Gaius Paulinus Maximus
-
Posts
1,604 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Static Pages
News
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Gaius Paulinus Maximus
-
-
Correct . But , think about it , some 6,000 to 7,000 Romans and allies spending a year or so to take a hill...Silva got a Consulship for that...
Masada was taken in 73AD but Silva didn't recieve his consulship until 81AD, that's eight long years so surely there must have been some other deciding factor in getting his consulship?
-
I pretty much agree with NN, good luck to them.
I suppose some people will see it as a bit crazy but at least it's better than worshiping Satan or some other strange religion (cult, sect or whatever).
Slighty off subject.....
But speaking of strange religions etc, I read in one of today's daily papers (can't remember which one) that the leaders of the cult/ religion of Scientology had claimed that Tom Cruise is the new "Christ" of Scientiology and that he is the "chosen one" chosen to spread thier faith throughout the world, they also reckon that in years to come Cruise will be worshipped like Jesus.............Hello
The word 'fruitcakes' springs to mind
-
Great review Augusta,
I'll put that book on my list, it's good to get a different perspective of someone who probably 99% of people believed to be a woman who was responsible for the deaths of many members of her own family.
-
Cheers for that tip off Pertinax, i'll definitely be tuning in for that one.
-
, but anyway.Between 'Fawlty Towers', 'Black Adder' and 'Are You Being Served', they didn't miss casting aspersions on any person, place (especially Scotland) or thing. I don't think that anyone, even the Royal Family, could have taken offense. It all was done perfectly with that Brit genius and sang froid. The writers know how to use language. Quality!
I finally realized that the Cap't Black Adder series is really an anti-war series.
I ask any, and all, if there were only four Black Adder series?
Yes there were only four series, take a look at the Black Adder website it's got everything an Adder fan wants.....Interviews, quizes, episode guides etc
-
Ave Gaius
I just finished the book. I agree with you - the best part is the one about the civil war itself. It is easy to discern the difference between Caesar's writing style and that of others, even in translation.
On the whole I did enjoy the book but I esteem Gallic Wars to a much greater extent, that is a book I could pick up over and over again. What is your preference?
Ave Gladius xx
To be honest i'm torn between the two, the 'Gallic Wars' is a fantastic insight into the mind of a military genius, it's one of the only pieces of work where you get a first hand account of the lives and ways of war of the "barbarians" but on the other hand his 'Civil wars' i think really gives us an indepth picture of the Roman army itelf i.e. how they lived, the hardships they went through and most particularly the art of the siege, during the civil war part of the book book Caesar must spend at least 60%? of the story describing how and why the siege works were manufactured and used, unfortunately there's no diagrams in the 'civil war' like there is in the 'gallic wars' so you (or maybe just I??) spend a lot of the time just trying to imagine how it would have have looked.
I've just recently re-read the civil wars so i might be a little bit biased but all in all both are fantastic pieces of work and just for us to be able to read them so many years down the line is a total and utter PLEASURE
-
but if I was there, I would certainly not have sided with Pompey or Juba against Caesar
Heh
One would think Caesar was unbeaten
(all the Pompeians together - "dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium dyrachium")And just what did the Pompeians do after Dyrracium?
Haha basically underestimated Caesars legions and promptly got a good seeing to
-
Oh dear oh dear, it really does sound like you've had the bummer of all christmas's, but look on the brightside, it can only get better................. we hope!!
-
During the civil war Gaius Scribonius Curio was fighting for Caesar in Africa, he came up against the army of the Numidian king Juba who was fighting for Pompey. Before the battle he gave this rousing speech then promptly led his army to nearly total annihilation.
Was he too confident, arrogant or just unlucky?
But I suppose, although you are pleased with Caesar, you are offended with me; however, I shall not boast of my services to you, which still are inferior to my own wishes or your expectations. But, however, soldiers have ever looked for the rewards of labor at the conclusion of a war; and what the issue of it is likely to be, not even you can doubt. But why should I omit to mention my own diligence and good fortune, and to what a happy crisis affairs are now arrived? Are you sorry that I transported the army safe and entire, without the loss of a single ship? That on my arrival, in the very first attack, I routed the enemy's fleet? That twice in two days I defeated the enemy's horse? That I carried out of the very harbor and bay two hundred of the enemy's victualers, and reduced them to that situation that they can receive no supplies either by land or sea? Will you divorce yourselves from this fortune and these generals; and prefer the disgrace of Corfinium, the defeat of Italy, the surrender of both Spains, and the prestige of the African war? I, for my part, wished to be called a soldier of Caesar's; you honored me with the title of Imperator. If you repent your bounty, I give it back to you; restore to me my former name that you may not appear to have conferred the honor on me as a reproach."
Would you have followed?
-
Ave
I finally got my copy of Civil War from the Toronto Public Library. I just read the introduction so far and was surprised to learn that some parts were actually written not by Caesar but by other participants of that war. Anyway I'll share my thoughts about the book after I finish it.
Ave
I think Caesar was responsible for the book upto 'The Alexandrian War' as for the rest of the book a few names have been suggested like Hiritius who was known to have written some of the Gallic Wars, Oppius, Sallust, and Asinius Pollio all who had supposedly participated in the civil war.
But for me the best part of the book is the actual story of the civil war itself which we know was written by Caesar himself.
Will look forward to hearing your thoughts.
-
The battle of Pharsalus
Pompey some 45-50.000 men ( plus another 7 cohorts guarding the camp) v Caesar's 22,000 men (plus 2 cohorts left to guard his camp)
I'd say the odds were firmly stacked in Pompey's favor, but we all know the outcome.
