M. Demetrius

Well, I wrote this a few years ago, and I guess that it proves that not only do some straight men read poetry, some of us even write it. Anyway, since others are not quoting just one stanza, here goes: Signatures David Wills When we're huddled 'round the fire in December's stormy blow And the snow is dancing jigs around our knees, And the naked branches rattle in the field all night and day With no scrap of tattered leaf towards wind or lee And the morning shows no shadows and the grey sky rubs our caps, And we wonder how much colder could it be-- Just remember there's good purpose for this shivering that we feel, And the Planner's put it there for you and me. Like a novel has its chapters, and a poem has its verse, And a concert's movements measure short or long, So each season has a purpose with a meaning all its own Like each songbird offers up a different song. Using starshine for its pigment on the frozen window glass, The Winter scrawls its signature along. Our mortal way of viewing life is like that shining frost: Though we thinke we're made of power, we are wrong. Let the chilly blast of winter jab its fingers at our ears, And we bow our heads no matter where we stand. Yes, the Plan has made us humble, and we tremble with its power, and we whisper, "What a feeble thing is Man." Yet, a masterpiece are we, and no finer could be found Whether searching out the sky or sea or land For the signatures our windows bear is authored by the Lord, And is written in His blood, by His own hand.

They put up the marching camp in the same day they arrived. One night sleeping out in the open is all it would take to be wiped out by an attacking enemy army. We computed that a two cohort (approx 1000 men at full strength) army would be responsible for around 6 to 8 linear feet of ditch/berm per man. It's an incredible feat for us to consider, but it was their way of life, and they were incredibly organized about it. They slept in tents, of course. 8 men to a 9' x 9' "contubernium tent", nicknamed "papilio" (butterfly) because of the shape a wall tent makes on the ground when laid out flat, doors opened. These tents were made of goat leather panels, best we know, and had sidewalls about 18" high. They were around six feet tall at the ridge. They might stay a day or two, but when they left they burned the 4 gates (I believe they recovered the hardware of hinges and such) and moved on, leaving the ditches in place.

[ soapbox ] The previous post reminded me of something I forgot to say earlier. We don't really have public schools in America: we have state schools. A public school is a relic from history, in which the local community would have control and meaningful input into the school board's decisions. Now, with the representative school boards we have, elected people simply do what they think best, once elected. Same upward through the government, to the top echelons in Congress and the White House. I've been to many school board meetings to try to get conflicting or opposing views, and basically, I've noticed that they give you your few minutes to address them, then go on ahead and do what they'd planned to do all along. It's not really a genuine public input. The state/federal rules apply, not community standards, not anything else. I don't mind so much that they require taxes to fund, after all, taxes build highways, not individuals (and I like highways). But it's just silly to think that bureaucracy won't corrupt any institution. The foremost goal of any bureaucracy is self preservation, and self aggrandizement. [ /soapbox ]

Your assessment is pretty accurate, as far as I can tell. I've sent 4 through the system, and the 5th is a Junior in High School. It's not money, they get lots of that, it's the curriculum that's to blame. Political correctness is one enemy, and that one will grow as time goes by. Another is that the Teacher Union has such a tight grip on the choices that the school boards at all levels make. Huge lobby and PAC influence. I'll leave the varying world view collisions as they are, so as not to get into a philosophical argument here. The anti-religious movement is having its day right now, and that causes some omissions from history to be made. We home schooled our kids for a while, until our situation changed and we couldn't do that any more. At the time they entered the public schools, we had a 7th, 3rd and 1st grader. The principal called in a week or so and said they wanted to put them all into a "Gifted and Talented" program. I asked why, and was told that they were such great students, and so smart. I replied that they were really just normal kids, but they could all read, write, make reports (at their levels, of course) and cipher, because we'd been teaching them to do that. Around here the G&T program is more a social indoctrination into New Age thinking than accellerated education. We eschewed that, because we don't suscribe to that thinking. It's not hard or costly to educate children, but it's sometimes difficult to steer their philosophy, and to cause them to be something they are not. IMHO, that's part of the problem, too.

There is a partially completed reconstruction of a Roman marching camp at www.ad43.org. It's located in NE Arkansas, and each March they have a reenactor camp there. Lots of Romans and Celts marching around, battling, etc. One of the best Roman reenactments in the US. The leadership would be glad to share their sources with you, I'm sure. Check it out.

