Tobias
-
Posts
633 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Static Pages
News
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Tobias
-
-
That is very good, but it says that it can only offer the music services to the United States! How does that work?
-
Some of it is coming back to me now... just wait until the Battle of Chalons. Its like the director told the reenactors... 'Just run around alot yelling and such. If you get close to anyone pretend like you want to fight them but make sure the audience understands that you clearly don't mean to hurt anyone, and certainly wouldn't swing your weapon with even feigned authority'.
So how did the many deaths of the Catalunian field occur, did they just start falling down on cue
-
That is a very interesting paper Cato; most enlightening.
By the way, the discussion of the Gracchan corn dole must have been straying a tad off course to be talking about the Byzantine economy
-
why was the charge of P. Crassus and the Roman "inferior" cavalry so successful initially? You are not forced into retreat by an enemy that can do you no harm. Of course maybe the Parthians realized this because they turned around, encircled and slaughtered P. Crassus and his men.
Perhaps the retreat of the Parthian cavalry was actually the usage of one of the oldest tactics in the book?; the false retreat, raising enough confidence in the enemy to cause them to charge, abruptly turn around, surround them and slaughter them. I've seen it in so many battles throughout history that one would think that Generals would know better.
-
As far as Augustus being called the "Restorer of the republic" is concerned, i can only agree with PP in that it was rather clever of Augustus to make it seem as if all he was in the Roman Empire was the "Princeps", whereas he was really the big man, the head bloke. I believe that is where the term "Principate" comes from; the state of government at the time of Augustus.
-
In any case, I really don't care that much whether Brutus was a saint or not--getting rid of Caesar was a necessary step in securing the Republic (though obviously not sufficient), and so even if Brutus started off as a scoundral (and I don't think he was), he ended up doing the right thing in the end.
Although half of my points were apparently ignored, i'm glad we sorted that out sir
-
Has anyone read any of Quintus Ennius' works? Although only fragments of his works survive, what i've read (a part of his "Annals") is very good and interesting poetry.
-
I've read the Masters of Rome series, and am not ashamed to admit that i quote McCullough often in this website, especially in recent debates, because of the high esteem i hold of her books.
Also, you've only shown that Brutus' men may have used force to collect a debt. That's not extortion.Extortion: The illegal exaction of money by force, threats, importunity. (Definition from the Australian Pocket Oxford Dictionary)
I'll quote one of my own earlier posts:
one of his main methods occurred similarly to this: The Governor would threaten to send his army to camp in a random town in Cilicia. Brutus would arrive in said town and subtly suggest that a "gift" of, say, 100 talents, to the governor would help to send the army elsewhere. After this was suggested, the firm of Matinius et Scaptius (Brutus' front) would lend the town the bribe money. The governor would pocket this money, and Brutus would make even more for lending the money.And as i mentioned above and as you said, armed force was used to collect the debts owed! If you were offered a loan with 48% interest, would you take it? Well, if you had an army threatening to billet itself in your city and you didn't have the money yourself to bribe it away, and a "benevolent" person was offering this loan, yes you probably would.
Not extortion eh
-
Superior training is certainly what tells, along with professionality. A thing i would also suggest; the Roman Work Ethic. They were used to strenuous physical activity, and it was bred into the people. I am not suggesting they were physically bigger etc., just that they had a physical history of hard labour matching if not overtaking most other peoples. This is shown in the long hard marches undertaken, the huge amounts of fortifications erected and their stamina in all areas. For example; Caesar's campaign in Gaul. He moved his legions so fast that Vercongetorix himself admitted that the Gauls could never hope to match the Romans in speed. The Roman Work Ethic, i believe, is part of what made the Romans better. I am not suggesting that other peoples did not work as hard or harder, however, just that the Romans possessed a strong work ethic that translated to stamina etc.
-
Ah ok, fair enough. As i said, it was just a thought
From what i grasped, this teacher was a bit of a perfectionist, which is why he probably insisted on the usage of that title.
-
I've heard several versions about how the nose of the sphinx was damaged including the one about Napoleon's soldiers doing it. From what I can gather this is not true. Illustrations from the time show that the nose was already missing and it seems unlikely that Napoleon, who had gone to a great deal of trouble to bring scholars along with him, would have permitted such an outrage. The best explanation I've seen suggests that it was chisled away by Christians who saw it as a pagan symbol and, therefore, fair game.
Ah, thanks for that clarification. One hears these things bandied about, you know
I suppose, though, if Napoleon did aim a cannon at the Sphinx, the nose would be hard miss
Interesting though, do you mean that the Christians saw the Sphinx as a pagan symbol and sought to disfigure it by ridding it of it's nose, or that the nose was a pagan symbol.....
