caldrail

I disagree. I would advise the use of the 1000BC limit to be regarded with some suspicion. It was dreamt up by Victorian antiquarians who had no access to modern research and were prone to making assertions like this in order to sound knowledgeable. Although the population of prehistoric Britain was never numerous, there were established populations here long before the celtic migrations, especially the Halstatt Gauls around 500BC. After all, the various megalithic sites, including Stonehenge and Avebury, went out of use around 1600BC, and for a considerable time represented the labour of an organised society. In fact Britain seems to have been colonised as soon as the withdrawing ice allowed them too, and evidence suggests at least one false start before a recurrent ice build-up. Ireland however was less frequented. The earliest confirmed archaeology is dated to around 6500BC, concerning people who must have arrived by sea because Ireland had been cut off by rising sea levels a thousand years earlier. According to Francis Pryor (Britain BC), these early irish lived in lightweightweight shelters, possible migratory camps, subsisting on a varied diet of fish, eel,wild pig,birds, and hazelnuts. Mr Pryor does mention the possibility that ireland was visited temporarily at an earlier date.

An invite! I don't get a lot of those these days, so imagine my delight at receiving an email inviting me to a gathering in Bristol. Unfortunately an evening in Bristol is not the quick dash down the road it once was. Now it's a major expedition, planned and funded to the last detail, and oddly enough for someone who once thought nothing of driving two hours for a night out, off the edge of known universe. I guess that's what happens when convenient transport is no longer affordable. And what, you may ask, is the invite for? It's an evening presentation on the significance of lean production in the context of logisitcs, organised by a higher level recruitment agency, and boy oh boy do I not want to waste my time travelling to take part in that. The least they could of done was laid on a rock band for the night. An Invite To... For those that haven't seen it on YouTube, here's my three minute video trailer for the route I've been working on in Train Simulator. Hey, don't sneer. Rod Stewart might by a successful performaning artist but even he has a model railway layout. Unlike him, I can't afford a californian palace to build one in, so I have to make do with a computer instead. Much for fun than lectures in towns thirty miles away.

Let's make a distinction here. The original question doesn't refer to Roman house, it refers to wealthy Roman's houses. The vast majority of those in Rome lived in little better than squalor by modern standards, crammed into rat-infested jerry-built apartment blocks with no running water, insulation, or cooking facilities. Rural Romans, which unfortunately includes those still living in barbarian styles, were really little better. As for the villa system, to call it a miniature city is a misconception I think. You could justifiably regard it as a community, because it has a ruling family and all who live in the confines of the outer walls are in some way there to serve the family. But there's the difference. Unlike most communities, the population of a villa isn't there to benefit from urban life, nor do they have much self-determination about what to do with their time. They really are there for the comfort and profit of a few individuals. The Romans created a prototype for the medieval manorial system. I don't know if they actually invented it, and in any case, the Romans weren't very good at invention (other than poking insults at each other), preferring instead to let foreigners invent things and then take the credit for all those clever ideas. I suppose you could see a wealthy Roman house from the perspective of a pint sized urban community, but doesn't that rather miss the point of why it was there?

A doctors appointment at some ungodly hour of the morning forced me out of bed long before my unemployed body was ready to face another day. After all the trouble of using iron discipline and sheer willpower to push the duvet aside and start my epic journey to the bathroom, not to mention a long walk across town in the dark, they were locked when I arrived. Brilliant... Good Morning Swindon As the sky first began to brighten a bright star, or more properly some planet or other, was low above the roofs of Swindon and very noticeable. I wonder which one? Venus always seems to be the usual culprit although I understand Jupiter has been making its presence felt lately. When the sun finally rose it revealed a gloriously sunny morning. A shame then the ground is waterlogged after all the rain we've been having. You can't put your foot anywhere without getting clogged in mud. In fact, walking along the pedestrian underpass that runs underneath the Great Western main line near Swindon station, I found it almost returned to its former glory as a canal. The center was flooded with limpid oily water. You have to see that underpass to believe it. Victorian stonework still caked in soot and grime, concrete roofs with stalagtites in orderly rows along the edges of the blocks, and a whole series of electric lamps that stopped working round about the time they were installed. It isn't so much a mix of ancient and modern, more like the perfect habitat of Swindon Man, our native species of neolithic throwback. Referral of the Week Before the new year I was put on a six week job search support programme. Nothing grandiose. Just internet access and free stationery. That said, the facility was very useful. At the library I have a two hour limit to do everything and it all gets a bit frantic. Anyhow, I asked the Jobcentre if I could be referred to the programme again. Yes, they said, and promptly discovered no-one in the office had any idea of how to get teir database to allow it. Two advisors sweated of a hot monitor pushing and poking to no good effect. It turns out they couldn't because officially I haven't finished the first course yet. Apparently I'm stuck in a sort of electronic limbo. I already knew that.

