caesar novus

First of all, it's the hypocrisy by gov't I point to - switching their story in order to ride the coattails of dufus populism and further inflame the mob. I wasn't promoting de-regulation as an ideology; note I pointed to over regulation as "A" cause. as well as under regulation. As for the oil spill, I haven't followed details too closely since I've been on the road a lot with spotty access to media. So I'll address your bigger picture allusion. Yes, there is dysfunction based on the need for politicians to fund really expensive campaigns. Corporations cynically threw money primarily at their ideological enemies in 2008 because they were ahead in the polls. So now they have leverage over their paid-for politicians. Granted this is way out of control, but it isn't entirely evil. Corporations can be the only advocates for consumer issues that are too small or technical for particular individuals to get excited about, but are important en masse when it can make a wide customer base happier. Under ideal competition corporations bring some balance of power as intermediaries between consumers and suppliers of labor/capital/material. An exception to this is powerful labor unions, which answer to no consumer or provider of capital or managers. The fact that their political contributions could leverage gov't to subvert GM bondholders and centuries of contract law about bondholder rights shows the severe dysfunction and will dampen needed lending going forward. Where I live this is taken even further where management (school principals) are forced to be members of teacher unions, so there is no balance of power or intermediary covering parent requirements at all. The schools are run purely to please complacent workers and are among the worst in the developed world. Unlike corporations, those teacher unions are unaccountable to any consumer of their service since their political contribution power mostly trumps diffuse voter dissatisfication. Now to circle back to my original theme of 2 faced populism, the reason this dysfunction works in the face of supposed democracy isn't entirely the misuse of money... but of the voters letting themselves be taken in by opportunistic populist demogoguery. And that is most notable when politicians switch sides on an issue and feign outrage at what they have supported on record. I guess this thread was meant to alert people to not be taken in, or else the next regulation will be based on the exaggerated populist perception rather than addressing real problems with balance. It was apparent in a small way with the oil spill, but in a huge way with the mortgage crises. All stripes of politicians used to be wildly pushing regulations promoting gov't approved house loans for deadbeats - I think the normally very responsible Barney Frank was the most recent caught pretending he wasn't on the wrong side of the issue http://www.zerohedge.com/article/barney-fr...rrassed-about-f . Also might make a similar case about of the whys of Iraq invasion. All sort of invasion critic politicians voted FOR a multi point reasons for invasion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Resolut...t_Iraq#Contents but later pretended only the troubled "weapons of mass destruction" one really counted.

Germany was highlighted to support my theme of OVER regulation as a cause of the crises as opposed to just UNDER regulation, if I remember an article of Economist magazine correctly. They said the Landesbanks (a special kind of German bank) profits and thus survival were in a death grip from over conservative regulations well before the crisis. They went to AIG out of desperation to survive supposedly, whereas the other banks went to them out of greed. Well I thank you for being supportive in general, but I should admit I pushed the theme a bit far and folks are probably being too polite to point out a few holes in it. Interesting to consider the less reported angles anyway.

Originally the temperate US government response to the oil spill gave hope that due process could identify the root of the problem, and that innovation could march on using those lessons. But now the populist mob has forced them into a frenzy of duplicitous self righteous rhetoric and threats of irrational damaging legislation. Is it any surprise that the high risk drilling was promoted by subsidies? The Clinton administration passed the "Deep Water Royalty Relief Act" and failed to deactivate it when scheduled. Congress sweetened it up during Bush administration according to http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Why-Was-BP-D...813326.html?x=0 . How does the mainstream press let the lawmakers get away with this hypocrisy, even back on the financial crisis? The Clinton administration decided that gov't backed mortgages were being refused due to predjuice rather than the facts that show individuals had hopeless credit histories. So they force loans to be made to every victimology category that predictably blow up en mass later. http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/fanni...ftt_503592.html Same case internationally. Germany gov't wears the mask of regulated responsibility, but their overregulation of landesbanks (sp?) left them suicidally unprofitable. For survival they tapped into looney schemes from US AIG, which blew up with the US mortgage market (caused by not only US but Chinese gov't which flooded US with lending rather than spending). What bugs me is the US gov't bailed out AIG and thus Germany (85 billiion IIRC) rather than a scheme already on the table that shared the pain at least a bit with the greedy customers (like German banks). Lost the link on this, but the hypocrisy just goes on and voters and press let gov't get away with it.

