Segestan
-
Posts
188 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Static Pages
News
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Segestan
-
-
In the year 306 BC the Diadochi was the popular accepted Monarchy in Alexander
-
The Gaul was a ' Dying Gladiator;. Art such as this was part od a revival of art throughout the Hellenistic World. Many wonderful works came out of the sculture schools of Rhoades such a the Laocoon, The Toro Farnese. The Rhodians were the wealthy traders and financiers of the world.
regards,
-
Ave!
Claudius was severely underestimated by all. This saved his life. During the many radical, violent purges after the death of Augustus, Claudius was overlooked as insignificant, an idiot, below even the
lowest slave in intelligence. This is patently false, far from the true intellect of Claudius as could be. Claudius was not disabled mentally in the slightest.
The Romans judged people on visible accomplishments, glory, victory, and the achievement of more and greater political achievements, public fame. This cycle of achievements was never ending, to Roman nobles it was always the next glorious act that was sought after, too never stop striving, never reach satisfaction. This psychology of externalized self-esteem caused every person to misjudge Claudius because they could not picture him as a soldier, statesman, senator, and orator. Locked in a culture dominated by exclusionary social warfare, no Roman could visualize him in any position open to a man of his social rank.
This was a great shame to the Roman mind, for what else could a nobleman do? To actually work was a concept totally vile to the Roman nobility, this left Claudius with no options but private study, far from his rightful place in Imperial politics, lucky for him. His stammer and weakness of body allowed him to be one of the few Emperors wise enough to hold the office, he did not waste his days with endless social maneuvering but in study with his great tutors. While enduring the ridicule of those he most desired to please, Claudius cultivated his survival plan, that of feigned and exacerbated disability. Claudius realized that while his family hated him, they needed him, vile as their souls were they needed someone they perceived as less than, they needed a scapegoat, and Claudius must have seen this deminished role as his only hope of survival.
The Romans had brutal and nearly incomprehensible families. I am sure you are aware of the practice of exposing deformed children to be rid of the disgrace. Shame and loathing were the Roman reactions to disability. It is almost miraculous that this fate did not befall our Claudius, truly Fortuna graces his life. Claudius was by far the most fortunate member the Imperial family, only he could live with relative freedom. All others of his family, Germanicus his loving brother the exception, choose to ridicule Claudius, bound as they were to harsh morality, they did not realize the gift of obscurity they had bestowed. This obscurity alone allowed Claudius to live through both the political purges of Tiberius and the wanton depravity and sadistic terrors of Caligula. After almost all his peers had been eliminated in power struggles, Claudius remained.
His disability alone made him the choice of the legions. In fury and anguish the execution of mad Caligula was committed, Little Boot! loved by the soldiers must die, a devils choice the legions faced indeed. In desperate rivalry the legions looked to Claudius, a man safe for all factions to choose, for no one feared him. Claudius, while hiding behind the curtain could not have known how well his plan had succeeded, how great his relief and how great his terror must have been upon that day he was thrust upward to the purple.
So came to power one of my favorite Emperors, the thoughtful, intelligent, kind, drastically under-estimated, Claudius.
In pursuit of a diagnosis of Claudius
-
Does that mean that you beleive the seperation in classes is to balme for the fall of the republic or the fall of the empire?
By the way thanks for that information; i've never heard anyone argue that it was the split in classes that caused the fall of the republic. Anyway your reasons seem to be well researched and your figures precise and your oppinion well argued.
Thanks.
The blame for the
-
The Fall of the Republic began in earnest around 177 BC on the conquest of Liguria. After the Final Conquest of Italy by the Romans. The domination of Italy meant the end of the Expansive Wars. The populations began to rise rapidly; in BC 173 there were only 269,015 adult male citizens; but by BC 136 there were over 320,000 ; by BC 125 there were 394,336.
The result of this rapid increase in the Roman population was an over-supply in the labor market. No new Roman colony had been sent out since BC 177, and no more plunder from conquered countries remained to be distributed ;and the lands of Italy being all assigned , and the neighboring nations being subdued , there was no further relief to be expected from that source.