And some areas of england too. I know of at least two llama farms. There are llamas and alpacas all over Central Texas. The llamas are used as coyote defenders for those who raise sheep and goats. They spit goo at the coyotes, and will kick and stomp them. Coyotes move on to easier prey, evidently. One of our near neighbors raises llamas, and they shear them for wool (she's a spinner). And the horse. I wonder if there was a cataclysmic event here around that time...corresponding with the last Ice Age?

There was a "camel corps", and the Wikipedia article, though very short, is accurate. All the Romans reportedly did, however, is hire local camel cavalry, and enlist them into the ranks of Auxilia. They were not very popular, as horses and camels really don't get along. Same sort of thing was tried in the US Southwest during post-civil war days. Didn't work well there, either. http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php...ght=dromedarius

Gamaliel says very much the same thing early on in the Book of Acts. Probably the Romans didn't really care that much so long as there wasn't any trouble. Once the High Priest made it an issue, though, Pilate's purpose was to restore order, even if it meant being the proxy executioner for the Sanhedrin. You're not alone in that wish. Not just in Jerusalem, but Rome, Egypt (alas for the Alexandrian library) and other places. Razing a city to the ground and burning the rubble was commonplace when the seige was over. Who knows how many tons of scrolls and parchments were lost?

The question is already answered technically. There's a tomb in northern India that has been 'the last resting place of Jesus' for some considerable time. The local legends state that Jesus travelled to India as a young man (well, he does disappear for a while, and the other legends have him travelling to Britain... Your choice I guess until anyone has any real proof). Now this story has him adopting an version of buddhism which he preaches in Judaea on his return. In a way, it makes sense, because his message in Judaea isn't necessarily the one the bible relates, since the bible is an evolution of a censored version of stories written decades after his death. Paul was preaching as a career after Jesus's death (they never met), and took two years out before travelling to Rome to get his religious concepts together. What I believe Paul did was take bits of Jesus's preachings, which might well have been odd to mediterranean ears, and rebranded them in a more acceptable style, with added spice from other older existing religions, and basically created a faith that went on to greater things. Now the crucifixion isn't proven so I understand (don't quote me on that, I don't know the arguements for and against), and the story in India is that he returned having failed to convert his countrymen. He settled down, had children, and was buried in this particular tomb. Legends? Legends are just that, aren't they? Beowulf, Hiawatha, Odysseus, all legendary heroes, but not all their deeds are necessarily factual, are they? You've made your theory about Christianity known. And you are entitled to believe that or anything else you want to believe. We're all free to do so. Jesus' death is as well recorded as many if not most other contemporary deaths in Judea. If the Bible is viewed only as a historical record, and all the prophecies are left out, it's still consistent in that report. If the prophecies are included, it's a pretty interesting statistical picture. Gosh, what a long list of theories, sir. How do you suppose the body of Jesus would have gotten all the way to India, when the Bible clearly states it was laid in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Aramathea, a member of the Sanhedrin? The earliest discovered manuscripts of the Gospel of Mark are supposed to be only about 30 years younger than the original. That's a pretty close copy for an ancient document. Closer than De Bello Gallico by a couple of centuries. The Dead Sea scrolls should have laid to rest the theories about the Hebrew portion of the Bible being a distant cousin of the original writings, I'd think. The whole 27 foot long scroll of the Book of Isaiah's being essentially letter perfect to the modern Hebrew is reasonable enough. But that's another argument. I digress. Most of those other issues are actually addressed in the Bible, but I'm supposing you're ruling that out as a historical document, right? I don't find any teaching in the Bible that parallels Bhuddism, except for generalities like "you reap what you sow", common in many cultures, for example, and obvious to most of us anyway. Still, Paul was "in the desert" for seven years, according to the Book of Acts, after which he began his preaching career, but his teachings don't seem to be out of keeping with what Jesus taught, afaik. He went primarily to the Gentiles, Peter went primarily to the Jews. Could you point out an example or two of Paul's teachings that differ from Jesus'? Not that it makes much sense to argue the Bible with you, and that's not my intention. I just wonder why if I were to say, "Einstein said [factoid], Julius Caesar reported [factoid], the Bhagivad Gita teaches, [factoid], Immanuel Kant wrote [factoid], Nietschke said [factoid]" people (most of whom have never read these) smile, nod and say, "Yeah, that's right", but if I say, "The Bible says [factoid]" these same people will chorus "Well, that's your interpretation. Besides, that book has been changed so many times through translation that it doesn't say what it originally did." Interesting, but fruitless as a conversation. Many of the records in Jerusalem were reportedly destroyed when the city was taken over by the Sicarii zealots, then sacked and partly burned by the Romans in 70AD. I would not particularly expect that somewhere in a fireproof vault existed a list of all the crucifixions performed in and around Jerusalem. Josephus gives a general account of Jesus' crucifixion. Is his report, added to the Biblical insufficient evidence? I wonder if I were to make bold and broad assertions concerning Tacitus' life, or Caesar's, or Ptolemy's or whoever else ancient, if it would go unchallenged on a history board? I think not, but I could be wrong. Just out of curiosity, was Paul's beheading in Rome recorded? Church tradition says so, but I don't presently have any other sources. IIRC, that was sometime in the 70s, and most likely anybody in trouble from Judea at that time would not be well received in Rome, for obvious political reasons. War in Judea, change of emperors, need to make an example, etc.

