LEG X EQ

Strange, all the information i have (schopp) state that the Ligurians are Dinaric/Alpine, in the racial sense. Another thing that is strange, is how can the genoese be classified as South-Italians when SOUTH-Italian is a geocraphical term and Genoa and Liguria are undisputed Geocraphically NORTH-Italian?? Tuscany is central Italy, so how can one than claim that Liguria, which is north of Tuscany to be the south???

As for the text, you mention liberties. What exactly. The thing i find strange about the text is the reference to the women. Makes it seem that the women did male labour all year long, while De Mortillet describes it more as seasonal participation. As forThe shields, no the second quoted text has nothing to do with Diodorus, and isnt mentioned along with it. But in the text that was written in the history book refering to diodorus and the texts of de mortillet, all refer to gallic type shields. But, my logical guess is that. Like the Gallic Hordes, the Ligurian warriors were not uniformed in terms of helmets (did they use any?) and shields. The Ligurian tribes that lived on the cisalpine side, used the modified gallic type shield and the Transalpine Ligurians used the greek type shields. As for the rest, Long sleeved tunics, Cloaks and sheep wool pants are the norm of the ligurian warriors. In connection to the greeks, i only know about their trade, attacks on the colonies and the myth of the foundation of marseille, were the leader of the greeks marries a ligurian queen. ADDITION: This link, which has also passage from the text of Diodorus that i translated http://warflute.org/armies/ligurians_polemicus_army.html

Thanks, Its a pitty that all the information that the Etruscans collected and had were destroyed. We would all know more if they were still present. I found a text about the Taurinii and Salassii that was written from Diodorus Siculus ca. 50 BC in a german history book, passages were also used by Gabriel De Mortillet. (i translate the best i can) "The Salassi and Taurini inhabit a sour earth, and lead hard lifes. They carry powerful and heavy tools and weapons. The whole day they cut firewood, they work the earth, crack stones, because of the harshness of the land. They succeed to tame the nature with their consistancy of hard work, but they pick rare fruits with difficulty. They share the hard work with their women, who are accustomed to work with their men. They get their main food sources from Hunting and Fishing to compensate the poverty that comes from the fruits and land. Since, they live on incredible mounts (Alps) they are accustomed to face roughness, become strong and muscular in the body. In these places the women have the force and the authority of the men. -- In Battle they have an armor lighter than one of the Roman, they protect with an oblong shield, in compliance with the Gallic use, and the tunica is tightened by a belt and they wear pants made of sheep wool. They have one sword of medium length. They are strong and fearless not only for the war, but also in the comparisons of the difficulties that, in the life, introduce sourness.-- They take care of their Long hairs which they wash in the cold alpine streams." I would like to add: On the topic of their height, i couldnt find anything. I know the Ligurians were considered great warriors and employed by the syracuse(greeks) as mercanaries. But also there i didnt find anything on their height. All i found was this Ligurians: They wore long sleeved tunics with a broad leather belt and a cloak. These were probably fairly plain for the ordinary warriors but more varied for the richer ones. Their shields were Gallic style but chopped of at the top and bottom. Archaic conical helmets may have been worn. As for the Lepontii, i have read in numerous texts that they used the Etruscan Runes (alphabet)(the exact same runes, not a variant), is that true? Can any really confirm this?

Thanks, Celto-Ligures was also where i was leaning to. As for their height, how much was their average height? All i know about their appearance is that they were descriped as to be the first of the long haired nations and to have auburn coloured (red/brown) hairs. Strabo said: Many tribes occupy these mountains, all Celtic except the Ligurians; but while these Ligurians belong to a different people still they are similar to the Celts in their modes of life. Could it be that the Lepontii are also Ligurian or Celto-Liguria? The Lgures are the carrieres of the Terramare culture that took place in north-west Italy and south-east switzerland, The Ligures than migrated by boat all along the Rhone and its valley and from there, along the french riviera. So could it be that the lepontii are a ligure tribe?

@Rameses the Great No, i am deffinatly not out to get you or insult you. I have no intentions of doing this what so ever. It could be my German way that i take things to literally. But trust me, i am not getting personal over a PC, because its idiotic and cowerdice. So dont interpretate any emotions or intentions into my posts. Ancient History is delicate issue, especially on continental europe. So i take things a little to precise sometimes and it could seem that i am attacking you, but i am not. I just try to point out certain Historic facts in the best possible english i can come up with. so, no bad blood.

