Sextus Roscius
-
Posts
329 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Static Pages
News
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Sextus Roscius
-
-
You're a UNC alumni. Nice to meet you, but back to the subject.
Virgil, when I said that the republic was over once Caesar crossed the rubicon, I meant that the republic was no longer the effective controling force. After that caesar and the empoers had to real power, the senate was no longer the deciding force. The empoers only had to maintain the senate to keep a sense of "freedom" in the public. Also the senate suggested things but the Empoer didn't have to do them. That is what I meant, rather than that there wasn't any Senate at all.
-
the republic was over when Caesar crossed the rubicon. There was not going to be more senators once that happened. Octavian played no role in whether or not there was going to be a series of Empoeres
-
Octavian would not have risen to be the same empeorer that he was if it had not been for caesars will. Infact, he wouldn't be much without caesar considering he was adopted heir rather than blood line. Perhaps at the end of the civil war then he would have still turned out on top but it is more likely that Antony would have become Empoerer. There is no telling what would've happened then. Perhaps for the better if Antony left Octavian as his heir and Octavian in turn left control of the Empire to germanicus rather than the obviously faulted Tiberius.
But my answer remains the same. Octavian would not have been considered one fo the best Empoeres in history if he hadn't succeded Caesar to power. If Caesar hadn't left Octavian in his will in the first place then perhaps he would not have seemed as important and been more disregaurded. Ceasar's legions where very loyal to Caesar but once Caesar died they split apart to the different combatants. Perhaps some of Caesar's soldiers wouldn't have gone to Octavian had Caesar not designated him. There must have been some loyalty left to the legions.
-
Interesting, I didn't know that Haloween was of pagan origin. Thank you for the information, I'll have to look into it now. Good to know that the christians didn't change all the holidays. Do you know any good places to start on the subject?
I'm not as well taught in Roman Holidays as I am in other areas. It would be most helpful. Once again, thanks. Now to google....
-
I don't believe that Roman soceity and culture had any more to do with the mental state of the average person compared to the actual conditions they were in personaly.
Like Primus Pilus said, the average Roman had a lot less knowledge about what was going on in the world considering that they didn't have T.V., radio, or the internet, they had to rely on source of mouth for most of their information. Only the Nobility, and even not all of them, would have been knowning what was going on world wide. However, even these patricians could only get information of something a day to several weeks after it had already happened becuase everything had transported by boat or road. Both where incredibly lengthy depending on how far away the information source was.
I think that most people would've not been affected by the ovious violence in roman culture becuase quite simply they grew up in it which would've made them acustom to violence or hate. Wheras now adays, parents are constantly sheilding their child from the "horrors" of soceity which can be the cause of kids and adults alike being so flabergasted by things to day which really aren't that bad.
There are obvious excpetions such as Caligula, but who can blaim him. I would have gone insane too if I was him. But more likely killed by tiberius....
All said I think there was no more or less pychopathes and lunatics than there are today because the culture they were in was the same through their entire life.
-
I felt like creating this topic after reading another one which is the reverse of this topic. I wanted to figure out who was the worst general in Roman history and what other people thought about the subject. I thought this would be a better result than the normal questions asking about who the best was.
Anyways, in my opinion the worst general of the Romans was (out of the major ones) Hardian, becuase he ultimately signed Romes death wish be sealing off the frontiers. The constantly expanding frontier was vital becuase new conquests provided slaves and wealth for the empire which we needed to keep things being built and to maintain the mass infastructure of the Roman Empire.
Though I do see why he sealed off the frontiers, I think he sorta took the sore losers way out by saying "well, I give up, fine, we'll just stay right here!" instead of saying "Oh ya, well your mom is smelly too! Come over here and say that to my face! Thats it I'm a coming over" I know this isn't at all acurate but I sorta think that is how the Empire started being once Hadrian sealed off the Frontiers.
-
Oh, I took in incorrectly, my apologizes. I'm still not sure if that had anything to do with it, i'm sure Pilus would know but as for now I'll try to look into it.
-
While I'm not entirely sure, I beleive that there wasn't any specification between the signifer and his armor depending on the century he represented.