So the Florida/Cuba/West Indies land bridge existed, but not Panama? Hmm. I'm not that old yet, so I don't remember. I may have missed it, but were the American Camels the Dromedary type?

Is however not? I don't guess I understand what your question is, then. The Israelis of today know where many of the patriarchs' tombs are, as they've handed down the information since it was new. Some of the Israeli ancient's tombs have been lost, that is, nobody knows where they are, some have been defaced and removed, some have crumbled and probably been built over by something else. To go into the tomb areas in Israel and locate a specific tomb from what's existing today without the continuous history would essentially be impossible, I think. They didn't put big tomb markers on most of them, maybe for a king or something, but not for the other people. Jesus' tomb would have been from the 30s AD, though, not 1 BC.

Is however not? I don't guess I understand what your question is, then. The Israelis of today know where many of the patriarchs' tombs are, as they've handed down the information since it was new. Some of the Israeli ancient's tombs have been lost, that is, nobody knows where they are, some have been defaced and removed, some have crumbled and probably been built over by something else. To go into the tomb areas in Israel and locate a specific tomb from what's existing today without the continuous history would essentially be impossible, I think. They didn't put big tomb markers on most of them, maybe for a king or something, but not for the other people. Jesus' tomb would have been from the 30s AD, though, not 1 BC.

Well, like everything else, caveat emptor. Do your research, be sure what you're getting, then be happy with the cheaper price. These five items are generally accepted in just about all the Reenactor Legions in the US, and reportedly in Europe. The helmet is the one most often seen on the Adamklissi Monument.

Zero. It was reported to have been destroyed during the Muslim occupation sometime around the end of the First Millennium. I no longer have the reference work that cited the date and names. These same kinds of defacements of tombs and ancient monuments are happening today, too.

Fakers do exist, and they deceive many. There are those, of course, who would draw the conclusion that simply having some of the same beliefs in one religion or another doesn't automatically mean they are copies or false. If truth exists, it will be found in many places to varying degrees. I suppose I know what you mean, but I don't agree with the apparent implication that Christianity is false because it shares ideas that exist in other religions. Counterfeit money shares many features of real money, but only one is real. I also rather suppose that even in a thread with a provocative title such as this one, it would be easy for a conversation like this to turn ugly. I don't think that's what the board is about, but if you do, then do as you will. I won't argue about the planks of Christianity with you, as you have already made it clear that you are antagonistic toward them. I believe; you don't. So be it. Don't confuse the basic concepts of Christianity with midieval priests' behavior. The Spanish Inquisition was anything but Christian in nature, though it was performed by leaders of the church of that day. Fakers? I say so, others say no. Pax Dei vobiscum

How, then, are we to explain the startling difference between Gaelic spoken in Ireland and the language of the Welsh? Are we to assume that they evolved from a "mutually intelligible dialect" in just over two millennia? Not that unbelievable, really. Read Chacer in the original. It's certainly unintelligible to a modern English reader, unless he's studied the Old/Middle English language, isn't it? How about the subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) differences in Shakespeare's English and our own? He was not using highbrow words for his day, he wrote so ordinary people could understand. Now I need a dictionary, and sometimes a cultural study to know what he really meant. Consider what our ancestors (some of mine are British) spoke in the year 8.

