Northern Neil

Interesting! Off topic a little, I know, but are you refering to purely Jewish prayer, or are there any pagan/cult origins/influences? yep, so I won't dwell on it long. Aparently it crops up in a Babylonian context round about 500BC. I will PM you when I have looked through my books and found the specific reference!

Sorry! A bit late... hope you had a great day!

During the early third and fourth centuries there were many cults whichwere very similar indeed to Christianity; some of them even had the same miracle stories, and the 'Lord's Prayer' has been around, in one form or another, since the 5th century BC. Maybe Constantine et al simply unified all adherents of these different cults under the umbrella of Christianity. For a lot of people the adoption of Christianity would have been simply a change of name of their deity. But maybe this is a discussion for another forum. I think maybe Ursus you should, or at least spend time watching it. Whatever the director's personal views, I believe that it is a great movie which has a serious go at portraying a highly important, yet not widely known figure from the ancient world. There does not seem, to me, anything which would lead me to believe that this movie, or rather Hypatia's story, can be seen as allegorical to the modern US. It does, however, portray the battle between reason and blind faith in a way I suspect you will appreciate. Finally - Well done Rachel Weisz, GREAT performance!

Although the term 'Dark Age' is currently out of vogue, there was a massive economic collapse and drop in population which effected most of Western Europe between 400 and 1000, its low point (in terms of political and economical development) dated at roughly 800. By that time, most towns in Western Europe consisted of a church surrounded by a huddle of huts, and fields of rubble where the once extensive Roman town lay. The same thing happened in the east from about 625, although with less far reaching effects. Put another way: The average citizen in 400 ( and some animals!) resided under a tiled roof, had access to a wide variety of cheaply available consumer products, and was able to send a letter from York to Alexandria. A standing army ensured the security of the countryside and literacy - if not universal - was widespread. One hundred years later everything had changed; most people lived in wattle huts with thatched roofs, had access to a very reduced 'kit' of household goods - usually self made, and were unlikely to stray more than a days walk from their own homes. Trade in the Mediterranean did not attain early 3rd century levels until the 18th century, and urban re-growth did not start until the tenth century. The term Dark Age may well be out of vogue and the Middle Ages indeed encompass the period under discussion. But commentators at the time ( Gildas, Sidonius Apollinaris ) were pretty sure that a precipitous and rapid collapse of civilisation had occurred. Modern historians such as Ward Perkins would agree - see his well researched book 'The Fall of Rome and the End of Civilisation'. As Melvadius says, it happened at different times within a hundred year spread. In Italy itself, for example, the 'Dark Ages' probably did not begin in earnest until, ironically, the Empire reclaimed Italy from the Ostrogoths, and by so doing left it weakened and unable to resist the Lombards, who destroyed Roman material culture for good. The term Dark Age has been used with regard to the situation with the Greeks between the Santorini eruption c.1250BC and the emergence of classical culture in about 700BC. Again, economic decline, a loss of literacy and a paucity of written records characterise this period. Maybe we could dispense with the term 'Dark Age' and use the less emotive and more accurate term ' Rapidly ocurring and long lasting economic decline'. But it all amounts to the same thing.

A good point, and one would assume that to be the case. However, from experience in re-enactment, in the days when I was younger and thinner, a flat oval shield makes a testudo far more easily and efficiently than a highly convex rectangular one (SCUTUM). The flat oval shields can be overlapped like roofslates, and it takes but a few seconds to get rid of any chinks and gaps. Achieving this with SCUTA is far more difficult, and it is only possible to get an efficient overlap in one plane, i.e. with the guy in front and behind you. Gaps constantly open up with guys to your left and right, as the convex nature of the SCUTUM makes a steady overlap in that plane quite difficult.

Honorius, for me, has got to be the worst. A petulant, inneffective pipsqueak who had Stilicho murdered and didn't care a fig for Rome as long as he was safe in Ravenna feeding his pet chickens. If someone different had been emperor, a character resembling Valentinian I for instance, The Empire could well have extricated itself from the mess it was getting into in the early 5th century. His dad Theodosius 'The Great' was only slightly better.

...also, a third of what makes up modern Germany actually was colonised and included in the Empire, much of it for around 400 years.

How about THIS?!

