriction and price on land (certainly in Britain) would make this very difficult indeed unless one is very rich. Also, the effect would be largely cosmetic, hypocausts etc being less efficient and more costly to run than modern central heating. In the event of a big lottery win, it would be a GREAT project, though!

Indeed, and as such were aimed at a colonial power. What Orwell (and I!) were on about is popular uprising or revolution within a society, by its own citizens - although again, Kosmo might want to comment on that regarding the events in his country in 1989?

I want to live there!! Some of those houses are great.

I think it is a common belief amongst most humans in developed societies. As a child I held the belief that the further back in time one went, people were les and less intelligent or advanced. Bronze age people were less advanced or intelligent than Iron age people but more advanced and intelligent than stone age people, for example. Most people who do not read history books make this assumption, and I dont believe it is anything to do with Darwinism. This has always been the case even when society has taken retrograde steps: In the middle ages the church looked back at the pagans of the classical world and considered theirs a more enlightened and developed society, forgetting that their religion started out as a populist cult which impeded learning and philosophy once it gained ground. Likewise modern totalitarian revolutionaries who burn books and ban some art and literature because it is degenerate.

As Orwell stated in 1984, common people never cause uprisings or revolutions - middle class people do, in the name of the common people, and using the common people as a means of changing place with the upper classes, who then become the new middle. The common people (as a group) always stay where they are. I think that applied then as now. Rebellions in the third and fourth century were military coups.

In addition it would continue to provide a demand for antiquities in which profit, not archaeology, is the prime motivator. (Sorry to be a kill-joy, but the Roman fort at Lancaster, which I personally helped to excavate, was plundered by individuals whose prime motivation was to sell the resulting loot). but yes, these are fine examples and I would like to know if these were produced into the 5th century, as I would like to see a comparison of styles. In Lancaster museum there is an example with a stamp and also a cat's footprint. Next to the cat's footprint is the print from a thrown stone!

Maybe this was part of the 'system' anyway - could it be that favours were given such as governorship of a province, whereby the benefactor not only lined his own pockets, but was expected to from the outset? Was Spain not governed like this in republican times?

The control is in place already. English culture and autonomy has been eroded to such an astonishing degree - we in England have been persuaded for decades by guilty post - colonial liberals that English culture is virtually worthless compared to that of the Scots, Irish, Welsh and the plethora of other cultural influences we are exposed to. As a result we have no culture to speak of any more. And who objects? We have taken all this squarely on the chin with barely a word of protest. It would take an idiot not to be incensed at the degree this has happened, yet 95% of the English populace does not give a fig or even realise it has happened. That is because as long as there is pub football, X-factor, cheap talk shows and other trashy entertainment, and a supply of cheap consumer goods to soak up everyones cash, only the thinking 5% will actually get annoyed enough to express the dissent to which you allude. The only things most Brits know about the EU is that it bans bananas which are too bent, is top heavy with bureaucracy and wants the British to use monopoly money instead of good old Pounds, shillings and pence. The Roman State knew that if people were comfortable enough, well fed and entertained, there would be little need for a standing army in most provinces because people were too comfortable to rebel. What the Romans had a vague view about, modern capitalist governments are aware of to the most acute degree. If the EU over the next 25 years were to ban our monarchy, compromise our sovereignty and make us part of a federated Europe, the most that would happen is that readers of newspapers with lots of words in would get slightly annoyed - and keep their mouths shut in case they get accused of some kind of bigotry. In my view however it matters not wether this is the work of the EU or ourselves. We are already quite adept at cultural suicide, and I cannot help but think, to take one very tiny example (I can think of LOTS more), that the absence of Britannia on our coins, breaking a nearly 300 years old tradition, is due to the fact that the Union Jack shield contains cross - shaped decoration which is offensive to a small but very vocal and irrascible section of our population.

Independent maybe, but I think we are doing a very good job at submerging our identity already, EU or not.

Hmm... I am a 'libertarian Lefty' according to this.

Material on Nepos duly read, and correction noted

The definitions of Empire waver somewhat here. For example, Niall Ferguson states that the Soviet Union was an Empire, but leaves republican Rome out of the equation. So, does an Empire have to have an hereditary head of state, or not? He misses out Egypt altogether, which lasted about two and a half millenia. Ok, apart from the annexation of Palestine in the Middle Kingdom (or was it the new?) its 'foreign' possessions were but few. Yet it was a state which held sway over foreign peoples for a very long time. The US fails to a degree in the Empire stakes on account of having few foreign possessions, continental US obviously being regarded as home ground - yet the American plains/midwest are colonial acquisitions in exactly the same sense as much of Africa was to the British and French. So in that sense, we already have an 'Empire' of 200 years standing (I am not 'US bashing' here, BTW - simply using available data to counter some of these ideas). To what extent does regime change mean the start/demise of an empire? Parthia and Persia may have technically been different states, but from the Roman point of view, it was business as usual with the Eastern neighbour from 80 BC until AD625. Again, shooting the Tsar did not stop Russia from gobbling up its neighbours, did not change the underlying culture or language of the elite, and did not permanently effect the religion of the dominant ethnic group either. Linguistic and cultural extermination of minority groups continues to this day: Volga Finns, Turkic groups in several areas and the Samoyedic peoples being a few examples. Moreover, the nature of colonisation is now different than in the past. In Europe we have experienced considerable immigration from Middle Eastern and Asian countries in recent years. These people rigidly protect their own culture and acquire large areas of their host nation's cities for their almost exclusive use, and in extreme cases even advocate eventual ethnic and political control of the host nation. If empires are indeed crumbling under our very noses as Caldrail suggests, then the refusal of Western democracies to recognise this trend may be a factor. Colonisation such as this is an entirely recent phenomenon and as such does not figure in this essay, yet it may well effect the matter under discussion. Lastly (phew, I hear some say!) One cannot in all seriousness regard the EU as an empire, and if it seems like a Franco - German exercise in assuming some kind of imperial power, then it is the fault of timid British governments that it has not become a Franco - Anglo - German force up until now. This idea also excludes the influence of other powerful nations such as Italy and Spain. The EU is there for all member countries to participate as their governments see fit.

These pictures are very good, and I have a sudden desire to visit these sites again. I must say I preferred Pompeii - as you say Klingan, it has the feel of a city, and little imagination is needed to clear the weeds and put the roofs back in place. I think the best way to visit these sites is by oneself, or with sympathetic friends - many of my pics from these sites are marred by the presence of an individual whom I am now fortunate to be free from, but who insisted on being in most of the pics! Anyway, I managed to salvage a few useable ones from the wreckage, and render others acceptable as reference pics by the use of various photo - editing software programmes: yours have filled the gaps! BTW, did you get the excellent DVD 'Voyage to Pompeii'?

I scored a dead-centre on this. However, being an American test there were some issues which are very hot in the UK at present which perhaps arent in the US, and were absent from the test. I have some strong views on these absent topics!

The reverse is the case on both counts. Christianity soaked up Roman and Pagan tradition like a sponge, and emperors like Constantine and Theodosius are still called 'The Great' because of their patronage of the Church. But you are correct in the way Rome is regarded by some Christians, who are obviously oblivious to the fact that their religion was re-invented and eventually protected by the Empire. But for the Roman Empire, Christianity in its definitive form would never have existed. Getting back to the wine presses, I wonder if the Muslim ban on Alcohol came ready - formed into their religion, or developed as a result of seeing its association with the rival religion? Are there records of vineyard in the Nile Valley at this time?