|
Who do you think is the most unappreciated general in Roman history? I understand this is slightly subjective, but I'd be interested in your opinion anyway. I've always thought that Quintus Sertorius doesn't get his fair share whenever they talk about great Roman military commanders.
|
#
¿
May 24, 2012 09:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 00:32 |
|
|
The Crisis of the Third Century? I'd love if someone made a writeup about it because my knowledge about Rome ends with Augustus' death...
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2012 23:10
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:In your opinion, who was the "best" Roman emperor? What about "worst"? Can't really imagine there is any other answer for "best" then Augustus. Maybe Trajan or Hadrian?
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2012 08:37
|
|
|
GamerL posted:
Why would they? It's useless desert all the way down, until you hit useless jungle and Rome was a land power with reliance on roads. Their seafaring prowess and trade was almost entirely based on the fact that once they had conquered everything around Mediterranean there was nobody to challenge them and it was an inland sea of the Roman Empire. The coasts and the Nile had all the riches and all the cities. Despite what it looks like in the map Rome was pretty good at not biting more then they could handle. Better to trade with the tribes who are crazy enough to live in those hellholes then to try to conquer them (never an easy thing to do with nomads) and eke out whatever little you can get out of there. The Great Desert was a way more formidable reason to not go South then the Germans ever were for not going North. Even now the vast majority of populations in countries covering that part of Africa live on the coasts and around Nile.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2012 21:18
|
|
|
Also, can someone tell me how the heck did Romans keep putting armies in the field time after time Hannibal wiped them out? It seemed to me that Hannibal's army was a single one that Carthage wielded in his campaigns while Romans lost what, 100,000 men alltogether and yet were able to invade and completely destroy Carthage not that long afterwards. Also, was the Hannibal the only person badass enough to make Romans need to resort into guerilla warfare? Does anyone else come even close to his boogeyman status in the minds of Romans?
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2012 17:30
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:As Maharbal said (not really but who cares), "Hannibal, you know how to gain a victory, but not how to use one." So he was a great tactician, not a strategist. A failing of many great military commanders.  Yes, meatballs! posted:
And if it isn't clear from the picture, they used those fortifications to repel a superior attack from both sides. Gladiuses, shields, pilum...nothing was a more useful weapon for the Romans then a simple legionary spade.
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2012 12:13
|
|
|
BrainDance posted:I dont know enough about Roman culture, or that anyone does, but how much of that survived to the present? Sorry, another really vague question, but how much is my culture as an American Roman?   (She's not a random woman but a Roman goddess) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoclassical_architecture#Ancient_Roman_Influence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_ancient_Rome Basically your whole structure of government, several values and many of your most recognizable symbols and buildings. Countless, COUNTLESS words and concepts in your language. So much of your legal concepts (ever wondered why all of them have latin names?) Lots of arts, poetry, music and so on. Christianity. U.S. is actually one of the most Roman-influenced countries in the word, crazy as it is considering that not a single Roman ever stepped foot on America. DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 16:35 on May 30, 2012 |
|
#
¿
May 30, 2012 16:33
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Claudius allegedly wrote a huge and authoritative history of the Etruscans but it is lost. Isn't it true that a SHITLOAD of Roman writings were lost? Like a vast majority of the stuff written during their era?
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2012 22:30
|
|
|
What is the most important piece of writing (etc. mentioned in other works) that we have lost in history? It's amazing that even with so little surviving to the modern era we still know this much about Rome.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2012 09:32
|
|
|
Alan Smithee posted:What were the greatest stories of upward mobility? Someone lowborn holding high office that sort of thing Emperor Justinian was born a peasant who I think could barely read before his uncle (who served in the Imperial Guard) adopted him. Theodora was literally a prostitute before becoming Empress. Belisarius was a peasant as well. Meritocracy for the win!
