WotWotius

But does one really need a homage to 1950's B movies? I'm thinking no.... I'll wait till my cousin gets the dvd in a few months. That depends entirely on how one perceives film. I personally class a film as 'good' if it leans towards some form of artist value or acts as a source of disposable entertainment. The Crystal Skull certainly leans towards the latter, and does this very well, which is probably why I do not have a problem with its B movies references. It is all too annoying when these 'disposable entertainment films' attempt to have some form of artist temperament and produce something as half-baked and mediocre as, say, the Hulk or Blade III. The fact that films such as Indiana Jones and Transformers are shamelessly over-the-top as well as being completely devoid of plot is something I find...well, refreshing. Some may say that this is the beginning of a cultural wasteland in cinema; I, on the other hand, commend these films for not beating around the bush and just sticking with explosions! Coming back to the point I made earlier about a fake artist temperament in action films, I have found a fake trailer that hammers it home:

Said woman may well have also have been the man's wife and thus still exerted power through her husband. We do, after all, know very little of the mentality of the period. Further, I resent archaeology being dubbed a 'male-oriented' field: so-called 'feminist' archaeology has been a quite a notable factor in the subject since 1970s. This is especially true in both the study of ethnographic analogies and in anthropology.

The tarantula came along after the fridge scene. They must have cut it out...

You seem to forget that Raiders had a melting Nazis scene - just as excessive as the end of the Crystal Skull, methinks. I absolutely loved it. It worked within the framework of an Indiana Jones film, but progressed with the time within which it was set. While the first ones were very much in keeping with the 1930s adventure book, Crystal Skull was quite a cool homage to the 1950s 'B movie': Tarzan, horror, ants, outrageous communists, ____ etc. Therefore it is supposed to be shamelessly over-the-top!

The resemblance is uncanny: This will probably confuse anybody who has not played Halo...

I have come up with a good five puns. Unfortunatly, they are all far too obscene to post here...

Isaac Asimov is one of the earliest modern writers to mention this in his "Book of Facts" but Adrian Goldsworthy strenuously derided this as a myth arising from a misunderstanding of an early Latin source (I forget which one). Yes, this misconception arises from gross misinterpretation of the below literary sources: 'Their soldiers were sick from want of sleep, and because of the unaccustomed food which the country afforded. They had no wine, no salt, no vinegar, no oil, but lived on wheat and barley, and the flesh of deer and rabbits boiled without salt, which caused dysentery, from which many died.' - Appian, 6.54 'Both Corbulo and his army, though suffering no losses in battle, were becoming exhausted by short supplies and hardships, compelled as they were to stave off hunger solely by the flesh of cattle. Added to this was scarcity of water, a burning summer and long marches, all of which were alleviated only by the general's patient endurance. He bore indeed the same or even more burdens than the common soldier. Subsequently, they reached lands under cultivation, and reaped the crops...' - Tacitus, Annals, 14.24 Although these sources do suggest a certain aversion to meat, it is only an aversion during situations when the meat was off. Further, both Appian and Tacitus only give reference to the diets of legionaries during the campaign season - a time when soldiers, while often well supplied, still had to forage. There are also some discrepancies in the archaeological evidence. Analysis of the organic matter found at the auxiliary latrines at Bearsden do suggest that the peacetime diet of the average milites mainly consisted of wheat and vegetables - a theory complemented by the lack of archaeozoological evidence. This is, however, slightly offset by the back that the soil at Beaersden is rather acidic and thus probably destroyed any animal remains. This is most probably an example of absence of evidence as oppose to evidence of absence. The belief that legionaries were vegetarian is, by nos means, complimented by the act that inscriptions relating to the Roman army sometimes give reference to soldiers' prowess as hunters - an inscription found at Durham, for instance, mentions a prefect of a unit of Ala who had bagged himself many a wild boar; a tombstone found at Xanten on the Rhine commemorates an Ursarius, or bear catcher. One other point that needs to be considered in the fact that there was not set diet for the legionaries: diet was very much dictated by the locality of produce. Therefore, a soldier's diet in a one area may have had less meat in it than a soldier in another. One thing that remains to be certain is that soldiers were by no mean vegetarian.

