Tobias

You beat me to it Neos Dionysos, i was going to suggest that book Nepal was right above the British possessions in India; it probably even shared borders with British India. It stands to reason that Britain would have had alliances and treaties with Nepal.

Really! Name one. Australia In our first war, we got our backsides absolutely kicked-but we proved to the world that we were as brave, as skilled and provided as good soldiers as any other nation. Sorry sorry, way off topic and way too late, please excuse me

I'm glad we can agree there Cato sir Let us indeed move forward, and meet again in another fiery debate

Here in Australia, the ABC has recently started rebroadcasting the entire series. Well, when i say recently, it started a little while back, because we're in the era of the 6th doctor now. That's how i got into Doctor Who-i finally discovered what it was

I believe that culturally, it may be a little more distinctive. It could be said that Justinian's codifying of laws helped along things, and certainly, the Eastern Roman Empire was ruled entirely from Constantinople by that stage, and by the time of Heraclius, things were definitely far different then it was in, for example, Constantine's time. Heraclius was the last ruler to come from the west, but the first ruler to adopt the greek title "Basileus" instead of "Imperator". So i would agree that approximately around the times of Justinian to Heraclius was when things come to a head culturally. When i look at this topic though, i am always reminded of some peoples in Greece still calling themselves "Rhomaioi" well into the 20th century...

At the time, the Emperor was Basil II "Bulgaroktonos". When the great landowners of Asia Minor revolted against the Empire, Basil himself suppressed the rebellion. To do so, he decided to form an alliance with Vladimir of Kiev, as Russian fighters, attracted by the ready employment available from the Byzantines and the great treasures to be had, had been going to Constantinople before the alliance. This experience of the skill and dangerousness of the Russian warriors had persuaded Basil that an alliance with the Rus would be very profitable. As well, Basil had grand ideas of expansion, and wanted as many soldiers as he could get. Basil's younger sister Anna was married to Vladimir (after Vladimir had himself baptised and his people converted to overcome her reluctance ), and Vladimir supplied 6000 men for Basil, as well as evacuating the captured Imperial base in the Crimea, Chersonesos. The Rus warriors were instrumental in ending the rebellion, and proved their worth. They were later organized into the Emperor's Varangian Guard, as was said. The Varangians accompanied Basil from battle to battle; from Abydos to the siege of Emesa in Syria, to Georgia and to his ruthless campaigns against Bulgaria. Later, an Italian nobleman named Meles rebelled. Leo of Ostia had this to say about the Rus in Basil's quashing of the rebellion: As for the Saxons and Normans migrating to the Byzantine Empire, i believe again the prospect of employment in a rich, famous, powerful yet far away land was very alluring, and they also, i believe, went so that they could fight new enemies, as well as (In the case of the Saxons) fighting the Normans and Russians

Only too true i'm afraid. The Ostrogoths and others had been carrying out the Roman laws, systems, routines and maintaining the institutions. But they sure as hell weren't going to let go of Rome without a fight. When Ostrogothic resistance ceased in 562, the city of Rome was a shadow of its former self. Justinian had already abolished the Senate there, and the office of Consul altogether. The people of Rome had assisted them, as they had come to respect and tolerate the "Barbarians". To wander a tad, I believe this engendered respect may indicate how the "barbarians" may have behaved if they had originally been treated better by the Romans. Exactly. Belisarius' and Narses' campaigns in Italy were horrendously expensive economically and militarily. Taxes imposed throughout the expanded empire would have been horrifically high, which would encourage anyone to rebel, explaining the speed with which Justinian's territories melted away (although the plague, the invasion of the Persians and the Arabs certainly helped this along.)

Mate, i don't know if i'm reading some of your posts wrong or if you're reading mine wrong, but i am not calling Pepin the founder of Charlemagne's empire. I'm just saying that this growing relationship with the church was advanced further with Pepin clearing the lombards out of the Papal states. I am not forgetting the Merovingians, i just don't want to get too into the dynastic side of things. I admit, however, that they were very instrumental among the Franks. That's my point. The People had little faith or respect in this person as an "Emperor".

