BBC Rome\'s Lost Empire

[M. Demetrius]

Well, according to Erronius, "at least seven". Didn't Buster Keeton do a great job in that film? And of course, the self-inspired Miles Gloriosus.

[falcons1988]

It was poor, and dumbed down into sensationalist rubbish. Rather, than opening up questions and stimulating debate and backing up with physical evidence. If they honestly thought there was the big lighthouse at portus, why did they not send for Tony Robinson and the Time Team? I see it as mere vehicle for new archaeological techniques.

There was no consideration for sociological and anthropological areas of study, there was very little context, stratigraphy, dating, who, where, when and why. Example: - When in the forests of Romania, they 'talk' about a fort that could house 8000 men - two legions, much bigger than originally thought, as well as a smaller fort. Where is the date? phases of construction or demolition? Where was the theorisation and proof by excavation? I can theorise now saying that, it is unlikely that in conquered area you will need two legions to hold on to an area longer than 10 years. Once the insurgency has been dealt with and peace has been restored and it is a prosperous area. Is there any need for large scale troop numbers? Once that is complete you scale back your forces, you just need about 500 auxillias or legionaries to keep order.

Adolf Hitler proved that excessive force and domineering is counter-productive. In order for a conquering force to be successful, you have to give the locals better than what they had before, and make them feel wanted and part of your 'empire' in a good way. Any ruling body should know and understand that.