Tobias

Sorry for the delay LOL, my Avatar is the Fifth Doctor Who, acted by Peter Davison

I would agree that land ownership measured wealth and high standing. I believe Marcus Tullius Cicero was a compulsive collector of country villas, and many Emperors and influential persons in the late Empire had considerable estates in Thrace etc.

Yes, i thought that Heraclius's campaign was great as well. I'd have to say that such battles by Basil II Bulgaroktonos as Kleidon and Emesa were quite important in re-establishing the Byzantine's power.

It's one of the Carlton United Breweries' latest adverts. For those who don't know, that's a brewery in Melbourne. I can't say i have seen the Coors commercial, but then Australians are very jealous about our beer, and an American brand wouldn't last as long as a snowflake in hell lol

I don't believe so. Even after Heraclius' victories against the Persians, the armies (of both the Byzantines and the Persians) were exhausted. They could not hold back the flood of people, united under the word of Mohammed. I don't believe that even a rebuilt empire could have held them off, not one so recently rebuilt anyway.

G'day everyone Recently here in Australia, and previously worldwide on the net, an ad for an Australian beer, Carlton draught, was released. This is an extreemly amusing ad (in my opinion). I've got a site here where you can view this ad, and i'd love to her some comments on it http://www.bigad.com.au/

Ah yes, should have thought of that. I mean beginning with Constantine, as i consider the beginning of the Byzantine Empire to be when Constantine moved the capital to Constantinople. Although really, the true beginning was when Justinian abolished the senate in Rome and made it so that th Later Roman Empire was ruled entirely from Constantinople.

To quote Bram Stroker: "I have learned not to think little of any one's belief, no matter how strange it may be. I have tried to keep an open mind, and it is not the ordinary things of life that could close it, but the strange things, the extraordinary things, the things that make one doubt if they be mad or sane." Of course, that point of view has absolutely nothing to do with the topic, so please excuse it

I must say i've never heard of it. It musn't be very popular or indeed existent over here in Australia

They purged slavic nuances did they? That's something i didn't know. How interesting!

Ah, now those were interesting. With all the "sightings" these days though, one wouldn't know what was real and what wasn't. Magna Mater eh? I'll have to look into that in more depth. Thank you for your help

Ahh, i've seen the light Thanks very much for that Viggen and P. Clodius, i was a bit stymied

I daresay it would be mostly because Britain was always a far frontier territory; conquered as an example that Rome could cross oceans for greatness. It was not as valuable a province as most of the other provinces. It's distance and occassional inaccessiblity i.e. fog, rough seas, caused England to not become as Romanised as other provinces. The ordinary people would probably never have bothered to become fully fluent in latin, but they would have held on to their language and beliefs, not to mention the invasion of the Normans and before this the continuing invasions of the Picts and Scots. Dacia was subdued after a long and difficult war by Trajan. It was added to the Roman Empire at Rome's peak of territory and power. Perhaps the dacians, having witnessed this might, wished to be like the Romans. It would not be the first time a tribe or race wanted this. Thus, they adopted the language and never let it go, wanting to retain that thought that they were still part of the mighty Roman Empire that had gained their respect and subservience. Despite the many occupations of subsequent tribes, including Huns, Bulgars, Magyars, Avars etc. the idea of remaining "Roman" was a talisman that they probably clung to. It was the same with other nations. they just couldn't accept that Rome, so immortal and great, could fall, as they were so awestruck and, well, Romanised themselves. It's like i've said before, a nation that is mentally as well as physically subdued will remain thus far longer than a mere physical conquest. Trajan's victory, once complete, was complete. Thus they maintained it's institutions and language, as you said, can be seen today. The territory was mainly abandoned because of the other tribes migrating into the area and its obvious potential in future to be a kind of meeting ground for migrating tribes. The abandonment of the territory was perhaps a rather foolish decision.

Ah, i concede the point

If you're looking for economic, i started a thread discussion on the wealth and currency of the Romans in another section.

Hmm, to tell you the truth, i'm not sure if it was in circulation either. It must have been to an extent to destabilise the empire so, if only in it's expenditure by the Government. The Gold Standard of Christendom, the Hyperperon, was a Byzantine coin, an originally pure gold coin that was widely accepted. After Manzikert and the other subsequent disasters and the debasement of this coin, Venice minted it's own pure gold coin and the trade of the Mediterranean was moved to Venice. This loss of trade resulted in further decline and Constantinople's reliance on Genoa and Venice for survival, often ending up the first casualty in their frequent wars. Skipping back to Republic and Early Empire, is it true that the Denarius was more of an official roman currency, but the sestertius was more common?

G'day I was just viewing my profile, and whilst reading it I noticed that it said what the local time was where i am, and it said a time totally different to the time it actually was! Could someone enlighten me what's happened? Did i make a mistake in registering or something?

That looks like an interesting book, i'll have to make some enquiries about it to the nearest bookstore

i read that the Romans under Caesar in britain could not initially come to terms with the archaic yet dangerous war chariots used by the tribes there. These celtae etc. here must have been rather fearsome to scare Caesar's legions!

One view i would suggest is that that has already basically been said: The Romans killed many tribespeople to instil fear and to subdue them. The Nazis were merely killing Jews because they considered them inferior, not worthy to stand next to the "super race". There's an obvious difference here. As for the British in South Africa, i couldn't agree more that the tactics they used were scarcely different from any other nation trying to instil fear and obedience; but that didn't make them a race intent on genocide or ethnic cleansing, they merely wanted obedience from the boers.

It does not make the British Empire as bad as the Nazis. Most expansionistic powers know the advantage of a subdued nation that is mentally subdued as well as physically subdued.

In the Post Roman Empire section, a certain thread showed a drawing of how an appearance of the Virgin Mary allegedly inspired Byzantine soldiers and citizens during a siege in 1422. After reading a rather large book on the history of the Byzantines, it seems that the Virgin Mary was quite a symbol for the Byzantines, if not a patron spirit of the Empire. I was wondering if anyone else knows of alleged appearances during the history of the Byzantine Empire or even before?

At any rate, i'll be keeping an eye on this thread, it'll be really interesting to see what's happened in this site. So Let's do the time warp again eh?

Mate, i'll tell you what, if i'd known about this site, i would have joined back in 2003 It sounds like this site's had a colourful history already! Another revolution by another Spartacus? Well, i suppose it's good to learn from past mistakes, but perhaps some people don't learn

That's all very well, but you forget the invasion of the Lombards. Would the union that secured Italy remain secure with an invasion by a numerous and fleeing tribe, displaced by the Avars?