Well, like every other manufacturer, some of their "replicas" are somebody's fanciful idea of what the [insert object name] as an artifact looked like. In truth, almost NO helmets made today are "authentic", no matter who makes them, since they are not made of exactly the same metal alloy, not fabricated by hand made tools, hand hammered using only homemade charcoal (a decently made single piece bronze helmet made with whatever tools the armorer feels like using can cost above a thousand dollars and will have a year or two waiting period) etc., etc. Nothing we do is the very same. Having said that, the new versions of Deepeeka have been made or revised after talking to historians, many of whom furnished the equivalent of "blueprints" and measurements, and the helmets, for example, have been scaled up to fit modern Western heads. In short, they asked what people wanted to have that was regarded as authentic, and proceeded to make that, with supervision on the prototypes from historians and archaeologists. The brass is a little copper lean, compared to the originals (which was more like our "red brass", not the common "yellow brass"), and they use modern mild steel instead of hand smelted iron. But the shapes and details are about as close as can be expected. The particular helmet advertised is one of the generally approved ones. The new ones bear the suffix letter N after their catalog numbers. Bigwig reenactor/historian/archaeologist fellows have approved them. The two gladii are regarded by most reenactor groups as good enough for starters, until the reenactor can afford one of the hand forged 200 to 800 dollar blades, and a sheath of similar price. The brass work on the Deepeeka lockets, chapes and gutters is copied from museum specimens. The caligae do have machine stitching in the leather soles, and the hobnails used are not exactly the same shape and dimension as the Roman originals. The uppers have straps that are a little too wide for most people's taste, but a pair of good scissors can fix that in about an hour or so. Also, they are not custom fitted to the foot of the wearer, and may need a little tweaking to make them comfortable. Heck, I put a Dr. Scholl's gel pad with a leather oversole glued to it in mine. No sense in getting blisters, and my feet are not conditioned to hard leather soles with no heel, but with steel nails all over the bottom--very dangerous on polished floors, I guarantee from experience. The beaded pugio is the least accurate, but in Deepeeka's defense, nearly none of the pugiones that are of the lower price category by them or the other suppliers are made the same way as the majority of museum specimens. There are a few who copy the blade contour very closely, and the cross section as well, and some of them are said to be pretty good replicas, but the prices are five or six times the price of these. Still, the majority of Roman reenactor groups will pass the Deepeeka beaded pugio, and those centuriones don't mind having them in their muster line. So, I guess that's the sort of answer you were requesting? There are some groups that are so specific that unless you are wearing hand spun, hand woven, hand sewn Soay sheepwool tunicae, of the proper sized and ply of thread, proper natural Southern European dyestock, exact dimensions of some museum find, and unless your "persona" is perfectly period matched for every piece of gear (that they're looking up in their chosen textbook) you can't play with them. If your leather bag isn't from Southern Italian goatskins, if your sword isn't exactly like the specific one they've chosen, you can't carry it. Their lists go on. They are predictably small groups, with sore necks from their near vertical nasal postures. Deepeeka isn't a custom fabricator. They're like the Chevrolet. Lonely Mountain Forge, Joe Pielo, and a dozen or more other armorers are the Cadillacs. In the end, both cars will get you there, but the prices are considerably different. Primus Pilus, do you reenact, or do living history? If you do, surely you've met some of the "stitch counters" I'm referring to above. They're not much fun, and they really don't help further the hobby as much as they think they do, in my opinion. Authenticity is one thing, nitpicking is another.

Reenactorstuff dot net is selling off its 5 line items of Roman gear for really good prices. http://www.reenactorstuff.com/auction/cate...php?parent=1825 They have: Brass Acquincum helmets Caligae in various normal man's foot sizes Pompeii gladii Mainz gladii Beaded pugiones (daggers) The owner of the site says that when this present list of items is gone, there will be no more. All are made by Deepeeka in India. I don't work for them, just passing on a good deal I found on the Net. All those items are good for first or second Cent AD, or with the exception of the helmet 1st Cent BC, according to most reenactment groups. Always check with your own centurio before ordering ANYthing, or you might be embarrassed later.