LOL Doctor Who began in 1963, Pertinax, with William Hartnell as the first doctor. If you go this site: http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sps/tv.html, it will show the chronology of the episodes. I'm thinking of getting a new one, this one is a tad long. It's meant to be in poem form, which is why it may not make sense. I've also cut a few lines out, otherwise the poem would be far too long. But i like Patterson's point of view If you want a translation, i'm sure my fellow Aussies will help

Excuse my ill wording. At the time, i was a little miffed at your argument. What i meant by defeated was that it did not come to fruition. By the way old lad, i seem to recall an instance when Caesar offered to relinquish all his gallic provinces and six of his legions, provided that he be allowed to keep Illyricum and two legions, and allow him to stand for the next consulship in absentia. Gaius Marcellus Major and the two counsels-elect (members of which political group?) had no intention of putting it to vote (although, to be fair, at the time i believe there were barely enough Senators to form a quorum.) But with the Marcelli (Optimates), as consuls, the senate was bullied and controlled by the Boni. And while we're on Caesar's lawlessness, i recall an incedent in the Senate when a chap named Mark Antony vetoed the passing of a Senatus Consultum Ultimum and (albeit rather violently) argued his case against it, Lentulus Crus ordered the lictors to remove him from the Senate. Given, he was acting on Caesar's behalf. But it has to be said that it was not the most lawful thing to do to expell a man from the Senate because he was trying to prevent the senate from relinquishing it's power to veto the Optimates. Very well worded there old lad, especially when you know damn well what i meant. I meant that the Boni did not want Caesar to escape, whether he controlled all that you mentioned, or had next to no power at all. Please read my wording better, as i myself admit that when i wrote the former post, i wasn't typing particularly well. Why should Crassus have had his powers stripped from him, unless he too was an enemy of the Optimates? Caesar, will admit, was doing everything to save himself. But when he consistently gave options of peace to avoid war, it inevitably fell to the Boni (Specifically Cato, Ahenobarbus, Bibulus, the Marcelli, Lentulus Crus and more i cannot name right now) would cause these to be rejected, because they (again, motivated by the anger and jealousy of Cato and a few other diehards) did not want Caesar to escape total prosecution and exile. You're rather good at twisting my words. Are you referring to every single Optimate in the history of the Republic? Because i sure as hell wasn't. Again, i was referring to the ultra conservative group that spearheaded the attack against Caesar i.e. Cato, Ahenobarbus, Bibulus and the others. I believe this is just going to go around and around. That we are stolidly opposed on this point is a given, and i have no wish to persuade you away from your personal point of view. We must agree to disagree, M. Porcius Cato sir

G'day All Recently, whilst reading about the rise of Pontus and Mithridates' attack on the Roman Empire, i found a reference to the "Social War" that Italy was just emerging from when Mithridates attacked. All i know about it is that it was when Rome was compelled to extend Roman Citizenship to include all of Italy. I wonder if anyone can can tell more about the social war?

Really? That's terrific! The only thing unfortunate about that is that out here in the bush, we don't get channel 10

Romulus Augustus did nothing but abdicate to Odovacer, and give him the Imperial Regalia. Odovacer then gave the regalia to Emperor Zeno in the East, stating that one emperor was enough. So; Odovacer's Kingdom considered itself to be a successor to the West, and they also owed allegiance to the East. Zeno did not really have enough power to regain full control of Italy, as he was having enough problems recovering from his usurpation by Basiliscus, so he accepted Odovacer's control of Italy whilst remaining his overlord. In the opinion of many, the Pope did not have much of a right to do this, as he merely ruled the Roman Catholic Church, not the Roman Empire. However, that is beside the point. Charlemagne's successors did little to earn the title, and his empire disintegrated. As i mentioned above, Otto of the Holy Roman Empire was merely crowned "Emperor" because it was the wisest course for the Pope to take. I can from there on only quote one of my colleagues from UNRV; "The Holy Roman Empire was neither Holy, nor Roman, or an Empire." As i mentioned above, the Papal states were "protected" by various rulers, and initially conquered by the lombards. I myself don't believe that the title of a Roman "Emperor" bestowed by the Pope had any meaning whatsoever, because a Pope had no right to do so. The most direct descendant from ancient Rome was the Byzantine Empire. Why do i get the feeling i'm repeating myself

