DecimusCaesar

Interestingly enough Stonehenge wasn't originally concieved as a monument built out of stone. It was built in various stages across a period of a few hundred years. Originally it was only a circle mound with an earthwork enclosure built around 3000-2920 BC. The second phase consisted of timber logs which were placed in side the circle around 2900-2600 BC. Then followed the early stone stage where smaller stone monuments were added after 2550 BC. It was only around 2440 to 2100 BC that the massive stone lintels were added and Stonehenge started to look like it does today. Then from 2280 to 1930 BC some of the stones were repositioned, where they have remained in their places till modern times (except for some periods when they collapsed). It is odd to believe that the Minoan Civilisation began flourishing a short while after the completion of Stonehenge.

Mesopotamia was certainly more fertile during the era. During Sumerian times one of it's main sources of wealth was for people to dive for pearls. I'm not sure in which region this took place, but it is believed that the story of Gilgamesh swimming to the bottom of the ocean to retrive the branch of eternal life was based on this. This goes to show how different the area must have been compared to modern times, so the Hanging Gardens might have been sustainable.

Have Fun! God I miss my University days....I've only just finished a few months ago. Unfortunately there was no real Classics society in our University, so I never got a chance to go to any meetings. I didn't even study any sort of history at University. Wish I had. Still, It was one of ,if not, THE best times of my live.

Interesting article. I read that many famous figures such as Cleopatra used to dye their hair. I have wondered how effective were wigs in ancient times? Would they have looked realistic or would they have just been big clumps of hair sown on to material?

During a recent discussion on 'HBO's Rome' thread, 'Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa' (c.64 BC - AD 14) was brought up. Some forummers said they admired him and that his role in history has been downplayed by his friend Augustus Caesar, who wanted to claim the victory at Actium as his own. Yet Agrippa had an impact on other areas as well. His defeat of Sextus Pompey was an important event that shaped the last few years of the Republic. His building projects helped Augustus make Rome into the city of Marble. Even his bloodline would have an impact on the Julio-Claudian dynasty. How much of an impact did Agrippa have on the end of the Republic and the early Principate? Was he really one of the most important men of the era or is his importance overplayed?

True, the Spartans did wear red robes but they never wore them in battle, they were too valuable.I think that the game desingers were skimming through the Osprey book 'The Spartan Army' when they designed the Hoplites to look like that, as there is a drawing that looks just like them in the game. It also makes sense as the later era Spartan Hoplites had given up wearing Corinthian helmets and had began wearing Conical shaped ones. They were based on this picture: Spartan Hoplites The Armies of Egypt did contain Phalanxes although not of the type shown in the game. The Ptolemaies recruited Greek soldiers to serve in their armies, who would have been equipped in the same fashion as the the Seleucids, Antigonids and the Macedonians. For some reason they have made the Egyptian soldiers in the game look as if it is the Bronze age (They look as if they are from the New Kingdom era of Egyptian history, not as Hellenistic soldiers). They probably did this to add variety to the game as many would be disappointed to see the Egyptians looking no different to the Seleucids or Macedonians. 'The New Kingdom' look is the archetypal look for the Ancient Egyptians, people usually think they look liked that when they think of Ancient Egypt. It is true what you say about the Lambada being the symbol of Sparta, it's odd that the game producers made it a symbol for the Macedonians.

You would be right Spittle, the last episode is about the fall of Rome. I wonder how they will cover it. Come to think of it, will they place the Fall of Rome as Alaric's sacking of the city? or Gaiseric's? or Romulus Augustulus's surrender to Odoacer? I didn't think of Rome as it also contains a fictionalised storyline involving Vorenus, Pullo, the families of the main characters as well as some other charcters that have been thought up by the series creator. It might be the most accurate depiction of Rome as an 'Entertainment' program but it strays off the path of accuracy more often than the 'Ancient Rome' documentary.

Bronze Age Greece: On the early history of Greece, especially the Greek Bronze Age 'In Search of the Trojan War' by Michael Wood is great (as well as the BBC series the book accompanies) as well as 'The Greece of Odysseus' by Peter Connolly (which gives a very basic outline of the Trojan war, with some great pictures - it's very short too). 'The Myceneans c. 1650-1100 BC' byNicolas Grguric is a good book that gives a brief outline of Warfare in Mycenean Greece. 'Mycenean Citadels c. 1350-1200 BC' by Nic Fields also gives a good short coverage of Bronze age settlements like Tiryns, Mycenae and so on. 'Mycenae: Agammemnon's Capital' by Elizabeth French is also worth a look as she has been working as an archaeologist on the site for years, although the book is more academic than the other titles listed. Classical Greece: the Histories of Herodotus are a must as well as the outline of the lives of the famous Greeks by Plutarch. Thucydides is good as well as Xenophon's account on the March of the Ten thousand. 'Persian Fire' by Tom Holland is definately a good book to read up on if you are new to the history of Greece. It gives an account of the Greco-Persian Wars. 'The Spartans: An Epic History' by Paul Cartledge is worth a look as well - he is an expert on their culture. 'The Greeks at War: From Athens to Alexander' (Philip de Souza et al) gives a brief overview of the major wars in Ancient Greece from the Persian Invasions, Pelopennesian War and on to Alexander's campaigns. 'The Greeks: Their Life and Customs' (E. Guhl and W.Koner) is an old book (maybe out of date too) that gives an outline of the architecture and material culture of Classical Greece. Alexander and Hellenistic World: Arrian's account of Alexander's life is the greatest that has survived to our time: he sees Alexander as a hero. Quintus Curtius Rufus's account is also good, he sees Alexander as a Tyrant. Peter Green's biography is brilliant as well, as is Robin Lane Fox's. Michael Wood's book and TV series 'In the Footseps of Alexander the Great' is good for beginners. To get an understanding of Alexander the Great's personality 'The Nature of Alexander' by Mary Renault is good. 'Conquest and Empire' by A. B. Bosworth is also a thorough and academic research on Alexander's life. 'Alexander the Great' by Nick Sekunda and John Warry deals with the Macedonian army and the Campaigns of Alexander (it also contains many illustrations). 'The Hellenistic World' by F.W Walbank is a description of the World after Alexander up until the Conquests of Rome.