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2012 12:07
|
|
|
Giving Roman citizenship to anyone except real Romans of Rome (including the Italians and Latins just around Rome) used to be a real out there left-wing radical position. Marcus Livius Drusus got assassinated for trying to give Italian Allies of Rome the citizenship. The Social War changed that.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2012 12:59
|
|
|
General Panic posted:
This is true. I hate reading "Fall of" anything history books unless it's like Nazi Germany or something or the following state is more awesome.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2012 20:48
|
|
|
Girafro posted:Okay so after the Etruscans and the founding of the empire Caesar begins his career as some sort of war lord, doesn't he? How does he become the emperor? I imagine he was high born and I'd wager his conquest in Gaul plays a part but I don't see how he could become the ruler of Rome. And when Caesar is on the scene Greece has already been conquered, correct? You got it a bit wrong. It goes kingdom - gently caress the Etruscans - Roman Republic with an overseas empire - principate (what we know as the Roman Empire). Caesar is still fully in the Republic era. Julius Caesar began his career like every other Roman nobleman, gaining more powerful positions through military and political maneuvering, finally culminating into becoming the governor of three different provinces, giving him control over four Roman legions. He uses these legions (and others he raises) to launch his conquest of Gaul which is a massive success, earning him uncontested wealth, power and popularity on top of a loyal veteran army that by probably any measurement is the best in the world. And yes, Greece was already conquered alongside with a buttload of other stuff. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:RomanRepublic40BC.jpg Understandably his political opponents (Primarily Cato, Cicero and Pompey Magnus) become worried and order him to disband his army and return in Rome - legally they can do this but obviously Julius sees what they are planning - so they can prosecute him on some trumped up charges. So he says "gently caress that" and crosses the Rubicon with a single legion (THIRTEEN!) which is so much better then anything his opponents can raise, that even though Pompey outnumbers Caesar like three to one he doesn't think his chances are very good and flees Rome to East where he has clients and friends to raise an army for him. Meanwhile Caesar goes to Spain and subjugates it in less then a month. He goes to Greece where Pompey is waiting with slightly bigger army, loving crushes him in the battle of Pharsalus, Pompey's cause is pretty much dead except for Cato who remains stubborn as always and goes to Africa, while Pompey flees to Egypt. In Egypt the Egyptians take one look at who is doing better and murder Pompey as a favor to Caesar (who doesn't take it as one when he arrives to Egypt himself). Caesar is declared Dictator in Rome because there is nobody to resist him (Cato eventually dies in Africa and was already a joke), gets tangled up in an Egyptian civil war between Cleopatra and her brother, wins it, has a kid with Cleopatra and goes back to Rome where he is appointed dictator for life one month before his assassination. At some point he picks up as his heir his grand-nephew Gaius Octavian who is only 16 but already so loving awesome that Caesar knows what his choice is. Then he gets stabbed. You see, Caesar was never an Emperor. He was a Roman dictator like several people before him and he didn't change the Republic. That would be left to his heir Octavian (now known as Caesar himself) who was so loving awesome that he leaves Julius in the dust when it comes to anything but military exploits. And for that stuff he had Agrippa. And Caesar Octavian becomes the first emperor of Rome, more popularly known as Augusts, but that's a story as long as this one. Longer, actually. DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 12:25 on Jun 12, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2012 12:21
|
|
|
Girafro posted:So it was Caesar's heir Octavian who changed the republic, how exactly did he do this? Was it just the armies he inherited from Caesar that allowed him to maintain his status or was he just as clever as his predecessor when it came to maneuvering his position? DarkCrawler seems to believe that Octavian was a bigger bad rear end than Caesar but honestly I barely know anything about him other than he inherited Caesar's throne. (Long-rear end post coming up. Augustus is by far my favorite historical figure, bar none, and it is his period in Rome that I know the most about.) There was no throne to inherit. Octavian inherited Caesar's wealth, name, and clientele but he didn't inherit the position of the dictator-for-life, it