-
What about the Sibylline Scrolls?
The original Sibylline Books were closely-guarded oracular scrolls written by prophetic priestesses (the Sibylls) in the Etruscan and early Roman Era as far back as the 6th Century B.C.E. These books were destroyed, partially in a fire in 83 B.C.E., and finally burned by order of the Roman General Flavius Stilicho (365-408 C.E.).
It would have been pretty interesting to see what all the fuss was about.
-
I've become quite interested in the story of Belisarius and am thinking about ordering this book
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Belisarius-Great-G...TF8&s=books
Has anybody read this? Would you recommend it?
-
The ancients have been storing and processing grain from as far back as 8000BC, yet just how they did it I'm still trying to find out, probably something along the lines of the pit system mentioned by Moonlapse i expect
-
The question of Boudicca is interesting to me. When I was but a lad, trying desperatley to stay awake and not fidget during history class, she was aleways known as Boudicaea, which surely is the greek version. Now - is Boudicca an original name or simply a modern 'celticised' version of the greek version?
If you type 'Buddug' into the welsh lexion search engine provided by DC then it does actually come up with the translation 'Boadicea ; Victoria'
Strangely though if you enter 'Caradoc' which we believed to be the proper name for Caratacus then no match comes up so maybe we're barking up the wrong tree with that one??
Edit:
Sorry guys(and gals) my mistake :bag: if you type in Caradog not caradoc then it does infact come up with Caratacos ; Caratacus.
-
I think that MPC is spot on. At that time, Rome was probably the cleanest city of the ancient world considering its size.
Wasn't Ravenna once the headquarters of the Roman Adriatic fleet?
True, Augustus founded the military harbor after he defeated Antony in 45BC and it became an important station for the imperial fleet for many years.
Ravenna also had another role in Roman history, it was where Caesar gathered his troops before deciding to cross the Rubicon.
-
A big happy birthday to a fellow northerner
:beer:
:drunk:
ENJOY!!!
-
I believe that Boudica might have been 'Buddug'. Which is pronounced as 'bith-eeg'. The Caradoc or Caradog mentioned by PP is also correct. Both Buddug and Caradoc are as about as close as we'll ever get to the real names of Boudica and Caractacus.
Interesting, Decimus. Have you any idea, then, where Manda Scott the author got the name Breaca from for Boudica? I have always assumed it is her own interpretation, of course - but wondered if it had any basis in truth. (Scott gives it as a form of Briga, the goddess).
I should add, of course, that as far as I have always understood it, the name Boudica meant 'bringer of victory' and was a title given to the Queen, rather than her given name at birth. Would be interested to hear what you think.
I too was under the impression that the name Boudica was given to her by the Britons meaning 'bringer of victory' as for her birth name, that i think we will never know.
As for Vercingetorix, i thought that 'cingeto' was his gaulish(birth) name and 'ver' meaning 'the' and 'rix' meaning 'king' was added to his name after he united the gallic tribes and lead them to war against Caesar.
-
The word 'propaganda' carries the connotation of an 'intentional lie'. I don't believe that anyone can prove that what Caesar wrote was an 'intentional lie'. It is entirely possible that he wrote what he 'knew'' and that what he knew was true. I don't believe that putting G. Washington's crossing the Delaware in winter on a coin or the portrait of Queen Elizabeth on a stamp is 'propaganda'. I can't think of a proper word for this, but the words 'publication' and 'glorification' come to mind.
I wouldn't call it a lie, i think exaggeration is a better way of describing what Caesar wrote
-
How very true PP.
Surely one of the best pieces Roman of propaganda has to be Caesar's Gallic Commentries, what better way to 'big yourself up' than to record all your "amazing " victories over those terrible Gauls and then let the people back home know how much of an all conquering hero you really are. How very clever :smartass:
Does anybody know of any other pieces of propaganda dating earlier than this period and if so what's the earliest piece available?
-
Propaganda is considered to be a modern political art, but the Romans were masters of 'spin'. How did Rome's leaders communicate their power and their policies to a massive and diverse empire?
Have a read of this article and tell me what you think.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/roman...rticle_01.shtml
-
I've just recieved my wallmap and i must say that i'm very impressed with the quality and detail of it, i've spent the last hour studying it and am delighted with my prize.
All i've got to do now is find somewhere to put it!
Thanks UNRV
-
If it's true that there's no Marcus Agrippa in series 2 then this is major cock up on HBO's part, Agrippa played an essential role in the rise of Octavian/Augustus, to cut such a major historical figure out of the story is just so wrong!
-
The victory over the Iceni in 61AD on Watling Street I have heard was achieved despite being outnumbered 20:1. Possibly an exaggeration I'll admit
The true numbers of this battle we will never know but what we are pretty certain of is that the Roman army was definately greatly out numbered and only overcame thier foe through organization, discipline and training. Lets not forget, this was a professional army with years of experience and training up against an enemy which relied upon brute strength, courage and numbers.
For years the Britons had just proffered to harass the Roman lines and engage in small skirmishes and to avoid full on confrontation with the Romans because when evenly matched they knew that they could not defeat them in open battle, but i suppose that when the numbers were so greatly stacked in thier favour, the Britons thought that the time was right to end it once and for all, but unfortunatly for them they totally underestimated the fighting quality of the Romans.........And the rest as they say is history!
Revived Ancient Greek Religion
in Hora Postilla Thermae
Posted
Haha
Everybody chanting ' show me the money!!'