Jump to content
UNRV Ancient Roman Empire Forums

Lacertus

Equites
  • Content Count

    492
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Lacertus


  1. I recently read or heard that Ivan the Terrible built a secret library within the Kremlin. It was alleged to possibly contain 'Byzantine' manuscripts. Are the Russians doing any work on this?

     

    I would not be surprised. After Ivan the Terrible, Russia was divided and chaos broke. Later the Soviets probably tried to hide it. With Russia more free, I expect the Russians may want do more work on it. 'key' to Tsar's secret library'

     

    Oh, well. It cannot be truth B)

     

    The true story sounds so: His library was in the Kremlin until distemper in 17 AD. Then all books were looted and a part of them is completely missing but some of them were collected in the State Historical Museum in Moscow and i saw a few books from this library.

    The real library had about 800 books. They were brought from Byzantine by Sophia Paleolog (wife of Ivan III and grandmother of Ivan the Terrible). It was collection of old ancient (Greek, Roman and Byzantine) authors.

    I pereodically read "Ivan The Terrible's library was found" or "we know where is this library" but all talks about it are groundless only.


  2. I remember only one case when a naked roman woman was depicted on a horse, it was an engraving of an unknown painter from one of Italy museums (16-17 AD). It was Tarpeia on the picture and I guess the painter was a person with powerful imagination and he decided that she must look so. :D

     

    Tarpeia - a woman from Roman legend who betrayed the Roman army; when the early Romans stole the Sabine women, the daughter of the Roman commander fell in love with the king of the Sabine people; Tarpeia arranged that the Sabine king would marry her if she allowed them into the Roman fortress; the Sabines killed her once inside; a cliff was named after her on the Capitoline Hill; this


  3. Were the Samnites a Latin people like the Romans?

    Samnites had migrated in the land once occupied by the Opici or Osci and from them, they assimilated the customs and the oscan language. It is believed that they came to the Samnium from the nearby land of the Sabinis from whom they descented. With this suggestion one may conclude that the Samnites got their greek origin from the Spartans as asserted by the historians Strabone, Plutarc and Dionysious of Alicarnassus.

    Have read that Samnites gave the Romans all they could handle in battle. However Rome eventually beat them. What made Samnites any tougher to beat for the Romans,than any other people? How did Rome finally beat them?

     

    Samnites wars

     

    Were Saminites and others in Campania the best gladiators? If so,why is that?

    They never were gladiators (maybe, someone was, lol) but "samnites", the heaviest armored gladiators, took their name, costume and weapons from the mighty warriors of Samnium. These warriors would become the model for the standard Roman gladiator.

     

    Who would be the present day descendents of the Samnites?

     

    The Samnites capital was modern Benevento in the rugged terrain east of Naples. I'm not sure that this nation safed their roots, there are so many events happened in Italy. Most likely Samnites mixed with other Italian people. :(


  4. With the help of Franks. See "History of Franks" of Gregorius Turonensis, chapters about their embassies to Constantinople.

    I'm not sure that Gregorius Turonensis could write about this events. He wrote about first invasion of Franks to Italy, yes, but not about Maurice's plans. He died erlier (591AD) then all Maurice events finished (602AD) As the Empire could do nothing to protect the Italians, they invited the Franks to their help (584AD). This first invasion of Italy by the Franks began the process that was to end in the separation of all the West from the old Empire and the establishment of the rival line of Emperors with Charles the Great (800).

    I can read it though but I have only Latin text and don't know about any translations. I can read on Latin but it's not so pleasure for me though and I don't know about any translations (Maybe they're exist, but I didn't see them)

     

    But if Maurice had been able to establish a strong imperial thrown in the West, that worked with Constantinople, that the West could have eventually been reconquered?

    This is one of the popular theme now to try to "change" the historical view on different events. Maybe, Maurice had such plans but he haven't even any possibility to think about it seriously because he was busy with Avars and Constantinople economy which became more and more intricate and Maurice became more and more unpopular. :(

    Sure, he tried to do anything but he hadn't time (and maybe brains...?) to figure out what he must to do.

     

    I read History of Byzantium by Timothy E. Gregory, he used many documents and guided by historical source. Good one! :(


  5. Wasn't the Crimea a source of wheat for the Romans and Italians? Wasn't the city also a Roman outpost?

     

    wasnt Feodosia a client state to Rome?

