Primus Pilus

How'd they know that? They must have skipped over me when they were passing out the pamphlets on this stuff

The rural poor were also more likely recruited because they vastly outnumbered the urban poor. If broad estimates of 70 - 90% of the ancient population living in rural areas is true, and we can assume that the rural population had a far higher ratio of poor vs. rich (as the highest concentration of wealth was certainly centered in the cities) it just makes sense for the rural poor to have made up the bulk of the recruits. (Especially when we consider that urban population percentage did not truly increase by great numbers until the 20th century). Urban poor was certainly recruited in the late Republic by men like Marius due to various circumstances, but as more Italians were enfranchised and more rural citizenry was available, there was a corresponding shift to rural recruitment. Urban poor probably continued to be recruited but they probably made up an equivelant percentage of the base population. If 20% of a region was urban (without taking into account the wealth of urban vs. rural citizens) then it might stand to reason that only 20% (and probably less due to the wealth factor) of that regional recruitment was urban. As for Dando-Collins, isn't he essentially considered a novelist? I'm sure he did his research and probably pays considerable attention to historical detail, but scholarly reviews seem to dismiss him as a historian, though I haven't tried any of his books personally.

Looking for a stretch... how about the bastardization of the olympic games by Nero? Along those lines though perhaps the incorporation of theatre, musicians, singers etc. undermined the concept of Roman glory above personal pleasure or indulgence, by providing distracting leisure? Obviously this is quite the stretch, as the Romans were hardly a Spartanesque military society prior to Hellenic influences and its not as if the Romans became complacent peace worshippers =P

I actually agree with Cato the Elder that Greek philosophy could be quite annoying, but I can hardly label it as harmful. Otherwise I'm also quite hard pressed to find a single overwhelmingly bad result.

In theory, the idea of regular pay and the opportunity for social advancement (for the family and the individual) could have continued to be an incentive in itself, but this does not seem to have given any real motivation to the old citizen classes, even the poor. We know that the citizenry developed a certain level of complacency towards military service and that it clearly lost its attractiveness as an opportunity for advancement, but had military service actually become a true social pariah because of the inclusion of and reliance on 'provincials and barbarians'? There were still plenty of poor Italians, and poor 'old provincials' in places like Hispania, Gaul, etc. I don't know if the question has ever truly been answered as to why these people did not seem to pursue regular military enlistement in any large numbers. Was the proximity to the borders truly that important, was the economic advantage in barbarian recruiment that great.. or was Rome so reliant on pacifying its neighbors by including them in its army, that it precluded recruitment of its own citizenry?

This one seems to be the most reasonably priced but I have no clue on the quality of the translation. There are no reviews and the author description, "Flavius Vegetius Renatus wrote an instruction manual for the Roman military. He was well qualified as a soldier and author." seems to lack the basic criticism that nobody knows who he was, or what actual qualifications he may have had. Other versions available through Amazon seem to be pushing $100. Perhaps there are other options available locally for you?

Look for the sake of these people I wont get in a spat with you. You could have sent me a personal mail. You like to attack me so its not a surprise for me...in fact its expected. P.S. I'm 15 years old so I am a bit you know still you should treat me with some respect. Calling Da Vinci a hack and a con artist, a man considered among the great geniuses of history, quite frankly sets you up for criticism. His artistic ability, whether one likes it or not, is not reflective of his other work. Now if you want to call Dan Brown a hack for writing the Da Vinci Code and giving the impression of it being non fictional... that's another matter entirely. Da Vinci, however should not be blamed for being part of the subject of this book whether he had some actual hidden agenda or not. (Which has not been proven despite other claims).

Considering that Caesar crossed to Britain about 175 years before the wall was built, its unlikely that Hadrian had anything to do with it. But yes, Caesar did have a difficult time in Britain... especially the first crossing in which he was undermanned and seemingly underprepared.

I am going to ask you to stop dual posting with alternate ID's.

This is footnoted, and the footnote says:-[1] These were veterans who re-enlisted on special terms and formed a bodygaurd for the General. Ah yes thank you greatly. Considering the heavy focus of Polybius on the Punic Wars and the army of the 3rd and 2nd centuries BC, that is a bit of confirmation on the idea of Scipio Africanus having a praetoria style personal guard. I've been perusing Livy... but to no avail so far.