-
G'day All
This is just a kind of nit-picking suggestion; Over the years, i've developed a huge interest in the "Byzantine Empire". I got the opportunity to speak to a teacher eminent in the subject, and when i did, i immediately got my head bitten off for calling it the "Byzantine" Empire. This person said that the term "Byzantine" was a relativelymodern term, used to distinguish the later, greek-speaking empire from the earlier, latin speaking empire and that it should be at all times called the "Roman Empire" or the "Basileia Romaion"( Which is the greek for "Imperium Romanorum"). I was converted to this, and remembering this website's liking of ancient or at least non modern terms for it's forum headings, i wondered what you people and admin would think if i suggested that "Basileia Romaion" was incorporated into the Postilla Historia Romanorum title or description somehow, instead of Byzantine. I know it's a greek term, so i was thinking of not bothering, but i decided to anyway.
So, what do people think? Yes it's nit-picking, but it's a thought....
-
I was motivated by curiosity- i always heard about this "Roman Empire" when i was younger, and i longed to find out what it was. Well, as is the case with many, once i started, i couldn't stop. I come across this site whilst researching online, and i liked what i saw enough to join the site. I love all aspects of the history of Rome, with the exception of a deep interest in Religion. My main area of study is the Eastern or Byzantine Empire. That is my forte, and the area i know most about and am most strongly dedicated to. (Although i can never manage to keep out of the Civil Wars of the Republic)
-
My favourite superhero...I always liked Super Mario, but after seeing him in about 50 000 things i got sick of him. My favourite superhero now would be the Doctor, out of "Doctor Who"
-
Yay - Just saw a preview for this on Channel seven in Australia, starts January. We get everything late.
I assume you mean Prime, Germanicus? If so, that is worth a thanksgiving, because that is a channel of which we are just inside the broadcast range
-
I believe it was truely the fourth crusade that damaged and destroyed the Byzantine Empire and economy. The lost of Asia Minor was a big blow economically, but Constantinople was still the major trade center of the East because its location in terms of trade.
Certainly, that is correct. But read my post above; as i said, the Empire lost it's major recruiting ground for soldiers and it's heavy cavalry, and came to start relying on European armies too heavily. As it couldn't effectively guard it's own frontiers, territory was lost to advancing peoples (although Alexius, John and Manuel Comneni held things together for a while), and thus came instability amoung the various factions of the Empire. Action was demanded, and when it didn't come, Emperors were deposed. This continuing civil war and disunity made it absurdly easy to gain against the Byzantines, in terms of land, trade and economy. As you said, the advent of the Fourth Crusade was what effectively destroyed the Byzantine Empire, but it was the loss of Asia Minor that was the first fatal blow.
-
Or it may be that Brutus' name was used to provide a veneer of respectability and authority to what Appius Claudius was doing and that Brutus had little knowledge at all of what his father-in-law was up to day-to-day (doubt very many of us do).
So you are saying that the extortion methods i mentioned that were used by Appius Cladius were respectable, mate
Also, recall that Cicero's correspondence was in the hands of Octavian, and when he published Cicero's letters, Octavian had every motivation to depict Brutus in the worst light possible. After all, Brutus had soundly defeated the little Caesar in the first battle of Phillipi, and poor Little Caesar's feelings were hurt ever after.Begging your pardon, but if you are referring to Octavian, soon to become Augustus, you are dead wrong. Cicero became governor of Cilicia in 51 BC; before Caesar marched on Rome, and when Octavius was a young boy. It was during this governorship that he wrote his intial letters on the subject of Cilicia's condition under the previous governor, Appius Cladius. Perhaps the letters you are referring to are later ones.
Most importantly, however, Appius Claudius was tried on charges (and acquitted), yet Brutus was never charged at all.Not surprising. As was mentioned, Brutus, with his front of 'Matinius et Scaptius' covered himself very well and ensured that virtually no evidence alluding to his activities came to light.
I'll quote a paper i found on the subject;
However, there were apparently less attractive traits to this marble man. Historians cite an evergreen tale, derived from Cicero, that Brutus was so parsimonious that he insisted on a 48% return of interest on loans he issued to the town of Salamis in Cypress; this was all the more shocking because senators like Brutus were debarred from money lending. Brutus' people later resorted to force to collect the debt and deaths occurred. Cicero, discovering Brutus' acts when he became governor of Cilicia, was frankly appalled and wrote to Atticus at wearisome length; he also remonstrated with Brutus at his ruthless pillaging of the Salamian populace. Relations between them began to cool.In light of all these facts, I'm hardly inclined to moderate my praise of the young man who struck a mighty blow against the forces of dictatorship and the rising tide of pernicious monarchism.As i said before, Brutus and the conspirators deserve no thanks. Most of the conspirators were motivated out of jealousy; Brutus out of what he thought was in the interest of the common good. However, neither he nor any of the other murderers gave mature foresight to the lasting effects of the low murder, or of the peril of the power vacuum their actions would cause. Whilst researching Cicero about his letters, I found that he commented that the lack of planning following the assassination was disastrous. It successfully destroyed any potential to restore the Republic, as Julius Caesar had known, and led directly to a two-part civil war; that of Antony and Octavius against the murderers, then the two men against each other.