With the Greek Cities no longer bothering us, and rebels pushed aside on Sicily, my obvious next move was to attack Carthage. Surely a victory would raise our standing in Rome, which I have been informed is not good. We need triumphs! Herenius Valerius, our adopted colleague, led the assault on the city of the Punes. A small relief force attempted an ambush upon him, led by none other than Hasdrubal himself, who I understand swore not to retreat from the field of battle until we were defeated. With him was Bisaltes, a man driven by inner demons, and another worthy foe. I had expected an epic battle. We were, after all, threatened by superior forces. To my relief the gods favoured the Scipiones, and the battle was won without fuss. Carthage was ours! A great victory! As if that pleased the Senate... Yes, yes, yes, very good, now go and blockade Thrapsus, they said. A triumph? For that scuffle at Carthage? Pah. The ungrateful senators demanded more for the reward I sought. Old Cornelius died. He was our family patriarch, and we wish him well on the crossing of the river to the afterlife. He never could tolerate journeys by water. In his place is Julianus, who lacks the gravitas of our former patriarch but is perhaps a better politician. We failed at Thrapsus. The carthaginian navy reopened the harbour as I prepared for the next senatorial decree. Caralis, a city in Sardina, must be conquered. As I embarked troops in North Africa those left behind were ambushed by the sneaky Bisaltes. Defeat... Utter defeat... And now Carthage demands the return of Liliybaeum. By 256BC Caralis was ours, and diplomacy has secured an alliance with Numidia, for which the Senate gave their approval. Nope. No triumph. Not yet...

I live in a world that is increasingly surreal. I admit that. My horizons have shrunk enormously with the loss of transport and means to pay for it. That alone shouldn't be too significant because although I don't get out of the house much these days, I used to do so a great deal, thus I recall how it was to have a life. Ahh, yes, those were the days! Pummelling peoples ears with a drum kit, flying aeroplanes, driving fast cars, and generally acting like every other young man with enough money to enjoy a spot of hedonistic living. But recently my life reached a new level of surrealness. I received an email telling me that the Museum of Vacuum Cleaners is doing well and had a great financial 2010. Wow. Must go there sometime. Virtual Danger The news was depressing. The weather report unsuprising. The rejection letters from employers stacked up on the table. At times like this you need to walk away and do something. On this particular occaision I chose a computer flight simulation. Not something I always do, but it's fun in short doses and keeps me busy until the sun comes out again. As it happened, I found myself at low altitude, closing in on a relatively slow and helpless enemy aeroplane. Under normal circumstances the outcome is predictable. On this occaision though the enemy was flying a lot slower and began to turn tighter than me. I don't remember quite how it happened, but my fighter 'flicked', a result of pushing the enveople too far, and it turned over on its back pointing toward the ground. I know this was only a simulation, but my virtual life was over in the next second or two if I diidn't do something quick. Push the joystick forward. Give myself more seconds to get out of. Right roll, plenty of top rudder, and with barely feet to go before I became a war statistic, I pulled out of the desperate situation and began climbing away, looking around to see where that enemy plane had escaped to. In real life I never faced that situation with aeroplanes, mostly because low flying is frowned upon by the authorities, but also because I didn't indulge in aerobatics in aircraft not designed for them, and at the end of the day I never was a fighter pilot. Thing is though, I had a brief instant to react to that suprisingly frightening situation before the 'You're Dead' screen came up. I reacted without thinking about it. To have pondered my options at that moment would have invited disaster. I was watching television the other night and a program came up about an incident in real life where a cockpit window on a passenger jet blew out. The captain of the aircraft was sucked out, held only by his ankles, pinned against the fuselage by the airflow. His cabin crew fought to get the airliner down and keep their captain held in place, even though they thought he was dead. As it turned out, the captain was a very lucky man, and made a recovery months afterward. As rare as such incidents go, that was a real life situation. None of my problems with flying aeroplanes were ever that dramatic, thankfully, though I had one or two worrying moments and a couple of near misses. Training and instinct are great survival tools. So I ended up shooting down the enemy plane and got a little star attributed to my name on the screen. It was just a game. But for that one moment, that fleeting instant, with the ground gyrating in the wrong way and disaster imminent, it all seemed very real. Afterward I switched off, and headed for the kitchen for something to eat. As for the airliner crew? They all suffered an extraordinary experience, and I doubt they'll dismiss it as lightly as I could with my computer adventures. Opinions of the Week "You are one" Growled some young man as he made his way past the house the other night. One what? Spit it out boy. If you want to make yourself heard, then do it properly. Or why bother? I mean, what are you, exactly? A doctor, dentist, magistrate, policeman, fireman, ambulance driver, fighter pilot, businessman, or some other pillar of the community? I don't think so. Well, since you decided to tell the world what you think, I consider I have the same privilege. You don't amount to anything, do you?

It's important to realise how macho and chauvanistic Roman society was. I don't doubt for a moment they had those among them who sought alternative lifestyles, you get that in any society, but the issue of manhood is very important for Romans. The accusation of effeminancy or sexual diversity is often used in a demeaning and directly spiteful manner. The problem is that we look at this issue from a slightly more enlightened attitude in the modern day, or at least most of us do, and thus we miss the reasons that Roman celebrities are described as having unusual tastes. Now I'm not saying that any particular Roman did not indulge as the writers suggest they did, because I only have their word for it and as dubious the accusation might actually be, there's often nothing to contradict these accusations. That's precisely why they were made in the first place. We should also realise that many of these accusations may not be intended to insult or ruin a reputation (public image was hugely important for important Romans), but made on the basis on hearsay and gossip. An observer misinterpreted a joke or gesture, perhaps being unaware of what the situation signified, and quite possibly the tale quickly inflated as gossip often does. From something relatively innocent but misunderstood, a story becomes common currency. In order to underline that, we ought to take a moment to look at the way the common classes relate to the world. For them, with limited education and difficulties in expressing themselves, graffiti is almost always sexual in nature. The sort of thing scribed on Roman walls isn't fundamentally different from the sort of thing we see in our own day, except perhaps I notice a more distinct frustration emerging in modern times, and less public advertising. This is because the individuals involved are driven by these instincts. As social animals, who gets to mate is an important issue, at least subliminally. Women are attracted to confidence, wealth, and success, thus the common man generally struggles in that respect and lets off steam with the depressing and unnecessary record of their emotional and intellectual state. Was it so different for the Romans? Apparently not. Certainly sex was more readily available but at the same time the virility expected of a Roman raised the bar of their expectation in that regard. So was Caesar bisexual? I don't know. I share the doubts expressed above, but I'll have to keep an open mind on the issue because I don't have any reliable source to balance that accusation. I suppose that means the accusation has stuck to Caesar. Perhaps, but isn't that the entire point of 'thrown mud'?

