DecimusCaesar

Happy Birthday MPC!!! I wish you a very good one!

Can't help but think that Dr. Ray Howell is trying shift a few copies of his work by jumping on the rugby bandwagon. Who knows, his work might be a well researched study of the Silures?

Our God Consul now has the powers of the mysteries! :notworthy:

It's amazing how ancient treasures re-surface. The so called 'jewels of Helen' were dug up in Germany a few years back after being hidden after World War 2. What makes this discovery more special is that you rarely come across a lost ancient text. I wonder how many other lost works will be found.

I haven't seen the rings on google earth, but they might be Barrows, these were Neolithic burial mounds. These would be flanked by dirches that would have acted as chalk quarries. Most of these barrows would contain the bodies of many individuals. I'm still not sure if these were the ones you mentioned.

I've decided to go with mass migrations. If Romans suffered from internal conflicts from within they would have been able to over come these problems and survive, like they did after the age of anarchy in the third century AD. The invasions of the Goths, Huns, Vandals and other barbarians caused to much stress on the empire's borders, and they collapsed, leading to the end of the Western Empire.

A great review Ursus, I was curious about this book ever since I came across it on Amazon. The synopsis was very brief and lacking in detail so I wasn't sure what the book was about. Your review was very informative and clear, a well written piece.

Thank you very much for posting these links Theilian. I was planning on getting Cicero's collection of letters (I have his 'On the Good Life'), so this was a welcome surprise. The letters bring an immediacy to Republican Rome, something that lacks in the work of most historians of the period. They're very interesting.

While certainly not the worst (or even deadly for that matter), one of the strangest punishments in 18th century was to "ride the wooden horse". This punishment, which was popular in Prussia under Frederick the Great's rule; was a typical military punishment. The guilty would be forced to sit on a sharp backed 'wooden horse' with weights attached to their feet for a very long time. Another painful punishment was to be forced to run the gauntlet - where you would be lashed from two sides as you walked between two ranks of soldiers. This punishment is displayed in Kubrick's Barry Lyndon. Although these certainly don't measure up to the other tortures and punishments mentioned in this thread, they certainly would have been very painful to those who had to suffer them.

Critical opinion of the film is rising and it's becoming much more favourable. Most of the negative reviews I've seen are more concerned modern politics rather than the film itself. It seems that most people simply can't watch the film without tying it in to modern events, which is a shame. I'm glad you enjoyed it AoS! I probably won't be able to catch it in the cinema, but I'll definately be getting it on DVD.

It sounds as if it's a relativly large settlement. It seems to me that quite a few spots in England became religious pilgrimage sites. I think that Romans even went on pilgrimages to Canterbury, many centuries before it became a popular pilgrimage site in Medieval times.

Happy Birthday PP!! I hope you have a wonderful time! I raise a silver cup in you honour! :drunk: :punk:

Paddy O'Dwain, Now that's a fitting name for Saint Patrick's Day! Hoorah!!!

Same here with me, although she crossed the Irish sea and not the Atlantic Ocean. Saves on travel time! I'm curious what my Gaelic name would be: dfadydoniawsneav. Woo-hoo, early party!!! :drunk: :pimp:

The Romans rarely wasted their material and so only a little of what they have thrown away has survived. It's obvious that a lot of the organic material like leather would rot away. According to an article I read in 'British Archaeology' a few years back, rubbish in some ancient societes was set out in such a a structured order, that a lot of people considered that some rubbish was ritually thrown away.

Happy Birthday Imperator!!!

They certainly sound interesting Augusta. My own library of books on Persia is certainly lacking. I only have 'The Forgotten Empire: The World of Ancient Persia' as well as 'The Persian Army'. Most of the other books I have deal with Persia from the perspective of the Greeks or Romans.

I don't know if this will be of any help to you: Deepeeka Roman Helmets Some of them look more accurate than others. There doesn't seem to be a 'Maximus Cavalry helmet' specifically. Gladiator props Unfortunately I can only seem to find his Gladiator helmet and sword, not the cavalry one. Here's some more props: Gladiator props Here are some props from King Arthur, it does contain a cavalry helmet, except it seems to be missing its crest: King Arthur props

I rarely read historical fiction, and when I do, it's usually outside of the Roman era. I was impressed by Bernard Cornwell's take on a historical King Arthur in his Warlord Trilogy ( The Winter King, Enemy of God Excalibur. I've read his Alexander trilogy. I found the first two parts to be rather good but not brilliant. The last book 'To the ends of the Earth' was a dissapointment. It seemed rushed in comparison to the other two, and Manfredi struggled to fit in all of the events from Alexander's arrival in Egypt to his death in Babylon. It seemed to me as if he had been too generous with his time in parts one and two (almost as if he was considering on extending Alexander's story into several long volumes) only to be told by his publishers that the story needed to be wrapped up by volume three.

