Tobias
-
Posts
633 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Static Pages
News
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Tobias
-
-
LOL
By that stage, the Byzantines didn't really have an Empire
-
A historian, without a shadow of a doubt
I'd love to be around to record the glory years of the empire and write my own personal philosophies. That way 2000 years later, an ancient roman historian called Tobias would be referenced and quoted on this website
-
G'day everyone
I was intrigued by how similar Greek Fire was to Napalm. I instituted this topic to find people's views on the uses of Greek Fire and Napalm, battles where they were used and to have a general comparison in the destructive power, pros and cons of both these highly volatile liquid flames. As well, i believe to this day that the complete chemical composition of Greek fire is still unknown (those Byzantines could hardly be blamed for not wanting to lose their secret weapon), and it'd be interesting to hear some views on what the compositon is thought to be. So, overall, a general comparison of Greek Fire and Napalm os the purpose of this topic
-
Damn, i'm afraid that game was a little beyond my rather tired ability tonight
-
I would have thought Alexius Angelus; he promised the crusaders a large sum to help him gain the Byzantine Throne, and upon gaining it, he found an empty treasury, thus causing the Crusaders to sack the city.
-
One that hasn't been mentioned is the most prestigious and rarest of all military decorations; the Grass Crown. This crown would be presented to a military commander who rescued a Roman army from besiegement or a blockade. The crown would be made up of foliage from the battlefield like grasses, weeds, wheat, flowers etc. The army that was saved by the commander would vote to present the crown to the commander. Pliny speakes of it:
"But as for the crown of grass, it was never conferred except at a crisis of extreme desperation, never voted except by the acclamation of the whole army, and never to any one but to him who had been its preserver. Other crowns were awarded by the generals to the soldiers, this alone by the soldiers, and to the general. This crown is known also as the "obsidional" crown, from the circumstance of a beleaguered army being delivered, and so preserved from fearful disaster. If we are to regard as a glorious and a hallowed reward the civic crown, presented for preserving the life of a single citizen, and him, perhaps, of the very humblest rank, what, pray, ought to be thought of a whole army being saved, and indebted for its preservation to the valour of a single individual?"
Sulla was one of these generals who received a Grass Crown.
The Laurels were traditionally a symbol of victory, and in the time of the republic a general who won a brilliant victory was awarded a triumph, which entailed several lictors with their fasces adorned with laurels. They could not enter rome before their triumph. As was said, the Laurel Wreath dates back further, i'm not sure when.
-
I rest my case:)
Damn you give me a laugh sometimes Primus Pilus
-
I'm a new member to the forum, however, I have noticed something that I find quite interesting. It may be for simplicity's sake, but the vast majority of posters seem all too happy to use terms or names which do not actually explain what they are talking about, but defines it in opposition to something else.
For example:
Pagans - pagani originally from the countryside, farmers etc., but later taken on by Christians as a slur, presumably suggesting that all those who followed the traditional rituals were stupid, country bumpkins, that type of thing.
Barbarians - tribes of people who were not Greek (originally) and who's language sounded like a meaningless bar-bar noise. So essentially this means silly people who aren't us, just like 'pagan' does.
What I am suggesting is that terms such as this are too tainted to be used in what attempts to be as objective as possible a discussion, they are unhelpful and have too many negative connotations to allow a reasonable discussion of the subject to be had.
Just thought I'd stir it up a bit htere, but I'm interested to know what other people think - is there an alternative, or should we just use these words regardless as everyone recognises them? Are there any other examples?
Mate, the English language is littered with terms that have descended from slurs, insults, mistaken pronunciation of other languages etc.
No point changing them now, as was said, it'd only confuse people
-
I have a kelpie, a staghound/greyhound cross and what's known in Australia as a "Bitza" i.e. Bits of this and bits of that
We use them all for stockwork. Just a thought; Did the Romans use dogs for stockwork?
-
When was the first bicycle invented, out of interest? As well, when was the first Tour De France? This hypothetical topic is a perfect example of some of the...interesting...threads we have covered lol
-
That's something i didn't think of. I have always liked Alexius Comnenus because of the attempted rebuilding of his Empire he achieved after the defeat at Manzikert, with the limited manpower he had it was impressive that he regained a lot of Anatolia from the Seljuk Turks. Where were the Pechenegs though? Were they one of the tribes in or near the Balkans?
-
Thanks for that Cyrus
Now i can tell my friend where it's from
-
G'day everyone
The century just gone and the century just opened have both been scored by war and natural or man-made disasters-the last century some of the worst warfare ever. Have there been any generals, presidents, prime ministers or even lower that deserve the title of Magnus for their deeds? What about humanitarians or doctors or scientists? I value everyone's opinion in the subject, as always
-
Yes, i have heard this all too often.
I have a picture in a book of a vase from ancient rome that depicts a roman (obviously a rich and upperclass citizen) vomiting, with his head being held by his servant. I daresay it comes from wishing to flaunt their riches, as i doubt any of the lower class proletarii had vomitoriums
Rome probably had the largest amount of epicureans in one empire.
-
I'll have to keep an eye open for that, i have a very high opinion of John Julius Norwich
-
I'd have to agree, i felt like i was hitting my head up against a brick wall in the good old days in the Caesar vs Alexander threads
-
<<<<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?.
Don't get me started on that subject Segestan
-
I mean that because they were seen as heretics these people were destined to be treated as inferior or misguided by the romans of this time - if some powerful nation started treating you as an inferior for your beliefs, i'm sure you wouldn't take it well, and these peoples certainly didn't take it lying down for long. At any rate, if you weren't christian at this time, you were at somewhat of a disadvantage, although as you said, much of the military were not devout christians or even christians at all.
-
That's very interesting. I've seen many examples of how much the roman soldiery feared the wrath of the gods and saw certain signs as bad or good omens. I understand that Caesar himself did not attack somewhere because of a large black bird witnessed by soldiers over them. As well, at Pharsalus, Pompey's pre-battle sacrifices took place after the sacrificial sheep escaped and were recaptured - a bad omen if ever there was one for Pompey's soldiers
Roman religion has always remained a neglected region for me- it fascinates me how roman generals could use it to their advantage
-
This will be really useful-the amount of times i've come across latin quotes and wanted a proper translation but couldn't get one are innumerable.
Speaking of which, a good friend of mine sent me this excerpt of something-
"Alme Sol nitido diem qui
promis et celas aliusque et idem
nasceris possis nihil Roma
visere maius."
What does it mean, and where is it from? He keeps on needling me for not knowing where it's from; I know i've heard it before!
-
Is this some sort of in-joke you had to be around at the foundation to understand
-
Your signature seems to hint at the person within, Spurius
-
It is part of the wider world. The Byzantine Empire was now pretty much besieged on all sides-The Seljuks to the east and south, the Normans in the West etc. I believe there was a tribe threatening the along the Danube which was attacking as well. All this misfortune would have played it's part in confusing the Byzantines-as well as draining their resources.
-
I understand that the back of a true roman citizen in the republic was inviolate- it could not be flogged, no matter what the circumstances. This is what caused such a stir with Caesar in the lead-up to his marching on Rome; a senator (can't remember his name) flogged one of the "citizens" in the colonies that Caesar had set up in italian Gaul. Caesar believed this to be a deliberate flouting of the law and a direct insult to his dignitas.
The 20th And 21st Century Magnus
in Historia in Universum
Posted
There was a chap recently who found a vaccine for Cervical Cancer, i think he deserves a Magnus title
What about Winston Churchill? I think he could be deserving of the title for the way he inspired Britons to not give an inch to the germans in WWII and his immense capacity for work despite his age.
As well, i've been quite an admirer of Franklin Roosevelt since i watched Pearl Harbour:)
Seriously, he really brought AMerica out of the Great Depression i think, and as well as his inspirational recovery from that disease that i can never recall what the name is, he agreed with our PM of the time, John Curtin, to protect Australia from the japanese when most of our soldiers were in North Africa or P.O.W's after the bungling at Singapore. But then i'm not well versed in American history, so i'll leave the judging of Franklin to others who are.
By the way, my grandfather fought the Germans at El Alamein, and later on after Normandy. He survived and made it home, but what he saw and told me persuades me that Hitler deserves no title of greatness whatsoever, and that is not prejudice, that is an opinion contrived from a primary source of the war.