Black_Francis
-
Posts
27 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Static Pages
News
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Black_Francis
-
-
Hello there,
I just thought I would bring up something that bothers me greatly. In a whole bunch of places on the internet (scroll down to the bottom of = http://www.comitatus.net/cavalry.htm ) and in casual discussion the use of crossbows by Roman infantry escorting Julian is often brought up. It is this instance of "crossbow armed Romans escorting a Roman Emperor" that is constantly regurgitated. However, I find myself increasingly having to point out the correct context:
"....a short cut but was dangerous because it lay through dark woods.... To avoid delay he took with him only cuirassiers (Cataphractarii/Clibinarii) and artillerymen (Balistarii), an inadequate escort for a commander, and reached Auxerre by Silvanus' route." Ammianus Marcellinus XVI, II, Penguin edition, translated by Walter Hamilton 1986.I mean heavy cavalry and artillery in a forest!
I think the point Ammianus is trying to make is clear enough.I just have to say:
Caption:
Use of the Roman crossbow (arcuballista) from horseback. Note how it can be reloaded by hand using the pressure of the saddle. Emperor Julian was on one ocassion escorted by ballistarii; rather than being catapult operators, they may well have been mounted crossbowmen, such as this.
O'RLY?
I am not trying to debate the use of the crossbow in the late Roman army, my point is to simply dissassociate the idea of crossbow armed infantry escorting Julian in this particular passage.
On an additional note, does anybody know where the idea of crossbow armed Bucellarii comes from?
-
Ok, Myself and some other members of the Rome Total Realism Community are planning a mod for the Barbarian Invasion expansion pack.
The name we have come up with is
"Imperia Romanus"
Does this mean Empires/Imperiums of Rome???
Should it be Imperia Romana or Romanum???
-
ahhh,
Very interesting, thank you for that Onasander! I had not thaught of that.
-
Yes,
I second Ursus, show us some holiday pictures!
-
That was superb!
Thank you!
-
Hurrah!
Good old Gaius!
-
Also, if you ever watch American Public Broadcasting (PBS), sometimes they replay Professor Eugene Weber's history of the western tradition. He did a segment on the Byzantium.
Thanks Ursus... however Im British and have to make do with the BBC (great though they are!) so I have no chance of catching anything on PBS!
Thanks for the author reference though!
-
"Groovy"-Evil Dead 2.
"Hail to the King baby"-Evil Dead 3
(use it all the time on my Girlfriend!
)The whole "First rank FIRE!, Second rank FIRE!" scene from Zulu. Along with when the men sing "men of Harlech!"... more a scene than a quote though and a damn shame they didnt sing it in Welsh!
-
Thank you Ursus!
Would you be able to name some good books on the Eastern Roman Empire or is that simply going to far?
-
I'm a pretty strong proponent of the link between Catholicism and Roman culture, especially in the late empire. The structure of the church hierarchy, the titles, feast days, holidays and much of the symbolism owes a lot to Roman paganism and cults. Of course I should point out that Catholics don't worship their saints as deities, as you obviously know but thought I'd should state for non-Catholics.
Edit: I should add this wonderful quote found on another site: "The conversion of a Roman emperor to Christianity, of Constantine in 312, might not have happened, or, if it had, it would have taken on a totally different meaning if it had not been preceded, for two generations, by the conversion of Christianity to the culture and ideals of the Roman world" (Peter Brown, The World of Late Antiquity, A.D. 150-750, London and New York, 1971, p. 82).
I have been thinking a great deal lately about just what the "Roman" in Roman Catholic means. Im sure it is much more than a word used to signify allegiance to the Pope.
I always remember my priest making sure we understood the difference between "venerate" and "worship" when it came to Saints and the Blessed Virgin. It can be quite confusing to non-catholicis.
That quote form Peter Brown is superb, I recently used it in an essay I wrote about Constantine for my MA. Im sure Ive posted it in a forum somewhere...
-
Constantiople or Byzantium, which is the correct term for this city pre 1453?
I understand that Byzantium was the ancient pre-Roman Greek name for the settlement but how long was the city called Constantinople after Constantine?
