Aurelianus

Thanks very much PP and Phil! I didn't expect such a comprehensive answer, but very much apreciated!

Usually I would be inclined to be anti-Cicero because of his self promoting hypocrisy, and yet whilst I take this view assured that I am supported by modern moral standards, I find myself thinking that in truth they were minor things. Cicero had to work his way to the top through hard work and natural talent; he had to be self promoting to get into the elite from the outside. It is unfortunate that it became a habit, as his career passed its theoretical peek, but such is the interesting human psyche. Cicero as a politician I cannot fault; apart from being able, he tended to be far more moral. I think he really did believe Catilina was a threat to the stability of Rome, and his philippics against Antonius are admirable, and no doubt to Cicero

I'm sorry if the answer to this is obvious, but, In his creation of the principate did Augustus abolish the Assemblies, or some of them? I know he absorbed many offices, such as the Tribunes, and effectively took the powers of many others, like the Consuls who were relegated to merely leading the Senate, and were more often than not the Emperor, or an Imperial anyway. Please help.

I think its there so that the executers can maintain the "moral highground", and because of modern culture in the west many could not stomach witnessing such a thing. I agree with you though, If somebody deserves to die, then why bother with wether it hurts them or not? They have sentenced him then? when did this happen, I was watching the news last night and it didn't say anything about it.

Do I get some sort of honor for sticking up for your blue-eyed-boy? Oh no, the poor dear wouldn't! He was a god after all... he would have taken it as a compliment... probably, well maybe, ok its a 50:50 chance. Anybody fancy Stilicho's job? Challenging, well paid, interesting clientele

Umm.. "bliss"? dosent sound much like bliss to me.

There were splits in the early church, such as Arianism, but catholisism came much later after the west had fallen. The Pope did exist, but he was just called the bishop, and later patriach of Rome (the city) the 'barbarians' called him Pope and denying the authority of the patriachs of Constantinople, Jerusalem, Alexandria and I think Ephesus or maybe Antioch. DC is right, Constantine only converted on his deathbed, and he certainly favored the christians.

lol, id quite agree with you, just remember that to the poor deluded souls would have had it presented in a much better light, I imagin the average preacher would have avoided mentioning his religeon's phobia of all things beautifull and fun. im sure that in the beginning it wasnt even like that... or maby not. Also many people probably felt their life couldnt get anyworse anyway, so the only hope was an afterlife; but from my point of veiw that dosent have much to recomend it either. I dont consider pot plants and cold food to be my thing. Meekness a virtue!

Well, the celts tended to be a clanish lot, so you should technicaly call yourself a Cornovian (just think of it as your tribe expanding above the natural boundry of the river ). But if you want to choose: The Cornovii: people of the horn. Mainly a pastoral people, with salt works in the south; probably a big source of wealth, along with their cattle breeding. The fourth largest town in Roman Britain, Viroconium Cornoviorum (Wroxeter Shropshire) was where the unpleasant XIIII Gemina Martia Victrix was staitioned at one point. The Bigantes: the people of Brigantia - equated with Athene/Minerva as a fertility/knowladge deity. Thought to be a confederation of lesser tribes (Carvetii and Parisii).They are rememberd most for Queen Cartimandua's handing over of Caratacus to Rome. Cartimandua's friendship with Rome staved off invasion, untill her ex-husband invaded the kingdom, and Agricola subjugated it directly to Roman rule. The Choice is yours...

Ooo... yes, the opertunities to get an insite into the workings of their minds, and not just Caligula - although i would still keep my distance. Yes i am mad (slightly) not as much as old Gaius though Dont be so harsh on Tiberius, he has had a lot of bad press, espesialy from Suetonius (i think it was Suetonius, im too lazy to check right now. apologies)

I would have to say that all religions fall out of favour at some point, or are shoved to the side, changing situations bring new and differant desires, along with new gods they hope will fufil them. The old gods of rome were very formal, and their worship was very formal, to compliment the formal dignity of the political situation. Rome rarely had any dire national situations, so the domestic Lars were suficiant to appease the populances civil worries. With the fragmenting and barbarian incursions people found themselves in more volatile situations, they want to have a deity who offers them securaty, and protection from more major dangers. The cold formal and distant Jupiter didnt reasure the people, so they will enevitably turn to other options. An all powerfull sun god presents a prety good candidate. People, (and in history espesialy the uneducated) always seek to explain what they cannot, and protect them from what they cannot protect themselves. That is probably why there are so many aethiests in todays society - science explains alot of things, and the rest they dont care about, leaving no need/place for a god(s).