That's exactly the attitude that can stifle enlightment on the issue, and the reason for this thread. People have been afraid to describe advances of civilization in those cases where a reprehensible person was responsible, and the story becomes lost. Freeways were just an obvious thing that came from the sky. Every major Christian domed church looks like Nero's octagon room throughout 2000 years only due to habit... and just forget Nero's brilliant architects Severus and Celer because a bad person happened to approve of their work. It would be a shame to tiptoe around and be hesitant to describe real history as it was due to self censorship. This thread has maintained the contempt for the bad guys with adjectives like demonic, notorious, tyrants, and so on. The bad can do many good things which don't at all lessen the seriousness of their crimes or depravity.

I remember a lecture about the 5 good emperors where excuses were made for their bad behavior, and how "good" was used in very narrow realpolitik terms of the time. Except for Marcus Aurelius, maybe their goodness was partly just an inability to father a son and having to name a successor based on merit rather than their demon seed. Actually I wasn't thinking about whether behavior was mixed good and bad. I was thinking the birth of lasting cultural icons that were steppingstones to where we are today... but coming from an unsavory source. I forget the details, but I believe Nero's palace octagon room was a huge step towards later domed civic and church buildings. Caligula is sometimes credited with laying the engineering groundworks for the integration of Britain into Roman civilization. Hitler's freeways amazed Eisenhower who pushed for them in the US and they later transformed the world for better or worse. Hitler's unprecedented campaigning by air travel during his brief democratic phase allowed voters in vast countries (later elsewhere) live exposure to candidates.

I remember being confused about some advances of architecture and painting style happening under Nero's direction, then realized being a tyrant doesn't mean you say no to every good idea. History forgets, for instance, that Hitler brought about innovative freeway systems, political campaigning by airplane visits, and green-ness in the form of his vegetarianism. I suspect that even Caligula did some good, but can't remember. Would anyone care to list some good contributions whose origin is forgotten due to the monstrous reputation of the emperor?

Well, your itinerary is so jammed, maybe skip Burano in favor of Roman Sirmione and Venice Navy: . .

Also see supercute Burano, a sort of colorful toy Venice, on the same vaporetti route (don't use the expensive excursion boats near St. Marks, but the regular vaporetti from the backside of Castello). Maybe do this on a day pass, and do other scenic routes the same day around the imain island and main canal. The price of vaporetti has gone up so much I might just walk on other days, which is easy if you avoid the crunch between train station - rialto - San Marco (use the academia bridge and pleasant connecting backstreets instead). Visit fishtail beyond St Marco (has spacious parks and a wide boulevard where Napoleon filled in a canal). The gateway to this has the must-see NAVAL MUSEUM which documents the Roman pleasure barges of Lake Nemi and their excavation and demise. You should get in at 9am opening time, because you may not get thru it's 5 stories by the mid day closing time otherwise. Fascinating displays, such as the Viking incursions of Italy (sacked the wrong city they thought was Rome), ancient cannons, WW2 almost-suicide boats (had ejection seats for just before collision), ship artillery computers as big as a room, the surprising secrets of asymmetrical gondola design, seashells etc etc. Skip Milano.

I should thank you for your Pozzuoli report. I was taking a rest day on Ischia, then realized I was a short ferry hop from Pozzuoli. I didn't have maps or anything more than memories of your photo journal, but managed to savor the arena and seripede roman remains just fine. You are going to only pass by the sprawling Roman ruins at Sirmione on stunning Lake Garda? Well, maybe you have already been there. But I wouldn't miss an opportunity of stopping off the B. to V. train at Desenzano and ferry or bus to Sirmione. Or even savor the lake a bit more with the express bus from Brescia to Salo or Gardone Riviera, then ferry to Garda, then you can walk the shoreline thru Bardolino and Lazise, then ferry hop to Sirmone (can bus to Verona from most of these last places). All doable even with your luggage in a backpack.

One advantage to PDF is it scales properly when you use "magnify" buttons (something like cntl+ or cntl-). Browser screens tend to scale html in distorted ways. But for just sentence length, html viewers can normally pinch their browser window into a narrow column by sliding the lower right corner of frame to the left, and sentences will reflow (maybe have to exit out of full screen mode). I keep several browsers overlapping like shingles side by side, but each at full height of the screen. It somehow seems very natural to keep a couple side by side browsers running in parallel - better than just tabs in each one. Reminds me of the seductive editing of 2 parallel threads in the reality TV series http://www.aetv.com/the_first_48/ where the slightest pause in action of one story lets you find instant gratification in the alternate story, and vice versa.

