THERE IS A CERTAIN IRONY ...

[Michael Grove]

IS THERE NOT... that the undoubted success of the Roman Empire

was in some way established by the fact that its European Sector

included Britain but none of the other totally northern states of

Europe. This obviously had a lot to do with the fact that they

achieved, as a result of building the best warships and their

subsequent Punic Wars' defeat of Carthage ... complete control

of the Mediterranean and the western, Atlantic-facing shores of the

continent. As well as the fact that ALL that was Roman for as long

as their influence has existed, was based on what the Greeks had

established themselves over a considerable period of time.

Ease of access to resources also had a significant influence on this

territorial extent of the Roman Empire and particularly the minerals

that were available in Britain. A country which also provided a milder

climate to the extent that a terraced south-west facing vineyard was

soon established by the Romans, in the grounds of what is now

Blenheim Palace, only a stone's throw away from the churchyard

where Winston Churchill is buried in Bladon. It was, of course, he

who was one of the earliest promoters of the idea/concept of a

Union of European Nations, as opposed to the Benelux Coal and 

Steel Model which the French decided to hi-jack from their

neighbours. I would venture to suggest that Churchill would be

somewhat dismayed by what has since resulted, because of the

creation of a Eurozone subset of the EU, using its own currency,

before the establishment of a European Political Union, which

should have been included from the outset.

.