@Rameses TG I dont think the Gallic wars took that long, even if you count the Helvetii and Ariovistus. So the Romans did the best job in the gallic wars as one could have done. In Alesia, final battle. 280.000 Gauls vs. 55.000 Romans and the Romans won. As For UK, the romans had a stronghold, they managed the Boudicca revolt just fine in my opinion. Now, there i would have been surprised how the greeks would have managed. And the Romans learned from every defeeat. Cannae lost, Zama won. The whole 2nd Punic war, Rome was devided and they won the war. The Italic tribes and Greeks that took care of hannibals troops were all punished later on. Rome won the 2. Punic War. The greeks couldnt even defeat the carthagians in sicily. The Greeks were overrun by the Romans, Historic fact. End of story. ( Rome was a Government, not an ethnicity or Tribe. This government united Italic, Cisalpine Gauls, Ligures, Etruscans and Venetics. This union of warriors formed a mighty force that was hard to be stoped.) Caesar had a large amount of Cisalpine Gauls in his army at the conquest of Gallia.(Senonii, Insubres, Cenomani, Urobii etc) and cut threw gallia like a hot blade threw butter. Also the germanic warlord Ariovistus was not a problem.

Ok, all i will do is paste your absolute incorrect post with all its incorrect information, for most:Celtic culture evolved from northern Gaul and particularly in England. So don't say I don't know much about Celtic culture and let other board members have a say at your post. All i have to say inform yourself about Indo-European Migrations, Indo-European Cultures (lausitz, Urnfield etc.) and about Keltic migration. To your false interpretations, i never said that the italics created the druids. The Italic Tribes are Indo-European tribes of the Urn Field Culture that migrated south. And The Kelts migrated west. Have a little bit more respect for ancient tradiotns before you demonise them in public. As for your albanian refference, i have no idea what that is about?? Yes, Gauls invaded most of the Balkan and settled within Menor Asia, and whats your point? As for the Greeks not being afraid of the gauls, also there i have no idea what you mean?

@Pantagathus I have a question, as to what culture would you classify the Taurinii and Salassii? Ligures or Gauls? or maybe Celt-Ligures?

It seems you dont have a clue about the Keltic culture. The celtic culture evolved in the Urnenfeld Culture (along with the italics and illyrians and venetics) and progressed in the Hallstatt culture and La Tene culture. Those were cultures of great wisdom and progress across all of europe. So those cultures are of good foundations, and its purpose was not to scare anybody, just because the greeks were not accustomed to their appearence doesnt mean they were brainless monsters. Inform about the Goths, and dont be single minded and associate the modern gothic fashion with the ancient Germanic Goths.

Rome was sacked 2 times by your so called barbarians. 1. By the Senonii, a Gallic tribe that migrated to Italy in 420 BC (belonging to the group of Cisalpine Gauls: Insubres, Boii, Cenomani etc.) and sacked Rome 387 BC under their leader Brennus(brennus was more a title than a name, but thats how the leader of the Senones was remembered). Those Senonii where later conquerred by the Romans and in 107 BC granted Roman Citizenship. So no, they were not barbaric at all, they were the protagonists of the La Tene Culture (along with the other cisalpine gauls). 2. Inform yourself about the west-goths and their whole history with rome and the sacco di roma of that period. Than you will think twice about the so called "sack" and of them being Barbaric!

@Rameses the Great Its nonsense to compare the results of the Greeks in their prime with the results of the Romans in their prime. What matters is the direct comparison. And the balkans and menor asia were overrun by the Romans. So where were the great phalanx of yours there fighting their heart out? Why did the greeks needed the Romans to help them against the Ligures in southern france, if the were so great? why did the greeks call the Romans for help against the Macedons?? Why was phyrros deafetd although he had the Magna Grecia and certain Italic tribes (lucanii and Brutii) that assisted him? Why were the greeks so scared of the northern tribes that they need to buffer themselves south of the Macedons, and the Romans conquerred Gallia with an ease?? So the greeks are far behind in terms military success compared to the Romans. The Romans invaded all of greece and that alone just proves the domination of the Roman Legions over the greek phalanx.

