Matthew Johnson wrote:

> And 'comprehension' is exactly what you do NOT show, Bart.

It's illogical to beg the question.


> Your example misses the point. YOU claimed that the Roman Army
> required ALL its soldiers to be citizens, and that during the Late
> Republic (Marius) and even early Empire (Julius Caesar). I gave you
> the citations that proved that all these claims are wrong. You then
> tried to hedge and hem-and-haw.

Your citations do nothing of the sort.  In fact, it was Marius
who brought the "men of the lists" (those lowly Italians who
weren't as good as real Romans) into legitimacy.  That
has something to do with this other two-syllable word "before".


> Admit it, Bart, you are just plain wrong,

Oh, no, I'm very right.  Much more right than you know.
Someone e-mailed me and said "Why won't you talk to Matthew?"
and I said "Watch this.  Tell me when you've had enough."

He has now observed that, while anyone can look at what I
said and look at what you said and look up your references
so that the case should be closed, you insist that somehow
it's important that I be proved "wrong" (in what
ever outre sense you mean the word.)   He's surprised at
your obsession with _the person of Bart_.  Instead of
defending you point of view, instead it's nothing but
a (sorry) attempt at character assassination.

And, as of yesterday, he's had enough.

Bye forever, you less-than-worthless waste of time you.



((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group.  All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
(((   Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post.   )))

--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 1/19/05 10:35:22 PM ---