The poverty of the Roman masses became more and more widespread deeper with the rapid increase of the populations. The licinian Laws, which required the employment of a certain amount of Free Labor by landowners , and which limited the amount of land owned by a single proprietor , had been for along time disregarded in both particulars. The Capitalist had absorbed the public lands , which thus had come into the possession of a small class of wealthy men, who preferred to have them cultivated by the cheaper labor of slaves. It then became more and more difficult earn a livelihood in Rome, and only the means of acquiring wealth by cultivating public lands on a large scale , in farming out the revenue, or in governing the provinces. But the rich ruling class wholly controlled these sources of wealth, and they only resigned them to persons of their own class , so that the rich were gradually becomin richer and the poor poooer; and thus Rome became
-
I've been searching through the topics for a while and haven't seen a topic discussing this.
In my oppinion Gaius Julius Caesar ultimatly signed the Empires death warrant. My reason for this is that:
Towards the end of the empire, the emperors became increasingly scared of being overthrown by a popular general and often due to this fear had the most promising generals killed.Therefore if Caesar hadn't overthrown the republic, the generals would not have been hunted down as traitors but have been given consulships in which to expand the empire and bring Roman rule to barbarian nations; also as a republic, in my oppinion Rome would have been in a better position to deal with invading hordes.
Thanks.
It was Ceasar who attempted to reclaim Rome for the masses vs. the Oligarchy. The Republic had become a state of Millionaires and Beggars. Cicero was a leader of the oligarchy in the Senate. It is Not hard to imagine the reasons for the murder of Julius Ceasar. In fact the death of Ceasar was the real end of the Republic Not when he crossed the Rubicon.
regards,
-
<<<<Myself, i'd be interested in a kind of sea empire like the British Empire, naval oriented at least, i just wouldn't follow some of the more ridiculous policies of the British Empire>>>> ...; and Just What would those Ridiculous Policies Be?.
Myself:
circa 500 BC in the Mediterranean . By empowering; the Laws of Justice , empowering those laws that includes and Rights of Free Speech, includes rights of free will , that these basic rights having been empowered at an early age, and assured for all citizens ; that through providing all persons with the
-
It would seem the general view is supportive of Alexander's Eastern campaigns.
Macedonia was on friendly relations with Carthage through most of there history. I agree Carthage would have become concerned with a Macedonian Mediterranean Empire; even possibly leading to War. On more analysis ; I believe you are correct.
regards,
-
I thought the Celts and Gauls had large numbers of warriors?
In 397 BC ; 8 Celtic tribes banded together , marched into the Po Valley. In fact this was a result of over-populations in their own territories. Most of the young peoples were forced to attack neighboring tribes so that they might gain land and houses.
At any rate; I would like to think the Macedonian Phalanx could have " Utterly Destroyed" them.
Rome had at that time, if not the best units in the world, than surely a very close second; but still they fought these Celtic warriors for centuries.
I feel that being as how intelligent many persons of Germanic or Celt stock can be: I'd even bet that the Northern Tribes were a very clever association of foes. An enemy who took full advantage of every rock and tree. If the Gauls were not organized as a true Military power , why then do you think Attulas I invadered Pergaman ? They did Not have the organization skills of the Roman or Macedonian corps, but they fought with such a verocity , had long swords, were taller than others, in mass , that they often slaughtered their enemies.
however, you do have valid points . I agree; Rome and Macedonia were vastly superior culturally and Militarily.
regards,
-
" If the Romans could not totally master the germans, how would Alexander go?'
Probably not real well. The Gauls, Dardanians , Thracians and afew others were very savage warriors. Alexander could not have put enough manpower in the fields. Macedonia was simply not large enough to conquer the Northern races. Rome however would have battled Macedonia forces on a more professional level with the Macedonians probably being the superior Troops. At least in My view.
The Northern Gauls and Germanics were good metalsmiths and hunters. But had No siege warfare ability . This is why they never defeated Rome. to Battle the Germanic tribes meant savage fighting. Alexander Phalanx and Calvary would have been tested to it's limit of organization. I don't think Macedonia could have won that one.
regards,
-
Excellent points.
But South Italy was populated by mostly Greek settlers. The Hellens ruled in the South from their empire in Syracuse with King Dionysius I. I think they understood the strategic importance better than to see Rome as non-threats.
