Neoflash

I feel bad being included in this draw, I haven't posted on the forums for months. But it's to great of a prize to pass on. Count me in.

On the face of it this seems to be an important study however, I would tend to agree with Kosmo that while the incidences of hoards are a good indicator of areas under some form of stress they may simply indicate areas subject to population movement rather than necessarily the 'death' of the indiivisual(s) who buried the hoard(s). Statistics is often seen as an arcane art but modelling population decline on this basis is in my view pushing the bounds of what can or cannot be proven to any degree of certainty. As I understand it one of the major concerns in any statisitical analysis is that you are using 'real' differences as your baseline, which given the lack of accurate records from this period leaves this study open to question. The authors seem to have started from the premise that there would be a congruance of population size to the number of hoards rather than is there any other way of modelling ancient populations - that second question seems to remain unanswered. To defend this research I'd argue that internal turmoil and warfare rarely comes without a decrease in population. Furthermore, the researchers do not talk of hoards being linked to death but rather to population demographics (there being less people in Rome); wether they died or moved away is not the issue. The researchers simply linked the distribution of coin hoards to population demographic, that is population growth or decrease, not to the direct cause of it. When calculating population growth, one has to take into account four major factors: death, birth, immigration and emmigration. What the researchers are saying is that the amount of coin hoards proves widespread internal turmoil and warfare (they have proven this by applying their model to other times and places) and that widespread internal turmoil and warfare leads to a decrease in population. They do not specify but logically, during war and turmoil, more people die, less babies are born, less people move into the region and more people move out of the region; leading to population decrease or at the very least a serious slowdown of its growth.

Welcome to UNRV EoYP. What's your interest in the Romans? Interest in the Romans??? You do know we're all here for the chicks, right?

I hate to say this, Neoflash, but I think you're being very hard on Mr. Harris, there. 'Imperium' doesn't have the pace and, well, sheer adventure of 'Pompeii', but you've got to admire the man for his research, and ability to spin a very detailed, enjoyable and readable yarn around the established facts. I wouldn't hesitate to give it four-and-a-half stars, and if I hadn't read 'Pompeii' first, would've probably gone the whole hog with 5/5. I guess it depends on one's perspective. The rating I gave was purely based on the enjoyment factor. Five star would be my favourite reading experience ever and one star would be the worst. As you point out, the book is a masterpiece when it comes to ability to spin a very detailed, enjoyable and readable yarn around the established facts. But was it a fun ride? Was I gripped, enthralled, amazed while reading it? At times I was, but not as much as with many other books I've read. In Imperium, the political intigue was very good, but I thought the characters were a bit flat and the whole thing was a bit rigid, lacked emotional engagement. 3.5 stars is not a bad rating, I certainly recommend the book and did enjoy reading it, just not as much as many others I've read.

Just finished "Imperium" bu Robert Harris. It's about the political ascension of Cicero. It is a novel, but very true to historical events and places. I'd give it 3.5 stars out of 5.

"Empire: Total War" is awesome! Have you played since patch 1.4? It totally changes the game (for the better). Can't wait for the multiplayer campaign option to come out, that's when the real fun will begin.

Good point. To me there is a huge difference between looking at real human suffering (Gladiator fights, modern extreme figthing sports, videos of hostages being decapitated etc...) for entertainment purposes or out of curiosity and watching a movie depicting acts of violence. Movies are a representation of real life, wether modern or ancient, and throughout history there has been a lot of violence. To leave such violence completly out of movies would make them very unrealistic. But if the Romans of antiquity had not enjoyed watching people butchering each other in the Colosseum, today's movies could focus on other aspects of their lives. At the same time, do we really need to see every single drop of blood in slow motion from every possible angle, along with every single piece of severed flesh and limb. Atleast the romans were watching from a few dozen feet away. The fact is that, the way alot of modern movies depict violence today shows that many people enjoy watching extreme violence as much as the Romans did and, were such events legal, they probably would go see people hacking each other to bits at Maddison Square Gardens on Saturday nigths.

Not to be overcritical but, although the drawings are nice, I find the script and dialogue to be of poor quality. If you want really good roman comic check out The Adventures of Alix, I read all of the Alix comic books in my late teens and I can tell you they were pretty damn good. I actually started reading them again.