Ordered. I also ordered a similar book which showed up on the Amazon page, 'AD 381: Heretics, Pagans and the Christian State' by Charles Freeman.

Hmm... Tadjiks, Uighurs and Kyrgiz all look western/mediterranean in appearance. They reside on the edge of China and inside china itself. From the ancient world, Tocharians Greeks and Scythians probably contributed to their ancestry.

Monotheistic religions were essential to the political stability of dark age and medieval society, and continue to be so in many parts of the modern world. Naturally, they have, for the past 1600 years, made wizards and witches (remnants of the older religion) into fearful figures. Whilst I agree with Sovays statement, I must say that in early Christian times witches and wizards were not - at first - feared because they were unknown, they were very much recognised. As Christianity gained support they were alleged by practitioners of the new religion to be servants of the Devil. The unknown, occult nature of such figures has been enhanced and exaggerated by monotheists ever since. The shaping of Halloween into a celebration of the gory and horrific we have today was part of that process; initially it was a pagan festival to mark the start of the dark part of the year.

I think the concensus here is that early and late Roman armies were more or less identical in their brutality, Christianity only serving to give justification to the slaughter of non-Christian foes. I wonder, though, wether Alaric's Christianity played a part in moderating his sack of Rome?

Much to see? Not as much as you might think, it being one of the three (permanent) legionary fortresses of Britannia. The amphitheatre, however, is worth a visit. slightly more than half of it remains, preserved and consolidated. The other half lies undisturbed in what looks like a large private garden. There are other bits and bobs, visible under glass inside shops, and for a long stretch the city walls overly the walls of the fortress. The dead centre of Chester retains the T - junction layout of the fortress streets, and are even named in the Roman fashion i.e. Via Praetoria etc.

Looking at this plan, I cannot help but find similarities between the Earlier El Djem amphitheatre and the two stone- built British amphitheatres at Chester and Caerleon. Incidentally, Chester was the last Roman site I visited, last weekend.

Oh dear... there should, but I'm afraid I just can't keep my mouth shut on this one, and it is a history forum after all. Since I became active here once again, I have both bought the movie and noticed Barcas 'bump' on the subject on his thread 'Movie set in Roman Britain'. So here I go. I'm afraid it is just plain silly. Hadrian and Agricola co-existing? The fortress at Inchtuthill the size of a boy scout camp, when in fact it was a legionary fortress the size of York? Calling it by its modern name instead of the possibly more accurate and certainly grander sounding 'PINNATA CASTRA'? The bit that put the seal on its silliness for me was the bit near the end, when, marching back south, someone says 'Oh look, Hadrian has decided to build a wall' or something similar. Would they not have seen its turf-wall predecessor on the march north a few months earlier, or known about the already existing Stanegate frontier where they would almost certainly have received supplies on the way up to PINNATA CASTRA from Corbridge (sorry, CORIOSOPITVM)? I note that health and safety concerns prevented the use of Pila in the movie. Was the budget so low that they couldn't have shown the re-enacters in close-up throwing a volley of these, and then having a shot where the Picts received them, using fancy computer assisted animation, of course? I dread the next British produced WW2 movie - are we so scared of health and safety officers that soldiers will be shouting 'Ratatatatat' instead of using blanks in the old Vickers water-cooled? No. Silliness deserves pedantry.

This is indeed the case - during the 4th century the rank of 'Centenarius' seems to have replaced the centurion. It is unclear wether or not a centenarius could avail himself of the same career structure which was a feature of the earlier centurionate. The rank of 'Praepositus' appears to have replaced the earlier rank of Legate, and the latest documentary evidence for Camp Prefect is the mid third century, an inscription from Chester. In the late 4th century Ammianus Marcellinus was present in the war against the Allemanni, and Julian's war against the Persians. In his history the legions still appear recognisable, their engineering skills are commented upon, their eagerness for battle referred to, and also there is mention of time-honoured formations such as the testudo. But as Yehudeh states, the size of a legion was now 1'000 men. In addition, there was no longer the distinction of citizenship which gave the legions superior social status in earlier times. From the early third century onwards, every free person in the Empire was a citizen. The fourth century legionary, in his chain mail shirt, large oval shield and basic but efficient ridge-helmet all provided by the state, may not have cut quite the figure of his Trajanic or Augustan counterpart. But he was still a well trained and equipped soldier, and generally speaking, still had the advantage over the average Gothic or Angle raider. By the early fifth century, the tax base of the Western empire was greatly reduced. In addition, 'citizen' troops - if the term had meaning any longer - found themselves being conscripted rather than volunteering. Roman armies now as often fought each other as they did non-Roman forces, and the army was no longer seen as a desireable career. The final nail in the coffin of the old Roman army was probably when Theodosius employed 40'000 Germans and Alans to protect the frontiers, offering them land grants because the funds were no longer available. From then on, disgruntled 'Roman' officers such as Alaric found themselves acquiring land rather than being paid by the state. As this happened, Rome's tax base shrank still further, and so more barbarian troops were offered payment in land. That is the general picture of the situation of the Late Roman army in the fifth century. For the sake of brevity I have made a few generalisations of course! EDIT: During the sixth and early 7th centuries the Eastern Roman Empire still had units which were denoted as legions, the Legio V Macedonia for example.

