|
By:
People don't like thinking about things. They want things to be as simple as possible so they assume they are, even though they aren't. It's a self defence mechanism. It's like religion, people want to believe in it, even though if they thought about it, they'd realise it's based on fantasy.
|
|
By:
"A bit of a history lesson.... The Romans conquered England, but they couldn't tame the Celts."
I think you need to go back to school. |
|
By:
"It's now generally considered that at no time was even half of Scotland's land mass under Roman control."
|
|
By:
Saying Rome conquered Scotland is like saying Hitler conquered Russia
|
|
By:
England has many magnificent sights dating back to Roman times, and before.
Including a road that they say Julius Caesar built. Idon`t think that he actually built the road, or planted the trees beside it with his own hands. He was probably too proud for that, too mighty. |
|
By:
Saying Rome invaded England is like saying George Bush invaded Mesopotamia in 2003
|
|
By:
I agree in general with what Clydebank is saying, Churchill's five-minute conversation with the average voter quote comes to mind, but people just don't have the time or will to dissect every single piece of information so that are drawn to key headlines and what effects them, the most intelligent people are the people who don't vote at all, because they understand that their one single vote in any election is going to change the square root of 0, in any key vote/election, I want it to swing a certain way, but I wouldn't waste my time taking part, just like religion as said above, people want to believe their one vote matters, but computer says no.
Also, it wasn't the Scots that defeated the Romans, they were Caledonian tribes, Scots didn't exist, and they were helped by the Barbarians attacking Rome, but they did put up a monumental fight over a a long period of time. |
|
By:
Hadrian built Hadrian's Wall to keep the Scots(Caledonians) out.
The Romans did try to occupy Scotland but found it hard going. Also there was not a lot there no cities or wealth. So eventually gave up and built the wall. When you see a drunken Scotsman you can see their point ![]() I will excuse xmoneyx ![]() |
|
By:
CLYDEBANK:
I beg you to accept that there is no people on Earth who would not prefer their own bad government to the good government of an alien power. Would you willingly wear EU gold chains or walk free and naked to assert your own sovereignty again? Yes we could be poorer. We could also be richer. The point is that it will largely be in our own hands as a nation rather than those of unelected bureaucrats. Is that simple enough for you? |
|
By:
The Romans invaded these shores and got a foothold in the south but there was not enough to tax rob and steal and they fecked off ,however little there was in south there was even less in the north ,i suggest Ireland was the same ,feck all for them to get there grubby thieving hands on ,can imagine them after struggling in Northern territory sending somone to Ire and the message coming back was head in hands man.
Hadrian never built the wall to keep caladonians out ,in fact i dont think there is any great evidence to why the wall was built ,romans just liked building imo ,more a vanity project ,to control and give an illusion of something ,they liked collecting taxes ,its what they did ,the peoples in northern britian were not rich in anything the Romans rated or anything they wanted and did not take to being controlled by a load of thieving monkeys . All this keeping people out is bullshit ,they wanted to create an illusion of power imo ,of the various tribes and people of the late iron age we know not a lot ,Even the term Celtic peoples is becoming more and more controversial and challenged. Caladonia a name used by romans ,likewise picts a name used by others ,no one knows what the natives called the land and no one knows what they called themselves . Much work still to be done but great the opinions of people who thought they knew it all are now being challenged with new age critical logical thinking . |
|
By:
they were here for 400 years so they took their time in fecking off
![]() They went back to Rome to boost numbers in the fight against the Barbarians. |
|
By:
A mere splash in the ocean of time
|
|
By:
Took a woman to shoo them boys away
![]() |
|
By:
*bad boys
|
|
By:
![]() |
|
By:
I so wish we had a Sir Donald here.
At least the USA isn't to far broke & he can sort it if he gets in. Left loons will be cringing by the above but id rather speak up than have my head chopped off - think about it you do goodin nut cases |
|
By:
I see ideas about Hadrian's Wall have moved on since I was at school breadnbutter.
Perhaps Mary Beard my cover this in her excellent series on BBC 2. It is very good. I am not entirely sure where Donald Trump would build his wall if he was here? |
|
By:
In fact Mary Beard covered Hadrian last week. Rome would build a lot to show their power.
The Romans would often build to send out a message, look what we can do, so don't mess with us. |
|
By:
The Romans would often build to send out a message, look what we can do, so don't mess with us.
So they built a wall 5 meters high ![]() |
|
By:
and 80 miles long
|
|
By:
It could have 5000 miles long, a long short wall is hardly intimidating or hard to navigate over.
|
|
By:
It is true the Romans failed to civilize Scotland, that burden was left to the English.
|
|
By:
The only person who knows why that wall was built was Hadrian himself
There are quite a number reasons why it might have been built, history is interpretive. It was occupied by Roman Legions, they could move quickly along that wall. I have admitted it was not just for defence as I was taught when younger. My best guess at the moment, would be it was symbolic, to mark the Roman Empires Northern boundary. Hadrian was saying everything to the south belongs to Rome. It is all arguable. I see you think Scotland needed civilising lfc1971 ![]() |
|
By:
The day before yesterday, Trump promised America they were "going to start winning." Yesterday, he identified his first potential target, Britain isolated outside of the EU.
In the jungle of trade-agreements, Brexit would make Britain the ultimate "low hanging fruit." dont think hardly any realise the implications. the eu are currently making sure the us dont get their own way on any possible deal. if they did get their own way its a disadvantage for "the non rich". they get affected more because of things like employment rights...having to lower standards to compete with the us...yes they have lower standards. at least the eu are on the workers side. love what the eu have brought in recently. isp's have to comply with non discriminating traffic shaping. this will force isp#'s with networks to make sure they are not throttling. and sh1t companies like bt will have to ensure they build a network good enough |