What were the men on the walls in 1453 calling their city?
What were they calling themselves?
Were they still calling themselves "Roman" as in the time of Justinian?
Where does the Eastern Roman Empire end and the Byzantine begin?
-
It is interesting to note that the idea of the family having numerous specific deities never really died out. The way Roman Catholics "venerate" different Saints and the Blessed Virgin alongside the Trinity is a direct descendent of this form of worship.
Most Roman Catholic families have a number of Saints that they have traditionally venerated, often through many generations.
The idea of a "Patron Saint" is also reminiscent of the ancient pre-Christian Roman tradition. The individual Catholic will often have a a specific Saint with which he/she identifies strongly and has a strong relationship with that will often last a lifetime, just as the pre-Christian Romans had their own personal deity.
-
Longbow,
Sorry to hear about your troubles,
Go scroll down to the TFT sub-forum here (you will need to lojgin/create an account first:
http://www.rometotalrealism.com/phpbb2/index.php
If you cannot find a topic discussing installation problems in the TFT sub-forum feel free to create one.
-
Just so you all know, TFT 1.5 has been released.
-
Why dont you try out Foundry miniatures http://www.wargamesfoundry.com/asp/nocookie.asp
They are well priced and excellent quality (its the Perry twins of Games Workshop fame).
-
Thanks for your reply.
On your point about whether or not Constantine converted to Christianity... Ive done a lot of reading on the subject recently and Ive come to the conclusion that he most certainly did... You only have to read the "Oration of Constantine" to understand that he was simply too deeply involved to be using Christianity for his own ends.... especially when one considers what a mess he made of other things (wife...kids).
http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-01/Npnf...m#P8120_3328019
I believe that the problem with Constantine is his perception of what Christianity was and how we perceive Christianity today.
Constantine claimed to simply be an instrament of divine will.. Just as Judas had to betray Jesus to bring about His triumph over death, so Constantine was condemned to have blood on his hands to further the spread and growth of Christianity.
I find it contradictory that the Roman Catholic Church claims much of its Primacy from Constantine himself and yet fails to even beatify him!
I understand that Constantine was a sinner and had blood on his hands but he repented and was converted... indeed, I see him as a model Catholic..he may well be the most important convert Christianity has ever had and his possible salvation and forgiveness to be a superb example of Gods infinite mercy!
-
I'll repent on my deathbed though..just in case
LOL, According to the Catholics... this would be perfectly acceptable. I don't think it matters though, if it turns out in the end that Christianity was the right way to go, I think everyone will end up in 'hell' anyway. I mean does anyone truly follow the teachings of Jesus?
Good point though Catholics also realise that it is almost impossible to be a truly "good person" and follow the teachings of Jesus to the letter (unlike many Protestants).
We understand that we are all naturally sinners and there is no escaping this (we are all selfish buggers, admit it!) but that it is our struggle against sin that God takes note of. After all, it is the mercy of God that we rely on for enterance into Heaven, to assume you are going to go to Heaven because you consider yourself to be a "good person" is presumptuousness and probably linked with the sin of pride.
Jesus is the ideal that we should measure ourselves against but we should also realise that this ideal is almost impossible to reach as a human being. Basically, we will always fall short of really deserving the love of God and salvation but this does not mean that we will go to Hell as it is through His mercy and forgiveness alone that we can obtain salvation and not really through any deed of our own.
I do apologise and I feel I have wandered way off topic... I felt I had to reply to Primus Pilus though.
Anyhow,
The form of Roman Paganism presented seems to make a lot of sense and certainly holds more merit than the beliefs that many new age "crystal gazers" hold to be true.
I have a great deal of respect for Pagans that worship the old gods in a proper and traditional manner. It saddens me to see modern Pagans devaluing the ancient Pagan tradition through association.
Needless to say and as you may have guessed, I am proud to be a ROMAN Catholic and through my faith feel a tenuous and valuable link with the Roman Empire.... After 312AD at least...
-
Voted for Germanicus because I knew everyone had most likely voted for Caesar.