@Pertinax My source is the book from the swede Christian Albrecht, Kulinarium Antike. In this book he sites the Knowledge of the Ancient world on Mushrooms. Sources and refferences are being made from the Greeks: Theophrastus of Eresos, Nikander and (on the topic hallucinogens) Dioskurides . And from the Romans: Cornelius Celsus and Plinius. I dont know an english book, but any english book that states texts and works of one of these 5 (espescially Dioskurides and Celsus) must contain info about the use of mushrooms in the ancient times.

In terms of hallucinogens, the Romans dwelled over mushrooms. Mushrooms were common within the legion as well as with the plebs. In Ancient Friuli (north East italy) certain types of Mushrooms with different hallucinogenic effects grew. So apart from the Alcohol, and certain seeds, Mushrooms were the most popular drug.

@Pantagathus I never saw this as an argument or as the beginning of one, i just stated several facts about the Samnites which were asked in the original question. You on the other hand have brought up a topic that is based on speculations and theories and myths. If you want to believe they were greek, than do so. But if you want other people to believe in your theory than state some facts. Show some maps of greek settlements within this area prior to the Italic migration or during the italic migration. Or anything else that will prove (somewhat) your theory. In my opinion you are making a mistake as to see the samnites as a whole, instead of various agricultural tribes that are classified within 4 main tribes. You seem to forget about their most sacred ritual the Ver Sacrum which is Italic, their Oscan Deities, their Oscan language, burial rituals, helmets etc. Again, state some facts about a pre greek (spartan) population that was absorbed into the later samnite culture, or in their 4 main cultures. @ Andrew Dalby The Itai from Saunitai is believd to have the same meaning as the greek Itali. The Greeks called the whole peninsula Itali, with various regions. That Pantagathus is also why the Latins adopted the greek names, just like Etruria.

Yes, it was just a statement to state their use of the oscan language and how long it can be traced back for certain. Well, the Greeks had a Name for the region(saunitai), long before the Oscii migrated to the south. The Oscan name for the region (Safinim) derrives from the greek name, so does the latin name (samnium). So to go by that name is clear, that greek roots are found, but if you take the Tribes that made up the samnites (Pentri, Caraceni, Caudini and Hirpini) than no greek roots are found. The Samnites were named after the Region, which name was of Greek origin.

Samnites (săm'nīts) [key], people of ancient Italy. Their country was Samnium. The Samnites were Oscan-speaking and therefore should be included among the Sabelli. The Tabula Agnonensis, a bronze tablet that carries an inscription engraved in the full Oscan alphabet, is an important record of the language. The loose confederation of agricultural tribes, expanding in the 4th cent. B.C., came into conflict with the Romans over Campania. There was probably a good deal of warfare before the three Samnite Wars (343-341 B.C., c.326-304 B.C., 298-290 B.C.), in which the Romans won control of central and S Italy. Although the Samnites continued to fight against Rome with Pyrrhus, Hannibal and later Marius in the Social War, they were crushed (82 B.C.) by Sulla before the gates of Rome; most of them were killed. Some survivors were sold into slavery(gladiators); the rest were Romanized. Samnium itself was split into 4 districts and 4 tribes Pentri, Caraceni, Caudini and Hirpini. Because of the Tabula Agnonensis they can be traced back as far as 300 BC. The story of them being spartans, is more a romantic myth than proven history. Everybody who was a good Warrior tribe claimed or were given origins from Sparta or Troy.

The Majority of hannibals army in italy was Gaul. Those cities that were allied with hannibal and let him and his men stay, (with all comforts). were pretty much all killed, ones the Romans retook those cities because of Treason. Those who might have been raped were killed because of unpurity. So if there was Blood Mixing,(which nobody knows) than those who mixed were killed later by the romans, they didnt survive.(lucani & Brutii)

@thamistocles If you would have made an effort to look around this forum at topics like this:Legions Become Majority Non-italian and others, you would have found all the answers.