That wouldn't make too much sense and would end up being costly and silly becuase if you were the 59th or 60th signifer, you would be wearing the equivent to the a large resturant sink filled with metal dishes, which would be too hard to wear or to even stand with. Wheras the signifer of the first century would have 1 or no discs what so ever and would be left fighting with chian mail which wouldn't be sufficent protection.
So it is most likely that the discs on armor had little or nothing to do with the century's place in the legion. They were just their for protection and to make the enemy scared since most of the discs found on armor are faces...
-
I'm glad they finaly took up the challenge and did it. I remember watching a show when I was about 7 or 8 years old that spent part of it talking about the mysterious shafts and their purposes. I've always had it stored in the back of my mind wondering what WAS up there. Thanks, I wouldn't have found out most likely had you not told us.
-
Interesting view on life Violentilla. Personaly working in a brotherel doesn't sound to fun to me but what ever suits you. I'm glad to know at least one person followed along my path with being a rich merchant of a not incredible prominate stature.
-
Your standing on white vs black racism is questionable but interesting, but I don't want to start anything.
I believe that in a way, it made sense for the Romans to see the celtics a inferior. They were in my mind at that point inferior and unproductive. Wheras the Romans made huge architectual triumphs, couquered most of the known world, and had the most or among the top complex system of life with tons of different standing, classes, and means to get where you wanted. The barbarians at the time formed no mass organized armies, lived in smelly hovels, and were massly illiterate.
It makes sense that the Romans viewed them selves as superior, while they looked up to the greeks as people with great liturature and culture and worthy of admiring. They judged by cultural sophistication and power.
Its strange but I remember a book I read with a story in it. The story was about a fight between students at a Roman school between who was better, the Greeks or the Romans. Part of it went
"The romans build useful things!" and it showed a picture of a Roman toilet. Then it showed the Greek kid going "But! The greeks make beautiful things" and it showed a sceen from a greek tragedy. I laughed at it but I guess it has some meaning to it.
-
Agreed, had agustus been smart he would've placed germanicus as his heir, personaly i think i would've gone along the same lines as Ursus and bribed the preatorians to murder tiberius and assume position on the throne. Tiberious would have been a easy target anyways, considering how he was constantly doing stupid things, and I won't go any further but to say Island Villa. Anyways, you could probobley take control of the empire with out tiberius even noticing it happened (i'm exagerating but oh well).
Well, I also wouldn't have gone along with being sent to asia minor and I would've kept better control of Caligula, not to mention have the older sons of Germanicus become heir, too bad they were killed off by Tiberius. Only poor little boots left to run a empire that he couldn't.....
-
while i'm not quite sure what you mean by differences.
Antony and Cicero both followed very different walks of life from different places, I find it hard to imagine them being much the same. Cicero was always very upright and was very keen on republican values while Antony, being a ceaserian, was fairly new age and was in the army making him most likely have a more militeristic view on life and how things work than Cicero who was a politician with no battlefield experiance.
So I'm just going of presumtion here and saying that they most likely weren't very alike.
-
When the ancients talked in terms of "Barbarians" it didn't invoke the negative connotation it does today. They simply meant foreigners.
Not exactly, you see the Romans did not call Greeks barbarians.
The greeks called every other people barbarian...
A interesting point you bring up, the greek word barbaros (I believe that is correct) meant anyone who didn't speak greek. Since anyone who didn't speak greek was basicaly saying giberish to them, it sounded no different than a dog barking or the song of a bird. Thus we get the idea that barbarian implies animal or primative.
So if you think about it, aren't we all barbarians to the greeks any ways (unless you speak anceint greek like one of my teachers lol). Sorry to digress.
Any ways, there wasn't much racism in roman soceity, however it is undoubtable that there was some, as in juveneal as some one mentioned.
-
A great list, my only problem is that I think sulla should be moved up a higher teir. He was a great general and one of the few awarded the grass crown (I thank tobias for that). I believe that he deserves a greater position than what he got.
-
A little bit I picked up which might suggest that my our idea is correct but it may not be for the time up to after this.