Here's an interesting observation: Sallust's discourse is almost identical to some well known biblical texts. Compare Sallust's "Hence the lust for money first, then for power, grew upon them; these were, I may say, the root of all evils" to 1 Timothy 6:10's "For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows." Also, compare Sallust's thoughts on the deterioration of roman society and moral to the description 2 Timorthy 3:1-8 gives of society's deterioration in the "last days". Sallust: "Those who had found it easy to bear hardship and dangers, anxiety and adversity, found leisure and wealth, desirable under other circumstances, a burden and a curse. Hence the lust for money first, then for power, grew upon them; these were, I may say, the root of all evils. For avarice destroyed honour, integrity, and all other noble qualities; taught in their place insolence, cruelty, to neglect the gods, to set a price on everything. Ambition drove many men to become false; to have one thought locked in the breast, another ready on the tongue; to value friendships and enmities not on their merits but by the standard of self-interest, and to show a good front rather than a good heart. At first these vices grew slowly, from time to time they were punished; finally, when the disease had spread like a deadly plague, the state was changed and a government second to none in equity and excellence became cruel and intolerable." Bible: "But know this, that in the last days critical times hard to deal with will be here. 2

Wow. I can do the same thing with rich old people. I take control of their brain and in their last hours of life get them to set-up a meeting at their lawyer's office in order to change their will and make me sole heir and benefiacy of their fortune. Muhahahaha!!!

Is that in the more French part of Canada or the English part? Montreal is in the province of Quebec, which used to be a French colony before the big bad English conquered it. The vast majority, including yours truly, of its 7 million inhabitants is of french descent and speaks french, although they have a different accent then the one you would hear in Paris; much like how American or South African english sounds a bit different than the one spoken in London. Neoflash

Thanks, that looks pretty good to me! Anyone else able to confirm or add to Neoflash's translation? Oke - we don't need Tartarus, because Latin is used extensively by the Catholic church, who have several words for Hell itself. Also, we probably don't need to repeat the verb, so I'd try venimus atque infernum nobiscum. Disclaimer - my Latin tutor once threatened to shoot me for wanton abuse of the ablative, so take my suggestion cum grano salis. Well done, your translation sounds a bit more like genuine latin than mine, which was a bit too literal, atleast I think. Then again, my latin is not that great so what do I know. The only thing I would have to say about the use of the word infernum for Hell is that it would not have been used by, say, a roman of the late Republic. Actually, it probably would not have been used at any time by any roman who was not a christian. So Nephele, it all depends on who is speaking the words. If you are writing a story and a roman from ancient rome is speaking them, he probably would not have used infernum. But if the pope from 300 A.D. is the one speaking, than yes infernum can be used. In ancient roman religion "Dis" was used to describe the underworld as a whole, the place where the dead ended up. "Tartarus" was a place inside "Dis" similar to what most christian now visualize when then think of Hell, a place of punishment. I hope this helps.

That's the plan. I had started doing some research about a year ago and then things got crazy at work and I had to shelf the project for a few months. Now I'm back at it.

Thanks Nephele, I will try to get my hands on that book. So are you saying that at any given time there were only 6 women on the college of Vesta (novices and trainers included) because the UNRV page on vestals says that there was 18 (6 novices, 6 actual vestals and 6 trainers). Here is another interesting question, could vestals spend more or less than 10 years as novices, vestals and trainers? Because if most vestals would stay on after their 30 years, it would mean than most of the "trainers" would occupy this function for more than 10 years. And if they occupied it for more than 10 years, would the actual vestals be promoted to trainers after 10 years of service as vestals? If so, there would then be more than 6 trainers. Also, the novices would become vestals and new novices would have to be appointed, bringing the total number of women on the college of Vesta to possibly much more than 18. Do you understand where I'm going with this, it's kind of hard to explain with words, I feel like I should be drawing a diagram or something.

I'm from Montreal, Canada. Laval, a suburb of Montreal, to be more precise.

