Jump to content
UNRV Ancient Roman Empire Forums

Divi Filius

Equites
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    352

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Divi Filius

  1. Divi Filius
    According to Leapfish.com Domain Name Appraised: unrv.com It has been determined based on search results that this name may be extensively valuable beyond the scope of the LeapFish.com domain analysis tool. It is recommended that you seek the services of a complete domain appraisal company rather than rely on this estimate. According to them: Combined Domain Name Appraisal Value Score: 3490 Top Level Domain Name Score: 10 Unwanted Characters Score: 10 Length Score: 8 Archive.org Score: 424 Google Search Results: 0 Yahoo Search Results: 71,600 MSN Search Results: 3,382 Search Engine Score: 1 Trusted by over 5 million customers! Estimated Domain Name Value: $1,483,250.00
  2. Divi Filius
    This sounds awesome, I saw it on a Bus add and immediately started plans for it.
  3. Divi Filius
    I would say that the biggest effect of the 'revolution' was probably felt in Italy and, more specifically, in Rome. I could not imagine that the Greek world or the western provinces really felt the upheaval to any great extent. Of course this is on a purely political level, no doubt the various wars and repercussions effected the provinces.
  4. Divi Filius
    While the early principate has fallen out of favor with me due to my rising interest in the later empire, Im still game. It seems that the forum's "empire" section seems to revolve mostly around this period... so I guess there is no reason to fight. I have been thinking of a new article: Frontiers/Borders of early Principate, which I have been trying to accumulate as much reading material as possible for. Plus I plan on reviewing Rome and the Enemy -- which deals specifically with this time-frame -- as soon as I completely finish it.
  5. Divi Filius
    The empire was never united and I don't think the Romans would have ever wanted it so, they feasted on the rivalry that existed within(and without) their empire and used it to their advantage. The Roman east and west were no more "united" then the various cities of Latium (and later, Italy) were with one another. Their only connection was an indirect one: Rome.
  6. Divi Filius
    I don't see how the cultural factor could seriously pose such a great threat. Until the Diocletian split was further imposed by Constantine declaring a new capital, the difference did not seem to have been such a big deal. The way I see it, the splitting of the empire was what made the cultural differences of the two "empires" more apparent, not vice versa. So long as Rome remained at the center of course. When the third century blew this away, then we seem Rome's centralization decline and the rise of the provinces. However, I am with you guys that the split was inevitable at a certain point, my only argument is that: could the emperor have played a greater role in the split by aggrandizing his position in wars at the expense of the provincial. Lets look at the early Principate. Civilis and Boudicca revolt seem to have been quite large, both, for a time, greatly threatened their respective provinces. Boudicca gets the exaggerated figures while Civilis destroyed two legions. The emperors seem to have played little to no role in both of these. The Jewish revolt of 67 stands in great contrast to that of Hadrians period. The former was placed entirely in the hands of the general(Vespasian) while Bar Kokhba saw the involvement of Hadrian. Parthia is another example. The early principate seems to have had far more to fear of the empire then the later one. The former lived in Crassus' defeat memory while the latter in Trajan's victories. However, while invasions of Parthia grow in the post Trajanic period, they seem to be lead entirely by emperor's(Verus, Severus, Caracalla, Alexander). Domitian personally takes charge of wars which are largely deemed unnecessary by contemporaries. In all these occasions the emperor seems to be playing a greater and greater role in the wars, which will make things seem unbearable when the problems of the 3rd century come. This is, however, not to say that leaving more power in the hands of the provincial would have saved the empire. *This is my second time typing this. Ugh! I crossed the page out by mistake just as I was finishing!!!
  7. Divi Filius
    Divi: We abolished slavery a long time ago, things called "machines" a lot of that work for us now. random Roman: So how did you come to conquer these "machines"?
  8. Divi Filius
    Alexander was marching through a well known world with a long history and trade-routes, and even then he had his blunders. Alexander is lucky he didnt have to face an enemy after the Gedrosia incident. Plus, what were Alexander's plans after Tarsus? From what we can tell, the original expedition was to go no further then that point. After that, luck seems to be a substantial factor in his campaign.
  9. Divi Filius
    This view seems to dominate. I don't know, I find that bundling up the period between 509 to 264 into one category to be way too broad.
  10. Divi Filius
    The problem was not unique to Caesar. I think this was really one of the big problems of antiquity, even Alexander suffered often in the logistics department. I think this is largely the end result of the Romans(and the Greeks, sea wise) being an adventurous people who mixed conquest with discovery.
  11. Divi Filius
    Yep. In fact, when Roman generals pondered the idea of taking the island, they did so with the mindset that Hibernia stretched along the French Atlantic coast and ended near the beginning of Spain. This made them consider conquest based on the idea that they could close up this channel and therefore secure all routes of Ocean. Really weird...
  12. Divi Filius
    I think this confusion could simply be a byproduct of not yet solidified social order which could not have been understood by historians of the later republic. I always saw it as the period of the Samnite war, ending with the defeat of Pyrrhus.
  13. Divi Filius
    I remember Forsythe tying these distinctions to the priesthoods: pointing to a far less secular time in Roman history when a number of families dominated the orders.(?) The Plebians could have simply been the rest? The emerging wealthy families from these could point to the secularizing and expanding of Rome under later periods. I havnt read Forsythe in a while so I may have to double-check what he said. Middle Republic. Rome is expanding. Perhaps they are high nobility from other Italian(or Latin) cities?
  14. Divi Filius