wasn't hereditary. Most people thought that Mark Antony, Caesar's right hand man and an accomplished soldier on his own would gain the position because while Caesar's will gave Octavian all the wealth, Antony was in control. All of Octavian's friends told him to just be happy with what Antony will let him keep and not try to reach for anything. Octavian response was equivalent to "gently caress that poo poo". He was nineteen years old at the time. He had no political experience, no powerful friends and no money. He had himself and Agrippa, his best buddy. So Octavian took the next boat to Brundisium. Why Brundisium? Because before he had died, Julius had planned to invade Parthia to avenge his friend Crassus and take back the Eagles that had been captured in the Battle of Carrhae. The funds reserved for this campaign were stored in Brundisium alongside with some of Caesar's veterans. Well, Octavian was hell of a speaker, was a handsome fucker who looked really close to Caesar and once he realized the effect this had on people he made an intentional effort to act and look like him from speaking style to height, meaning that he installed lifts on his shoes. He not only got the loyalty of the troops guarding the money but the money itself. Caesar's veterans loving LOVED Caesar and Octavian was the next best thing, especially when he constantly played lip service to what an awesome guy Caesar was, and as he started his march towards Rome more and more of Caesar's veterans flocked to him, and he now had the money to pay for them, further ensuring that they would follow him. In three months a 19 year old kid who had started up without any great wealth or resources had ended up with a veteran Legion and was one of the wealthiest people in Rome. He had no military experience but that didn't matter because Agrippa was a military prodigy. Meanwhile in Rome Antony had an uneasy truce with the guys who had killed Caesar, but had managed to drive most of them away from Rome because the people hated them. Octavian came to the scene and got rid of whoever was remaining. Brutus and Cassius, main conspirators, fled into East and started gathering an army of their own. Octavian managed to get into control of the pro-Caesarian faction because Antony wasn't liked as much as feared, and the other people hoped to be able to manipulate the young and likable teenager and saw him as a better option. Because Antony was a loving rear end in a top hat. Octavian was okay in letting people believe that he was a pawn and started working behind the scenes, gathering a large private army, even winning two of Antony's legions at his side with money and his personal charisma (those guys were veterans of Gaul too). Antony saw which way the wind was blowing and fled Rome. Senate hoped to get rid of him for good by making him the governor of Cisalpine Gaul. Not likely, he besieged the previous governor who refused to give his position (and was also one of the guys who had killed Caesar) in Mutina and generally started raising hell, because like said, he was an rear end in a top hat. Senate wanted peace in the province but had no army to force anything on Antony. Guess who did have an army? So the two consuls of Rome and Agrippa lead Octavian's army in victory over Antony in two battles, forcing him to retreat. Through bad luck or Octavian's machinations both of the consuls die, making him the only victor (Agrippa never ever tried to get any recognition for himself and was utterly loyal to Octavian in way that Antony never was to Caesar). Well, the Senate isn't entirely dumb and now they realize that Octavian is the only guy with an Army in the field. They try to give the command to Decimus Brutus, the governor Octavian just saved. Octavian and his troops pretty much laugh themselves silly and tell them to gently caress off. Octavian sends some of his centurions to Rome to demand a consulship for him. Note that he's not actually anywhere close to legally eligible to it. Senate says no. Octavian marches on Rome with eight legions and asks the same thing. Senate says yes and some nobody is made co-consul with Octavian who now pretty much rules Italy. Antony gathers an army on his own from Caesarian veterans who haven't met Octavian yet and some new troops, allying himself with a guy named Lepidus who has some wealth and power. They get into a position of equal power with Octavian and it seems that another huge battle seems to brew up. Octavian changes his tactics. He meets up with Antony and Lepidus near Bologna, runs circles around them in a negotiations, convinces them that their true enemies are Brutus and Cassius in east and forms the Second Triumvirate. The three guys decide to take war to Brutus and Cassius who have raised a HUGE army in Eastern provinces, but they need some money for that campaign. So they borrow a page from Sulla's book and proscribe