DecimusCaesar

Sorry my mistake. Some Persian line troops were armed and armoured in a similar way to the hoplites in linothorax armour and large round shields, unfortunately this was closer to Alexander's time and not during the Persian Wars of a 150 years earlier. Only the cavalry of the Persian Wars era would have been so heavily armed and armoured (according to Nick Sekunda's The Persian Army 560 - 330 BC) so Julius Ratus is right about this one.

Thanks for the article FC, a really interesting find! Strange they never came across it when they were excevating the site in the 70s. Hopefully they will post pictures soon.

Then tie it around the neck of their horses or display it at gatherings in celebration.

I found it better than the Caesar one I (nearly) saw last week, but then again I have very little knowledge on Tiberius Gracchus. Did anyone else think that the opening battle had something very 'Saving Private Ryan' about it? The part where he peers behind a wall and the Carthaginian archers shoot at him, reminds me of the part in 'Ryan' when they are held up at the bottom of the bunker and they send the sniper to shoot the German soldiers with the machine guns. I found it odd that no mention was made of Tiberius's brother who would go on to shake the foundations of the Republic after his death. The program also seemed to suggest that Rome was a democracy in one scene where a man tells Tiberius about the large crowd that has gathered and he replies'good...that means more votes.' I was pleased to see that they had decided to show the Roman army as it was during that era, with Triarii, Hastatii and so on instead of it being a army that consisted of Legionnaires. Perhaps someone with a better knowledge of Tiberus's day will be able to give a better description of what was and wasn't accurate.

The Oxford historian Robin Lane Fox decided to end his book 'The Classical World' with the death of the Emperor Hadrian. He sees it beginning with the poetry of Homer. The reason he places it at the death of Hadrian is that he consideres that era to be the last flourishing of the type of poetry made famous by Homer.

Interestingly I have come across the same ideas, for instance that Ajax was a warrior from a different period because the descriptions of his armour do not correspond with the archaeological discoveries from around the era of the Trojan war (c.1200 BC). He carries a large shield covered in leather, which according to some Bronze age historians puts him at an earlier age to the Trojan war as less emphasis was put on large shields by the Myceneans at that period as improved bronze armour was being constructed. Were there bronze helmets being used at this time or were the 'boar-tusk' helmets still in circulation?

I'm not sure why the Persians attempted so many invasions of Greece. I think they might have done it originally as revenge for the burning of the Persian city of Sardis. They must have considered the Greeks to be too violent to be ignored. Later on after the failed invasions they decided to play the Greeks against each other (Persia supplied Sparta with a navy in the Peloponnesian war). This was obviously the best strategy as no doubt another invasion would have cost too many lives and resources. If they played them against each other then they could feel safer that the Greeks would be fighting amongst themselves instead of planning another attempt to liberate the Greek cities in Asia Minor.

Very good selection Pertinax. I found the portable shrine to Hermes interesting as well as the image of Hercules. I notice the room for the soldiers pay is a often the best preserved part of Roman forts in Britain, probably because it was underground.

This is a real shame. Too think the settlement had been there for such a long time, only to be destroyed like that. What will become of the landlord, will he be fined?

It is very hard to interpret when Antiquity came to an end,300 476, 500, 640, 800 the list of dates is enormous and most historians can't agree on it. I think we can all agree that the Antique world had certainly ended by the beginning of the last Millennium (c.1000 AD) as I can't imagine that the Battle of Hastings or the First Crusade would be considered part of the Antique world of Greece and Rome. I think that it came to an end in some parts of the mediterranean at different times. It had certainly ended in the West before it came to an end in the east.

I haven't seen their portrayl's of Caesar, although I have seen Claude Rains in some other films like Lawrence of Arabia.

That's a good article...I never studied history or archaeology when I was in University (which I just finished a few months ago). Even If I wanted to go study it , I wouldn't have the money or the time to go on another university course which is a shame.

Personally I found Hinds' portrayl of Caesar to be the best I had seen so far (although I haven't seen all screen adaptions of Caesar's story). I agree with Cato on this one.

History was written, if you consider what Herodotus wrote: 'in order to keep the memories and the deeds of our ancestors alive'. People study history because they are curious as what occured long before their own times and before the generation of their grandparents. Oddly enough most history taught in schools these days only expand back to our granparents generation and no further than the beginning of the 20th Century. One philosopher once wrote that the sign of a primitive people is 'those who cannot remember the past beyond their grandfather's time...' sadly most people these days cannot remember the events that took place during their own lifetime (I suppose I'm one of them). I think one of the main reasons history is taught is that people throught the ages have wanted to be immortal, they wanted to be remembered for doing something. That is why, even today, people (even those who have no intrest in history) say that they want to make 'history' by doing something spectacular or unique. People are afraid that after the last member of their generation dies then their whole world will disappear with them and everything they knew and understood will be forgotten. Imagine if a 100 years from now nobody would remember anything of the events, people, culture, art, music etc of our own time. That is why history is written, so that the world we live in and the people who occupied it shall be remembered.

This begs the question are we still living in an industrial society like that of the 19th century Victorians or are we living in a digital age? Personally I can connect better with ancient authors and the ancient world than I can with the Victorians, perhaps it is because Rome was a multinational, multicultural Empire and in that way it was very similar to our world compared to traditional Victorian society. Then again my opinion has been coloured by the fact that I have more of an intrest in Ancient Rome than in the Victorian world and I could be just picking out stuff that made us similar to the Romans and ignoring those things that make us disimilar (the religion, technology etc). Perhaps if my knowledge of the 19th century was better I would be saying that we have stronger connection with the Victorians than with a distant era like Rome.

Ah! Bettany Hughes's documentary, she has done some work with Paul Cartledge in the past. I saw a few minutes from this series and it sounded interesting. I would buy the DVD if I had more money, but I suppose I have to wait for another time as most of my family and my friends are having their birthdays this month.

I had always traditionally seen the end of antiquity as AD 476 and the fall of the Western Empire. Some Medieval Scholars are placing it earlier, with the Middle ages beginning around AD 300 due to the Feudalisation/Christianization of the Empire. Many other factors go with this theory, as PP has already mentioned heavy cavalry became more prominent at this period (Cataphracts and Clibanarii as early Knights?) and the richest Romans began recruiting their own soldiers to protect their property after Adrianople as well, spelling the end of the traditional Roman army and the beginning of the feudal soldiers of the Medieval period. Other scholars suggest it's end at AD 800 with the fall of Ravenna and Charlemagne's re-establishment of the Holy Roman Empire, others claim it ends with the Rise of Islam and their conquest of the Middle East. This conquest did bring an end to urbanisation (which had been so important in the Classical era)and the re-distribution of the population in the countryside. It also signalled the beginning of a new world order - Islam, which would sweep away the Roman Empire in the east after the Germanic tribes had destroyed it in the west. That is why I am starting to prefer that the Classical World came to an end in the 7th Century.

In many battles the Persians did not have a chance to use the chariots or cavalry (even if they had brought them over) as Greek terrain was often unsuited for it, too much hills and not enough flat terrain (note: King Darius at Gaugamela in Iraq sending his army to level the desert floor so his chariots could move unhindered...didn't work though). It is true that the vast majority of Persian troops were no match for the Greek Hoplites, but some of King's own soldiers were very good warriors. Still, this lack of good Persian infantry might have led to the Persian King of Kings recruting Greek mercenaries into his armies (like Memnon of Rhodes during Alexander's day).

It ought to be out by March 2007.