    Me: He was Napoleon. After France, what you call Gaul, threw off its king and became a republic, he overthrew it and made himself emperor. Augustus: What an awful man!
  15. Divi Filius
    Certainly nowhere near the extent of the west, the east still had most of its recruiting territory. However, following Adrianople, Germanic barbarians made up a considerable portion of the Byzantine army; and from what I hear, this continued until relatively late. Btw, the Roman army did not disappear right after 476. We can find traces of them deep into the Merovingian period.
  16. Divi Filius
    Around 410 the Notitia Dignitatum tells us that there were still deep elements of the [more] traditional Roman military organization. It is really impossible to give a definite answer, but by 476 the Roman army was made up almost entirely of Foederatii. What remained of the "Roman" army was dispersed as small garrison groups.
  17. Divi Filius
    Oh wow. I dont think I have ever left a formal introduction. Well, better late the never; plus I think the riped well since I first came so its just as well. I am Divi Filius(the artist formerly known as Scanderbeg, about 2-years ago...). Yes, I am a Son of a God, however, it has little to do with actually honoring my father, I simply want to aggrandize myself and thought "hey, might aswell take my dad with me!" Actually I am a resident of NY(Eboracum Nova), 19 years old and currently a student at a local college which I wish to transfer from because its mostly business oriented. Next year I will be posting from a different location though. My interest in Roman history was actually first sparked through a video grame(can you believe it?!?!?) about 2 and 1/2 years ago. After joining a local forumer I found myself spending less and less time on the game and more and more time on the history section. Finally I entered a book club which picked I, Claudius as the book of the month: I devoured it and made Claudius the God my desert (although the main course was the real seller). Afterwards I started spending more and more time searching history via the internet, eventually running into UNRV after I made a search for the Second Macedonian War. The website and the books(the former aided in the search for the latter) set me on the path that I am on now: preparing for study in Classical Civilization. Here I am now, far more learned then before but still learning and to tell you the truth there are few things which make me happier.
  18. Divi Filius
    I would give it a 7/10. Nothing in it that really made it stand out, contrary to my hopes. Too much story, too much "crazyness", annoying narrator etc. etc. Plus the whole "get out of formation and squash the Persians on your own" thing really defeated the whole meaning of the event... Plus the Spartans ended up looking more like a semi-organized Barbarian group then the most disciplined unit of the ancient world. Perhaps the writers were thing of the Gallic invasion at Thermopylae? And yes, there is probably more history in an astronomy book then in this movie. Even the phalanx positions were ahistorical and completely awkward.
  19. Divi Filius
    During the times of the early Principate, armies were rarely commanded by the emperor himself. Throughout most parts of the empire generals were taking care of the provinces -- except for major eastern power, but even then. Unless an emperor wanted some kind of military glory(Claudius) then the generals(or princes) at his disposal could deal with the situation in the provinces. However as times moves forward we see the emperor monopolize the roles and powers of the empire*. As this is happening we start to notice that the emperor is becoming more and more important in his role as general. The size of Trajan's campaigns made his presence a necessity, however Antoninus Pius seems to be the last emperor to carry about a major war by sitting on his throne and legislating. When Commodus retreats from the Danube, the campaign against the Macromanii ends there; while Alexander Severus is forced to abandon his war against the Persians when barbarians cross the Rhine. It seems then that it was the centralizing of the empire under the hand of one man made the emperor ultimately relinquish some of it to an equal(not exactly an equal though, however 'technically') in order to deal with the problems of empire. While troubles in the early empire did not match with those of the later empire, it is in the former that we see men like Corbulo while in the latter its simply the emperor. My question is: could the empirial split have been avoided or was it really a necessity of the times? *The reasons for this are obvious and manifold, so I will not get into them.
  20. Divi Filius
    I am the most partial to Tacitus. His synical witty cynicism, irony, duplicity(his Histories is filled with moments where he stears towards a certain position only to contradict himself later), and, most importantly, his veracity. Ammianus is also in this list, however it should come to little surprise since he models his work after Tacitus.
  21. Divi Filius
    I can onyl argue about what actually happened, not what could or would have. Perhaps if we did not have Sulla's drive and ambition the problems of the Republic would not have been as apparent.
  22. Divi Filius
    Syme presents us with just one of the sides in this huge debate, there are others, namely Birley, who views the first part(the part he chose to print for Penguin Classics) as having a good amount of truth.
  23. Divi Filius
    Traditionally Marius was placed near the top for his reforms, but today that theory has come under heavy attack, their effect seem to not have been as permanent as we originally though( see War and Society in the Roman World, particularly 'Military Organization and Social Change in the Late Republic'). Even then the question is hard to really answer, but I would also have to go with Sulla. Him marching on Rome set the path for the later copy-cat move by Caesar.
  24. Divi Filius
    If it's going to be NY, I can no doubt make it. However I dont think I have the means($$$) to make a DC meeting. Or a meeting in any major city that would require hotel and transport arrangements. 8 bucks an hour can really limit you....
  25. Divi Filius
    There have actually been a lot of documentaries done on Hitler is his "leisurely" mode in his Bavarian retreat. Many of them were also German propaganda video's there to show Hitler's "homely" side. I remember a certain song that was written at the time which was actually quite catchy when I heard it. It was in German. "Hitler's little [something]". Something that persists to this day, although in a darker way. lol
×
×
  • Create New...