WotWotius

Bolton is a long way from Leicester, whats the matter with your home town club?? Don't mean to be nosey but i'm just a bit curious I just like the name: I take a very scant interest in football, so I only really judge team by their names and kits etc.

I don't know what to say...that man was Ray Mears and David Attenborough rolled into one great Australian package. Horriable bussiness indeed.

I admit the book had an encapsulating story--whether or not it was Dan Brown's is another story. However, it was written in such a clunky manner that it just got on my nerves. And as for the film, quite frankly I found it offensive...albino monks are not like that in real life .

True, at this time, Churchill's 'we 'must never surrender' attitude was by no means reflexive of the Britain's populace. I think Britain's previous Prime Minister, Neville Chamberlin, embodied the view of her public (a public desperate to avoid any form of war). If he were not doing it because public opinion dictated him to, why else would he have launched his 'appeasement' policy? Sometimes I wonder what would have happened if Chamberlin opted for the weaker willed Lord Halifax over Churchill as his successor. I'm afraid I am going to have to disagree with you there. Prior to 1941, America was taking a firm anti-Nazi stance: unlike in WWI, 'lend-lease' was limited to the Allies only; FDR gave frequent talks on how the USA was the 'great arsenal of democracy'; many political pressure groups (including many civil rights organisations) were actively against the atrocities taking place in Europe--the CR campaigner Phillip Randolph at this point was already talking of launching a 'double V campaign' (Victory over tyranny, and Victory over the civil administration); and come Operation Barbarossa, the USA extended 'lend-lease' to the USSR as she was now an ally of Britain. I admit that all of this was before Britain and the USA's 'special relationship', but you cannot assertively say that the US viewed the UK as just a neutral partner to sell arms to. Pearl Harbour was only a catalyst for further military support--in other words the USA would have entered eventually.

I found quite a nice military bust of the Emperor Galba with a fairly Hellenistic looking Gorgon on his breastplate: I think it was a fairly common emblem to have on Imperial busts.

What do you think?

Even King (former king during the Battle of Britain) Edward VIII was a keen sympathasizer of Mosley. I am curious to know whether or not Mosley met Hitler--I vaguely remember being told he did. Does anybody know the fine details of this event?

It comes from Plutarch--I was only reading this last night...strange. Below is a quote from source in question: 'It is said of Helvia, the mother of Cicero, that she was well born and lived an honourable life; but of his father nothing can be learned that does not go to an extreme. For some say that he was born and reared in a fuller's shop, while others trace the origin of his family to Tullus Attius, an illustrious king of the Volscians, who waged war upon the Romans with great ability. However, the first member of the family who was surnamed Cicero seems to have been worthy of note, and for that reason his posterity did not reject the surname, but were fond of it, although many made it a matter of raillery. For "cicer" is the Latin name for chick-pea, and this ancestor of Cicero, as it would seem, had a faint dent in the end of his nose like the cleft of a chick-pea, from which he acquired his surname. Cicero himself, however, whose Life I now write, when he first entered public life and stood for office and his friends thought he ought to drop or change the name, is said to have replied with spirit that he would strive to make the name of Cicero more illustrious than such names as Scaurus or Catulus. Moreover, when he was quaestor in Sicily and was dedicating to the gods a piece of silver plate, he had his first two names inscribed thereon, the Marcus and the Tullius, but instead of the third, by way of jest, he ordered the artificer to engrave a chick-pea in due sequence. This, then, is what is told about his name.' Plutarch, life of Cicero, I

Rough Crossings, Simon Schama This may not be exactly what your looking for, but I recently received this book as a birthday present, and from what little I have read of it (I've only had time to read the preface), it seems like it has some potential. Even though I absolutely detest Simon Schama's onscreen presence, I have read his History of Britain, and I hate to say it but he is a worthy popular historian who delivers interesting, though not too taxing, points on Britain's past.

...so he engineered his own downfall?

Yes, enjoy you spoils.

I have juist finished an A-level in American history (1877-1993), and I found that the most interesting book I read for the subject was: The Unfinished Journey, William H Chafe

The book I'm reading states that, according to the epigraphical evidence, the majority of auxillia stationed at Hadrian's Wall were in fact from overseas. Roman Britain, Peter Salway It was interesting what you said about British troops stationed on the Danube. Do you know of any British inscriptions from that area?

I've been looking for a replica of the famous bronze miniature statue of the Spartan warrior below. Does anybody know where I might be able to obtain one?

I heartily agree. I also thought that Brutus was perfectly played and scripted; he was exactly as I imagined him to be. No, I think Cincinnatus was a more prominent (even legendary) Roman historical figure than Cinna, who history has generally given a bad press. Besides, I think that the whole purpose of the dialogue was to indicate the ignorance of the common plebs (e.g. Pullo). And the reason Cincinnatus is not mentioned in Rubicon is probably due to the fact that the book deals with the Late Republican period--Cincinnatus came much earlier.

Hehe, amazing. Click for a live version.

They are actually many examples of mutinous legionaries, just read Tacitus. In the Agricola, he refers to the ample amount of mutinies taking place in Britain during the 60s AD. Additionally, in his Annals, Tacitus gives an excellent account of how during the rule of Tiberius, unrest was stirred up by Roman soldiers on the Rhine wanting to be discharged. If my memory serves, I do believe there is a story in there which talks about legion cementing their eagle into its podium; so when the men were called to arms, they passed off the fact that the eagle couldn't be moved as a sure sign that the gods did not want them to fight.

What I find so hard to understand is why Brutus followed Pompey so willingly. Pompey did in fact kill Brutus' father for his association in the troubles caused by Lepidus in 77 BC. Allying himself to Caesar would have given Brutus the perfect opportunity to settle an old grudge.

No, Polish is the way forward.

Maybe the fact that Varus--lawyer and clearly a man non-military integrity--was appointed as a governor of a frontline province, indicates that in the eyes of Augustus, the province at this time was pacified.

Do you know if its the BBC or HBO Version out of curiousity. I didn't know that there was any difference. BBC has more sex and less politics The truncated episodes being 1,2 , 11 and 12, each of these "pairs" being edited together as single episodes. You gotta love our liberal censors.

That's the sort of pain I went through; I just didn't what to scare young Antiochus.

Fair point. I always thought that he resigned because he was physically and mentally exhausted. If you don't mind me asking, I am interested to know what your Whitehall job was during the 1970s.

Are there any figures regarding the population of the Roman Empire as a whole?

The original US government system was, in a way, based on the Roman Republican system. Maybe the statue was a tribute to Rome's pre-Imperial government.