Spurius

That whole Spartacus debacle was some fun There does seem to be waves of new registers, some just signing on to get help with one or two pieces of homework However, some do stay and it is great to see younger posters gradually gaining knowledge and improved writing styles. Now if only we older, grouchier people could show some change too... I like the level of discussions here, so even though my forte is in periods after Rome (especially the period that ended the Byzantines) I like being here. If for no other reason than it makes me dig out my old college notes on foundation to late republic. BTW, those old logos did look interesting.

If not, I'm sure my son could. If nothing else to change his diapers right now. Later, well.... :pimp:

I'd choose despotism. I would be unquestioned monarch with a system of buereaucrats to run the day-to-day operations and legal matters...with myself having the power of life or death over them during job review times They had better meet my criteria for efficent and honest work or the axe...and I'd let them pocket "bonus" money if they complete projects under budget. As far as heirs go, I'd celebrate my 60th birthday with a battle of my potential heirs. They and their 1,000 men would battle at one place with the winner/winners gaining the position. If they want to split the power and work together, so be it. They'll get their chance to rule after I'm dead. :pimp:

Yeah, it didn't sit well with the average Egyptian when the "Great Bull" was a cow . Do they have any graffiti for Cleo like for Hatshepsut? (Pharaoh bending over and taking it like *ahem* a man) There had to be some, but did any survive like the workers cave for Hatshepsut?

I think this line from the article sums it up (for good or bad reasons): "Nearly half of Skype's users live in Europe, a quarter are in Asia, and an eighth are in North America, providing eBay with a large audience as it seeks to expand outside of its core North American market. " As communications systems grow and merge, fewer and fewer entities will be in control of it. It has become an elite oligarchy already, the net is no different or immune compared to the rest of the business. Positioning for a buyout is what I think e-bay is doing. Hurry up and enjoy Skype! It'll be gone within three years, IMHO.

Some of the areas of interest in this "What if..." (at least as far as for me): 1) Would Rome and its rulers have gone much farther into northern europe and Gaul, or would they settle for barbarian tribal states in constant turmoil? 2) Without the drive to conquer Gaul or beyond, would Rome cast its greedy eye east and force more land/ client kingdoms from the Parthians? 3) Would Rome have finally exhausted its martial power early (with more civil wars) and become more "eastern" with more emphasis on decadence and personal gain by the elite for only themselves instead for the state and themselves? How is Caesar involved in these? Here we go.... 1) Caesar's need for conquest and glory put Rome farther into europe than it would have naturally gone...at that point. I imagine that Rome's paranoia about the Celts would have eventually drove them to subdue or payoff the Gauls. I don't envision Gaul NOT being romanized, just a matter of time. In any event, Rome's hand would probably have been weaker when the big migrations started. 2) The Republic was extrordinarily money hungry. The Empire did need money, but it was more efficent in its use (thanks to Augustus) than the Republic. Money for elections, money for shows, money for taxes, money for trade (much better than commodities), the list goes on. The East had riches and tax farming was raised to a fine art by the Romans. Caesar was going to go east, but got cut short. With the chain of events leading to empire delayed, perhaps Rome would not have gone very deep into the Levant. The military expenditures would have been cost prohibitive and the roman economy may have suffered more devastating cyles of recession and negative growth. Or maybe even more of their military would have been concentrated there, leaving more vulnerability in europe and the various people migrations. 3) This is more of a philosophical view. Caesar lead to Augustus and his strengthening of "family values" in Roman society. Even though the emperor's courtiers got very decadent, there was enough of a service and honor mentality to hold the Empire together longer than any loyalty to the Republic would have. Granted that Rome would have remained the military power of europe during that time, I think that without Caesar and empire (even a delayed empire) the rich would have gone off the deep end and acted very much like the Etruscans. All of this is IMHO and speculative. It may fall apart like a house of cards...but that's what discussions are for

Looks like E-Bay thinks it's a good deal too. :pimp:

I think he just wanted to know about Beowulf because it is a great poem and one of the earliest surviving manuscripts in english (yes old english, but still english). HW

Yep, stooopid for me :bag: Thanks. :pimp:

I may be being a bit dense, but I can't seem to comment/reply to anyone's blog. You do just hit add reply or comment, write it and send it ...correct? If not, color me stooopid :bag:

So what do others think? I tend to agree with fdgh here...Hannibal didn't fail, Carthage did. I have two questions with a seige of Rome by Hannibal. 1)Was Hannibal really lacking engineers? There should have been ones available from the sympathetic southern cities. Materials available on site too. Was this a real problem? 2)Would sacking Rome been enough to stop Rome? I think that only the stone by stone destruction that Rome did to Carthage would work. Would Hannibal or Carthage carry out this destruction? I don't think so. Carthage would want any economy gain it could get from Rome after the defeat of Rome.