I'd have to agree with a lot of others on this thread and go with Athens. It's cultural achievemnets were spectatular (as are its monuments), it was the home of Democracy and Philosophy for some time as well. Sparta I find to be a lot worse, they had the best army but their society was a totalitarian militaristic one that shunned learning and remained so opposed to new ideas that they allowed themselves to be defeated numerous times by the Thebans under Epaminondas. Although they saved Greece at Thermopylae (even though they lost) they were still a terribly brutal society.

Oddly enough I was searching through a list of Iron Age Tribe names (and their capitals) today. It's amazing considering that many countries in Europe still have Celtic place names - there's lots to be found across England - Stratford Upon Avon being one, Tyriola in Germany (or is it Austria?) is another...even after a period of a few millennia the place names have become so engrained in peoples minds that they have survived in countries that have been over run by numerous invaders since the Iron Age.

I think the Varangians were like the Imperial German guard of the Julio-Claudians, they had no connection to state politics or the culture they existed in...they were foreign mercenaries that were hired by the Emperors to serve them and they depended on them for food, pay, shelter etc When Nikephoras Phokas was killed his Varangian Guard thought of killing his murderers but seeing as he was already dead they were free from his service and therefore they held back. If they had been present they would have defended their Emperor to the best of their abilities no doubt. This is slightly off-topic but seeing as the discussion was about foreign troops in employ of some countries, didn't Henry V have a retinue of Welsh archers as his personal bodyguard?

I'm not sure which ones but I am sure I've had problems with the Glory of the Army folder. Then again this problem seems to come and go..one day it works fine, the next I have little troubles. There are other times, such as a few weeks ago that I could barely go on the site as pages took a long time to load. It's much better today. Should I report any problem to this thread if I encounter something in the future? (saves on having to send PMs to the site adminstrators).

I've also had the same problem with the forum. It keeps logging me out when I look at some pages. A while ago I had the opposite problem - I would log out when I left the site and when I would come back I would still be logged on. I contacted Viggen about the problem and he suggested I selected the delete cookies option at the bottom of the page. I have also run Virus and Anti-spyware scans on my computer and nothing has come up so it must be a problem with the forum.

I don't think that Caesar had to worry about over-feeding his soldiers or making them lazy. At Dyrrachium and before Pharsalus he kept his veterans occupied with many jobs such as constructing ditches and building other structures. Caesar had more to worry about his veterans having nothing to do, because they frequently mutinied through boredom and inactivity rather than through lacking a proper diet.

Sounds good Ludovicus! Though I suppose it's very hard to get a copy of it on DVD. It's a shame really as this era of Roman History is continually ignored by film makers or if they attempt to tackle it they do a botched job of showing Rome and the Romans as if it were the golden age of Trajan - Marcus Aurelius.

I've noticed that the series tries to keep the amount of characters down so that they concentrate on the lives of some figures in more detail. If they add too much people then the story becomes too complex to explain in an hour. This would put off a lot of viewers who have no knowledge of ancient Rome so I guess that some people (including Gaius Gracchus) had to be cut out of the story. Whether this decision was made by Mary Beard or the BBC is another matter (I think its the BBC's decision - they care more about viewing figures than historical accuracy). Still, they did very good considering the budget and time they had to do the series. Plus you have to admit, it is probably the most accurate depiction of Ancient Rome ever attempted by a documentary series or Film for that matter.

Here is one example I have found: Byzantine Flag Hopefully this is the one you mean... I have found another different example of the flag: Second Byzantine Flag

Thanks Phil, I was curious about that. After reading up more on Tiberius Gracchus, it seems like the BBC did make quite a good job even if some of the ideas about him were outdated- The show suggested he ran for Tribune of the People as revenge for the Numantaine debacle, but modern scholarship has rejected this theory somewhat. Other stuff was very good such as Scipio Aemillianus ordering a painting of the storming of Carthage as well as some of the speeches made in the TV show was based on actual speeches told by Tiberius according to Appian in the Civil Wars. Now let's see what they do with Vespasian's story.

I didn't see much of that show and I seem to have forgotten a lot from it. I also have a very vague memory of Alexander as I only saw it once about a year ago. What was the referance? I also noticed that one of the actors from tonight's program had died shortly after the filming. I don't know what he is called as he isn't listed on film sites.