The movie was simply called "Caligula" and was released in 1979. It was not actually considered *or*, having even been, I believe, released at the Cannes festival, but it was definately smutty. Caligula - The Movie. Definitions of "pornography" vary, but the (SIC) "depiction of erotic behavior intended to cause sexual excitement" (Merriam-Webster) is presumably quite representative of the modern consensus. There were multiple versions of the 1979 Brass/Lui/Guccione film; the 156 to 160 minutes unrated uncut versions are probably the closest we can get to an "original" Caligula; their explicit content includes plenty of massive orgies, lesbianism, transvestism, masturbation, fellatio, cunnilingus, urination, anal fisting, sibling incest, rape, decapitation (by a giant moving wall!), infanticide, mutilation, and castration. If we agree with MW operational definition above, and irrespectively of the merits of this movie, Caligula is as *or* as it can get. And it was hardly the only *or* movie projected at Cannes (actually a 210 minutes edited version was used). This movie is frequently considered nowadays as some kind of Urban Legend, but it was actually a big failure in its own time; pretending to combine *or* and history, it became too explicit for historians and too pretentious for *or* fans. Don't get me wrong, I totally agree that many aspects of the movie are pornographic in nature. But according to the MW definition it is the intent to cause sexual excitement that defines *or*. The question is, Was the entirety of Caligula made with the intent to cause sexual excitement in its viewers? If it was, than it is a pornographic movie. If it wasn't, than it is a movie with pornographic elements. The fact that the movie was "too pretentious for *or* fans" is an indication that it was not intended to cause sexual excitement. If it was, it failed miserably. After all, we all know what people watch *or* movies for (manus turbare) and Caligula would certainly be at the bottom of the list for most people as such a facilitator. *or* movies are made for the sole purpose of causing sexual excitement. Like you said, Caligula was more of crappy artsy fartsy attempt at blending history and pornography and it failed. The sex scenes had more shock value than they were sexually exciting (for most people). What I meant is that Caligula was not considered by most, as being a pornographic movie, as being part of the fledgling *or* industry of the time. It was in a class of its own, and not a very good one.

I am by no means a latin expert but I thought I could get the translation ball rolling. Here is what I came up with, might want to get someone elses opinion though. venimus atque tartarus venit nobis Venimus = We are coming Atque= and Tartarus = Hell. This is probably the hardest to translate because the romans had a complex belief system surrounding the underworld. "Dis" could also be used. It all depends on what you mean by Hell. Venit = is coming Nobis = with us Cheers

The movie was simply called "Caligula" and was released in 1979. It was not actually considered *or*, having even been, I believe, released at the Cannes festival, but it was definately smutty. Caligula - The Movie.

Here is an excerp from the Histories of Polybius http://ancienthistory.about.com/library/bl...t_polybius6.htm. He does talk about wealth requirement for the officers (tribunes) but it seems that the soldiers were taken from every tribe and the only requirement was that of age. Hope this helps. Neoflash

Hi, I'm looking for information on roman cities ca. 100 B.C. Is there a book or document that lists all, or at least many, of the major roman cities, their status (full citizenship, partial citizenship etc.) and their population ca. 100 B.C. Thanks, Neoflash

I have checked the UNRV page on the subject and did a search in the forum. But I have not yet found a satisfying answer to the above questions.

Hi all, Here are a few questions and observations regarding the Vestal Virgins. Your answers and comments are welcomed. First here is some general information about the Vestal Virgins. - For most of Rome's history, there was 6 of them. - They we're generally picked between the ages of 6 and 10 years old. - They served for 30 years. 10 as Novices, 10 as full fledged Vestal Virgins and 10 as trainers/supervisors of Novices. - They had to remain virgins. - If they broke their vow of chastity, they were buried alive. Now here are some questions. In answering them, please try to give information pertaining to the middle and late republic. - At any given time, how many Vestal Virgins were there? They were often said to be 6 in ancient texts. Does that mean that there was 2 novices, 2 full-fledged, and 2 trainers? Or does it mean that there was 6 novices, 6 full-fledged and 6 trainers? - Also, I have read that most Vestal Virgins, after having served the 30 years, chose to stay in Vesta's service instead of returning to public life. This would mean that there was probably much more than 18 Vestal Virgins at any given time. What do you think? - Was there ever exceptions where a girl older that 10, possibly even a young woman, was selected to become a Vestal Virgin? - When was the selection of a new Vestal Virgin done? When one of the trainers finished her 30 years term ? When one of them died ? When one of the actual Vestal Virgins became a trainer ? - Could a vestal virgin renounce her vows (like catholic monks or nuns can) before the 30 years were over? - If she technically could not renounce her vows, in practice, what do you think would happen if one day she just decided to get up and quit? You know, just get out of bed, throw away the Vestal Virgin's outfit, don the regular dress and move to the country. - I have read that Vesta was worshipped, not only in the city of Rome, but in other roman cities (municipes). Is there evidence of there being vestal virgins in the municipes as well? - Is there a record of a VV being rescued AFTER being buried alive ? Thanks for your help, Neoflash

I just wanted to say thank you for all your input everyone, I never thought I would get such good feedback and advice when I first posted. Don't even think about stealing this brilliant idea, I already have "Ryanus" copyrighted, trademarked and licensed out to Universal for movies, Ubisoft for the video games and Hasbro for the board game and action figures. No but seriously, I think the concept has much potential, I just have to focus and make it happen. With all the help I'm getting from this forum, I believe I can. Salutations, Neoflash

I don't know Ursus... I think your idea is just too wild. I really don't think the world is ready for such literary innovations. But what the heck, if you write it, I'll read it.