A cystal ball however, was not needed. The Gauls had been at war with Macedonian and Persian Armies for centuries. In fact the Macedonians had collaborated with Persian Forces as they moved East to west through Macedonian Territory.
Yes , of course you are correct in your analysis of Alexanders visions in the east. But even without the knowledge of Romes rising power ; still moving on the West first would have gave Alexander vast resources in Gold and Manpower. He would have far easier have defeated all foes after his Western Conquest.
regards,
-
-
Paul was a Hellenized Jew. Seleucia was a Hellenized dynasty . The Macedonian General Antiochus founded this province out of the First Division of Alexanders Empire. His son Seleucus I Nicator began en extensive building program.
He built the City of Antioch ; named after his own father....the
-
Adrianople was the result of Valens policy to allow the pursued Visigoths to re-settle in Roman territory land south of the Danube. The Visigoths had been run -out of their own home lands by the invading Huns. After the resettlement; Visigoths had supported an usuper as Emperor over Valens by aiding the pagan Procopius against Valens. The Visigoths then reformed an Army , and attacked Valens Roman forces. 40,000 Romans including Emperor Valens himself died in the fighting. Valens was an Adrian Christian who had persecuted the Catholics. The End of Rome was due to many things; most notably the division of Christian doctrines and his own attempts to hold territory as far East as Mesopotamia.
Valens Troops lost against the Gothic Calvary mainly due to this poor command leadership.These same Roman troops had devastated the Visigoths in their own territory of modern Romania in 367. Valens also became involved in a war with Persia in 371-372
At this time in Roman History ( though Rome proper had long been over) it would have surved Rome better to hold historic Territory that was Roman, rather than pretend that an Empire existed of Romans.
regards,
-
Seleucus Dynasty: lasted from ca. 321 BC to 64 BC, the rulers known as the Seleucidae. The Seleucid era began October 1st 312 BC in Syria and on New Years Day , 1 Nissan = April 1st 311 BC in Babylonia. Seleucus was a ruling cult. Promoting ideas of Divine Hellenization.
Founded by Seleucus I Nicator ( Victor) born 358 BC son of the Macedonian General of Philip II , Antiochus. Antiochus means
-
Correction: One Mule =500 dollars. 16x500=8000 dollars per Denarius
30mil x 8000=240,000,000,000 billion dollars.
so Perseus had a currency worth of 240 Billion dollars. Far richer than even Bill Gates.
regards,
-
King Perseus of Macedon had a personal fortune of 120,000,000 Sestertius at out break of the Third Macedonian-Roman War.
A Roman Sestertius was one-fourth the value of a Denarius.
A Denarius was worth 16 Asses about 133 BC.
In US dollars an Ass cost about 500 dollars. One Denarius is worth 500 dollars.
By Dividing Perseus
-
In Ancient times; Every Tree, rock, brush , animals etc; all elemental things were composed of a in there essence of a soul, a conscious being. It was a common occurance that these ethereal souls played actual roles in the daily lives of mortals. They could aid or terrorize a person.
One of the Acts of Christ coming into the world was that the mortal live was no longer accessable to those in the ethreal condition.
Faith or non faith these ideas alone , they then became the motivating causes of human acts.
regards,
-
<<<<<<Three reasons is quite limited, given the magnitude of the question you asking. But to answer it quickly i'd say:
1. Poor leadership and protocol on behalf of the Emperors
2. Barbarian incursion and incorporation within the Empire
3. Countless civil wars>>>>>>
I'll 2nd those.
Only add: Internal stability was always the weak under belly of Rome.
As Rome grew from a village to an Empire it became , by default, less Roman.
Hadrian for example; actually returned many of the earlier conquests back to the enemies of Rome. He did Not simply take a defensive posture.
I would have to say the number one weakness that caused the Fall of Rome.... No leader arose who would or could Hold what was Roman. Some men like Aurelius tryed.
regards,
-
What Changed Us?
A.Centuries of Wars; between the Oligarchies power structures..aka..Kingdoms. Lead to a decline in the numbers of societies.