One thing to consider is that in many Roman towns there were purpose built market complexes built separately from the Forum itself. Trajan's Market in Rome is a fine example, as are the 'kiosks' at Leptis Magna. The 'Serapaeum' at Pozzuoli is thought to be another example. Trajan's Market consists of a complex of streets which have what plainly appear to be shop fronts facing the road. The kiosks of Leptis and the example at Pozzuoli consist of circular collonaded or arched structures resembling round temples. These really did work in much the same way as a modern market, in that there were a lot of purpose-built shops and stalls concentrated in one place. So, I think it would be fair to say that the Forum was mainly administrative but sometimes hosted a market and permanently sited businesses, but also there were permanent purpose built markets built elsewhere in the town. A Wikipedia search for Trajan's Market and Pozzuoli turns up some good photos. Here is a good pic of the Leptis Magna kiosk.

Hmm, your excelllent little review has prompted me to go onto the Amazon website and invest in what appears to be a little gem of a DVD. I am pleased that it gives more 'obscure' characters their due place in history. ( On obscure Romans, I'm pretty certain that if Shakespeare had written about Decius, Aurelian, Placida etc etc as well as Caesar et al these people would be seen as less marginal characters in popular culture.)

On some maps of the Roman Empire, the little known Bosporan Kingdom, situated on the Sea of Azov in the Ukraine, is depicted as being within the bounds of the Empire. On other maps it is left out; a similar situation arises over the status of pro-Roman tribes in southern Scotland such as the Selgovae and the Votadini. In both instances the peoples of these regions were not directly taxed, but there were very substantial cultural and trade links. Maybe, for want of more records, Ireland evolved into such an entity? Politically it had a sort of unity in that it had a 'high king', and the substantial defended harbour at Caer Gybi in Northwest Wales can only have been there to service trade across the Irish sea. It could be that the people of Ireland were indirectly taxed via this trade route? I also find the rapidity of Patricius' conversion of the Irish a bit suspicious. Maybe he got the credit for a process which had been underway for decades? My suspicions are that if the Irish were literate in the same way that the Bosporan Greek colonists were, our maps might, just might, show Ireland in a similar ambiguous way. All speculation of course, but there do appear to be a few bits of tantalising evidence.

A small telescope or pair of binoculars would have been a precious thing.

Yes. Ptolemy 1st was one of Alexander the Great's generals.

Here here to that! I believe Sydney James was a ittle too handsome for the role of Marcus Antonius though. Seriously, I dont think I could add anything that hasn't already been said here or on PP's original link. Apart from how relieved I am that that no-one on either site is saying she should be portrayed as' Opressed, Black and African'. As for AJ's suitability or otherwise, at least she seems to have made an effort to read about her role, so we may see a surprising performance. I quite liked te actress who played her in HBO's 'Rome'. Forgotten her name, though.

Zooming in closer still, the excellent Ordnance Survey map of Hadrian's wall, showing all remains in red or black (depending on invisible or visible remains) has recently been re-published by English Heritage. On the other hand, for a very broad overview may I reccommend the Penguin Atlas of Ancient History and its companion The Penguin Atlas of Mediaeval History? If still in print they provide a delightful cartoon strip of the growth of the republic/empire, its shrinkage and its continued fortunes in the middle ages as the renamed 'Byzantine' Empire.