Primus Pilus

Welcome to Repetere Actionem ("Act Again"). This is the forum to discuss Roman and ancient world re-enactment of all forms: military, cultural, religion, etc. Please feel free to post pictures of events, known schedules of upcoming events, links to reenactor groups, etc.

Umm, well uh, I'm dyslexic?

There are a few older threads here discussing the survivors of Carrhae. There is a great deal of speculation that these men ended up living in Parthia or China (Gansu in particular). The following thread is a merging of several different discussions. Some of it may seem disjointed (or links won't work) as a result. Legionaries in China

I wonder if the posted price already included the supposed discount. The email didn't suggest that one had to click through any sort of particular link to see the proper prices anyway. Oh well, no great loss in the big scheme of things, but I figured a few folks may have been interested. I'll post again should I get any more special notices.

Right, but what Vorenus was emphasizing was that while he LOOKED Gallic, he WAS Roman. So I don't see the inconsistency--at least within the context of the show. And there were family names like Flavius (meaning blond-haired) that clearly indicate that not all Romans were necessarily the stereotypical dark haired Italian. Not that hair color alone would make someone look "Gallic", but it provides a decent example that there is enough historical realism for the appearance of Vorenus in the show.

Indeed. And in fact it wasn't necessarily an indication that one was named a commander, but that one was hailed as a victorious commander, eligible for a triumph. There were many legitimate legates who were never hailed as imperator.

So did anyone take advantage? I get the distinct impression that the answer is no?

"After five years of thorough research, we found no evidence of the legendary Epang Palace," said Li Yufang, head of the Epang Palace research team and staff researcher at the Institute of Archeology of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS), at an international archeological workshop held recently in central China's Hunan Province, according to a report by Beijing Morning Post on October 21... China.org

Received the following in my email... Everything is 20% off today only (Oct. 23 2007) between 12 and 4 PM EST (5 pm and 10 pm GMT) http://store.hbo.com/family/index.jsp?categoryId=2079010

It was likely raised in Cisalpine Gaul (simply as a matter of proximity convenience) just prior to Caesar crossing the Alps against the Helvetii. Though Caesar himself claims it was in Italy proper... Bellum Gallica 1.10.. Even so, it wouldn't be impossible for potential recruits from all over to gather when they heard that an army (and opportunity) was being raised.

P.P., you are NEVER out of order. I must ask you, did the Senate not ultimately control the state? In the early Republic one could argue that fairly definitively, but by the middle Republic the people's assembly carried virtually the lone legislative authority. The senate was clearly still the pool that provided the magistrates that effectively ran the administrative processes of the state though.

My intention is not to call you out by any stretch DD (welcome to the forum, btw). Just open discussion. I suggest only that the Senate did not act alone in uniformity either for or against these issues (especially in the later stages of the Republic). There were members of the senate on all sides of any particular issue. Alone, the senate was not much more than a deliberative body and a pool for the election of magistrates. The senate is too often labeled as the countering body to Caesar and completely opposed to the needs of the populace when that simply isn't the entire story.

Hard to know... he butchered anyone that may have been capable. If they were capable, why didn't they - whoever 'they' are - take over instead of coming up croppers? Antony! Cicero! Who? Other than a few major names (12 or 17 according to Appian), I cannot attest to having any knowledge of whether any, all, or none of the approximate 300 senatorial and 2,000 equestrian* proscribed could've or would've become remarkable contributors to the Roman world. I'm afraid that I lack the hell-spawn powers of Nostradumbass and am completely incapable of such conjecture. * not including any others who were not on the actual lists, but may have been inadvertently or purposely killed in the "denarii for heads" bloodbath.

Hard to know... he butchered anyone that may have been capable.

Seriously, has anyone ever read the actual quatrains? For those that haven't, please allow me to present an overview. They are a collection of disjointed and completely generic statements with absolutely no basis for being applied to actual events. Sure there is the supposed notion that he made things obscure in order to protect himself from overzealous christian loons, but how on earth can anyone rightfully claim to be able to decipher this garbage. Nostradumbass indeed! Per this site... http://www.getodd.com/stuf/nostradamus.html, it's the quatrain of the day for 18 Oct. 2007. "One day the two great leaders will become friends In the path of the hollow mountains The twelve red ones will spoil the cover For a long time peace will be maintained for them" I know what it means... but do you???

