longshotgene

Does anyone know where it is mentioned in a book the number of surviving Classical Latin texts still in existence? I need to find this one fact.

Cool. I appreciate the opinions on his work. I am about 200 words away from making the finish. I have never had to review or research an historian before. I have to admit that this assignment was kind of boring and painful. I equate it to pulling teeth. One last question for you all. Do you think the Classical History field would be what it is today if it was not for Grant? I think of the Feminist movement which he helped through his work, the many translations that he did of classical works, and many other accomplishments. The man wrote over 50 works without the help of being attached to a University. And what makes that even more fascinating is that he wrote the bulk of his work over topics in the classical world other than the military! Any way. If you guys could respond to my final question, that would be great. Thank you for the help.

I am finishing a research paper on Michael Grant and wanted to ask you all what you thought of Grant's works? What do you think of him as a professional? Do you consider his works a good source for academia as well as the lay reader? Any professors who would be interested in allowing me to cite them, I would appreciate. The rough draft is due next Monday, but I thought this would add an interesting touch to the paper if I could get the opinions of some members from academia. Thank you

The problem with battles like this is that you already know the end Everyone is massacred. It is kind of like watching movies about the Alamo. You know what happens ahead of time. I would have to disagree with it being a good movie topic. What did the battle culminate in? It is like watching a movie on Custer's last stand. You know Custer dies, has his ears pierced, and that is it. That battle started the beginning of the end for the indians.

I would have to say we have learned a little from the past. Look at the Iraq War. So many individuals say we should not be over there. Remember the old adage, "My enemies enemy is my ally." It rings true with the war. The American public is so stupid to think that Saddam would have kept the weapons in Iraq. Those things were long gone in Iran. Hence why the U.S. has created a launching platform on either side of Iran. The Romans did the same tactics with countries they conquered. It is called a "Double Pronged" attack. I love history, but I cringe at the individual who calls themselves a "History Buff". What is that exactly? Someone who regurgitates facts at a party to make themselves look intelligent?

Greek Fire did save Constantinople on a couple of occassions. I read a paper where they used it on land and sea. The beauty of it on the sea was that it supposedly did not extinguish due to the water. The Ottomans learned this firsthand.

I was thinking. Were do we see Latin every day? I used to smoke back when I was in high school. I loved smoking Marlboro Reds. Then I noticed the cigarette companies were bastardizing Julius Caesar. If you don't believe me, look at a pack of Marlboro's the next time you pass a tobacco store or gas station. Also, if you smoke Pall Malls, they are found followers of Constantine. But where else do you see Latin subliminally?

The Golden Ass all the way! That book would be hilarious to see in a movie format. If I couldn't have that, I would have one that would focus on Constantine and show his great hypocrisy. It probably wouldn't be well received by Pall Mall smokers though.

Well, the last emperor was Romulus Augustulus. That was historically accurate.

I didn't like the movie because I can't stand Kingsley. He made a horrible Merlin. Otherwise I thought the movie was somewhat entertaining. At least the boy found the sword at Capri, the death place of Tiberius. There are some very historically accurate parts to the movie, but then there is a lot of fiction. As historians we have to decide if we want to tell the raw facts, or if we want to add the fluff we don't know about. That is the difference between a good historian and someone like McCollough.

I have been performing a paper on the evolution of the historiography of Ancient Greece. So far I have ended my paper with Polybius being the last true Greek Historian before the rise of the Roman Empire. Would you agree or disagree, and why?

Caldrail, it sounds like you are almost as frustrated as I. Unfortunately, I am one of those people who would think it cool to operate in that function. I used to play Morrowind. In that, you could fight Roman soldiers, but you were almost always an elf or some wizard-type person. I guess Rome:Total War is just getting old for me.

I've seen this one, but it wasn't that good. They need something that lets you pick the time, occupation, maybe even what province you come from. Something! I get tired of playing the general or Caesar. I want to be a common soldier in one of the games. And not in the final days. All the good stuff has already happened by then.