     

    Most likely, yes, Crimea was one of the Roman's source of wheat. They bought wheat (and wine too). Officially Crimea (and Feodosia) never formed a part of Roman Empire but there was an agreement between some Crimea city states and Rome to defend Roman borders against numerous nomads.

    Nevertheless, these states were under the Roman power and couldn't be independance in spite of the fact that this region never had the status of Roman province.

     

    I added some pictures in my gallery, not Feodosia but Panticapey, it's other city state in Crimea.


  6. Oh, yeah, it's a good theme for discussion.

    Heinrich Schliemann was not the most famous archaeologist of his day, though he was famous. Neither was he the most skilled. He rarely followed good archaeological procedures at his excavations and was roundly criticized by later archaeologists. He wasn't even the most scrupulous of those in his profession, something confirmed by his illegal smuggling of a priceless historic treasure out of the country of Turkey.

    He was, however, perhaps the luckiest archaeologist of all time.

    I saw the "Priam's treasure" because it's kept in Moscow in The Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts (the collection was took out from Berlin in 1945 and was showed only in 1996 first time!).

    There is a opinion that Schlimann's digs were poor vandalism, he destroyed the culture lays of many civilizations which were on this place including Homer's Troy.

    What were the lays of ancient Troy?

    1. Maritime culture, Aegaean, Cycladic: Troy I, 2920-2480/20 BC

    2. Troy II, 2600-2480/20 BC, most wealthy, treasure from this period found by Heinrich Schliemann

    3. Troy III 2480/20-2300 BC

    4. Anatolian culture: Troy IV, 2200-1900 BC

    5. Troy V, 1900-1750 BC Highest culture of Troy / Wilusa / (W)ilios / Ilios / Ilion / Ilium, vassal of Hattusas

    6. Troy VI, 1700-1250/30 BC, destroyd by an earthquake between 1250 and 1230 BC

    7. Troy VIIa, 1250/30-1180 BC, Hattusas fell around 1200 BC, stormed by Thracians, Troy VIIa burnt in 1183 BC

    8. Balcanian culture: Troy VIIb1-b3, 1180-1000 BC or later; then partly or completely left until around 750 BC

     

    What are your opinions on the subject?

     

    I'm sure Schliemann was discourteous with history and archaeology. He found a treasure but it was not Priam's treasure (it's not so mean, his finds were great) He falsified his finds and destroyed many lays of ancient cultures in a rush for wealth and glory.

    He has a flair to finds but he was the greatest adventurer... :D


  7. Well, I'm not Irish, but I'm Catholic.

    There was a big celebration St. Patrick Day in Moscow. ;)

     

    Did you know that St Patrick wasn't actually welsh? He was kidnapped from somewhere (i forget, maybe wales or england) and taken there as a child!

     

    St Patrick was born at Kilpatrick, near Dumbarton, in Scotland, in the year 387 CE ;)


  8. I hope I'm not very late. I would like to clarify a matter (something ;) )

    There is an opinion that the Celts spoke a common Celtic language. Celtic scholars have supposed this common Celtic may have been spoken just before the start of the first millennium BC. during the Urnfield/Hallstatt eras. Soon after, five(?) distinct dialects emerged which may be subdivided as follows:

     

    Hispano-Celtic (now obsolete)

    Gallic (now obsolete)

    Lepontic (now obsolete). Lepontic was a speech-form spoken in Northern Italy around the time of Christ, attested by a handful of short inscriptions in a form of the Etruscan alphabet.

    Goidelic or


  9. I wrote just now a work about Celtic society for my University and I collected a mount information about Celts including some methods of their burials.

    Well, the most part of Britain, Ireland and North Europe was covered by bogs, people lived near bogs, cross the bogs, build the roads throw bogs. They knew that bogs are the great place that can safe their dead bodies too. The bogs were the place of burials for many Celtic people. They preferred to draw down in the bogs dead bodies. Such was indeed the case. There were very different bodies: men, women, and children. They were in different clothes and they could have some wounds or have not them, because the true reasons of their deaths were different of course.

    I couldn


  10. Today's name of the city returned us to beginning of Common Era. Feodosia is one of the Northern Black Sea costal region cities that kept its antique name. This antique town was founded on a deserted coast by Greeks from Asia Minor Milet in 6-th BC. Its history began from the moment when Greek vessels had moored to sandy coast of a cosy bay. Seafarers solved probably also that such fine place could be only the gift of Gods. The bay was occupied by nomadic population (probably they were Sarmatians). They couldn

×