Kosmo

I liked this show because it did not try to make someone look very good or bad like most do. Like other historical shows it has a problem with the passing of time so when the first 2 wifes were gone together with other important people it lost it's main characters. The title, the name of a dynasty, should mean more then that sexually deranged Henri VII and his commitment problems. It should have been about his remarkable father and it must be about the reigns of all his children, not only about his youngest daughter.

Neph, you have very nice sledge dogs. Merry Christmas everyone!

While I agree on the futility of comparisons under very different conditions like i.e. Caesar vs. Ginghis there are things that we can still compare. In many cases the preconditions for victory that you state "effective weapons, trained soldiers, able officials and operative logistics" were depending on the commander because Alexander, Caesar, Pompey etc were not just battlefield generals handed an army and a mission like Paulus at Stalingrad but also political leaders that had the power to get weapons and provisions, select and train personal etc. So we can compare Caesar and Scipio and see how they handled logistics (clear win for Scipio) training of soldiers (Scipio trained 2 defeated armies into victorious ones while Casar was handed a good one from start but he improved it remarkably) picking of high officers (Caesar's general were usually defeated when alone but I know nothing of Scipio's officers) etc.

The perfect example that heresies and schisms had often mundane reasons backed by fancy arguments it's donatism. This long lived schism did not have many ideas besides that it's members should be the official priests and bishops and not the catholics. The starting point was some alleged irregularity in the appointments of clergy after the persecution of Diocletian but the schism continued until after the islamic conquests 4 centuries later. I believe that at stake were the jobs of hundreds and thousands of bishops, priests and monks who would have been unemployed if their side would have lost the debate so they kept in Africa 2 parallel churches in conflict for half of millenia.

The most direct translation of res publica is "public object" I think that the meaning of republic become opposed to monarchy much more recently. Venice was one of the many italian republics ruled by a duke. The polish-Lithuanian commonwealth titled itself as a Republic and Napoleon was briefly emperor of the French Republic so maybe republic means a political system that at least in theory elects its rulers. If it is so Rome was always a Republic as hereditary rule never became completely accepted and there was always required and sought the consent, even formal, of various bodies like the Senate and the army.

Neater than reindeer! That plane has a red nose so it must be Rudolf... Merry Christmas, Happy Saturnalia and Great Holidays!

650.000 men it's the number of soldiers presumed for the entire roman army (East and West) not the size of the force at Adrianopole that was much smaller.

Any bow could be made very powerful by making it thick and less elastic so the small composed bow of a horse archer could have the same power as a longbow. The limiting factor was the strength of the bowman. Crossbows could be made more powerful then bows by using for drawing not only the muscle of the hands like it is done for bows but also the feet or mechanical pulleys. If we compare longbow vs. composed bow we see that the longbow was much cheaper and more resistant, the composed bow was made from several pieces glued and tied together so it would brake up more easily especially when wet. The composed bow was small enough to be used from the horseback while the longbow was to cumbersome for that. It is no surprise that the longbow was preferred by the infantry in the regions near the Atlantic Ocean where it rains all the time and there was less room for cavalry while the composed bow was preferred in the steppes of the Eastern Europe or the arid areas of the Middle East where the vast open spaces were dominated by cavalry.

Welcome! It looks like your in the wrong subforum, this is about news. Your essay will have some problems I think because: roman cities are based on greek and hellenistic models, many roman cities are actually greek/hellenistic cities that lived on under roman rule (how you classify Syracusa, Athens, Ephesus or Antioh?) If in the West roman expansion brought in many places a new type of city and architecture in the East there is no major change. For me there is no clear cut distinction between the two. Good luck!

Probably because they had many competent archers (most on horseback) and archers are superior to crossbowman. The crossbow was a bit like the arquebus would be later: powerful and easier to master by less trained recruits but with a slower rate of fire.

This one? http://www.historynet.com/the-roman-empire...e-in-ad-378.htm

Interesting. While some of this frauds are easy to spot some like "the God's Hands" are almost impossible to uncover and the damage could massive and lasting: "Prominent Japanese archaeologist Shinichi Fujimura has been caught red-handed burying artifacts at a site, prompting demands for a review of the nation's Palaeolithic record. Nicknamed "God's Hands" by colleagues who marveled at his luck in locating ancient sites, Fujimura was senior director at the Tohoku Paleolithic Institute. His discovery of artifacts dated to the early Palaeolithic period (600,000-120,000 years ago) at the Kamitakamori ruins in Miyagi Prefecture in 1994 established the site as Japan's oldest. ... Fujimura first won acclaim with his discovery of 40,000-year-old stoneware in 1981. The self-taught archaeologist has investigated more than 150 archaeological sites in Japan, including most of the country's Palaeolithic sites. In light of his confession, Fujimura's involvement in several important discoveries at these sites has brought many fundamental ideas about Japan's Palaeolithic--and the content of many textbooks--into question. The Japanese Archaeological Association is debating whether to reinvestigate sites he excavated. The Tokyo National Museum has removed more than 20 artifacts discovered by Fujimura from display; other museums are following suit... "