around 300 Senators and 2000 other noblemen, brand them as outlaws and put a price on all of their head. Being that they have the only army in the West, who's going to say anything? Anyone - anyone with the slightest political clout or power is killed, as well as anyone who has ever pissed off Antony or Lepidus in the past (Octavian is too young to have any enemies). So they take the money of the dead and head off against Brutus and Cassius. They meet them in Battle of Philippi - Greece again - where Mark Antony and to a lesser degree Agrippa beat the "Liberatores", Brutus and Cassius commit suicide. At some point Octavian gets Senate to recognize Julius Caesar as divine, meaning that on top of everything else he's the son of a god too. The Triumvirate divide Rome to areas of respective influence to avoid another civil war now that there is nobody else to oppose. Antony is at the height of his power and popularity having won the battle of Philippi, so he gets the hideously rich East and all it's resources. Octavian gets the West with all it's problems - recently conquered Gaul, irate politicians, restless soldiers. Lepidus gets Africa because nobody gives a poo poo about him. But everyone knows that the situation can't last forever. There are attempts to preserve peace (etc. Octavian married his sister to Antony) but both Antony and Octavian are just too loving hungry to be equals. The first crack appears when Sextus Pompey, the remaining son of Pompey Magnus, who has gathered a massive fleet, conquers Sicily and cuts off Rome's grain access. Antony refuses to help Octavian who is now left with starvation as well. Agrippa clears him out of this problem - it is impossible to build ships in Rome's Mediterranean ports, so Agrippa builds a massive fleet of his own in a lake and cuts a channel to the sea. Because he's a badass admiral as well he kick's Pompey's rear end in Battle of Naulochus, losing 3 ships to Pompey's 30. Lepidus tries to claim Sicily to himself, but his troops rally to Agrippa and Octavian and he's left with nothing but a priestly position and a retirement. Octavian gets Africa, and gets the senate to declare an political and religious immunity to himself. Antony decides to do what Caesar didn't manage to do - go into a campaign against Parthia. He fares slightly better then Crassus which means that he only loses around a third of his troops and is driven out of Parthia in ignominious defeat. Pissed at Octavian because he refuses to send him more legionnaires, he sends Octavia to Rome and hitches off with Cleopatra. Octavian spreads propaganda about Antony being bewitched by an Eastern witch and becoming less then a Roman. Slowly public opinion turns towards Antony, exploding when Octavian gains his will through less-then-respectable means and it's about as anti-Rome as it can be - he gives Roman provinces for his half-Egyptian sons to rule as kings, plans to be buried in Alexandra, makes Cleopatra his Queen, etc. Octavian has the public support to go to war against Antony. Agrippa manages to corner him in Actium - Greece again- and decisively beats his and Cleopatra's navy when they attempt to break out. Antony's army joins with Octavian, partly because it's clear that Antony is lost, partly because they loving hate Cleopatra who was kind of a bitch and gave orders to the soldiers as if she was their commander. Octavian pursues them, defeats them in Alexandria, where both Antony and Cleopatra commit suicide. Since "two Caesars is one too many", Octavian murders Caesar's son by Cleopatra so nobody can challenge his position as Caesar's heir. He annexes Egypt to Rome, becoming it's Pharaoh in name. Since nobody has power to resist him he gets further public points by pardoning many of those who were at Antony's side. Review the situation: Octavian is now 32. In thirteen years he has gathered the the following things: ALL of the Legions. ALL of the Navies. Egypt (his personal property and rich as gently caress). Half-divine status because Julius is god now. Superb general who is 100% loyal to him. Public admiration of the populace. loving ridiculous amounts of money, even without Egypt. Crapload of clients. His resources and the number of people that are loyal to him is so massive that he is able to legally transfer control of provinces and the military to the Senate because the power he has over things is so massive that he doesn't need laws to support them. He establishes the Principate - the Senate has all the OFFICIAL powers, but Octavian's UNOFFICIAL power and authority is so massive that all the Senate does in it's time is to beg him to take those official powers too, shower a shitload a titles and honors on him - literally every title and honor that exists in Rome and when they ran out they started inventing new ones. They cede to him Hispania, Gaul, Syria, Cilicia, Cyprus on top of Egypt and elect him as consul a lot of times. He barely has to ask for any of it by this point. The Public doesn't even need to be threatened by any sort of force, they love him because he does stuff like pay for construction out of his own pockets if the Senate can't gather the funds. If the public treasury gets empty he tops it up. People understand that all that is good for them comes from Octavian. In 27 BC Senate gives him a snazzy new name, Augustus which means "the magnificent" or "illustrious". And among the titles they bestow on him are such ones like "Princeps" and "Imperator"... DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 20:37 on Jun 12, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2012 20:33