Zosimus is fairly non descript but he describes God as being on the side of Theodosius. Thats not definitive though I suppose. Ambrose Epistle 57 to Eugenius certainly leaves the impression that the emperor has "heathen" leanings. Paulinus in his Life of Ambrose mentions that Eugenius was a nominal Christian and it seems that he used Pagans for political and military gain against Theodosius. As Arbogast was the chief power in the western empire and all accounts suggest he was Pagan, it seems pretty safe that there was a concerted effort to restore some semblence of pagan idealism. I certainly don't think its Theodosian propoganda at any rate. I think that Philostorgius was an Arian and Theodosian was certainly anti-Arian so Philostorgius (even though both were Christian) would have little reason to favor one over another Christian. But he could favor a Nicene Christian (which was anti-arian) over a pagan. In theory that is

Yes they were bodyguards but as the Lictors were also a symbol of the magistrate's imperium the function served a different purpose than the Praetorian. Despite their function as a form of bodyguard they were not soldiers. This concept developed completely within a military perspective and was not truly related to the lictors whose occupation did continue despite its lessened meaning under the principate. I suppose what might be an interesting relationship is whether or not Lictors in the Principate period were hand selected from among the Praetorians rather than the citizen body as was traditional. Certainly magistrates were able to hand pick Lictors, but it would be interesting if they were assigned from among the existing Praetorians. But in theory it would make more sense for a member of the Imperial family to be accompanied by both Lictors and Praetorians when applicable, as both a show of tradition and a show of force.

I suppose it could be Munda... Plutarch says of Caesar...

Agreed... moved and title edited. As for Roman cartography... Ptolemy was actually quite detailed and using astronomy and mathematics was among the first to develop a system of coordinates roughly equal to that of Latitude and Longitude. While the cartography appears largely unrecognizable compared to more detailed modern maps, the accompanying text, as well as the earlier work of Strabo clearly illustrates an understanding of geography. Strabo Ptolemy

Yes, Numidians were Berbers, but Berbers are more than just Numidians. They occupied much of Northern Africa. A good introduction courtesty of wiki

Sounds like you are describing Alesia... but Caesar did not write those words... 'If I die, you all die'.

According to Andrew Lintott in The Constitution of the Roman Republic (which I think you in particular might enjoy for quick reference Cato) the custodes seem to be synonymous with the term diribitors. Here's his passage retyped verbatim... The baskets (cistae) containing the votes delivered were watched over by custodes, who in the late Republic were drawn from the album of jurors for the quaestiones: under the principate those at Rome were called 'the nine hundred' (nongenti). These custodes were also responsible for counting (diribitio) and reporting the votes to the presiding magistrate. He cites Cicero Post Reditum ad Senatum, In Pisonum and Pro Plancio as well as Pliny Natural Histories, Varro Rerrum Rusticarum and the Lex Municipii Malacitani. Hope that's helpful.

Indeed we could have used some aid especially in establishing the sites of legionary fortresses in Judaea. It was not so much a question of evidence as much as placing them in the right place for the particular time frame. At any rate, thank you for the compliments... and should we ever make a larger representation of the east, I hope you won't mind if we pick your brain. I would love to help. In my opinion, the biggest weakness I saw in the map was the abscence of some fortresses in the east, particularly in Judaea and Transjordan (Provincia Arabia). On another note... is it possible to get some digital segments of this map for use in presentations? I wouldn't be looking for a full digital copy of the entire map (and could see people printing off multiple copies), but small segments to illustrate specific locations. Also, would it be possible to reprint a smaller version of this map within an academic publication? Darrell, feel free to contact me privately... primuspilus@unrv.com and we can discuss the details.

Nobody seems to be discrediting Constantine and his achievements are quite noteworthy. Just being able to maintain a semblence of imperial order for some 3 decades is incredible in its own right. Whether he was a Christian or an opportunist is irrelevent for most of us from the historical perspective. We can understand his influence on the religion and culture of the western world regardless of his actual religious affiliation. You are attempting to paint for us a picture of Constantine as some great icon of virtue and purity when he was anything but. He was at times a quite brutal man who used any means necessary to secure and maintain his power. This is not to discredit his achievements but to point out that which we do know. At any rate, one need only look at Constantine's triumphal arch in Rome which depicts images of Jupiter, Mars and Hercules after Milvian Bridge and his supposed conversion, to understand at a glance why his full conversion is doubted. Consider that his coinage continued to depict Sol Invictus prominently and it is well attributed that he had a natural affinity for Apollo (of whom the sun is a symbol). One popular theory is that Constantine viewed the Christian god as one powerful war god in a pantheon of deities and continued to use them all as necessary but that he obviously leaned towards the Sun symbols (Apollo, Sol Invictus and the Christ).

Hello and welcome

Ahh indeed, thank you for the clarification.

I don't even know what it is?

Yes it is Latin and Carpe Diem is generally though not quite accurately translated in English as "Seize the Day". The original quote from Horace would be more appropriate as "Pluck the Day". I believe the similar looking "Capere" would be better associated with seize... but I'll leave that to our more knowledgeable linguists to settle. Here's some basics courtesy of wiki.

Salve and welcome. Thanks for stopping in to our little community... feel free to join in the discussions, ask questions, whatever pleases you