Spurius
-
Posts
211 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Static Pages
News
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Spurius
-
-
British actors I really like, and had kick butt roles
Ahh,
Edward Fox and as The Jackal he'd wipe out anyone.
(Kind of that "Batman beats anybody with planning" thing...
) -
So wait, if you took Patrick Stewart from the Dune era and pit him against Liam Neeson from the Krull era, who would win?
hmm..would either of them have the Skeksis (from Dark Crystal ) or the Peking Homunculus (Dr Who , Talons of Weng Chiang ) for backup?
this is a serious post isnt it?
Well you can get a feel for who would win by watching "Excalibur." Stewart get his daughter married off to Arthur, securing the doom of the kingdom, Neeson gets his butt kicked by Lancelot and throat cut by Mordred and Morganna.
Hey, that's about even...
-
May I suggest a few things?
1) There should be a rule, that the mods enforce, that no one can post " I have _____ on my ignore list " or "I'm going to put you on my ignore button."
2) If you do bring back the old "+ -" reputations, I suggest a public listing to show who gave who a "+" or "-" as well as who is ignoring whom.
No I don't think that this suggestion contradicts the first. The first suggestion is to keep a grudge bearing member from pulling a Cato and trying and get another member to leave ("I believe that UNRV will not be safe until Spartacus is completely ignored." Fond memories of that fiasco, not.)
The second suggestion gives members a tool to see if some other members they like/respect also have a problem with the obnoxious poster.
I suppose you could limit viewing the ignore rankings according to rank, but that would be self-defeating.
Also, the ability to give rep. points would be limited by rank the same as ignore, right?
Finally, if you do have a public listing of ignores, a member should not be able to see who is ignoring them...just how many have used the function against them.
And I think you should be able to ignore Patricians
-
Hmmm.
Father's side, old line American mutt (family traced back to 1694 entry in tithing ledgers in Mass.), with all kinds of northern European mashed together.
Mother's side, Russian from Pyatigorsk. (She didn't go home after WWII)
But, due to my age group and regional influences here in the states, ethnicity didn't matter as much as skin color when I was growing up. In that respect, I'm a bit on the pale side but tan up nicely in the summer.
-
My two for this day:
"While there's life, there's hope. "
- Cicero, Ad Atticum
" Hope is a waking dream. "
-Aristotle
(No, really...think about it)
-
The difference to me seems to be in the doctrine of second death versus hell. The second death is just that, dead with no ressurection...gone for eternity. Hell is eternal torment, still around but tormented.
So which is it, death or eternal torment for sinners?
-
In US Civil War they still used the line in open field? I think the prussian-austrian war of 1866 was the first one in which they fired from ground position.
When equipment permitted, there were rifle pits and dug in positions. Trouble was, a lot of the rifles in the ACW were muzzle loaders. Those units with repeaters or bolt action weapons used the prone position.
-
Three items? Well you give me money so I can skip the obvious clothing (usually wear shorts an a t-shirt if in winter). Hmmm:
Two book off my shelf and a blue case as I kiss my wife and son bye.
1) Oldest copy I have of the "Joy of Cooking" (it has complete instructions from skinning onward.)
2) "Practical Engineering"- just have to introduce some math concepts.
3) The blue case of first aid, travel medication and pain killers.
Yeah, that's it.
-
Well, as far as I know, no surviving or translated ancient texts actually have details on how the manouvers actually were carried out. It is all implied, so you have to make a judgement call on what you believe is possible. I, of course, could be wrong about the paudacity of primary or secondary sources.
Now then, here is my take on the subject:
1) Battles were fluid and most did have ebb and flows where close combat was not continuous up and down the line. In fact, where it was recorded as being nearly continuous by historians, there were always remarks about great numbers of casualties on both sides. This makes me believe that most replacement of ranks occured during these lulls.