Is this a popular belief/misconception? Discuss.

Thank you. It was an article based on an essay I did for a module on Roman Dacia. The article's title was: Intrusive Ideologies? Modern Politics and the History of Roman Dacia. Most of it has been posted somewhere in the Forum Peregrini. Feel free to have a look! Is this the one? Roman Dacia: archaeology, history and politics: describe the impact of modern politics on the way Roman Dacia has been presented in the archaeological and historical literature. -- Nephele Sort of - I added another 500 words, you see. I haven't gone that far yet. Getting published does, however, mean that I shall be able to cite myself in my dissertation...

Thank you. It was an article based on an essay I did for a module on Roman Dacia. The article's title was: Intrusive Ideologies? Modern Politics and the History of Roman Dacia. Most of it has been posted somewhere in the Forum Peregrini. Feel free to have a look!

The other day I was more than pleased to discover that one of my essays, submitted nearly a year ago, had actually been published in Exeter's Department of Classics annual journal. As stated, I submitted it a while ago, with no real expectations of it being published; not only did they publish it, but my article follows one written by Peter Wiseman! Anyway, I just thought that I'd express my glee here. Also, it seems that I have neglected this here humble blog. Methinks I should give some sort of account of the last year or so - it has been a great one, you see.

Indeed. Thanks.

Chin up - at least we're in Eurovision...

-'Ergo conversis regio more militibus Britanniam petiit, in qua multa correxit murumque per octoginta milia passuum primus duxit, qui barbaros Romanosque divideret.' -'And so, having reformed the army quite in the manner of a monarch, he set out for Britain, and there he corrected many abuses and was the first to construct a wall, eighty miles in length, which was to separate the barbarians from the Romans.' (S. H. A. Hadr. 11.2) Our only literary source for the existence of Hadrian's Wall.

I think the only reason why Cicero was not invited to assassinate Caesar was more to do with his personal affiliation with the dictator - the two did seem to get on in this respect. As Cicero greeted Caesar's assassination with delight, I also do not believe Cicero would have ever joined Caesar on a political level.

Thank you. Your emotes confuse me...

Actually, I shall be excavating the under passages of a Roman theatre - i.e. tepid marble under passages - so the only time I need worry about the sun will be during my free time in Bilbao, probably sipping cocktails. Oh, how I envy me... hehe

What a pack of smears! Humorlessness and cluelessness has never seen a greater champion than this Zoe Williams. I'm sure she'd be appalled by Monty Python too (had they any modern equivalents). Methinks that when one is assessing the future of one of the largest financial centres of the world, one is permitted to be humourless...

Wow, was that actually unloaded?! When did that happen?

A few months ago I mention that I would be excavating at Vindolanda over the summer - I think that there was some talk of coming to see me at the site. I have, however, received a better offer in the form of an month-long excavation at the Roman colony of Clunia in Spain: http://www.archaeospain.com/clunia/ While this clashes with my plans to spend a week in Rome, I think the Clunia site would be more beneficial to me. So alas, they is no chance of me having involvement in this UK meet.

London has survived plague, fire and two World Wars. Under Johnson, however, I think my spiritual home's days are numbered... http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/ma...ris.livingstone

Also, while not actually a quotation from an ancient source, it is still one of my favourites: 'Anything to get rid of this f**king hangover!' - The last words of Marc Antony in HBO's Rome.

Ah, I see that you are looking for phrases my Latin teacher has dubbed "wankers' Latin" - i.e. profound phrase, uttered only to give the impression of an individual's pensiveness/pomposity. I think he meant in a tongue-in-cheek way... Anyway, below is a selection of my favourites: 'natura semina nobis scientiae dedit; scientiam non dedit'. - Nature has given us the seeds of knowledge; it has not given us knowledge itself. (Seneca) 'humiles laborant, ubi potentes dissident'. - When powerful men disagree, the little man has a hard time. (Varro) 'solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.' - They make a desert and call it peace. (Tacitus)

Does anybody else like to drink grenadine neat, or is it just I?