Smooth and easy. Good job. Thanks Moonlapse! ....now to get some stuff worthwhile so I can post more....*grumble*

No worrys. If people will produce only for reputation points, do we really need to see it? I'm working on some stuff right now for the Post-Roman forum. Maybe the upgrades will be through by the time I brush it up. Here's hoping...

That should be nice. Walking up the interior ramp and stopping to look at the tomb gave me a far look back into the past...even if it was well lit or in great repair. Here's hoping the project goes well.

That's great. Could have some great stuff there.

I take it you aren't going to do combat demonstrations, just march and display right? Windless/Atlanta Cutlery makes some good looking stuff, but it can take forever to get if it isn't a popular item. Also Del Tin makes good stuff, and used to be good prices even with overseas shipping. Haven't order from them in years so I don't know how they are now.

The article says that the major problems set in after 2001 when its budget was lumped in to a bigger budget. That explains it. When we were there in 2001 (Sept. 8-13 ) the visit to Castel Sant'Angelo was okay with the cafe on the walls and some exhibits, along with the vendors lining the bridge, but it wasn't what I expected. I think it had been going soft before then.

Thanks for the visual aid too.

A sidenote: I remember watching Michael Wood in "In Search of the Trojan War" talking to an older woman archeologist about the dating of various Mycenean sites and digs in that part of the world in general. The dialogue, paraphrased because my memory is fuzzed a bit, goes something like this: Wood: "So, vital information about soil composition and texture as well as the depth of the artifacts help determine age? Lady: "As well as the artifacts found around them." Wood: " Erosion is a big problem on hill sides, as well as agriculture?" Lady: "Yes they are and the big thing that causes layer shifting problems in the Agean..." Wood: "Earthquakes." Lady: " Moles." Wood: (Looks let-down, like a boy told he didn't get what he wanted for christmas) Lady: "They dig underneath and things sink down through their tunnels. Sometimes more than three feet in a heavily populated area."

Yes, now it's bad...as you said. But in 1400 it was THE city of the Mediterranean. Too bad about it's slide, but at least there's still a lot of scholarly material waiting to be plumbed there (like the Fustat Geniza). I hope to take the family and see Grenada and then other points in Spain in a few years.

In the speeches supposedly given to legionaires before battle, much was usually made of their physical endurance. Even if you disregard them as flowery afterthoughts, there would still probably be some decurian loudly reminding you how weak and feminine your opponents are. The legions did a full regiment of PT besides all of the rest of their hard work days. They were as a group in superior physical condition to any non-professional army they faced. They were able to last in combat longer than their opponents. Now, that means as the first rush of the enemies falls away with exhaustion...the Romans could then eother press on, stop up with the frontline still able to hold while the fresh troops move up through the lines to continue the advance, or if immobile on defense the fresh troops could come up and tired legionaires retire to rest. A non-professional army would pile on top of itself trying to get at the enemy, forcing the exhausted troops onto the fresh Romans, or even a combination of fresh and tired Romans still able to fight. Also, as noted above, the fights were not continuous all up and down the line. Quick and disciplined movement of ranks would let the Romans change ranks, or even just ground shields for a fast breather. It's only when you had the mad bunching of desperate men that you got the big slaughters going. Most of the time, it was Romes enemies who were desperate.

Let me save you the trouble.... AAAAAAHHHhhhhhhh---*splat* :pimp:

I'm casting my vote to other, with two possible candidates. At first I was going to include Baghdad, but by 1400 it had been sacked a couple times. Still a pearl, but rough around the edges. My two nominees: Cairo: During this time the largest city in Europe, Africa, and the Middle East at a population of 500,000 or so. That would put its size in the same ranks as Tenochitlian and the Forbidden City. It had several grand mosques, the fortress and tower of the mameluks, a large palace and a "human anthill" of activity. Also, looking into the near distance, there is Giza (actually part of its suburbs today). This time period was a bloody one for Cairo however, the Dynasty was called the Circassian Mameluks. They oppressed the Jews and Chrisitians a great deal, and raided their Muslim neighbors a lot. Still the city was supposed to be at its most beautiful then. Granada: With the Alhambra, Generalife, El Carmen, the gates to the old city "Elvira", the Jewish quarter El Albaicin...all held today as pearls of beauty, so how much the better then? The kingdom was a vassal state of Castile in 1400, but the King of Granada still held court. It wasn't until 1492 that Ferdinan and Isabella removed the king and last Andalusian Islamic stronghold. Yes, Columbus's voyage was attached to this event as part of the good mood of the times. I lean toward Granada for beauty, but both are great cities.

Well, it does look like a form that was dressed to make it look more like stone, at least to my non-expert opinion. I'm out of ideas if the holes are for stakes or for pipes in a later period. Even if we can't come up with any useful suggestions, I hope you will inform us if you do find anything out.

It would make for interesting State of the Union addresses and boy, those press conferences. (insert favorite tirade from any of his movies here...)