Nothing much to report today I'm afraid. A strong wid howls through the air conditioning, the world revolves on it's axis, and the good citizens at the library are behaving themselves, apart from one gent who made audible his disgust at Facebook, or the blood curdling scream from downstairs as the deadly were-librarian claims another victim. I'll need to be careful because I forgot my silver library card this morning. The shocjk horror revelation today though is research by the Minnesota Planetarium Society, who reveal that because of gravitic influence our astrological signs are no longer accurate. When I was born I was a Libra, a sign that didn't exist until the time of Julius Caesar. Now I have become a Virgo overnight. Not sure what that means. So let's do a comparison and see what sort of person I might be... Libra Your element: Air Your ruling planets: Venus Symbol: The Scales Your stone: Opals Life Pursuit: To be consistent Vibration: Unsteady Libran's Secret Desire: To live an easy, uncomplicated life. Description: Every adolescent Libran's fantasy is to find the Prince or Princess of their dreams. As their lives unfold, the experiences, false starts, dramas, broken hearts and disillusionment they encounter seeking this personal Holy Grail, often shapes their futures in the most extra-ordinary manner. Love and love-lost makes a big difference to the Libran although their often happy-go-lucky appearance against all kinds of odds may not reveal this as fact. Librans can switch off from the world around then and during these periods much more occurs on the deep innermost levels of the Libran's psyche, than their closest companions imagine. Many Librans after establishing a lifestyle that somehow falls short of their childhood dreams, manage to conjure up a most independent life and keep up an image of being dedicated to a "close relationship". They can escape into obscure role playing - and often this makes them extremely successful business people. When it comes to romance and love, Librans can be difficult to fathom yet in business many Librans discover they can not only be creative, but it provides an opportunity to express the more diverse sides to their personalities. Their charm can win jobs and provides powerful friends. But in both work and play, looking for peace and harmony, Librans often say "yes" when they should be saying "no". It is a sad fact about many a Libran's personal or business lives to say - many would have faired far better had they remained alone! But for those Librans who do find their secret dream and meet up with their Prince or Princess, that's another story! You'll find them living in some exotic, distant beautiful place, probably running the local bar or restaurant, designing the beach or ski gear, looking wonderful, sipping cocktails and finding life to be the total paradise they knew it could be. What Librans always have to remember when looking to fulfil their dreams is they should never undermine their own integrity and hold out until their dreams do come true - not simply take whatever is offered. And now for my new adopted star sign... Virgo Your element: Earth Your ruling planets: Mercury Symbol: The Virgin Your stone: Sapphire Life Pursuit: To do the right thing Vibration: Compassionate and caring Virgo's Secret Desire: To love and be loved in return Description: Virgos are often put down badly by many astrologers and written up as being fussy and narrow-minded. But when a Virgo shines, there is practically no sign to match their inner light. An in-tune Virgo is a treat to meet. When a Virgo is confident within themselves they are the most successful, structured and creative of all the signs. Many Virgos can be found working in the "service to others" industries, ranging from welfare work, doctors, school-teachers through to practising natural forms of healing like massage, herbal remedies etc. One of the most magical characteristics of the Virgo is no matter how many times life or romance turns sour on them, they still manage to maintain faith in others, refusing to become cynical. There is ingenuity around this sign, a kind-heartedness, which unfortunately is sometimes played upon by others for their advantage. Virgos can often become victims of relationship power-games, where they are mistreated. Creative and sensitive, Virgos are delicate people who, like rare and special orchids, require individual treatment to fully blossom into their true unique beauty. Shy, they are happy to allow others to take centre-stage and often generate their time and energy into making those they love happy or successful. Virgos are givers and when the chips are down and you need a friend, the one available during those testing times when you need advice or companionship the most, is likely to be a Virgo. Virgos understand human frailties better than most, because they are so deep and reflective themselves. With a Virgo in your life you have someone who understands and cares and any romance or friendship based upon these qualities is certain to be mutually rewarding And The Winner Is... I don't know. I recognise traits in both stars, a common flaw that rational investigators notice about star signs in general. So I might be Libran, Virgo-ish, or perhaps even Ligoan or Virbran. Maybe I'm just me. Sorry about that, but hey, that's what you get for believing in obselete Babylonian astrology. As if the stars actually do reveal your future! What codswallop. It's midday and the skies are obscured by heavy grey cloud. Does that mean I have no future? Oh no. Think of all the time I wasted looking for a job.