On one hand, your pdf looks so similar to the gutenburg original on my screen, that I wonder if you have some unfortunate settings on your browser that should be fine tuned. I have an eye affliction (hopefully temporary but quite long lasting) that makes me aggressively reset all the browser preferences. The defaults tend to be terrible; now I have them set up so online reading is better than the printed paper experience. Actually I keep 4 browsers set up for different tradeoffs (none of them IE, which I hate with a fury). One brand is set up with display options perfect for printing. Another brand is set up with all default options for the native experience. I almost never invoke those 2. I keep a 3rd and 4th browser active at all times. One is radically optimized for online readability comfort and bliss. But it looks so unlike the authors intentions (sometimes actually omits or distorts things), that I have another browser with a balance giving proper parsing and such, but with very significant alterations for readability. Of course font types and sizes are important. Not just aesthetics of a font type, but check the way they scale to various sizes which unfortunately varies. They make some preferences harder to discover with each generation of browser, but it can be benificial to really track them down. For instance, the typical convention of black fonts on white background is barbaric on a backlit screen. It makes sense on the printed (reflective) page, because then black blooms upon white. But when backlit, the white is so harsh and dominent that white blooms upon black and makes the font shapes harder to discern. On my super readable browser, I take advantage of the eyes inability to focus blue sharply and use pale blue for background instead of white. De-emphasizing the background makes the foreground appear sharper. etc etc etc

You might also like an Italian POW escape book "No Picnic on Mount Kenya: A Daring Escape, A Perilous Climb" which also covers lengthy preparation of ice climbing equipment, etc in secrecy from the Brit jailers. Freedom was too far away to strive for, so they just wanted a several day climb and return to camp. More understandable if you have been there and stared at the big ice cream cone of an isolated Mt Kenya or Kilimanjaro defying the warm equatorial plain.

I have made several postings here about that course and others in the series. The original source of them is at http://oyc.yale.edu/courselist and gives you various format choices for loading on ipods or pc's. Unfortunately there appears to be no recent courses added when I last checked. Maybe someone can review the Greek History one; I know it has been mentioned here. I took the Roman one just before going to see some of the same monuments in person (also took some other Roman architecture video courses). I am thankful it was made available, and it did deepen my understanding - but mostly in some indirect way that I can't put my finger on. Since it's a huge time commitment to view the whole course, I will nitpick a few things to show it's not entirely a free banquet. There is an absurd emphasis on esoteric terminology. I don't argue with learning terms that you might need twice in your life, but she hammers in terms with no practical use for even specialists. Things that could be clearly communicated with 2 sensible words have to be compressed into one word nobody uses except on school tests. She apologizes for it. I don't like her choice of monuments to cover. In person they seem runts of the litter, standing by more interesting things. In more than one case she seems to pick them because they were associated with a women, or some such thing other than it's own merit. I guess it's forgivable in cases where she had research experience at the monument. BTW: I can't help commenting on digressions she chooses to inject into the subject, which can reveal what stuff she is made of in terms of smarts and biases. She makes a big deal of 4 gelato spots in Rome and Florence. I would say 90% of American visitors to Italy are devoid of taste and cannot appreciate "good" gelato. Sure, they LOVE it, but are equally happy with crap flavors and crap vendors, just because they are all better than "vomit cream" from home. To respect her I hoped she would be within the 10% category of discerning taste. I visited those places and cannot vouch for her taste. Borderline, unless they were just above the 90% level then fell in the year or so since her recommendation. Well, maybe this doesn't negate her scholarship since scholars may be nerds that develop other parts of their brains beside taste. Actually one place in Rome was acceptable, but already well known, and one flavor in a Florence place WAS remarkable. The other kind of digression was predictable but annoying. The loony left political jabs weren't as flagrant as in a Berkeley Roman course (I don't knee-jerk criticize Berkeley, because I used to work with awesome engineering graduates from there). But the kind of patronizing left-is-good, right-is-bad came out in goofy ways like celebrating modern politician's physical likeness to a corresponding good or notorious emperor. In another Yale course on Classical Music I got an insight into the eternal academic leftyness. It was done so ineptly and unconvincingly that it was revealed to be simple case of trying to appear relevant and edgy to the students rather than at all heartfelt! The professor is of impeccable qualifications (writing the textbooks, etc) but didn't want to appear haughty. He constantly tries to patronize the students with examples of pop culture, but from before they were born. He was so old that they sit uncomprehending when he tries to be a "hep cat" like he imagines youth admire. Also he gets his facts wrong when making comparisons in areas I know, from diseases to dates of impressionist paintings. I wish these professors would stick to what they know, but I guess they have to pander to the audience for their "ratings".