To hear history from the average plebe would be a very rare and interesting occurrence, however one I would love to happen. The idea of your average punter thinking of Octavian as Caesar returned, but it is quite likely that they thought he was the flesh and blood son of Caesar (with Roman adoption there wasn't actually that much difference anyway), and it was general consensus that the son was expected to be exactly like the father when it came great men. I suspect that many were not actually aware that Augustus was not the blood son of Caesar, even at Augustus' death. I would not have thought that the proscriptions caused any resentment toward Augustus due to the patron/client relationships, as clients whose patron had been executed was likely to be anti caesarean anyway, and those patrons weren't executed will likely to have both benefited and viewed it as a just vengeance on Caesar. Thinking out loud is good I do it all time

Caesar could aquire that sort of popularity if from a slightly differant class. when you say 'of sex drugs and rock n' roll in the Roman Republic' i imediatly think of Clodius . i wonder why...

Can i just point out that Sparticus revolted in 73 BC when Sulla was dead.

I agree with you, Julia, a combination would have been ideal, but after Sula the republic was an ideal, nothing more. Like comunism it is a wonderful and 'moral' thing, except it would not have worked because of human nature. If Aug had retired or not had a successor then another successful general would ask himself 'they did it. why cant I?'. Rome would then have been plunged into civil war after civil war, and i think that even mad Caius would have been preferable to that. I think what im trying to say is that after three (five if you count Marius and Pompey) men had established a primacy over the republic others would enevitably follow. If perhaps Aug had tryed to give the senate a bigger roll in decisions, say for example created something like the modern day system, where the monarch forms the executive (government), but he has to pass things through the senate to achieve success. Perhaps he could have then given the tribunes of the plebsa more institutionalised position. But then all that would have required him admiting himself to be a monarch...

I've never heard about this befor, but acording to this Ceasar had an uncle called Sextus Julius Ceasar. Has anyone read this, or is it a mistake? Or did he die early in life?

Ah, found it. The Rise and Fall of Athens (Plutarch), it baisicaly contains the biographies of the main figures of Athenian Politics, law and war. Something to wet your apatite for more.

I was saying that the first four were results of bad leadership: even with just a strong and efficient centeral government those problems might not have occered. If, just at the very end Rome aquired a brilliant general then no it wouldnt have made a great deal of differance. I'll refrase my final statement for you: Lack of leadership over a sustained period of time was the death of Rome.

Fact and fiction? For fiction I would recommend Valerio Massimo Manfredi's Alexander series, and Spartan and for fact, there is a book I would recommend, but I can't remember either the title or the author (it was a while ago). I'll have a rummage around for it.

Yes, I've heard of the these claims too, I don't remember where I read them, but I know they are there. I seem to remember the Romans thought barbarians effeminate because of their trousers too. And today we would view any man who wore a skirt to be effeminate, so I suspect it is a cultural thing. Also calling someone effeminate seems to have been a traditional insult down the ages, so any excuse would have been grabbed upon.

I dont know enough about Thebes, Corinth, or Argos to comment on them, but out of Athens and Sparta. I find Sparta has too little to recomend it; only its brain-dead single mindedness on its obsession with bravery. I have personally always found Athens a little hypocritical and elitist. Then you can't expect the epitome of societie develop overnight, and they did cultivate some brilliant philosophers. So I would have to say Athens.

In Latin they use both names, Cupido and Amor.

If you think about what Crassus did with his buying properties that were in flames at cut down prices, and then putting the fire out, then it would seem unlikely that house insurance was widespread. However it is difficult to conceive that no banking shark in Roman times thought up such a lucrative idea, is it mentioned anywhere?

no probs. happy to help . dont worry about the spelling, im little better.

It is a very good game (cant wait for medeival II), even if it is inacurate in everything apart from (on the whole) the military units. A question: you cant train the first cohort with the eagle can you? I was playing the macedonians for the first time the other day, and their realy dificult, they have the same position as the Byzantine Empire; facing east and west. I just finished off the Greek cities when I was attacked by the Brutii, Thrace, Dacia and Egypt. . I would have to say the spartans look good, but you have a point: how is that robe going to give them any protection?