|
|
|
Iseeyouseemeseeyou posted:So how did Octavian ever reward Agrippa? Well, he gave him bunch of important positions in imperial administration (Head of defense, construction efforts, public welfare, etc). He made him a consul of Rome a bunch of times. He gave him several governorships. Married his sexy-rear end daughter to him. He dedicated his autobiography to Agrippa. When he was sick he handed his signet ring, the symbol of his power, to Agrippa, basically naming him as his heir. He granted him the right to intervene in anywhere in Empire as he chose, only second to Augustus. Agrippa was the second most powerful and wealthy man in the Empire and Augustus never tried to limit his power and influence or suspected him of anything. It's hard to find a similar historical example. Every single time Augustus needed something important achieved he gave it to Agrippa. They had a break-up of sorts when Livia and Marcellus feared that he had too much power over Augustus (as if Agrippa would ever try to manipulate him) and to avoid trouble Augustus sent him away to govern a far-off province. But some historians see this as simply agreed upon together strategy to placate Marcellus and Augustus's wife and as soon as Marcellus died Agrippa was recalled to Rome. Besides they spent a lot of time apart because there were so many assignments all over the empire that Augustus trusted nobody but Agrippa with. When Agrippa died Augustus spent a month doing nothing but mourning him, and had a gigantic funeral for the guy. Agrippa had built a tomb for himself but Augustus insisted that his remains be placed in Augustus's own mausoleum, next to him. Agrippa built some of the most known things about Rome, including the Pantheon, by the way. And founded what would become Cologne. 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2012 21:43
|
|
|
And a lot of Roman corpses.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2012 22:15
|
|
|
physeter posted:2) The Centuriate. Antiquity wasn't running out of great generals or people to follow them. Knowing what to do when you got to the enemy is what mattered, and very often that meant everything from troop discipline to building 6-story siege towers. Centurions did this and more. Roman opponents gave bounties for killing centurtions for a reason. It was because these men could consistently turn farmers and fishermen into world-class heavy infantry in a matter of weeks. Most cultures did not have men like these, and not in this number. The number of veteran centurions would at all times correlate directly with Rome's ability to make war. They were a fascinating mini social class of their own that really didn't have analogues elsewhere. Yeah, Rome figured out how important NCO's are before anyone else, really. Backbone of the Legions. I'd also add Adaptation to that list. When Romans saw something that worked they didn't pass it off as silly barbarian stupidity, they adopted it. If their enemy kicked their rear end, they looked at what they did and then either duplicated it or devised a new strategy. When the times changed, Rome changed with them (until to a point of course, but no state has lasted as long).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2012 23:28
|
|
|
an skeleton posted:Here's one for ya: What did Romans generally look like? Skin color, height, etc? As a bonus, what did Carthaginians look like? My friend told me this has been a big source of debate. Romans, as in the denizens of the city of Rome, before the citizenship spread looked like Italians. Romans after the citizenship started to spread were white, black, brown, tall, short and anything in between you can find in Europe and North Africa, especially after Caracalla gave the citizenship to every free man in the Roman Empire in 212 AD. I think Carthaginians are generally thought to resemble Middle Easterns, Lebanese primarily.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2012 22:07
|
|
|