It's more than that. There seems to be a tendency for those spending time observing life rather than living it to become passive, almost in an instinctual way. I do note that those who live violently tend to enjoy it, and whilst I've no doubt that adrenaline can make a difference, experienced fighters are inevitably calm about their business. For them, there's nothing to be frightened of because they're fully aware of what violence is and know by practice how to deal with it. I knew a chap in workplace who was once jailed for soccer violence. He was a jovial sort, friendly up to a point, and a self confessed 'reformed' personality. Yeah right. I ended up having almost daily sparring sessions with him. As someone less used to fighting than he was, I was struck by how detached and cool-headed he was, never mind how quick and accurate his movements were. For him, fighting was incredibly easy, and inevitably I lost almost every exchange of pulled punches. The thing is, he enjoyed that activity without any need for adrenaline.

A quick glance through the news is always the same thing. Once again the plight of residents in Queensland, Australia, takes centrestage, but the the usual collection of political and financial wrangling makes life seem one long argument from start to finish. No wonder people turn to soap operas. What's the alternative? Learning that a female celebrity was sleeping with a different guy every night as one newspaper headline proclaimed this morning? How much of our news is nothing more than exaggeration and fantasy? Do people really sleep around in that manner? I don't doubt there are individuals who sleep around a lot, and these individuals are a rarity in any population whether we like to admit our own less hedonistic lifestyles or not. After all, if Jordan is headline news for behaving in this manner, it must be exceptional. Unusual. Newsworthy. Or is she wrapped up in some fantasy lifestyle of her own? You could could get very moral about her her reported behaviour and that is precisely what the media would like, so that revelations of her wild nights sells more papers. All part of being a celebrity I guess. Discreet Extravagance One of the side effects of a succesful life is the accumulation of wealth and the material bounty that allows you. Outward symbols of status are nothing new. Human beings instinctively proclaim their status with outward displays of wealth in clothes, cars, and as we note, sexual excess. Walking along the local high street yesterday, head down against the blustery wind and persistent light drizzle, I passed a row of parked cars, which at first sight was certainly nothing unusual in Britain today despite the price we pay for that privilege. The thing was that in amongst the hatchbacks and family cars was an Aston Martin. Normally such a car would stand out, an obvious sign of wealth. Yet this one was an unwashed maroon colour, and fitted right in with the perfect urban camouflage. I almost didn't notice it was there, and if I were honest, only the big hips of the car made it stand out at all. There was also a porsche 911 I used to see driving around Swindon that was painted in grafitti. Not coloured by some socially undesirable youngster in a hoody, but deliberately by the owner. Not quite as discreet perhaps, but certainly without the solid colour and deep polished shine we usually associate with cars owned by succesful wealthy individuals, I somehow doubt it saw much vandalism. Then again, I don't see it driven around any more.

It was noted by more than one source that young men were often keen to get stuck in. Sebastianus knew that and chose his elite advance corps from those who showed that sort of enthusiasm deliberately. That's a human trait of course. Young males are often competitive and aggressive, something that armed forces throughout history have relied upon. As far as training is concerned, I have no argument. Vegetius confirms the poor state of affairs, but the fact he moans about that state of affairs is significant. Please not that, irrespective of Mr Holmes opinions, the modern armies are much more concious of the need to 'break in' recruits in a way that would not be considered necessary a couple of generations ago. The potential is still there, but that it takes longer to reach it. One point we must accept is that as we reach the late empire, the willingness of Romans to seek a military career evaporates. Romans are drafted rather than asked to volunteer. Identifiably, the martial values of the Roman people were in decline. However, the point is not entirely concerned with those choosing a violent career. It also concerns the audience, those that did no more than watch from the sidelines, which according to Dr Gerbners model of human behaviour would introduce passive behaviour in those that no longer need to be aggressive themselves. This behaviour would eventually spread throughout a population and onto future generations by natural processes of learning as well as experience. It would seem to be an insidious efffect on society. I wouldn't of thought of it, but as I sat down to watch the program Dr Gerbner was waxing lyrical about how media moguls demand that programs show simple plots and violence, because that sells. It's that part of us that wants to watch others being hurt that is being exploited commercially. Then Gerbner stated this was unprecedented. That at no time in the past had this happened before. My immediate reaction was "Oh come on, Gerbner, what about the Romans? Their arena games were an entire industry...". Ping! The light bulb went on. I'm not suggesting for a moment this was the only reason for Roman decline, but rather a contributory factor that appears to be borne out by modern experience.

Last year I attended a programme designed to teach jobseekers how to go about searching for a job. Yes, it really was that banal. The course was aimed at young people who had never worked before in their lives so for me, it was like being back at infants school. One of the lads on the course at the same time was LB, whose penchant for stopping at Greggs (A high street bakery) o the way meant he never, and I mean never, arrived on time, though in fairness his light hearted attitude toward life meant he never would have any intention on being punctual. He really is someone who will be late for his own funeral. I bumped into him the other morning. That's the first time we've met since last year, and a cheery hello was exchanged. It turns out he's back on the same course again., or at least, when he can be bothered to turn up. And last night? I hear on the news that business at Greggs is rising. Kell soopreez... Caldrail Has Left The Building There is some excitement to report. Now libraries aren't known for high octane fast paced thrills and spills but yesterday as I went about my daily internetting a loud beeping noise interrupted my comatosed mouse-clicking. A small red light flashed from the ceiling. Everyone looked up and waited for someone else to react first. Luckily Dragon Lady was on hand to tell us the fire alarm was sounding and urged us in her very own special way to leave by the nearest exit immediately, and if anyone wasn't sure what was going on, a disembodied robotic voice repeated the insistent order over the tannoy. Gosh. That was exciting. Can we do that again? Slight Obstacle As if a fire alarm wasn't enough excitment for one day, I turned up at the Programme Centre to use their facilities and I was stopped at the foyer by one of the ladies, who told me the internet wasn't working. Sorry. Internet not working? But... But... Erm... Oh no. My little world is collapsing around my ears. Or maybe it hasn't. Ahh, now you thought I was not going to be able to carry on, but no, wait and see. I have another card in the deck. Slighty Bigger Obstacle I'll use my telephone. Didn't expect that, did you? I'll just phone Jobseeker Direct and get them to do a search for me... Dialling... The menunsystem is starting up but from experience I know I need only press '2' twice and wait for a personal response... "This is Jobseeker Direct, Tracey speaking, how can I help?" Oh hi. I'd like a job search please. "I'm sorry, we don't do that any more. Try your local job centre. Have a nice day." Erm...

270 to 264 BC My capital was Capua, south of Rome. Also I started with a colony on Sicily. I had every intention of conquering the entire island for Rome's glory. It seems the Senate anticipated this and urged me to attack Syracuse, a great metropolis under the control of the Greek Cities. Start as you mean to continue then. Rapid recruitment ensued and my reinforcements arrived by sea from the port of Ostia. There was a minor scuffle with sicilian bandits who soon succumbed to our swords. But Syracuse? That was a tougher cookie by far. One of the two greek generals was a man of some reputation in military affairs, far more able and experienced than my own eager but lacklustre family members. Gaius was up to the job, make no mistake. Our siege lasted long enough to build tunnels under the walls of Syracuse, and without any ado, we broke through and fought a pitched battle in the streets as the enemy recovered from the shock of our fast assault and rallied their men. We won. A convincing result, though the casualties we suffered were higher than I hoped for, including brave Aulus, a young man with much potential who sadly did not leave the field alive. The Senate were pleased with our efforts. Almost immediately the Senate required us to atack Lilybaeum, at the western tip of Sicily. This was worse since it meant attacking mighty Carthage. As it happened, the Greek Cities were at war with the Punic hordes and I hoped to play one side off against another, an artifice that failed to produce the desired effect despite persistent diplomacy.. My troops arrived at Lilybaeum expecting to lay siege as before, but this time, the crafty Carthaginians launched a suprise attack upon our army. This was not going to be easy. The odds were just slightly less than even. I could not trust my generals to win such a confrontation so I therefore took personal command. The Battle of Lilybaeum (266 BC) began as I expected, with remorseless advance of Carthages finest. Elephants! By the gods, they brought elephants! To make things worse my men reported Carthaginian reinforcements heading our way. We were outmatched. My plan was to trap Carthage within a killing ground by widening my front into three parts. The extra enemy troops foiled that by arriving on my left flank, and thus I had no choice but meet that advance with a third of my men. What ensued was a messy and chaotic battle. Punic elephants and cavalry kept me busy, preventing me from forming a solid line, always rushing here and there to counter a threat. Truly we were on the defensive. After twenty minutes, my men were wavering across more than half our number. We faced a possible defeat. Despair not, for the gods came to my rescue. One after the other, the enemy generals fell in bloody melee, and the Punic morale broke. They did try to rally at the end, mounting a dangerous counterattack, yet the battle was by this time in my grasp. And so we won. You may now cheer loudly. I had expected Lilybaeum to resist our presence. They did not. The cowardly inhabitants readily surrendered themselves to slavery, and the conquest of Sicily was complete. As the hot wind blows across the fertile sicilian hills, I study the map and ponder which step toward total domination should be next...

I've decided to document a campaign of Total War: Rome. For those who were born yesterday, it's a computer game that came out in 2004, and quite a good one as far as games go. Not every day of course, I have better things to do than to play imaginary battles, though in fairness I've done quite a lot of that in one way or another over the years. The year is 270BC, and I play the Scipii, a powerful and ambitious Roman faction in the great struggle for dominance to come. They come in a fetching shade of blue tunics too.

How many of us, I womder, would wander into an amphitheatre and watch two men fight with swords, quite possibly to the death? Although our modern civilised minds are repulsed by the idea, god forbid the sight of it, there remains nonetheless a fascination buried deep within us. After all, at their height, gladiatorial games were extremely popular in Rome, with leading competitors treated like star athletes. Now bear with me, because I do intend to discuss an element of human behaviour with respect to Roman gladiatorial combat. The thing is we do watch combat of this kind, almost on a daily basis. Film and television present us with a sanitised and not entirely real version of fighting. If you care to admit it, you'll notice that there's a part of you that enjoys the struggle and the villains final moment. We even trivialise the final blow with comic gags to highlight the bad guys demise. There are those who will tell you that watching such programs inevitably induces a sense of familiarity with violence. That by watching television in particular, we tend to assume violent atitudes ourselves. Statistics start to appear and we learn that children watch thousands of virtual killings in our own homes, and so forth. It seems then to the casual observer that we are brutalising our own society and making violence an enjoyable, and in some ways desirable, pursuit. By chance I caught a documentary on Russia Today, in which a certain Dr Gerbner was discussing the effect of violent television. With some interest I note that he says the link between violent television programs and violent behaviour in those who watch is unproven. Ever since the invention of television, no-one has made any convinging case that this assertion is true, despite a few publicised cases of where misguided individuals claim that to be the case. A handful of admissions out of the billions of people who watch television today? Hardly a huge problem, is it? Instead, Dr Gerbner informs us that psychologically human beings become more fearful of actual violence having been exposed to prolongued television and the protrayal of violent acts. On the one hand, our mental state and communication skill suffers from withdrawal from socialising, but also, we see these acts and whilst it can be enjoyable to see the vilain get his comeuppance in a bloody fashion, deep within us the idea that something like that could happen to us in the outside world begins to inhibit our ability to confront it. We begin to choose alternative survival strategies than simply swinging our fists. Cicero once claimed that the arena was good for a Roman citizen. After all, if a mere slave can show courage like that, what can a Roman do? Besides, it prepares a society for battle. Or so he claimed. However, now I start to wonder. Assuming Dr Gerbner is correct, and I have no reason to believe he isn't, then we might see some implications of the arena in terms of changes to Roman society as the imperial period progressed. In the same way that television has eroded peoples fortitude against violence in the modern day, did the arena do the same thing for the Romans over the course of those final few centuries? Notice that the arena grew increasingly bloody toward the latter half of it's popularity, with more accent on the theatre of it as opposed to an honorable display of one-on-one duelling it once was.. Obviously this was not an instant phenomenon, but a slow degeneration of peoples ideas about fighting. Rome had always been a society that encouraged martial values. Whilst under potential threats, the emerging superpower of the ancient world was understabdably reliant on the hard-nosed psyche of it's citizenry. But what happens when a society is successful? When the threat is now longer apparent, and danger becomes part of entertainment rather than a fact of daily life? You might then speculate that part of the reason Christianity grew in public acceptance among the Romans during the late empire was not only the promulgation of christian belief and values, but also a sympathy with the anti-violent rules by a public who experienced violence less than in previous centuries, and instead enjoyed in in the arena. It's easy to criticise that idea, claiming that if it were true, why did the effect not appear earlier in a more widespread manner? In answer to that, note the analogy with television. In the days before television was widespread, the public willingness to confront violence was much increased. I read of how an armed youth was brought down by a gang of outraged citizens acting at the spur of the moment back in the 1900's. Would that happen today? More likely the room would empty very quickly. Of course we don't instantly turn into frightened mice when we switch on the television, but instead, perhaps we might see an erosive effect taking place over generations as certain behavioural traits begin to make themselves felt. My idea then is that the Romans suffered the same pheneomenon, the same trend in public behaviour, that we experience and barely notice among ourselves. Notice how christianity and it's non-violent message is increasingly accepted. Notice how the Roman legions, as Vegetius tells us, lost their strength and spirit. Perhaps the Romans evolved toward a less stern mindset not only because of the weakening effects of prolongued success and the relative absence of hardship, not only because of the christian embargo on violence, but also because they chose to use violence as entertainment and thus eroded their own martial values in the process. In short, was Cicero wrong?

As I sat in the upstairs library lounge before my computer booking came up, I had time to ponder about life, the universe, and job-searching. I think my reflective mood was partly improvement in the weather, weak sunshine and a pale blue sky, with a chaotic band of cream and grey cloud lurking on the horizon. Below, on the busy pavement, shoppers and idle youths wandered back and forth going about their business. There was an orderly calm to it all, nothing like what it can be on a saturday night, and it seems remarkable that society can be so well behaved when it wants to. For those of us learning about current affairs in America, the news of a shooting doesn't seem all that shocking. Here in Britain we've become used to reports of gun crime across the pond, and the violence portrayed in imported film and television does nothing to dispell that view. We get regular reports of random slaughters. That said, I don't want to seem callous. As it happens I do hope the victim makes a recovery. However, it seems that the Americans are shocked by the attack on one of their politicians. The violence of the incident was not desirable in any way, yet a country whose constitution supports the ownership of weapons, one whose history glamourises the use of them, one whose day to day lives seem punctuated by gun crime to outsiders like me, should be so shocked at the shooting is baffling. I wonder? Is my puzzlement due to the inherently smaller world view of the British? What I mean is that although gun crime exists in America, it's spread over a much greater area, and to us, the impression is of a society prone to violence at the drop of a safety catch, because we naturally think in terms of a much smaller land mass. Or is this merely the result of media coverage? Are the American journalists deliberately accentuating the madness of it all? I heard a female reporter on BBC America last night talking about the wierd smile the perpetrator had on his face as he stood in court. A witness stresses the villain shoots at a little girl. He may well be a dangerous oddball for all I know, yet the reports accentuate his dysfunctional habits. It's as if the public are being treated to a virtual execution. Almost as if a man is being led to the gallows for the public to see justice done. But then are we so different? In the case of a recent murder in Bristol, a suspect was described by the media in preparation for his trial which as it turns out was not to be. Despite being an oddball himself, the suspect was released and apparently had no part in the killing. The difference then is one of style, both in how we live as a society and how we choose to report it. What About The Jobsearch? Oh yes, that continues, and what a strange endeavour it has become. Today I got an email from an agency telling me that they've received my CV from another source and they intend to file it for future use. That's jolly decent of them, especially since I've been sending them my CV for nearly three years in the vain hope they'd actually look at it. I had to laugh at a job advert today. Apparently for this vacancy the applicant requires "gritty determinatioon". Must be a job as a recruitment consultant.