Once again, I can't see this argument getting anywhere; i'll let this particular aspect be.
-
I'm a fan of Star Wars, but i haven't actually seen the cartoon versions yet, so i don't know what they're like. I certainly agree that Episode II could have done with a little more action and plot instead of focusing almost entirely on only a few things.
War of the Worlds; absolutely brilliant.
Batman begins; I'm not too much of a fan of Batman, although i have seen the early 60's and 70's "Zap" "Pow" batman series, and Batman Begins was far better then that, which is a good indication
-
Control of Asia Minor was the mainstay of the Byzantine economy; as was mentioned, it was the "breadbasket" of the Empire. Asia Minor was where the richest landowners come from, where most of the Empire's soldiers and horses came from and where many of the Emperors came from. As well; having control of Asia minor and the Golden Horn meant that it was impossible for rich goods from China to pass into Europe without passing through Byzantine territory, from which they could tax the merchants and the goods. These goods had to pass through Byzantine territory, because the alternatives was going through land hostile to Christians or Westerners and engulfed in war, which was the Holy Land, or going north-west from China into unmapped territory.
When the Byzantines were defeated at Manzikert, and the subesquent loss of most of Asia Minor, that heralded the beginning of the end of the Empire. It had lost it's main recruiting ground for soldiers, it's main horse breeding areas (Loss of the famous Byzantine Cataphracti subsequent) and much of it's right to tax incoming goods. With the loss of soldiers came loss of land; with the loss of land came economic instability; with economic instability came the fall. The low percentage of gold in the Byzantine's coins from it's loss of trade profits prompted Venice to mint it's own pure gold coin, and this signalled the Byzantine's loss of trade to Venice. Thus, more instability resulted; coups occurred, the 4th crusade took the city and that was that. The Empire would not recover.
Thus, possession of Asia Minor was essential to the Byzantine economy and survival. This is obvious in that the empire, in it's long history, experienced many disasters (i.e. the loss of Egypt, North Africa, Italy, the loss of territory in the Balkans, constant warring and defeats), yet continued to survive because it kept possession of Asia Minor, it's main source of funds and soldiers. Without it, the Empire soon foundered.
-
I'll say this Ursus; that is perhaps one of the best brief histories of Egypt i've read. I've attempted to do this myself: but i scrapped it because the versions i did were either too comprehensive or too brief or too lacking facts.
Looking at Alexandria has always fascinated me; especially during the Roman times. For a city to be rather indifferent to the needs of the country if it wasn't in the interests of the greeks or Macedonians and be the power behind the throne seems very interesting, as well as the city being a combined multicultural place (i.e. the combined gods of Macedon, Greece and Egypt).
I love ancient Egypt almost as much as Ancient Rome, and that history is a very good one.
A question slightly off track; is it true that one of Napoleon's cannon blew the nose of the Sphinx?
-
Disentangling Brutus' role from Appius Claudius' is obviously the critical issue here, and there's nothing in your posts that manage to do this.
That's the thing; they were apparently working hand in glove with each other, and the fact that Brutus was married to a young lady named Claudia, daughter of Appius Cladius, governor of Cilicia might signal a closer relationship then usual.
-
That's rather interesting Flavous Valerius Constantinus; a great view of Novum Comum. It is somewhat after the time period i am speaking of, however.
I was speaking of the time before Caesar granted the colony citizenship whilst he was dictator; before Caesar marched on Rome and during the Gallic Wars.
That is a very comprehensive account however FVC; they say one learns something new every day
-
I understand that although Gaius Marius inflicted that utterly crushing defeat on them, around 6000 of them survived, and settled with a tribe called the Atuatuci, around where modern day Belgium is. Kind of unfortunate-they ended up very close to where they began, but minus their numbers.
-
I honestly cannot see any truth in this. The only possible explanation about it not coming to light before now was that they kept it absolutely from everyone, not the easiest task in a city that delighted hugely in the scandals of Rome.
As Cato said, it just doesn't fit the character of Octavian to have incestuous relations.
Optimates Or Populares
in Imperium Romanorum
Posted
It is a rather difficult decision. Although politically, i am a conservative, i have no support whatsoever for the actions of the Optimates in the late republic. But rather then allow my vote to be governed by one group of ultra-conservatives in history, i will look at this in an unbiased way.
I'm populares