Potzblitz! posted:That still leaves the issue of border security and German raids. In that map posted few posts above, you can see all the tribes - it's not like Germans were the only ones around. Conquering Germany wouldn't solve those two problems, there would always be raids from the bordering peoples. The Rhine was a very good position that could be fortified and defended without HUGE trouble until the great migrations started.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2012 11:37
|
|
|
So Rome and Carthage. Had Carthage won the Punic Wars, would it have been in the position for similar expansion as Rome or did they lack some of the means, features and motivations of the Roman society that wouldn't drive them that much? I get this is somewhat hypothetical but just by looking at the map they had a similar geographic situation at the least - a massive rich city situated in the center of the Mediterranean, the nearby breadbasket of Sicily and also for Carthage, Iberia as a springboard for Western expansion.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2012 06:54
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:Yes, Caesar grew up in a rough neighborhood despite being in the ancient Patrician Julii family. You can lose senatorial positions, but not Patrician status. Sulla was also poor as gently caress. Iseeyouseemeseeyou posted:Caesar killed a ton right? (Julius Caesar). Or was that somebody else? Killed them so he could collect their wealth and fund more wars I believe it was. Indeed he did, but that was Gaius Julius Caesar Octavian, and he wasn't an emperor yet. Plus it was driven by Antony and Lepidus more since they had way more enemies. Sulla made theirs look not that bad though. To Chi Ka posted:I was wondering about the ecological transformation of North Africa. From what I've read, the region was a lot greener than it used to be, to the point where North Africa was considered the bread basket of the Empire because of the amount of wheat it produced. The Romans did pursue a lot of irrigation projects in the region. But who was responsible for the desertification of the region? The source I read blamed the Muslim invasions for destroying all of the infrastructure the Romans built up, which led to the region drying out. Another source I read said that the Romans used up too much water. Could this have been attributed more to changes in global climate as opposed to human action? Egypt was green and THE breadbasket of the Empire. And it still is pretty drat green. People who don't take a look at a satellite picture often are really suprised when they see it up close. Nile is a pretty awesome river. DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 15:19 on Jun 20, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2012 15:15
|
|
|
tables posted:Can you post random stuff about the legions during the Principate? They are going to make Rome II Total War? 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2012 21:12
|
|
|
Jimmy Smuts posted:Did temporary enslavement exist as a punishment for a crime? You could become an indentured servant to pay off debts, but you couldn't become a slave against your will were you a citizen. Iseeyouseemeseeyou posted:I'm assuming Exile would be to the Romans what Jail Time is to us today? In terms of punishment. Yes, there was no prison sentence in ancient Rome. For example the only (?) prison in Rome, Tullianum was basically a glorified hole in the ground where they held prisoners before their execution. Occasionally foreign leaders captured in war who were to be used in Triumph and then killed were there as well. Because Caesar wasn't able to hold his as soon as the Gallic War was over, Vercingetorix was in there for five years. Sometimes they would just have the foreign leaders in a comfy mansion before their execution, and Caesar probably would have respected Vercingetorix enough to give him that if he had the time. Some other enemies like Hannibal though...let's say that you don't have to wonder why he committed suicide. Pretty badass last words too. Hannibal posted:"Let us relieve the Romans from the anxiety they have so long experienced, since they think it tries their patience too much to wait for an old man's death." He literally went to the ends of Earth until he got tired of running away - I wouldn't be exaggerating too much if I said that the Romans fought couple of wars just to get their hands on him. Crappy death for an awesome general. But at least Septimus Severus was nice enough to restore his reported gravesite into magnificent condition when it was found centuries later. Maybe he was afraid that a particular ghost would come knocking at the gates again.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2012 00:57
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Very few people are aware that Roman empire invented Christianity. Not Christianity exactly but so many important traditions and beliefs that people think come straight from 0-30 AD were created by Roman Christians way after Jesus or anyone who knew him died. But that's not a mystery, cursory reading of Christian history tells you that the Roman Empire and Romans have more to do with modern Christianity then Jesus of Nazareth ever did. (And the fact that Jesus happened to be Jewish isn't the smallest reason for that)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2012 00:36
|
|
|
Twat McTwatterson posted:It's incredible when you really think about it. Christianity is a fascinating subject- its history, lore, mythos. And its level of importance in history cannot be shied away from. It's still here and arguably stronger than ever. Yeah. Nobody ever mentions Constantine the Great in church, but without him Christianity would be nothing like it is now. He should rightfully be the second most important person in the religion after Jesus.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2012 01:34
|
|
|
Boiled Water posted:If anything you'd think that a civilization at the height of it's power would've been much more able to resist mongol invaders. Yeah, like Khwarezmid Empire, four different Chinese Dynasties, Korea, Kievan Rus, Kingdom of Hungary... Mongols were something entirely new, just like Roman Empire were to the countless barbarians and other nations they faced up against. And for my book, Genghis Khans' army would have swept over any Legion Rome could have pitted against it. Baghdad's destruction had nothing to do against it's level of advancement.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2012 02:50
|
|
|
 (Augustus as pharaoh - of course he wouldn't have been caught dead wearing that thing in reality considering how into being a true Roman he was)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2012 13:04
|
|
|
Count Chocula posted:
More like the occasional Obama speech and lawyer dramas.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2012 13:27
|
|
|
Twat McTwatterson posted:Alexander is my favorite Pharaoh. Yeah, but he was a Greek. Then again, so were the Ptolemies. Ptolemaic Egypt was weird. A Greek capital, rulers and upper class surrounded by a crapload of natives and both groups hated eachother. I think Cleopatra was the first Ptolemy to speak Egyptian.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2012 09:11
|
|
|
Ptolemies were inbred to the point that you have to go for Habsburgs to find a challenger. There wasn't a drop of Egyptian in Cleopatra and it took Julius Caesar to convince her that maybe learning the language of the majority of your subjects wouldn't be a bad thing. It really was extreme how separated the Ptolemies were from the people they ruled, even after almost 300 years. Any other dynasty would have gone native ages ago.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2012 12:32
|
|
|
When and how did the official split of the Empire happen? Did the Eastern and Western Roman Emperors just divide it between them or was it a gradual process?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2012 14:34
|
|
|
bean_shadow posted:Are there any descendants of the Julian-Claudian house still around? Or even of Mark Antony and Cleopatra? Julio-Claudians died when Nero offed himself. Galigula's murders had been so massive that only Claudius and Nero pretty much survived, Claudius because nobody thought he was a threat (he wasn't) and Nero because he was a kid. The sons of Cleopatra and Antony, Alexander Helios and Ptolemy Philadelphus both died young and childless. Cleopatra Selene married a king of Numidia and had some kids, but their kids and their kids are not very well documented after a few generations. Might be someone around who is their great-greatx100-grandchild but there is no way to know for sure.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2012 17:07
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Numidians weren't "black" as it is understood today. Most likely. Ancestors to what are modern Berbers.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2012 20:42
|
|
|
Fizzil posted:This also made me curious, how did the Romans view other latins? I'm working on memory here since i don't remember the book i read but some legions had "italian" or "latin" auxiliaries which were clearly mentioned to distinguish them from romans, what gives? That was before all Italians and Latins were given Roman citizenships after the Social War. Basically Romans still thought of them as dirty foreigners. Around 90 BC Roman Italy was still a collection of alliances different cities and tribes of the land under the supremacy of Rome. They weren't Romans. Romans were only the people of Rome, and nobody else. Only they had Roman citizenship and benefited from those rights. It's like if only the people of Philadelphia would enjoy complete rights in United States - and only if you were a true Philadelphian born of a Philadelphian. The situation was getting pretty ridiculous for several reasons: Rome already had a