I could give a rather lengthy statement that might enlighten you as to how the Roman Empire survived until the 15th Century Roman Wargamer, but as you said, it all depends on perspective. Culturally, it is true that the last vestiges of ancient Rome were well on their way to becoming extinct by the fourth century. So, December the 25th is the festival of the sun god? Well, that is useful to know, i'll make sure i tell the local priest to offer a sacrifice to Sol Invictus on Christmas Day (joking)

I voted for the Babylonians and the Sumerians because they fascinate me, and they're also the cultures i know least about. It would be very interesting to see how they link to the Romans. A tribe not mentioned that i wouldn't mind knowing a bit more about is the Scythians. I know very little about them, and would be interested in seeing a bit more discussion of them.

By god, imagine how much he must spend on those decorations, never mind his electrical bill!

Don't be too sure Sextus; i was quite secure in my knowledge that the up and coming Flavius Valerius Constantinus would not catch me in my post count. He showed me a thing or two lol

Do i detect a hint of sarcasm That was ill worded. What i meant was that the territory or power being formed to become Charlemagne's empire began under Pepin. I did not forget. If you will be so good as to remember, as the Empire shrunk, they were merely fooling themselves to consider themselves "Emperors". Some of Charles' descendants were given names like Charles the Fat etc, which denoted the increasing lack of respect for these "Emperors". I just took the step of jumping ahead of the period of decay that caused Charlemagne's empire to shrink down to the Kingdom of Italy. He had enough to power to enforce his will as an Emperor, though.

I just recently decided to change my signature. I decided to put a bit of Australian verse into the site, and what is more Australian then Banjo Patterson? The quote i have for my signature is from Patterson's "It's Grand", a poem. It's an interesting (and in my opinion rather accurate) outlook on life.

Exactly, couldn't put it any better myself

My brother changed the wallpaper to a Doctor Who background. I now have a picture of the TARDIS, wreathed in holly, landed in a snowing field with a rather dangerous looking "Santa Claus" creeping around from behind the TARDIS...

Hmm, Saturnalia. Does this mean that the admin are going to step down and serve the rest of us?

That resolution was defeated because Pompey had no damn intention of giving up his powers. Pompey was being completly manipulated by the Boni, and any chance for Caesar to escape unprosecuted or with some mediocum of power remaining was solidly, insanely and jealously opposed by the Boni, and yes, mainly by Cato. In my opinion, and with no personal offence intended to you M Porcius Cato, Cato was one of the worst things to happen to the republic. Steadfastly jealous and insanely biased against Julius Caesar, he, backed by the Boni and the-by-that-stage puppet Pompey, refused almost all logical courses and options offered by Caesar and others to stop him from crossing the Rubicon. Cato and the Boni forced Caesar to cross the Rubicon. They had no intention of letting him escape unprosecuted and exiled and stripped of all powers at least. They were doing this because Caesar demonstrated to them that he was better then them in every way; politically, militarily, intelligence wise etc. He showed the Boni to be the size they really are; he deflated the puffed-up opinions they had of themselves. Cato and the Boni of Caesar's time deserve no thanks for their "contribution" to the Republic. I regret that it came to this, but i'm sick of the Boni being made to look as if they were golden defenders of the Republic and that Caesar was a tyrranical monster. Let the dice fly high!

Wow, i don't know what to say! Thank you very much! I'm sure i'll enjoy the book immensely-i'm actually lacking something to read at the moment Again, thank you very much Triumvirate. Cheers to all, and Merry Christmas as well!

But you can see the effects it may have; it would take a battle-hardened campaigner not to be repulsed by such tactics