Roman Britain can be divided into three demographic regions. The all important southeast, with a proliferation of Roman culture, is the anchor point of their civilisation in the British Isles. Next to this is a strip of territory running from the mid south to the mid east of England, where local and roman cultures existed side by side comfortably. The third region really was a frontier. Small pockets of Roman presence surrounded by native tribes living as they always had. Cornwall falls within this last category and archaeology does not discount its inclusion. In any case, the Roman presence in the far southwest was a formality. The locals, possibly due to a long history of trade with foreigners, seem to have accepted Roman rule and since they were so co-operative, the usual impingement of authority was unnecessary. For that reason alone, it's unlikely you'll find much in the way of Roman remains in that region.

Sunrise, sunset, Sunday, Monday.... Yes, Swindon has reverted to ordinary greyness. There's a sort of comfortable familiarity about layers of dismal cloud drifting across the town and never letting it be one thing or another. It's been a suprisingly quiet start to the year. I only heard the first police siren wailing past my home on saturday night. Even Punch & Judy, fresh back from annoying someone else on their christmas holiday, have been quiet and mindful of the fact that thanks to the lack of sound insulation I can hear everything they do. Yes, even that. At least I assume that's what they're doing. But that's their business and I'll spare them the spotlight since they've been nice and considerate since their return. Now then, as for the latest news about my comings and gopings, I must report an encounter at the front door of the Job Centre. As I arrived a young woman was waiting inside to be let out. To my left, another couple of young ladies, somewhat less attractive than the jaw dropping brunette facing me through the glass sort of assumed I was going to be a gentleman and allow them by. Oh, please use the door, why don't you? That meant I was standing in the cold draughty pavement outside. Right, they've entered, now it's my turn. As I slipped inside with a scowl the brunette slipped past me with a "You're welcome." The cheek of it! Chivalry should be offered, not demanded. Or have I missed the point of what she was saying? More News From Swindon The printers weren't working at the programme centre this morning. Okay, maybe that's not entirely newsworthy, nor as an event is it entirely new, but hey, it was an excuse for an extra paragraph. More News From The Swindon Newspaper A burglar got caught and sentenced to more than two years for being caught a third time. Proof, if any were needed, that police bureaucracy and red tape work after all. All I need to do now is buy another car and wait for it to be vandalised. The police will be able to catch the perpetrator at long last.

The use of rectangular or square shields might have older roots than the mid republic, despite the lack of direct evidence from archaeology. In ancient times, when Romans used rectangular shields, the Estruscans fought in phalanx using bronze shields, but having compelled the Romans to adopt the same equipment they were themselves defeated." Diodorus Unfortunately Rome did not employ historians until the third century BC, thus the information is suspect, but intriguingly I see a pair of terracotta statuettes found at Veii, dated to the fifth century BC. They show naked male dancers with spear and shield. Apparently the Romans used war dances to train their young warriors. One has a round shield suitable for phalanx, the other a square shield. Aside from ornamental variety, it raises the possibility that not all latins were fighting in phalanx. Perhaps the Romans did so and kept up with military developments, thus assisting their military domination of the Latins who might not have been so quick to see the benefits of fighting greek-style.

But that's just it. it didn't collapse. It was subject to a hostile takeover in the west after a decline to the point where Roman imperatism was ineffectual and unable to resist the eviction. Although we discount the western Roman empire from that point the state still existed in its atrophied form. The fact remains that financially the west was doomed after Constantine. Further, the bonds of society were becoming less coherent during the last century of the western empire to the point that communities were opting out of governmental control, rsisting taxation, and looking to their own defence. If that's not evidence of a decline, I don't know what is.

Sunday is living up to its name. A bright morning and suprisingly not too cold, even with the frost obscuring the pavement in the shade of the old college. Perhaps the new shopping mall development planned for that site, assuming they actually get around to it and find businesses still left open to operate from the premises, will have the benefit of ridding us of this frost trap. Good thing too, I say. I can't even begin to count all the times I've done my trademark 'Oh no - I'm slipping on frosty pavement' routine. That said, I think I'm getting used to living in cold temperatures. There was a documentary on the Blitz a while back which featured a veteran of the time pointing at the interviewer and saying with great cockney conviction "You can get used to anything!" I suspect that's true of survivors, but that goes for any trial or tribulation in life. The reality is that living in the cold reduces my activity a great deal. With continued good health as much as comfort to worry about, I've been spending more time staying warm than anything productive, though getting about on my jobsearch has certainly kept me from freezing up altogether. So it's great to see some sunshine. It really is. Except I'm sat at a computer with the sun on my back. No, it's no good, I'm going to have to draw the blinds... And In Other News According to the local newspaper... MOTORISTS will not see a reduction in car park costs in Swindon, despite the Government announcing local councils should entice shoppers with cheaper Parking. That says it all really. Maybe our new shopping centre won't appear in too much of a hurry after all, especially the government have conveniently forgotten they now charge us more to shop, more to drive, and as soon as the countries finances pick up a little, they'll all be finding ways to squeeze money out of the system angain. After all, they can always charge more tax, can't they? Or are they going to leave us enough to pay our bills this time? News of the Week The time has come for the world to have another great conflict or scandal. I know this to be true because soap operas are starting to fill up the headlines, always a sign of journalistic desperation. Actors are leaving the show, actors are being bumped off in dramatic virtual murders and accidents, and I'm supposed to care. It's sunny this morning. Time to get out and about. Much more interesting than bad accents and over-inflated story lines, don't you think? Stand by, world, Caldrail is on his way. Not quite news of the week perhaps, but as far as I'm concerned, hugely more world shaking than another departure from the ranks of virtual personalities on my television screen.