The province of Italica at that time was still pretty much the same Cultuarly and Ethnicaly than a millenium ago. Yes, The Romans made millions of slaves. But only a small fraction of them were shiped to Italica. Mostly as Houshold slaves or Gladiators. But slaves had no rights, so they were not allowed to marry and the majority died alone. Only as small percentage was granted freedom and an even smaller one remaind in italica. The majority of slaves were brought to north africa or iberia were all the mining was, or to Gallia and germania inferior where Towns roads and bridges needed to be build. The Slaves were important for the empire but not for the Province of Italica. But slaves had no rights in every part of the empire and so the majority died without spreading their seeds. The Foederati families lived in segregation in the countryside. It was not until 476 AD and Odoaker and his army of germanic foederati soldiers that mixed with the local Roman population. During East-Gothic rule the reamainders of Odoakers army were considered as part of the Roman locals, with the same rights. So the entire remains of Odoakers army mixed with the locals. The Slaughtering of the families of the Gothic soldiers, was an act of insanity. were authorities in the west got paranoid. They also murdered Stilicho and numerous other Generals in the Roman service. And basically crippled themselves, with that act of insanity.

@Julieboy i also dont understand the thing that you are desperately looking for. The thing is that you are making a mistake from the beginning and use the word Italian. There is no such thing as an Italian, or as an Italian territory. Modern day italy is a Political union of several regions. This union was created in 1861 and completed in 1918 and finally rounded up in 1947. In this union you will find the biggest differences. This union was created in 1861 by a bunch of Greedy Royals and Heated up Patriots that wanted to create the ancient province of Italica. But a lot has changed from 476 till 1861. In every department in Italy. Lingiustically, Ethnically, Historically etc. etc. The language Latin was split and mixed with didifferent elements (depending on the region) into the most various dialects.(sicilian is classified as an own language) Italian is nothing else, than the dialect of Florence in the 13th centuary. Language Romagnolo http://www.mitidiromagna.it/cgi-bin/miti/romagnolo.jpg Lombardic Dialects http://members.tripod.com/~rjschellen/NthItalianNums.htm etc. etc. And we can go about the Germanic tribes in the north and the arabic invasion of the south etc etc. bla bla bla. And all the different historic stages of each region etc. etc. The Point is there is no ITALY, there is the Republic of Italy and its islands. I mean do you consider those italians? http://www.walserland.org/comuni/images/folk01_big.jpg Those are Walsers, a germanic people that Migrated to the North in the 13th centuary. And Occupie a landmass. And are Italian citizens with a Germanic Language. If you consider them italian, than you will agree that there is only an Italian Nationality and not ethnicity, But if you dont agree, than why do you consider an Campanian or Umbrian more italian than them?? Do you consider a San Marinese (Seperate republic) More Italian than a South Tyrolian(Autonom Germanic People)?? Thats why sicily is considered sicily, an your assumptions that mainlanders and islanders mixed is just an asumption, there are no clear records. Furthermore, the funny thing is that the South "Italians" imigrated to the USA and the Northern "Italians" to south america. Argentina is heavily North "italian". Thats an argentinian soccer player (E. Cambiasso) of Genoese decent http://placente-fans.hp.infoseek.co.jp/other/cambiasso.jpg Thats Dean Martin Southern Italian http://www.davincibeverlyhills.com/dean_martin_pic2_pix.jpg The point is, that alot of US Americans take that as the standard of "Italian", because the have a predominant Sicilian community. While an Argentinian would take the Northern Italian as the standard. But the truth is, there is no standard Italian or any type of Italian. Italians as i have written above, different at every level. All of the italian regions have their own identity, dialect or language and history. That differs from the other regions. Thats why sicilian is sicilian. Piemontese is Piemontese, Aostan is Aostan etc. etc. One more word to the Lega Nord, that was falsly put in your link. The Lega Nord is not an organisation of people that want to Belong to germany or press on the Germanic (gothic - lombard) heritage of northern italy. They want an independant country called Padania. Its a geocraphical country that borders are the Valley of the Padus (largest river of northen italy). And every person that settled in that valley and the culture (from DaVincvi-Michelangelo-Macchiavelli-Stradivari-Venetian Republic-Ferrari-Ducati etc etc.) is padanian, and they dont want to share their culture and identity with the rest of the so called "italians" because its simply not theirs, because they havent comtributed anything and are different. These Padanian (northern italians) are furious at the fact that southern italians immigrated to the new world and claimed the padanian culture to be theirs and therefor gave it a bad name by mixing it with their own traditions. Personally, i dont think there will be an Italy in 2020. The mass that wants a Padania is becoming bigger and bigger.