All of these WWII games exist, but no Roman game where an individual plays first person. It would be nice if there was a game where you could play first person. You would have the choice of what to do in the Roman World; Soldier, Merchant, Common Citizen, etc. It would be O.K. to have campaigns, but also give the player the option of making a career. For instance, if you joined the Roman Army, you would have to go wherever they sent you. You could buy things once you were there, get information from other soldiers about plots and various things, etc. Why haven't they created something like this. It would be great to fight in a first person testudo.

From what I have read in a couple of my history books, Quintus Fabius Pictor was the father of Roman Historiography. Does any one know where I can go to find more information on the historiography of Ancient Rome?

I am working on a paper, and had a thought the other day. Where would one go if they were interested in finding a copy of a Roman census? That is, if one exists? Any ideas? Also, what information went on the census?

What historiographical movement would Grant technically be associated with? He obviously wasn't associated with the Marxist movement.

Also, can he be found within a specific historiographical tradition? I am trying to find this information, but can't think where to begin.

Hello, I am taking an historiography class for my masters. We have to choose a professor or historical movement to investigate and research. This is the requirement for the Research Essay. I chose to do Michael Grant since he was one of the big Roman Historians. Does anyone know where I can retrieve his presentations?

It sounds like the Romans should have met the native Americans. They used a combination of charcoal and pine sap. Pine sap becomes very brittle is left alone. If mixed with a little charcoal, the sap becomes pitch. Pitch has a great flexibility and is virtually waterproof. Especially is mixed and lubricated with animal fat. The native Americans used this stuff on everything that needed to be held together.

Does anyone know if the Macedonian Phalangites carried shields or just spears. I have seen images showing both, but I am curious if anyone has any hard evidence?

I agree with you guys on Rome:Total War. I bought the expansion pack, which is cool, but the game is still lacking. What annoys me is when you conquer a city and they rebel. I usually destroy the entire city or enslave them to prevent this, but somehow it ends up happening. And the crazy part is all of the troops the city manages to raise. I can't raise any more because the city has a population of say 300. My troops are kicked out, and the city ends up having a full army! It makes no sense. Someone needs to invent a game like the old Morrowind. There needs to be a game where you are a first person fighter. You fight in the legions and have a personal life as well. Something with a story line would be great. The battlefield games are great, but they get old. For instance, in Rome:Total War no matter how hard you may try, you cannot conquer, defend your borders, and stay out of debt. Debt is a constant disease in this game. And to keep the city from uprising, you need a ton of troops. It seems to be totally bogus. Just my thoughts.

What is the weather like at Hadrian's Wall during the winter? I went during the summer, but am contemplating going during the winter.

I would have to say Hadrian was a great emperor. He knew the limitations of the Roman Empire. Trajan expanded the borders, and Hadrian contracted them. The reason he never put on games in Rome was because he was hardly ever there. I think according to the biography written on Hadrian, he was only ever in Rome twice. I did find that he liked spending a lot of time in Greece and the near east, but does this make him a bad emperor? He was bi-sexual as were all but about 6 emperors, does this make him bad? He lashed out at certain people. Does this make him bad? I think we criticize a culture we are not part of too harshly. I would have to say that Hadrian was an excellent emperor. No other emperor spent more time going through out the empire strengthening its borders, and making it aesthetically more beautiful. And honestly, what Roman emperor ever cared about the peasants? I mean they cared about them not revolting, and paying their taxes. But what emperor actually gave a rat's rear about the vulgar? I have been to the Pantheon, Hadrian's Wall, the Limes of the Rhine as well as many other places Hadrian frequented. For that time period, the man would have covered a heck of a lot of land. I can't really remember an American president having done this except during election time.

Thanks guys for the info. The premis of my paper is the history of the Ancient Greek war machine, and how one of the reasons the Greek states fell was due to stagnancy in the military. The phalanx was an outdated formation. The Greeks insisted on using. The Macedonians insisted on using it. They continued making the same spear bigger and longer. It kind of reminds me of the German Me-109 during World War II. For its time during the Spanish Civil War and the Battle of Britain, it was a fine machine. But the Germans wouldn't let the design die. They kept modifying it, which eventually led to more deaths. Back to the original point, I want to show that this lack of change amongst other things led to the eventual outflanking and defeat manuever by the Romans. I think I can prove all of this, but I need to get the details. That is why I thought I would ask the pros. Thank you for the help by the way.