I have also run across sympathetic Nero trivia like the items you mention, but I don't know what to make of it all. He did seem irresponsible too. I can't understand why they mostly destroyed his palace instead of recycling, given the staggering investment. Of course there is a rationale, but it must have been very heartfelt for such destruction. I recently viewed a dozen or so busts of Nero (and similar numbers for other emperors) in museums of Rome and Naples. I have got to say that the Nero ones seem to reek of immaturity, flakiness, and a sort of careless arrogance. They sometimes showed him so young that he wasn't yet in the top office. Sometimes busts seem cookie cutter, like the Caracalla scowl. Even Hadrian always has the same inscrutable pose. Those I don't take seriously since they seem to be products of a publicity campaign. But when they vary I start to suspect I can rely on common denominators, like M. Aurelius being an absent minded professor or C. Augustus being a steely mind within a frail body. Nero was shown unflattering in so many ways, that I can't believe there isn't a hint of truth there. Of course I am talking about expressions, etc, not features you happen to be born with.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/04/arts/des...?pagewanted=all Well, maybe the hype for Cleo is needed to cover exhibit expenses, rather than being mindless new age ideology. It does seem a flip-flop in the usual victimology rant... support annointed "minority" member who gained power rather than the Egyptian people withstanding such an imposed dictator family of foreign origin. Just how isolated she was from Egyptian culture is suggested by a Wikipedia paragraph (possibly disputed in this forum earlier):

Wow, I'll take that with a dose of sodium chloride but I'll still look into it with an open mind. Well, if you find a citation you could correct http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Alesia#Aftermath which agrees with the no-strangulation theory. Actually the professor said there was LITTLE evidence (not none) for a ritual choking and Wiki suggests there was only gossip about it. He did take a ride in the triumph cage, but then went to prison with no further word on his fate, they say.

I would like to be included in the lucky draw!!!

Rats, just when I was breaking in my crispy 1998 version! I hope someone will review how much was updated. The Oxford book is good for before and during a visit because it is systematically organized. But afterwards to fill in some lingering questions about odds and ends that don't seem to fit, I like http://www.amazon.com/Rome-Environs-Archae...i/dp/0520079612 which seems more comprehensive. It's less structured freestyle format becomes a non-problem after you have familiarized yourself on site grounds. Maybe the missing pieces of Oxford are forgivable since they have extra sections such as on museums, timelines, and glosseries. They don't claim to go beyond the walls, like Coarelli does, but I don't understand why they barely cover the walls themselves. I had been puzzled by differences the 2 books take on the same sites. If it might be due to new research, it is hard to know who benefited by recentness. The Coarelli book is a translation of 1985 to 2003 material with possible updates to 2007 vs 1998 for Oxford. For instance on via Appia, they give different explanations of the Circus of Maxentius. Oxford puts the finish line at a judges box 2/3 way past the starting line (multiple laps). Coarelli describes but doesn't explain that structure, and puts the finish line at the Imperial Box opposite the starting line (which Oxford just says is a key vantage point for crashing turns). But proceed on to the Villa Quintilii and Oxford shows a big map with virtually no labels or writeup, while Coarelli does all 3 well.

Which famous opponents to Rome were actually in the Roman Army beforehand, pledging loyalty and benefiting from training and technology? I believe Vercingetorix and Arminius were in that category, and perhaps shouldn't be considered such spunky liberation heros in a clash of distinct cultures because they earlier submitted and pledged their life to Rome as well as being spoon fed their world-beating military secrets. It seem fundamentally different than, say, Zhukov beating Hitler generals (he actually first came to prominence after an upset victory against the Japanese steamroller in Mongolia). There the Russians used tactics borne of their own culture and technology not emulating their opponents but brilliant tank innovations for example. The famous battles of Alesia and Teutonburg Forest may be more like the 1903 surprise victory of Japanese over the Russian Navy - a product of meticulous coaching by British advisors rather than the natural strength of Japanese tactics and technology.