2) If it were necessary to replace while fighting, maybe this passage under the "Evolutions" chapter by Vegetius could shed some light:
... They should learn to dress in a straight line and to keep an equal and just distance between man and man. They must then be ordered to double the rank, which they must perform very quickly, and instantly cover their file leaders. In the next place, they are to double again and form four deep. And then the triangle or, as it is commonly called, the wedge, a disposition found very serviceable in action. They must be taught to form the circle or orb; for well-disciplined troops, after being broken by the enemy, have thrown themselves into this position and have thereby prevented the total rout of the army....
Especially with the "orb", this passage implies that these formation frontage changes are expected to be made while in combat. So here is my supposition on how it could work-
The legion is fighting normally with a double frontage. The enemy is not withdrawing either by weight of numbers or stubborness. The command to double frontage again comes down and the fresh legionaires doing the extra doubling. Then the tired and wounded ones could move back into the rear leaving the original double frontage formation intact. The good pilum throwers and sharp swordsmen could create enough of a space to carry this out with minimal problems, but even without them the evolution should be close to instinctive.
Also, if the fighting was indeed too intense for replacement even with a double-double frontage...you get the high casualties. Of course, unless the opposition are disciplined troops, the enemy is suffering even higher rates of loss. They are probably pressed too close to use their weapons effectively.
Again, just my take on the issue...I haven't really put any deep thought into this.
Cheers!
-
In my humble opinion:
The killing zone of ancient and early medieval war was fairly small and personal. If you were 20 feet from the fight, and didn't have any spears or arrows, you didn't affect the fight, except by your butt there. Don't run and maybe you won't have to fight if the lines hold and the enemy breaks.
Once in the killing zone, though, you couldn't sham fight. That person across from you will see to that by either knocking you down or killing you. So the real test is if a formation holds. If the men melt out position, well that's that.
So I don't think not wanting to kill another human was as big of a problem as it is now.
Sidenote: My Dad was a paratrooper in WWII. He killed men at range and even one by hand in a night patrol encounter. He also served on firing squads after the war during occupation. Get up, eat breakfast, go out shoot someone, drive somewhere else, shoot one or two more, then back to barracks, dinner and bed. He said that the firing squads were harder for him to think about than what he did in combat. He got out of those as fast as possible. Just an insight into one man's mind.
-
I'd like to add some information here, it's available at the Digital Attic 2.0. This bit is from "The Military Affairs of Ancient Rome & Roman Art of War in Caesar's Time " by Lt. Col. S.G. Brady.
"THE BATTLE
"After the signal to advance had been given by the bugles (signa inferre), the first line of the three moved forward with even step (certo gradu) until five or six hundred feet from the enemy. Then the bugles blew the signal to attack. The men advanced at double time (concursu), the first two ranks with javelins poised in their right hands (pilis infestis). When within range, these two ranks delivered their deadly volley. The next three ranks hurled their javelins over the heads of those in front. Then as the enemy was met, there followed a series of hand-to-hand individual conflicts, sword duels, repeated again and again since whenever a front-rank man fell, he was pulled back and the man behind replaced him. Men exhausted or slightly wounded would retire and be relieved by fresh men. The five rear ranks then took the place of these fallen or exhausted men, or perhaps increased the number of the attacking troops.
"When the first line as a whole had done its best and become weakened and exhausted by losses, it gave way to the relief of fresh men from the second line who, passing through it gradually, pressed forward one by one, or in single file, and worked their way into the fight in the same way. Meanwhile the tired men of the original first line, when sufficiently rested, reformed and re-entered the fight. This continued until all men of the first and second lines had been engaged. This does not presuppose an actual withdrawal of the first line, but rather a merging, a blending or a coalescing of both lines.