Command of the legion was usually given to a legatus legionis picked by the emperor from the senatorial class who generally had some previous military experience through service as a tribunus. In Egypt and from the the start of the third century also in other provinces the command was not entrusted to a senatorial legatus, but to a praefectus legionis, an acting commander drawn from the equestrian order.
This means that they probley did dash between the administrative capital and the legions. I'll let you know if I find more.
-
you strike a interesting question, one that I have no answer for and will most likely press myself to look into.
perhaps they simply stayed where they were more needed. A legate wouldn't have sat around at a border fort all day doing nothing besides running a camp. He would be where he was most needed, which in certain cases might be a fort.
they might have stayed at the administrative capitol most of the time near the proconsul incase they were needed imediatly or were called upon by some one higher ranking. Then when they were needed on the frontier or a legion was moving or going on a campaign, went with it. A general needed to have legates near by.
-
I'm a spellsword!
Aggressive, but with the brains to back it up: You are a Spellsword!
Score! You have a prestige class. A prestige class can only be taken after you
-
Magnus means simply great, not good or nice or any of those. Words do have different means to different people though.
In my mind anyone who can gather so many people to a insane cuase has to haave much skill and ability. I'm not saying that he did any thing "good" but I'm saying he did things that I doubt any of us have the ability to do; rehabilitated a destroyed nation into a powerhouse, rally the constantly warring departments of the military and government to his camp, and control almost all of western euorpe for a time.
I'm not trying to say that he achived "good" things but I'm trying to say that just becuase he didn't do "good" things doesn't mean he can't be great. Think past the horrors and think about whether you could've done what he did, not whether or not you would've done it. You might see where I'm coming from, if not. Then I respect your position.
I'll stop I guess before we get into a agruement here.
-
I rather like mine, its Lenw
-
Poli Caligae
-
Fun, but if your hurt badly, your hurt badly. No real path to health once you've lost a limb. Still would be fun, if I was in the army I would be a centurain or tribune. Not a front line soilder..........Then again, I'm sort of a wuss.
Any one else?
-
Einstien should have Magnus added to his name.
Many people will think wrongly of me for this, but Adolf Hitler.
Despite his inhumanitary treatment. He managed to do something that many of us who insult him and ridicule him daily lack the ability, determination, or ideas to do. Think about what he achieved, many bad things, but look at it deeper. He managed to rally an entire nation to his cause counquered more land in less than a year then the Romans could do in centuries and managed to hold almost the whole of western europe in his power, something that even the Romans never truely achomplished, in fact, no one had ever achomplished before. Look at it that way and you might see some light.
NOTE: I am not a facist or a Nazi, I'm just trying to say that we should look beyond prejudices against people for their beliefs and see how much effort and skill and time it takes for some one to do something of the magnituted they did.
-
Sounds fun, but not so much on the kicking, I'm not too good at that.
Alas, my heart lies with technology and other such things, I'm not so great at the things outside.
Worst Roman Punishment?
in Romana Humanitas
Posted
I wanted to get people's opinions on the worst Roman punishment of the anceint world. Any time period is fine but I thought I might learn something new out of this and might make some people feel sympathetic for the criminals today he heh....
Personaly, I think the worst Roman punishment was the punishment for patricide or killing your father. This was considered a act of ultimate evil durring the pagan ages or Rome. The punishment was devised by the Priests of Jupiter rather than the roman politicians. My file name is actually the name fo some one accused of this crime and also the case where Cicero made himself famous
The first thing that happened was that you were taken to the feild of Mars outside Rome. they would Then strip you of everything on you and have you put one foot on two pedestals placed a couple feet apart as to expose every part of your body. You were then wipped until there was no difference between flesh and blood on your body. The crowd was free to throw stones at you and about anything they wanted really.
After you were completely whipped they took your naked body and but you in a sack with a snake, a chicken and a dog. This was to simbolize the reverse of being born. Thus un-born since you had taken the life of the one that gave life to you, it was seen as fit punishment. After you were in the bag with the other animals they would sow the bag shut and then chuck it in the Tiber. How gruesome
I can only imagaine the poor person who had to do thins... :fish:
P.S. not sure why I put the fish thing but I thought it was rather funny at the time...