Not necessarily. The leaders of the day made decisions that might seem to us to have had undesirable implications, but then they didn't have the benefit of knowing exactly what was going to happen, so is it fair to apportion blame so readily? The fact is the west had already declined by the time of Adrianople and why exactly are we blaming the fall of the west on the emperor of the eastern half? Okay, I know he ruled both sides, but bear in mind the eastern half was where the money was, where the political power was, and in any event, finding himself running an increasingly disunited empire with weak legions that had suffered a major military reverse, why is his desire to seek to a short term answer to security so bad? In fact, one could decide that he was making positive steps to assimilate potential enemies and increase his tax base in the process. Perhaps the problem then is not so much his decisions over the empire, but that the empire was in terminal decline and the will and strength to reforge it was lacking, even though Theodosius made efforts to restore order in faraway places like Britain, itslef defensive moves at retaining territory and property rather than developing it.

Over the last decade I've been unemployed a fair few times. Nothing to be proud of and definitely something that inhibits my search for gainful employment at the moment. As a result of this I've become used to the regime of the dole office. It used to be fairly simple. You queued up and took your turn at a kiosk for your claim to be registered for another fortnight. That's all there was to it. Then the regime changed to plusgh offices and comfy seating where you waited for your turn to sign on, and now it was a more personal exchange. These days it's more of a compriomise between the two, with a sort of authoritarian air encouraged among claims advisors. Somethimes things don't quite go exactly the way they expect. Like when I made a pass at an attractive young lady the other side of a desk some years ago (he he he, did she ever give me a scalding), or when I assumed a noble title (Did I ever get scalded for that too). Always they remained in charge though, no matter how conversational they might be. There was always a hint of suspicion that you might be talking porkies. They say the eyes are a window to the soul. Eyebrows are a window to the belief. Things are different. All of a sudden the claims advisors are being helpful, supportive, and willing to listen to my plight, even asking me what I wanted from employment. Good grief. You never used to get asked questions like that. The law says you look for a job or you get no money. So used to being required to do one thing or another, I found being asked how I would like to sign on a peculiar experience. It's quiet. Too quiet... They're up to something you know... More Closures? During the demise of our last government much was made in the media of the catastrophic levels of shop closures on the high street. It seems we're not finished yet. In Swindon, Waterstones (Our book store) and HMV (Our independent music retailer) are both threatened with shutting up shop altogether. I know the current government says things are bleak and we all have to suffer, but books and CD's? That'll mean all I have left are god awful game shows on television, or the unsatisfying shopping on the internet. I like the smile and cheery farewell I get from the local shop assistants. All the internet does is bring up a page saying thanks for the cash. You know what I mean.

In general the Roman approach to prepared positions was to confine and starve them out. However, the Romans weren't always prepared to sit out a siege and sooner or later the need for victory would provoke a more direct response. The Roman commander might be keen to impress the Emperor with a quick victory, or perhaps need one to preserve what's left of his political career. There might be practical reasons for wanting a quick ending. Logisitics for instance. Even with a single legion on site, you still need sooner or later to supply nearly six thousand men with food and water in a region where foraging isn't so easy (and as everywhere, remains a diminishing resource). Although the Romans developed an expertise in logistics, this was primarily between fixed sites, not columns on campaign, which more often than not had to rely on their own initiative for supply. Once an assault becomes the preferred tactic, is a tunnel necessary? Could the rebels be smoked out with fires? If necessary, the legionaries would be ordered to go in, and you might well imagine the claustrophic hack and thrust in dark passages.

Unfortunately I'm a complete dunce about things nautical, but according to the somewhat limited information I have about sailing and in particular to the use of oars used as rudders, the downside to this approach is indeed control at higher speeds. bear in mind that Roman ships would not cruise at the higher speeds possible unless the wind allowed it. Unlike an engine driven ship, the capacity for oarsmen to keep a vessel at a good pace was quite limited. It's a fairly safe bet that maximum speed was for straight lines only, though I'm quite happy to be put straight on this. As for manoeverability, although the initial push of the oar against the water flow might require some strenuous effort, bear in mind that the whole point of the exercise is to turn, thus the vessel 'equalises' as much as possible, a compromise between the physical forces between the interia of the hull and the pressure on the oar reduces the overall need for muscle, if not entirely. The leverage of the oar at the rear of the ship accentuates its effect. Now as for the rope system you allude to, that's speculation, because nowhere have I ever read of such a system used on Roman ships. I now sit back and wait for my opinions to be swept aside by the tide of expertise on this subject.