A recent rerun of Military History channel documentary had a Canadian war collage prof saying there wasn't evidence for that fate, and V. was probably quietly killed (in lieu his army and people, which Caesar had more typically killed afterward in Gaul). Reason was that a captured V. was like Napoleon in Elba (with millions more to kill) - the one person who had proven to be able to unite unmanageable guerilla subgroups in Gaul and guarantee more uprisings. That may have been why Caesar did so many massacres beforehand - only way to send a message to all Gauls before they had a focal point like V. I think even in WW2, there was a similar problem. On paper France had the technology and troops to stop a Nazi invasion. Have you seen a German tank of this early era - they almost look like you could break off their skinny little barrel with your hand (unlike French tanks). Even the French president gave the right orders beforehand to prevent losing battles. But uncooperative factions and lack of a charismatic leader just let these advantages lay dormant.

Also didn't they give citizenship to nearby allies and neutrals? Some say Rome fell due to their newfound reluctance to co-opt the barbarians with chances for a place in Roman society. They added another kind of inclusivity to the common institution of slavery, that is wages at a rate that could give you the potential to buy your freedom in about 7 years. These folks were more like indentured servants than slaves. Some freedmen became outrageously rich - billionaires in modern terms. Roman realistic sculpture of individuals has never been equaled, whether by the Greeks or renaissancians. The subjects aspirations and fortitude (yet pragmatism) comes thru without appearing forced or theatrical. Their architecture reflects brilliant solutions to practical and aesthetic desires of mankind - not just pompous piles from meglomaniac leaders like tombs or defensive structures found all over the ancient world, but useful things of beauty.

Summary: Pompeii and Herculeum wither under indifference of national gov't, EU, and UNESCO bureaucracies. The best of what you see now are the product of past extraordinary caretakers and administrators and present foreign donors, but they are out of the picture in a bleak future. http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/2010/04/...uin-of-pompeii/ In my recent visit, Pompeii was appallingly degraded except for a couple isolated examples; even most roads were closed so that there was only one choked walkway to connect the 2 most popular ends of the site. Herculeum was actually improved from my last visit, but the donor activity responsible will end and much stuff is alarmingly exposed to weather.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/05/26...=1&ref=news Where is this is already allowed, Capua? I seem to recall you can see the plumbing there for flooding the place. I wonder if the one in Pozzuoli ever allows it... the underground looks in good shape and inviting, but was roped off on my visit. P.S. I wonder what to make of captions on site that make some amazing claim that you don't see in any other literature. Or on the other hand they ignore a key point in all the literature, as if they think it may not be true. In other words, how much gravitas for the signs... a lot, or could it sometimes be the product of a few loose cannons or pranksters that can't be stopped due to union rules?

A really interesting subject, although the article mostly covers pretty common knowledge. I'll expand with my impressions of 2 villas just outside Rome on Appia Antica. The villa of Maxentious is amazing for it's racetrack (circus) which is excellant condition. The track is so huge that the only tourist there asked me where was it, and I had to point to the brickwork all around us practically out to horizon (horsestalls still there too). The villa is fenced off for refurbishment or something and I failed to notice the most interesting feature... the villa extends to intersect the racetrack surround and gives residents a passageway to a private imperial box near the finish line without having to leave the house! I remember a buildup of bricks there, but didn't get a good look due to sticking to rare trails thru the knee-high weeds/wildflowers. Maybe someone will post pictures of this. Further out is the Quintillis villa which was stolen by emperor Commodus murdering the owners. I forget the terminology (and all spellings), but besides the beautiful bath features they labeled an oval area as something Commodus converted from some fine architectural feature to a sick killing zone where he could slay prisoners/animals/cripples. It was amazing to have tangible evidence that seemed to match the stories of good, bad, and ugly emperors.

The exaggerated climate hysteria was in part a fad related to wealth and comfort. That's when idle minds turn to hypochondria, like the anti-globalization riots before 2001. Then terrorism episodes snapped folks back into a more rational assessment of priorities, and maybe the current economic crises is doing the same for climate hysteria. Idle minds in comfortable 1st world enclaves become captivated with whatever sensational junk is being promoted by the media (desperate to increase audience) then feel they should be activists out of guilt for comfort rather than logic of the issue. Other contributing factors are the switchover to a new hypochondria, that is flying anywhere near traces of volcanic dust. Absolutely childish how over cautious this was played out, when ash has never caused a flying fatality (I may be biased by being a glider pilot who has no fear of landing without engines). Also my month in Europe was the coldest spring I have ever experienced - cold rain almost every day. In fact brutal hail and a flood in the forum, which left me wheezing and spitting up blood for 10 days (pneumonia I assume, but I didn't let it slow me down).