Well, hold onto your pileii, there are many people today who believe God speaks to them, in His own time and ways. Not all of us are crazy, though it's clear some of us are. Also, some who say that they hear from God are not telling the truth.

Can you elucidate on the Clibanarii and Cataphracti, then? I thought those were armored heavy cavalry. The Clibanarius, in fact, was armored all over with a form of segmented armor, and it is said the horses wore some armor, too. Those were smaller horses than the Western European chargers, of course. But they didn't use them, evidently for a direct assault on massed infantry, probably, as already stated, to prevent their horses from tiring too soon.

Yes, Republican Roman Army 200-104BC page 21ff, evidently the source reference for this is Livy (26.4.4) Seems logical enough, not that modern logic has much to do with Ancient Thinking.

Deer would only do well in New York City if the underbrush and plant life, their food supply, as it were, suddenly increased. I'm in Central Texas, and a particular lakeside community here is peopled with those who thought the deer were beautiful, and began to feed them in their front yards. The deer figured out right away that rosebushes were a tasty snack, and they multiplied to such an extent that nobody could keep their bushes and trees any more. After the predictable outcry from the PETA people (who all live in other neighborhoods elsewhere, of course), hunters and catchers were brought in, and the herd was lessened. The live catches were released into the forests. They were probably the first ones taken in the next deer season, since they'd lost their fear of humans. The deer that were shot were butchered and the meat given to charity groups. If you feed a stray, it just might stick around. That may or may not be a good thing after all, you know? And in the rutting season, bucks are downright dangerous. Those antlers are not just for show.

There's not much to add to what has been said already, but a quick look at Trajan's Column, the Adamklissi metopes, and other reliefs on arches, grave stele, and art of various kinds universally shows the Roman cavalry horse as about the same size of the AmerIndian pony. Nobody faults the bareback, or near bareback riding Comanche for having smaller mounts. The real advantage of the horse in the sort of battle that Romans and their enemies fought is the ability to run down fleeing troops when a line breaks. Cavalrymen were wise enough to avoid getting surrounded by infantry. In the middle to late Republic, light infantry (velites) were sometimes ferried to crucial spots on the battlefield by riding double, then dropped off to skirmish at a flank or corner of the enemy line. This could tip the balance of the fight on that end of the line, by forcing the infantry to defend from the direct assault of heavier infantry and an enfilade attack of missiles. Smaller horses eat less. Mixed breeds are less prone to diseases, etc., just as in dogs, sheep, and other animals. The Romans understood how to breed livestock, and they were observant enough to note that big horses sired big horses in a general sense. Still, most of the cavalry were mercenaries, hired from cultures that were horse warriors. The Roman battle philosophy revolved around heavy infantry. Once the stirrup was brought to them, though, some say from the Sarmatians and Parthians, the whole nature of cavalry combat stepped up a notch.

In many Celtic societies, both Insular and Continental, women were, indeed, soldiers in the field. In some, they were the weapons trainers for aspiring young warriors. Although a queen such as Boudicca would probably not go into the thickest part of the battle, it's more than reasonable to presume she was involved, likely hurling javelins from her chariot. The commander in chief of any army is foolish to be in a position of extreme danger when there are other choices. It's much harder to command when dead. Boudicca, for example, would be able to fight hand to hand if that were the need of the time. I rather doubt she tried to break the Roman formation, as some shock troops would have done. But if a cavalryman or infantryman approached too close to her chariot, they did so at their own peril. No, she wasn't superwoman, but Celtic women had a reputation of being exceptionally fierce in battle. Sometime around 350-400AD, IIRC, a prominent church leader helped pass an ordinance that forbade women from fighting in combat.

And the first trip to the latrina would have been a dead giveaway. Don't think for a minute that word of a female in a camp of a zillion men would not have gotten around.... Menstruation. Lowering the right shoulder of the tunic for harder labor, wearing a tunic with no modern female underwear, well, it just wouldn't be a secret for long.