B. The social evolution of Representation; through a Republic , Democratic or Socialist set of doctrines. A result of the need of better organization.
C. The technological evolution of knowledge. Mechanical inventions changed productivity.
D. Christianity. The doctrine of human salvation through deeds of humanity to man. Though this basic moral formula has ever sense Christ and the missionary work of Paul , has been used , abused , misunderstood and by both faithful and enemy alike.
But nevertheless: Christianity was the New humanist Doctrine for the Slave populations. A doctrine and a way of organization, that was instrumental in leading to laws of fairness and justice that gave the common man the same rights as the King.
E. But most important and Above all: What changed the human experience after Christ was generational drama. The fact that each generation adds a new statement , a new design or flavor to life. It was a natural consequence of the ever changing human adventures that lead to Rome in the first place, and it was this 'human drama' that gave us Christ and his message of Hope and salvation.
Hope and salvation once placed in legal octrine changed the world.
None of these changes can nor should lead to a utopian atmosphere. Christianity is an expectation not a reality.
regards,
-
Some scholars have his birth in 100. But the extensive records of Caesar' career and the dates of those along with others scholars of the times, all who placed his birth in 102...I'll go with that date.
There's nothing perfectionist about history. Yesterdays tales are from many sources and the higher- up the political ladder the more self-aggrandizing propaganda these tend to be.
regards,
-
Well : if You say so Peter. The Fisherman staus that Christ spoke from was an idealistic platform for the masses of humanity. That is he was a God living as a common man. Caesar was a God according to the Imperial Cult , already a Divine Being. He therefore did Not need to be as a common man. That is what I was attempting to relay Peter. Now can you add a few lines of knowledge and not just a short note of discord? I'd like to learn your knowledge about Christ and his message if you care to prove you know What You are taliking about!
regards,
...There are just so many historical writings of Christ the Loving messiah of an enslaved -bondaged mankind. Written by men and women of good moral virtues.
It is silly to even contrive that a Roman Caesar ; a man who represented world power with all of the riches that the created world had to offer him, would reduce himself to the status of a Jewish fisherman over religious dogma. Caesar was according to the Roman Imperial system ...a Divine Being. This was why he ruled. He did not need to reduce his status to become a King. He already was one. By Divine Right!
regards,
I don't think Caesar "reduced himself to the status of a Jewish fisherman...". This was done by others.
Maybe you should read the book in order to know what you are talking about.
Peter
-
Welcome.
Pelasgians,
the people who occupied Greece before the 12th century BC. The name was used only by ancient Greeks. The Pelasgi were mentioned as a specific people by several Greek authors, including Homer, Herodotus, and Thucydides, and were said to have inhabited various areas, such as Thrace, Argos, Crete, and Chalcidice. In the 5th century BC the surviving villages apparently preserved a common non-Greek language.
It is uncertain whether any ancient people actually called themselves Pelasgi. In later Greek usage their name was applied to all
-
Did Carthage ever have a chance?
Actually ; Did Rome ever have a Chance?
Carthage was the richest city in the world. Carthage was Three times the size of Rome.
It was the International Headquarters of merchant princes who could afford to buy anything
Delian League/athenian Empire
in Historia in Universum
Posted
The leagues were the unionization of the cities. Some were for plunder and conquest , while others more philosophical , or economic unions. The center of the World could be placed at Rhodes. Rhodes was the Economic and Philosophical center. The Rhodians had great wealth and most students of business went to their academies. Athens was certainly a great city with a very high degree of civilized thought; but the leagues could not have over-come the struggles between the Monarchial or capitalist needs of ruling the everyday affairs of the ancient world.
The power in ancient times really rested with a few families of great wealth and power.They inter-mixed throughout most kingdoms. The commoner was really without the securities needed for self and family, was helpless in a savage world without a membership in one form of rule or another. Slavery was the price of non-membership.
Athens could have become a great power if only the Aetolian League had not for selfish means brought Roman power into Greece. Had the Athenian allied themselves with the Diadochi and not the upstart Roman senate than Athens would have joined in a new revival of Greece power. I think the Hellens having had long standing colonist in southern Italy lead them to believe Rome would be a good counter to the Diadochi? They were wrong!
regards,