huge Mediterranean Empire. The people of this Empire outnumbered citizens to like 1000 to 1. Not really much of a sustainable situation in the long run, they had enough discontent without having all of Italy pissed off at them as well. Marian reforms had allowed the poor people of Rome to enlist in the Legions, but they still had to be Roman citizens. Meaning that the more populous Italian auxiliaries which fought in the Legionary style for the most part actually outnumbered the true Roman armies. All profits from the wars pretty much went to Rome and left rest of Italy poorer and poorer as their men fought in those wars and weren't around to farm. Italians started to be near indistinguishable from Romans, whether by virtue of language, general culture, etc. Conservative Romans nonetheless continued to view them like an U.S. conservative would view an illegal El Salvadoran. Terrible land distribution led into most of Italy being owned by Romans. Marcus Livius Drusus had lead a reform campaign to address Italian concerns but he was assassinated by conservatives. It was a final strike and this all culminated in a collective rebellion of Italian Allies. Italians had a very well trained force of 100,000 men (almost all of who had served in the Roman campaigns) and they were a real threat. They formed an independent nation called Italia after Roman style, electing two consuls and having a capital in Corfinium. That was a pretty great threat and it was coming from inside Italy, which meant that they had to call on Marius and Sulla to take de facto command and gently caress some poo poo up. Being Marius and Sulla they did gently caress poo poo up but it was obvious that the current situation wouldn't last and Rome's oldest and most bitter enemies Samnites swore to fight to the very end. So Senator Lucius Julius Caesar (relative to the better known one, although different branch) offered full citizenship to all Italian and Latin communities who had not rose up against Rome. It was followed by a second law that gave the citizenship to any male of an allied state (revolting or not) who would present himself to a praetor in 60 days. Everyone laid down their arms in a hurry to get a piece of that action and that was the Social War. After that there were no Latin or Italian auxiliaries. DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 21:40 on Jul 4, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2012 21:37
|
|
|
So is this the WWII tank discussion of the Roman History thread? 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2012 19:16
|
|
|
isoprenaline posted:How did Romans shave their faces? Razors. Widespead use of razors is thousands of years of old.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2012 10:55
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Hadrian was the first bearded emperor. The gooniest Roman Emperor disagrees with you. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2012 14:43
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:Well-written slander by an opportunistic dipshit. Think Tony Blair. Antony was a total rear end in a top hat though. Lot of truth in the Philippics.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2012 14:04
|
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:Question about Rome and the Gauls: I heard recently that your average Gaul was about a head taller than your average Roman. Is this true? If so, what's the source of the difference? Diet? Genetics? Head taller might be pushing it, but diet. Meat-eating pastoralists VS sedentary grain-chompers.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2012 01:12
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 00:32 |
|
|
Crash course in Latin. Pump up on military tactics, history in-depth, medical knowledge and so on. Drop down around 160-170 BC and work my way into the imperial court. Within a few years of my appearance, Commodus mysteriously falls down the stairs. Repeatedly if possible. Then I'll help Marcus Aurelius find a proper heir while we spend our days talking about philosophy and science.  Alternatively? Pop back in time of the Second Punic War and give Hannibal ALL the military and political knowledge I can possibly have to accompany his already incredible talents at war, and tell him to march on Rome and take over Carthage. Not because I hate Rome or anything (I love it!) but because Hannibal deserved better! Or poo poo, drop down during or slightly before the Crisis of the Third Century, join any of the Legions, rise through the ranks because my knowledge of history, strategy, military technology and tactics are thousand years beyond anyone else, make myself general and crown myself Emperor. If half those punks could do it so could I. DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 11:08 on Jul 12, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2012 11:00
|
|