I agree, if its one person in history i dont like, its Hannibal. Well, in the end Rome won the war and hannibal lost it. Although Carthage was an empire and rome wasnt. Although he was allied with pretty much everybody that could seriously help him and Rome was alone. Although he was in italy for 14 years he never managed to sack a single city. The Romans that fell in that war were all revanged in the 3 battles of Nola, The battle of Zama, the sack of Carthago Nova etc. He was the bigger opponent, he started the war, and he lost it. But yet hannibal is being praised as the hero of the second punic war. http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/...arthage_218.jpg

The Etruscans(Rasenna or Rasna as they called themselves), were the indigenous people of Italy. Their culture never experienced a break or a radical change from the villanova culture. And has strong similarities to the indegenous culture of the swiss lakes. Their culture and language was later heavily influenced by the greeks. Rasna writings http://www.language-museum.com/e/etruscan-1.gif Their looks differed from dark hair to blond hair (while the dark hair was predominant) People with blond hair in the middle and on the right http://www.unitus.it/dipartimenti/daf/euro...%20leopardi.jpg person with blond hair on the left http://www.lifeinitaly.com/art/img/Etruscan-fresco.jpg http://www.maravot.com/Etruscan_banquet6.gif The Italics, were indo-european tribes. They crossed the alps from the north and settled in between the land space of etruria and magna grecia. These tribes were linguistically seperated in Latin-Faliscan and Oscan-Umbrian. These tribes were cultuarly and ethnically related to the germanic and mostly celts. Italy was than called Itali, greek and meant "land of cattles". Those tribes (who were similar in culture and language) that migrated to itali from the north, became known as the italic tribes. Samnites, were not an own tribe. The Samnites were Sabellic(italic) farmers, that settled in Samnium (region-- south east of rome). Their looks differed from dark haired to light haired(were the dark hair were predominant as well) The north of italy was settled by Ligurians--North Adriatic Veneti--Raetians--Celts. The Gauls than conquerred pretty much all of northern italy, except the North Adriatic Veneti. The Romans than butchered and deported all of the celts in the north, just a small minority of ligurians remaind. The North Adriatic Veneti , swore loyalty to Rome and became roman citizens. The North Adriatic Veneti were Indo-European. it is quite certain that they came from the Baltic coast and were germanic. Their look was predominant light (blonde and blue eyed). Thsese 3 type of peoples and their culture Rasna--Italic--North Adriatic Veneti all fused and created the Roman culture and identity. Were modern day italy especially the North and Central is still predominate. It is recorded that Augustus had blond hair and blue eyes, and Julius Caesar had blue eyes (nobody knows his hair colour, becuse his hairs were grey when he really became famous) But i think that it was still the minority, the majority had either brown or black hairs and brown eyes. Roman Fresco Roman Bikini http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/w/x/wxk116/bikinib.gif http://www.leafandstone.com.au/images/frescos-2.jpg This is how propably the average roman looked like http://www.geocities.jp/roundtable12knights/maturoma2.jpg The south of italy was always greek or greek influenced. Sicily should not be mistaken with italy. Sicily is an island with its own culture and dialect. The island of sicily is today an autonomy island and only somewhat politically belongs to italy. Its culture was Phoenician and Greek befor the Romans conquerred it. and later had periods of Arabic, Normanic and Spanish influence and rule. So connecteing sicily with italy is wrong.

Yes, that number must be wrong. I agree with Virgil, that the drastic downfall began in the 60sAD. Its estimated that Before and during Nero(54-68 AD) around 75% of all legions were still italic. Reiner Kleinschmidt,(german historian and professor in G

Publius Cornelius Scipio In my opinion he was the Prime General responsible for Romes victory in the second punic war. And who knows how the world would be today if Rome had lost the second punic war. Alexander Fleming The British pharmacologist that discovered, Penicillin.(i hope everyone knows how important that was.) Kaiser Friedrich Willhelm II The German Kaiser that was the most responsible for WWI, a war that was terrible for europe and its colonies, but nesseciary.(there was no way around that war).