"Thus the enemy was given no rest and was continually opposed by fresh troops until, exhausted and demoralized, he yielded to repeated attacks. Sometimes the onset of the first ranks was sufficient to put the enemy to flight. For this reason the, best marksmen with the pila and the best swordsmen were put in the forward positions. The standard-bearers were not in the front ranks, but were kept behind the good men of at least the first two ranks who were perhaps called "antesignani". (emphasis mine- Spurius)
"There was at times a natural tendency to close in, probably from the right, the exposed flank (latus apertum) to the left, and this necessitated commands to open ranks and extend intervals (laxare manipulos). For this and other reasons the first cohort on the right of the line had the best men in the whole legion. But the readiness and steadiness of all troops, officers and men, in sudden emergencies showed the excellent tactical training they had received. Battles were won by these persistent attacks, and the Gauls, once defeated, suffered heavy casualties, being mostly cut down or captured and sold as slaves. "
The same place makes comparasions between FIELD ARTILLERY and HEAVY MACHINE GUNS correctly or incorrectly.
The Attic also has some Vegetius there too.
-
...
I thought it was funny, don't know if I'd go outside with it though! I was partial to "Ides, shmides".
Have that in a good sans serif script, add in some bloody knife wound rips...voila.
-
(very slow load there)
It kind of confirms that as long as you have had humans, they've gone out an directly impacted their environment. No judgement call on good or bad...just took over the situation rather rapidly.
Ever read "Something New Under the Sun", by (I believe) McNeil? Good overview book on climate history esp the 20th century.
-
This is a most interesting and learned discussion, may I interject that the female lactatory glands which are an object of male fascination ( and appreciation) are such a powerful amatory symbol as they mimic the well rounded female buttock . Might it therefore be that as the invagination is topmost we are seeing a symbol of the breast rather than the posterior? Or perhaps Pranzarone doesnt get out much.
I am happy to acknowledge either as paramount.
I can't lay my finger on a link, but I do remember back in an old Sociology course we went over a survey on attractiveness (facial symetry, proprtions, etc) and there was a section on sexually attractive characteristics. One thing across cultures (including ones where bare female breasts were common) was that males were attracted to the well formed firm female buttock. That and 20-something-year-old women. Take that as you will :wub:
Cute, guys...next thing you guys will say, I guess, is that you want to be linguists, too? ^_^Perhaps we do, with a certain cunning ....
-
But you gotta watch out for those handkerchiefs...or ending up one :angel:
-
I noticed that we were lacking a general view of the races, so here is - extended from my first posting of it here.
The Chariot Races: an overview
Horsepower
The team of horses was called the auriga (aurigae). In translations and usage, the term is also refers to the driver and the driver/team as a unit. The best or swiftest horse was called funalis. Its position on the auriga was always the outside, to lead the other horses while covering the most ground. The team strategy was to array the other houses to best effect in support of the funalis. As with many other entertainments, at a certain base level, it mimicked a virtue of Roman society: The best use of people was to be arrayed as a good auriga in support of their patron.
The race teams consisted of two, three, four or more horses. A two-horse team was called a biga, a three-horse a triga and a four-horse team was a quadriga. The quadriga was rigged with the center two horses yoked and the outer horses held by trace. Control of these outer horses was paramount for speed. With large teams, the inside horse became important in that the animal had to hold the inside line to keep the chariot from crashing on curves. There were larger teams, with as many as ten horses, but they were very rarely used and mostly as a showcase of drivers skill rather than speed. Imagine the skill and strength involved in holding as many as six horses by trace.
Chariots and their Drivers
Roman chariots were always built for speed. Given the terrain and relative late organization compared to other civilizations, early Rome did not adopt the chariot as a weapon of war. There was no large platform for secure footing, just enough room for the driver to stand. No provision made for a second rider to help with the turns or hurl weaponry. There were almost no side railings or even side walls. The wheels were as light as possible and would have shattered on an overland journey. The racing chariot owed little to its weapon of war precursor.