Before the glory that was Greece and Rome, even before the first cities of Mesopotamia or temples along the Nile, there lived in the Lower Danube Valley and the Balkan foothills people who were ahead of their time in art, technology and long-distance trade. For 1,500 years, starting earlier than 5000 B.C., they farmed and built sizable towns, a few with as many as 2,000 dwellings. They mastered large-scale copper smelting, the new technology of the age. Their graves held an impressive array of exquisite headdresses and necklaces and, in one cemetery, the earliest major assemblage of gold artifacts to be found anywhere in the world. The striking designs of their pottery speak of the refinement of the culture

Thank you! It was a fun excuse to drink 3 days in a row. I started training for Saturnalia

It was strange to see that the World Cup would be organized in countries famed for violent criminality like South Africa and Brazil. I think FIFA wants to offer hooligans a real challenge...

My mistake. The best source for the tactics against horse archers it's Hadrian's general the greek Arrian that had fought against alans, wrote a book about it, Ektaxis kata Alanōn, and it's also our best source for Alexander. His descriptions of Alexander's campaigns can be colored and distorted by his own previous military experiences.

After reading how Crassus got lost in the desert it's interesting to look at a map and see that it is impossible, he was still in roman lands. Lucullus had already defeated the parthians like many roman generals after him.

Diegis first post summarizes very well what is known about the subject. I add that there was probably no large evacuation of the parts of Dacia away from the Danube as by the time of Aurelian several major units from the garrison had sided with pretenders and left Dacia and there are no finds of coins from the time of Aurelian so romans were probably not in control of most of the province. One (later two) Dacia province was indeed created south of Danube usually called Aurelian's Dacia to distinguish from Trajan's Dacia north of Danube. Romans kept cities on the north bank of the Danube and from the time of Constantine controlled a deep area demarcated by a vallum fortification some 700 km long parallel to the Danube until after 400 when the huns destroyed the area. Some small cities survived in a reduced state in Dacia proper until the advent of the huns. It is probable that local latin speakers played an important role in the conversion of goths to arian christianity. The Santana de Mures/Cernikhov material culture can be seen as a mix and an interaction between goths, sarmatians, free dacians and roman provincials.

Salve Diegis Between 440-447 the huns not only defeated the Eastern roman field armies but conquered most of the cities and fortresses in the Balkans and there were lots of them. In many places the destruction it's confirmed by archeology so the complains that more then 100 cities were taken may be true. This shows that they did not used "hit and run" tactics even if they did not kept their conquest but sacked and destroyed the cities. Their composite army had probably a large infantry corps and a very efficient siege train to do what the goths failed to do before them. Geography, the fleet and the walls of the capital protected most of the Eastern half and it's wealth from the invaders from Europe and the army did kept the Persian and the Caucasus frontiers safe.

I don't get why modern Egyptians and Peruvians have rights over artifacts of Incas or ancient Egyptians? Even if they were the same nation the claim would be dubious, imagine France asking for all impressionist paintings to be returned.

We have "scientific" models predicting dramatic and destructive climate change. We have also dire predictions of deadly pandemics. Terrorist attacks with tiny number of casualties (what % of US or UK citizens are killed by jihadists yearly outside conflict areas?) provoke enormous changes and loss of freedom for everybody. Various foods are targeted by official or private campaigns making unproven statements about their health danger a good example being the absurd vilification of salt. Many people and organizations, public and private, want us to be afraid for various reasons that are about their interests and against ours. They profit from scaring us at our expanse. Media has become the place where this craziness it's propagated and public opinion it's at the level of a 5 year old looking for monsters under his bed. Rant over. About the most recent global scare: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/...,637119,00.html

Aside from the myth of the Caledonian boar hunt, is there any hint that the Greeks of the 5th century or the Carthaginians ever engaged in 'royal hunts'? In "The Hunt in Ancient Greece" Judith M. Barringer identifies earlier and later connections withe the Eastern royal hunt but for archaic and early classical period, especially in Athens, hunting, together with warfare and athletics, make up a trio of physical activities that are defining occupations for the aristocracy. http://books.google.ro/books?id=PMqCYtXqub...;q=&f=false More about the royal hunt: The Royal Hunt in Eurasian History by Thomas T. Allsen http://books.google.ro/books?id=6V9MtZT6go...;q=&f=false