It isn't surprising to see them regurgitating old material. Are they still showing 'The Roman War Machine' ? I remember seeing that when it first aired at the end of the last millennium about 2 years back I had a chance to tune into the History Channel only to see that the show was being repeated, although now it had been heavily edited, meaning that most of the good material had been removed.

According to Vegetius the plumbatae were very effective, he states: " If soldiers throw them at the right moment, it seems as if shield-bearing infantry were almost to imitate the role of archers. For to wound the enemy and his horses before they could get not merely to close quarters, but even within range of javelins." The plumbatae also had the advantage of being easier to throw in a tight formation. The Romans had other effective spears and javelins at their disposal which would have done the job, such as the 'gaesum', which is sometimes referred to as a 'angon'. As for bowmen, they were employed much more frequently than in earlier times and in greater numbers. Vegetius says that a "third or fourth of recruits, those with talent, should be excercised at the post with wooden bows and training arrows..." It should also be noted that infantrymen of this period began using primitive crossbows called 'arcubalistae' by Vegetius. As well as having large detachments of archers in the military, the later Legions also made use of fundiotres (slingers) and cavalry archers. This illustration by Gerry Embleton should give you an idea of the destructiveness of missile barages in late Roman warfare: The Battle of Strasbourg, AD 357

The film is about to be released in the US this week. So far, it's teetering on the brink of being 'rotten' according to the film site 'Rottentomatoes'. It ranks as 60% out of a hundred with 12 positive and 8 negative reviews. The number will of course grow, when the film is officially released. Despite this, the public has rated the film 90%. All in all, it's doing alright, considering that Alexander ranked at 8% in its opening week. It currently sits at 14%.

Although I don't have 'the History Channel' and therefore I can't discuss the program, but I am curious if these are the documentaries they aired a few years back- in which they had full scale reconstructions of the lives of barbarian warriors- The Huns, Goths, Vikings and Mongols. Will Terry Jones' series be aired as well? Or is this a completly new line up of shows?

Although not the worse, the sixteenth century monk, Bartoleme de Las Casas mentions people being thrown into pits filled with sharpened stakes. A bit similar to being impaled, except that your entire body falls onto them, instead of just one being stuck into you, as was the traditional method used by Vlad Dracul.

This is no different to the role of an Optio in a Republican or Imperial era legion. They would butt wary legionary's back into battle with their staffs, and their primary function seems to have been to stop the army from disintegrating . The Tesserarii (officers of the Watchword) also served a similar purpose in the Imperial Legion. Even the Hoplites of Greece had veterans at the back to make sure the newer recruits would not attempt to retreat in battle. It seems that these officers were an integral part of numerous armies of the ancient World, and not a sign that the Field armies of the Later Empire were poorly disciplined. It would also seem that the comitatenses recieved a good standard of training, which is displayed in their flexibility and discipline in the field. Other units were not so good. We hear of some units of limitanei who would have tend to farms, weave baskets etc instead of training for combat. Vegetius argues against them in some of his works. Even so, several other units of limitanei were exceptionally well trained and were always ready for combat, especially those posted among the Danube - where the Romans faced some of their largest threats. By the mid third century, the lorica segmentata was fallling out of popularity. One of the reasons was that the armour was being manufactured in fabricae (factories) and it was difficult to mass produce segmentata, although much easier to make hamata, which was the main armour for the infantryman of the period. As the authour of the De Rebus Bellicis tells us, as a far as an infantryman is concerened as long as he is wearing his helmet, a thoracomachus, iron greaves and his shield, he is ready to enter into battle. The Departmet of Archaeology at Reading University conducted tests on the effectiveness of hamata and squamata armour, and they came to the conclusion that it afforded 'very effective' protection to the wearer, even without under-armour padding on some ocassions. Even so, segmented and plate armour found its way into the cavalry, and was among the main equipment of the Catapractoii and Clibanarii. This is true. The infantrymen carried the semi-spatha into battle. The spatha had been the chosen sword of the cavalrymen since earlier times (perhaps as far back as the early first century AD) as it was much longer than the gladius, and therefore much easier to wield on horseback. The spatha was not of a poorer quality in comparison to the gladius. If anything it was it was better-It was an excellent stabbing and hacking weapon. According to I.P Stephenson: "While in in open, or skirmish, order on the extra blade length of the spatha gave it an edge over its predecessor (the gladius)." The abandoment of the pilum is understandable. The plumbatae, the lead darts carried on the inside of the shield became the primary missile weapons of the age. Several of them could be carried into battle, unlike the pila, of which there were two. During these times, the opening of a battle would sometimes start with a prolonged barge of missiles - like that at the Battle of Strasbourg in AD 357. As a result a large number of missiles would be needed, and the plumbatae would have been useful in situations like these. The late Roman infantryman also had other types of spear and javelin at his disposal, including the spiculum, a heavy javelin that was similar to the pilum. A lancea was a light spear that could be thrown in battle or used for hand to hand combat. This was particuarly useful in an era when cavalry charges were frequent.