The average charioteer had a relatively short career before injury or death ended it. Pile-ups near or on the meta (metae) were common (see track configuration below). The Roman style of racing had driver standing upright and slightly forward in the chariot, wearing a belted tunic in the colors of his team (more on that below) and a light helmet. The Greek style had the rider stand higher and straighter. The Roman driver looped the reins over his arm for a firmer grip on the traces in the corners, unlike the Greek style where the reins were gripped just in the hand. That meant if anything happened that caused a spill, the Roman driver could be dragged by his team. Hence a curved knife was worn in the belt to cut the reins if necessary.
The public adored the top drivers. They were quite literally comparable to modern day sports stars
-
Hmmm, I think I'll put down two events/actions that would have great history changing potential.
First the Roman: Go back and convince Sulla not to spare the divine Julius. Why? To see who might have ended up as the strong man to initiate the Roman Empire....or would the empire never have gotten off the ground and Rome never reach its heights of power? A collapse into endless civil wars and then what would modern europe and its history have been like?
Other history: Convince Henry the Navigator (Dom Henrique) of Portugal not to have pursued exploration. Would major focus have stayed on rounding Africa, or would there have been a Portuguese dominated new world and the treasure that made Spain into a powerhouse instead proping up Portugal and what difference that would have made to the west.
-
Oldest Photos I could find with a minimum of effort
and
-
Got it, and quick response there....
-
Maybe I spoke too soon....
Go to this thread here.
Note the thread starter and look again on the second page.
thealphafemale has a zero post count, even with the two posts here. Still listed as a member, not Damnatio. Is this a problem? Or just a quibble? The member page has a four post history but the display reads 0.
I think I've seen another like this, but I can't remember the name.
"Bubble, bubble....toil and trouble....."
Reason for edit: Damn-atio spelling
-
"N-a-a-a-a-ahhh, n-a-a-ahhh, naaa-a-a-h....n-a-aa*" was the goat's only comment.
* Translation- "At least I get foreplay in the morning now."
:wub:
-
Transit is go....all is nominal...5x5.
Very smooth gentlemen.
-
Age:43
Gender:Male
Occupation:Analyst in treasurer office
Creating a more violent society? Most definitely. The extent to which it is, however, is open to question. A Chicken/Egg paradox.
Violent media, by all clinical accounts I've read, adds to the agressive tendency in all subjects to a greater or lesser amount. But, this media did not rise in a vaccum. Society had to have wanted it, else there would have been no reason (read money) for so many media representations.
Did media create this need, much like like advertisement agencies creat need for luxury cars and vacations? By that I mean creating a want/need for something which the lack of has no negative effect on life. To a certain extent (like games), they do...but I think it is a gross overstatement of media power and influence calling it a primary cause. It greases the treads and makes it more likely, but daily home life, work environment, personal contacts, brain chemistry, childhood trauma, lonliness, guilt and many other things have more effect on wither a person is violent or not.
-
I'm sure there are plenty of people in here who watch the History Channel - Which documentaies have been your favorite?
Well, I find THC to be fun lightweight watching...esp. the Civil War Journal, Wild West Technology, and whenever Gunny is on... but I really have problems when they try to do in-depth history.
They have serious problems with many of their "facts." And I notice the farther they get from the U.S., the sketchier their facts get. It was quite a relief when they first started up, but now I genrally avoid it because they irritate me with some error or too large of a generalization in every other show.
That being said, and inspite of the problems, I also liked the series on the American Revolutionary War.
Thumbless Soldiers
in Gloria Exercitus - 'Glory of the Army'
Posted
Just like Neos Dionysos wrote: Who says there were employed as frontline fighting men?
Wanna shoot things thumbless? Here, use a ballista or scorpion.
Wanna swing a sword? The metal smiths can always use another warm body to carry blades or sharpen on the grindstone.
Wana aid your fellows? You can go ahead and scout and lay out the new campsite. You can also do latine, repair or cooking duty. Also ox traces and tame horses can be held without thumbs while driving a cart or leading a mule.
And if you ever have to swing a sword in an emergency, an underhand grip and thrust while balancing a shield against your other arm can keep you alive until help comes.