Hus

In a 2004 episode of Timewatch, Julius Caesar's Greatest Battle (2008) the two presenters, Mark Corby, military historian and former British army officer, and Dr.Neil Faulkner, retracing the footsteps of Julius Caesar and Vercingetorix respectively, suggested that Caesar may have been sitting on information about Vercingetorix that he withheld from his histories, suggesting that there had been a history between them? Is it possible that that Celtic nobleman had served in the Roman army, as had Arminius, Spartacus and as Alaric later would, and that the two foes actually knew one another from unmentioned events prior to 52bc?

Isn't the more likely and/or accepted scholarly view that the IXth was simply ordered abroad, and struck camp unrecorded?

I love this series, which as a Roman history non-expert, I think looks quite bloody and authentic. However, I found two comments curious; In the Julius Caesar episode;- "The Rubicon ... even today it is so small that no-one really knows where it is" And in the Nero episode; (On Nero becoming an actor) "It would today be like Queen Elizabeth II becoming a pole dancer"

I dunno- the Brythonic Celts had always waged war with one another, and a warlike status footing would have kept them in fine trim, able to fight very capably, which some Roman mentions state that they could. That last battle was pitched, and the Celts, I'm theorising above, could have sent skirmishers around the back of the Romans through the woods? They were fantastic guerilla fighters - didn't Boudica's army ambush and rout the IXth from Lincoln? And later the Silures also another legion?

We all know about how a failed Art student-cum-Corporal Schickelgruber led the German people...when he wasn't even from Germany, but how ironic are some of history's other conflicts and battles? Take the Battle of Stoke (1487)- A Welsh King of England (Henry VII) leading English troops against a foreign invader- only 85 years after a huge but failed Welsh invasion of England! The enemy? English figurehead pretender (Lambert Simnel), crowned in Ireland, invaded England to overthrow the above, with Irish-German-Swiss troops! Or the Battle of the Boyne (1690)- (uncle fought nephew!) A dour, aesthmatic Dutch King of England (William III) led an Anglo-Dutch-Danish-Finnish-Irish-French Huegenot army against:- An (ousted) English King of England (James II) leading a Franco-Irish Catholic army...in Ireland! He fled so fast that his own men nicknamed him S

Wasn't Bush a total d***head? What on earth did the US [not legally] elect such a retarded imbercile for? World embarassment or what?

Any updates on this/these projects yet?

This used to be my fave film, and it still is great, but there's a few things I keep thinking about whilst viewing it;- The film ought to have ended whilst Maximus was 'drifting' along the Colosseum? There should have been more battling in the Colosseum, more animals, Christians and gladiators etc? More Political intriguing and casual cruelty, to offset the oppulence?

It's the tactics that baffle me- a switch from effective military guerilla strategy of ambush, to a pitched battle. It sounds straight forward, but why would Boudica simply face Paulinus without ordering a flanking attack via woodlands known to at least some of them? Even if just to harass and divert?

Thanks, Kosmo. How about the second part of my post;- "I'm new and don't wish to tread on anyone's caligae but on the homepage, how's about- for new posts/threads- the same Roman helmet icon as is currently there, but one with a bright red plume?"

Firstly, this is a great forum which I'm enjoying and maybe it's because I'm still finding my way around? I noticed that when I log in, I have to search through the forum to find my posts, as opposed to a 'view your posts' link which some forums have. I could simply click the 'notification' option for each post, or search my profile, I suppose, but I am not used to doing this. Another idea I had, again I'm new and don't wish to tread on anyone's caligae but on the homepage, how's about- for new posts/threads- the same Roman helmet icon as is currently there, but one with a bright red plume? Just my two denari's worth...

I bought this book, drawn in by the title and supposed serious pretence of research, but it's a shocking work of avaricious and sensationalist fiction. What on earth other historians thought of it?

Fantastic work, Viggen! Once again, you saved the day! I would've loved subtitles or English translation, but can't have everything!

This is what I reckoned was a fantastic drama-documentary which was shown in 2009(?) on the History Channel. This remarkable documentary brings one of the most devastating battles of ancient times back to life: The Battle of Varus, also know as the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest. Fought in 9 AD

I liked this film, despite keira Knightly, her costume and the film's ending/s. Why were the Saxons invading north of Hadrian's Wall?

Much of the globe seems to want something from British museums, but where does it all end? Italians wanting claim to all of Roman Britain? There would never be 'empty shelves' as replicas can be made to stand in the original's stead, but it's an irksome practice- or trend- for the world to want something which belonged to their ancestors so long ago that it now has no relevance to their youth, who are more into mp3's and X-Factor!

This is a fantastic drama-documentary which was shown in 2009 on the History Channel. http://www.viipillar...attle-of-varus/ The Battle Against Rome - The Battle Of Varus Director: Christian Twente Languages:English Subtitles: English, Chinese Running time: 104 min Audio format: Dolby EX 6.1 Aspect Ratio: 1.78:1 Anamorphic Widescreen Based On Latest Historical Evidence And New Findings A Spectacular Sweep Of History Told Through Astonishing CGI It says 'coming out soon' but I emailed the company 'contact us', they replied saying they still aren't sure when it'll be out, and not in the UK! Useless.

Great, Viggen. That may well have answered my question. Thanks

Good explanation, thanks, guys..

That's why I said 'in retrospect', being not a Roman or Biblical expert, I was asking it in return for an answer. Thanks Cicero, I'd be interested in what you find.

Thanks, Viggen, the doc gathered experts from all fields- even rivals, and went with rare special permission to experiment with it, performing several extensive tests (which archaeological programmes like Time Team etc rely on) and much heated debate, but came to the medieval conclusion. Shroud- DaVinci and the Savoys Examine the shroud

Thanks, guys, but as I said, in retrospect, I wonder why the Romans didn't bother to record the slaying of such a notable Christian, and as 'pagans', celebrate it posthumously, remembering which Legion/auxilliaries they were?

As we understand it today, Christ was crucified in 33ad, only three years after he began his ministry. But which Roman legion actually crucified him? I remember reading about Templeborough (a Roman fort near Sheffield, South Yorkshire). This Roman garrison was erected by the 4th Gaul Cohort who apparently had been stationed in the East, built that fort and lived there: two unnamed tombstones reveal this - were they very same auxilliaries that had crucified Jesus? And, from 'pagan' Emperors, did they receive a retrospective reward, once they realised who Christ was?

I saw a documentary which gained permission to cut a small snippet of the shroud and examine it with carbon dating, which revealed a medieval date. The materials and shroud match this era. Also, if one unfolds the shroud, it doesn't open in the realistic manner as if a human had been wrapped inside it - the measurements of a human head would ensure that if one unwound a blanket/shroud after encasing a person, the fully opened image, at 180

Hi Centurion, I certainly believe that the Romans wrote their own version of a 'barbaric' revolt- one led by a woman -which was abhorrent to them. We don't exactly have a neutral version of events, nor the full story. But then, every ruling regime does this?