So you are saying Germanicus was actually better than Caesar, or you just wanted to be different?
Im saying that I used my vote to encourage people to consider other possibilities and though I know I have not voted within the guidelines of the original question (I should have voted for GJC) I believe I have voted in a way that I feel is justified.
Im sure we have all seen plenty of polls where Caesar comes top of the generals list. Maybe a poll should be opened that excludes Caesar.... but then Scipio Africanus would probably win!
Maybe a poll on who had the greater gall.... I think Sulla would give Caesar a run for his money.... marching on Rome with a Roman army for the very first time, after this all other generals that marched on Rome were simply following down a path that Sulla had explored (Ive been reading "Sulla the Last Republican"). Sorry, this is off topic.
-
Thank you both for your comments and thank you Jimbow for the superb links.
Just what I was after! I cant believe I hadnt seen that article at romanarmy.net earlier!
-
I read recently (and I cant remember where) that legionary cohorts within the same legion had different coloured shields.
Is this true?
I thought all the units in a legion had the same shield design and colour shield.
-
How did a standard bearer defend himself?
I think that if it got to a point where the Standard Bearer was actually being attacked then all was lost anyway.
The idea was that the cohort would group around the standard and defend it to the death as it was a symbol of their very identity and a sacred object to them.
I read somewhere that the standard bearer was actually deployed in the center of the cohort a couple of men behind the front line.
My theory is that the legionaries would attempt to place themselves between the enemy and the standard which would create pressure on the enemy line directly in front of the standard bearer. This would focus the power of the cohort into a point and create a wedge formation in a melee rather than dissipating the strength of the cohort along the length of the facing enemy formation and would also encourage forward motion as the legionaries pushed towards the point directly ahead of the standard.
-
Does Julius Caesar come into the game??? pLease tell me?
He does if you use the "Rome Total Realism" (RTR) mod and then download the sub-mod called "The First Triumvirate" (TFT) on top of it.
TFT is basically a mod for a mod. It is great. You can play as Caesar, Crassus or Pompey.
TFT v1.5 is out in the next couple of days and TFT 2.0 should be out a week or so after RTR 6.0.
Go to http://www.rometotalrealism.com/phpbb2/index.php (The RTR forum), scroll to the bottom of the page and check out the TFT sub-forum. There are previews of 1.5, discussions and a 2.0 preview. You will see lots of posts by me there.... because Im a TFT team-member!
-
I spend a lot of time at the Rome Total Realism mod Forum and also at the Total War Center.
These are both sites that discuss the pc game Rome Total War.
Im so ashamed! :bag:
-
If you play Rome Total War be sure to download Rome Total Realism.
RTR version 6.0 is out soon and looks great and there have been a number of previews released recently.
Here is a link to the official website which has previews etc:
http://www.rometotalrealism.com/
And here is a link to the official forums where the discussions take place:
http://www.rometotalrealism.com/phpbb2/
Enjoy!
Maybe Ill see you there.... Im a site Praetorian (moderator)!
Tired of seeing crossbows in association with Julian in Ammianus.
in Repetere Actionem
Posted · Edited by Black_Francis
I don't think that is is impossible to use them in a forest at all.
My point is that I don't think Ammianus was referring to cheiroballistra/manuballista or any other form of "crossbow" which is how the passage in question is often interpreted. The point he is making is that Julian is being accompanied by a wholly inappropriate escort of heavy cavalry and artillery. I believe he further emphasises this point by the use of the words "dangerous" and "dark woods" implying danger/menace and being difficult to traverse. This helps to further convey how inappropriate/insufficient/unable to repel an attack the escort was.
He uses the words:
dangerous+dark woods+inadequate escort for a commander. Combine this with heavy cavalry and artillery and I think the picture is clear enough.
I don't think he is simply describing the escort Julian had as it would be of no real consequence. What he is trying to convey is Julians somewhat daredevil and rash urge to follow Silvanus. Indeed Ammianus even describes Julian as being "on fire to imitate the example of this bold general (Silvanus)." in the same passage.
Penguin: