Sextus Roscius
-
Posts
329 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Static Pages
News
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Sextus Roscius
-
-
"...if they tried to resist the auxiliaries they were mown down by the swords and javelins of the legionaries, and, if they turned toward the latter, by the claymores and spears of the auxiliaries."
Tacitus, The Annals, 12, 35.3.
Perhaps the Claymore does have this long a history as we traditionaly know it. The Vikings had them, so I wouldn't put it beyond. Perhaps people from germania and northern braitannia moved into the roman areas at some point and brought with them. Or it could be refering to sabres, but I'm in doubt as to that this was different from the ones we know today becuase its unlikely, but possible, that a word would change so much over a period of time.
The vikings were relitively close to the romans time wise and since the vikings had them, I'm sure the roman definition must have been the same. Auxiliaries probley brought with them thier culture and military knowledge upon moving into the roman empire or being conquered by it. I'm sure the romans could see the advantage of a large, slashing, hacking, and bashing sword wielding by a ripped german in their forces. So It might be the same thing.
-
I live in the home of the most recent NCAA Team, doesn't matter much to me but might to some, Chapel Hill, the entire town revolves around the college UNC. Its in the great state of North Carolina in the US of A (Unified Sporks of Austria) or as better known (but not officialy named) The United States of America. I like it were I live but its too hot, the weather can never be just right (unlike the 3rd bowl of poorage).
-
Why was the phalanx so imobile?The English used a kinda phalanx during the civil war and they were anything but imobile.The English used Pikemen and they were arranged in units of a couple of hundred men,they would march in line formation or form squares if cavalry were about,it only takes a couple of seconds to get into square formation and then no one can get at your backs.Infact the english were using these tactics at the time of the red coats too,a Brown Bess musket with a 3ft bayonet on the end is a kinda spear i suppose.All of the Army's parade groud marching today is based on the pikemen's drills from the civil war.
So why were the Greek phalanx's so slow and cumbersome,as i understand it they only used the one tactic,which is to form a long line at the front and wait for the cavalry to get round the enemy and push them onto your sarissa's.I may be wrong though
A point well made, but the greeks had to compensate for their sheilds, which were much different. The English Pikeman didn't have as standardized equipment and often didn't fight with sheilds. The formation without sheilds would have allowed for slight changes in angles and direction of the phalanx formation without disrupting the overal defenses. Whereas the greek form of the phalanx used sheilds, which had to be kept in a certain overlaping wall (or simply held depending on era) which they depended on for defense becuase they didn't have the same body armor as the English Pike man later on. So when atempting to change direction of the phalanx these sheilds would have to be lifted up, there by lowering the defensive. They could not do this in battler becuase a opening in the sheild wall would break defenses which were nessacary becuase of the lesser body armor of the standard greek hoplite.
All said and done the general would be weary to change position of the phalanx on the line when the formation was ready and marching towards the oponent (in this case roman) that could use any disruption in the order to its advantage with a deadly barrage of pilum and then a charge with the advantage of the broken phalanx. The phalanx would only function effectively against a roman oponent who had no opertunity to use its pilum with which to break up the tight packed formation. This means that the calvary would have to be used in order to keep the romans from their deadly charge, to effectively use the hammer and anvil strategy. This meant that the greek infentry had to be close enough to their roman oponents to have effect while not being damaged by pilum or other projectiles. Hence they added sheilds with which to defend against these projectiles creating the imobility of the phalanx.
-
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.
While true that Caesar might have signed the death warrant for the empire, as F.C. said, for a admistration such as the senate to manage, or even counquer a empire so large, it would have to alter its function and format in ways unseen by humans as they are means to be. I feel that the empire was doomed to a dictatorship all along once the marian reforms had taken place, which put the favor of the soldiers not in the senate, but in the generals who payed them. This ultimatly took power away from the government. As we all know, when the army is more powerful than the politicians than both are doomed.
-
I beleive it was the wedge formation that was used to break enemy formations that couldn't be broken by standard means, correct me I'f I'm wrong.
-
And anyways, does anyone know roughly how many times decimation has been used?
Sorry, I don't have a estimate. I feel sorry for any slave subjected to be a witness, the only way they were allowed to obtain information was through some of these methods.
-
The Scottish 'Schiltrom' of the 13th - 15th centuries was the same, a reworking of the Phalanx. Perhaps the English technique (during the 100 years war) of heavily armoured, dismounted men at arms supported by missile fire weakening the enemy prior to impact could be interpreted as a re-working of the legion? Just a thought...
Point well take, but it depends on what stage of Roman warfare you refer to. Durring the Late-Republic to Early-Imperial Period soildeirs were not very "heavily armoured" in the sense of full body armor with sheild and 100+ pounds of metal (I beleive legionary gear at that time whiegh in at 80kg or so) but if you refer to the troops of the late-imperial age we see much more heavily armoured troops with chain mail and some times plates over that (weighing in significantly higher than the "metal strip" armour of the early-imperial period) then there might be some connection.
The idea of the british soldiers using similar tactics to that of their roman counter parts is that even durring the major transition from roman to mideivel many roman things were kept rather than destroyed. Also, some theories suggest that instead of all citizens pulling out of the island along with the soldiers, they stayed and moved into what is modern day whales and southern britian. This would explain the resemblance of british tactics after the western empire's fall and into the hundred years war. Perhaps the British relized that this formation/tactic was put to good use against the greeks and their celtic brothers (by roman definition) and relized that the same tactics could be adopted to defeat the scottish schiltrom formation as well as french formations in the hundred years war. Good connection but I beleive we have strayed off topic.
-
Note that the Flavian Amphitheater is also the Colisseum, just different names, the Colisseum was adopted becuase of a collosal statue of Nero that stood there becuase the Flavian Amphitheater was built on the remnants of Nero's Golden House. I do agree that the mock naval battles would have been interesting, but they were later removed in order to make the 2 story network of tunnels we see underneath it today.
But your choice, not mine.
-
The chi-rho symbol is the greek sign for Christ which is the first two letters of Christ in Greek. Yes, I do beleive that was the battle constantine saw the Chi-Rho in the sky
-
well I say, before they get out of slavery, they have to move up the ranks of slavery, maybe even until you made twenty posts you were a freedman! lol, just a thought.
-
In the back of my mind, I've always thought that perhaps the circus would be more interesting than the gladatorial games, it was the equivelent to nas car racing today.
High speed vehicles hurtling down tracks pulled by horses, practacly fliping off at every turn. The countrers slowly turning and the roar of the crowd. A gladatorial arena in its own right, race well, or die trying. I think it must have been more thrilling than the simple gladiator fights. The gladiator on gladiator fights were one on one or multiple on multiple, while interesting at first, it must have gotten dull after a while. But the races never did, never the same or monotone, but thundering wheels and the walls of rome would echo from the noise.
There was another part of the circus as well, some times dramatic battle recreations were put on before the building of the flavian amphitheater, there is even evidence that elephants were brought in from africa and used to recreate battle's with hannibal, this must have been very thrilling.
Truely the arena was gruesome and jovial at the same time, but was the circus more so? your thoughts.
-
While a great improvement for the archaeological comunity, I find it a dispointment becuase when I dabble in that field (as I would sort of like to do at one point or another) it won't be the same, classic, childhood fantasy type thing that I had dreamed of doing.
Oh well
-
Ave!
Orestas and by extension his ineffectual, puppet Emperor son Romulus Augustus, in my opinion are the worst politicians and generals. A dubious distinction indeed, however, by temporal positioning (474-476 AD)they are clearly prime candiadates for the "Worst Failure Of All Time" award. To be the Roman Emperor to yield to Odacer, a vile German, to be the General to cede the Western Empire to these offensive barbarians, to be ruler at this time and fail to forestall the fall, must, to me, qualify for worst Roman leader ever. Pax
Going well on your way to freedom Pax? Anyways, I must agree with you, they were clearly a bit of the legions of thigns that caused the empire to collapse. Ironic is it not that "Romulus" was the first Roman to rule rome (by legend) and that "agustus" was the first empereor that the last emperoer would bare the same name as those two. Purpose, or concidence?
-
personaly, I think the tetrarchy abolished the major sense of unity in the mediteranian, the whole "a huge bunch of people united under one flag" really I beleive helped keep the new foriegn provinces in the east side with the old, traditional west becuase quite simply, they had to get along.
But with the tetrarchy they no longer had to and this lead to the seperation of the Ideas. While the west kept its anti-barbarian ideas, the kept fighting and losing becuase they no longer had the support they needed from the eastern provinces. While the eastern provinces didn't think they needed the west any more and let it burn, which in the end was a bad thing for the econemy, not to mention they kept bribing the barbarians off like cowards becuase they didn't want to get involed.
All said, I beleive the tetrarchy was a horrible move that helped lead to the empire's downfall.
-
what about the equestrians viggen?
-
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm............ for this one, from the things brought up on my own topic, I have concluded that this was the worst touture/exectution technique.
I give the member Trajen full credit to this:
The offender's penis would be wound with wire, and he would then have to drink water until he died (presumably from a burst bladder).
And I think that would be horribly pain full, not to mention messy.
-
"I like it too, but some devout Christians might reasonably object to discussing Christianity in a Temple to Jupiter. I guess we'll see."-Ursus
In response to this, perhaps the name should be changed to "the college of augurs" or "office of the pontifex maximus" just a though...
Also, I think the ethics forum should be "study of roman life" how ever that is said in latin,becuase my latin is mediocere at best, Being in 8th grade has only given me 2 years.
P.S. sorry for my unusualy quoting style.
-
We crowed around boxing screaming at the top of our lungs to "kill em", a vocal version of the thumb down.
Actually, I beleive it was the reverse in Roman society, thumbs down meant to spare the man's life and vice versa.
But I do agree that we are a tad too violent, not to mention self contradictory, in america anyways. We say in school, violence is never the answer, then they teach us about the wars that solved all america's problems.
-
I would want to be the Cato the stone-cold hard@** son of a (female dog) centurion who made life a living hell for new Roman recruits before the Dacian War. Sorry for the profanity, but ever since I watched the History Channel's Special Segment, Rome Week, they made Cato the Centurion(who was a real guy) seem like a modern day drill sergeant in the Marines which is probably a true description of centurions back then. Also, I like to states the a squad of recruits were trained the same way in almost every aspect of modern day squads.
Quite hilarious, :stupid:
Anyways, these are all interesting, I'm surprised by how many people this topic has appealed to. But I still want to remain the rich merchant/banker living the high life in Rome without much to do, just time to read and write philosophy, mingle with those lower than me and perhaps take up with a patron at a brotherel, but my views are my own. I find them all fascinating, people's views on life.
-
I chose Sextus Rocius becuase he was one of the few Romans acused of patricide. It was in his case that the famous Marcus Tullius Cicero made his big day-view as a advocate in a valiant defence that left the prosecution in shambles. It was this that lead to Cicero's increidible success and the saving of a man from a very violent death.
As you might tell, I am a great fan of Cicero and greatly admire him. But his name means "chickpea" and that doesn't fit me so I chose Sextus Rocius becuase he marks something great.
How much we are like that ugly beast, the MONKEY! -Cicero
-
I ranked as Trajan
You are quite fortunate to rank as the emperor Trajan, possibly the greatest of Roman emperors. You have relentlessly expanded the empire and even humbled the mighty Parthian empire. Loved by all, vastly larger than life, you are the model for all future emperors. It is hard to find a bad thing to say about you. HAIL CAESAR!
Trajan
79%
Tiberius
71%
Marcus Aurelius
68%
Antoninus Pius
61%
Vespasian
61%
Domitian
57%
Augustus
54%
Nerva
50%
Claudius
39%
Hadrian
39%
Vitellius
32%
Nero
21%
Caligula
14%
Commodus
7%
-
Agreed, the legionary was entirely prepared to counter a force of hoplites.
Considering greek forces where the most obvious enemy becuase they ocupied Italian soil before Rome became the dominate force of Italy. Charthage also used phalanx in some instances and they were another early enemy.
Perhaps this is oart of why Roman soldiers later could not as easily counter the formations of germanic and gualic invaders?
Also, it is clear that Alexander was a great strategist, and that is the arguement made by many alexanderphiles but it is clear that the Roman's possesed superior anti-phalanx technology (most notably the pilum) and could, even if out meanuveured, destroy a phlanx if they used the tactics correctly.
-
what about some other non-punic war battles. For example, Caesar's blockade of Pompey at brundisium was rather interesting, it failed, but some very ingenious techniques were used.
Also, I voted other, becuase we all know that Teutoburg Forest is with out a doubt the single greatest roman victory of all time!
And also, the single great Roman general ever to walk this earth is Varius, who with a brilliant move (in complete shock to the enemy) marched his men right into the trap, and then (as they never suspected and were taken agasp by) retreated effectively loosing thousands of troops needed for the battle in germania.
Varius! Give me my legions back!
-
My state (North Carolina) is all the way tied with Florida, of all places to be tied with, its Florida! OH WELL... I still am fine living in the upper-middle class range and I plan on going to college in england to avoid the impending doom the united states faces...oh well. anyways, ouch, 51 has gotta hurt.
Changing Forum Titles
in Renuntiatio et Consilium Comitiorum
Posted
Perhaps new names for the aercheological (spelling, sorry) forums would be nice, though I'm at a lose of words to be used.