Here's a couple more just for S&G's. Invictus Vis (Invincible Force (vis can also mean strength, might, violence, etc.) Imperium (supreme power or authority)

I'm partial to the following quote from Vegetius... "qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum" He who desires peace, prepare for war. The Praeparet Bellum (prepare for war) part would probably be most effective for what you're looking for, if at all. It's a start anyway.

Excellent pictures Violentilla... thank you. However, those are some frightening chariots and villas displayed in the background. Burn the barbarians!!!

Salve, NM. That's quite exact, and it's true for the Eburones also. Their whole history was covered by Liber V (Cp. XXVI-LI) and VI (Cp. XXIX-XLIII) of Caesar's Commentarii de Bella Gallico, plus some indirect references at Liber VIII (Cp. XXIV). Other Latin sources like Cassius Dio (Roman History, Liber XL, Cp. V-VII,IX,XXXI and XXII) and PA Florus (Epitomes, Liber III, Cp. X) simply repeated what Caesar said; Strabo Γεωγραφία has only a brief mention (Liber IV, Cp. III). They really disappeared. Indeed, relegated to obscurity by their defeat at the hands of the Romans. Ambiorix isn't the only prominent figure who's fate is left unknown by Caesar. Ariovistus of the Suebi also seems to have disappeared without a trace, though the Suebi as a whole did not go the way of the Eburones.

I've sent mine in twice already... and I hardly use the thing really. My 3rd box seems to be the charm so far though.

Ursus has done it again. This time he presents a very inviting look into one of the lesser known Latin epics... To paraphrase Egyptologist Geraldine Pinch: all myths are sacred, but not all myths are solemn. Some myths are even laced with ribald perversions. The Golden Ass has not the timeless majesty of Homer, the dignified moralizing of Hesiod, or the conscious patriotism of Virgil. Its characters usually range from somewhere between agents of petty self-interest to despicable dregs of society. It is told not as an epic clash of heroes against monsters and gods, but as the absurd adventures of a hapless fool. The setting is not some archaic realm lost to history, but the Roman province of Greece... Read the full review of The Golden Ass by Apuleius

The female presence seems higher to me... especially in the equestrian and higher member groups? Perhaps you ladies are simply more vocal... Shocking I know!!!

Salve, PP. I'm certainly confused, because following the link that you kindly left us to Nicolaus' History of Augustus (1923 CM Hall's translation), I found the following quotation, which I post again for convenience: "FGrH F 127: (8): After this Caesar celebrated his triumphs for the Libyan War and the others which he had fought; and he ordered the young Caesar, whom he had now adopted, and who was in a way a son even by nature, on account of the closeness of their relationship, to follow his chariot, having bestowed upon him military decorations, as if he had been his aide (syskenon) the war." Nicolaus clearly contradicts himself if you compare it with your quotation from FGrH F 128: (13). Then, as you rightly points, the corrected score would be: Lifetime adoption 1 (Nicolaus) : Posthumous adoption 5 (Appian, Cassius Dio, Nicolaus, Suetonius and Velleius). Thanks in advance for any additional clarification. I agree, that would certainly seem confusing. However, I read this as someone not paying proper attention to contextual chronology within his writing. What I mean to suggest is that, yes Nicolaus is still correct from Caesar's viewpoint. Caesar adopted Octavius and in his perspective Octavius was his son (or was going to be by legal definition). The issue is that Octavius still didn't know it, at least as far as I can tell. I very well could be misinterpreting what Nicolaus is saying, but in connecting both passages together (the declaration that Caesar kept it secret follows the triumph passage contextually), I am inclined to believe that Nicolaus has just poorly presented his facts as opposed to reporting incorrect facts.

Schools should work like they are supposed to. Teachers should focus on the lesson plans and encourage those students who care to achieve and leave the rest behind wading in the miasma of their illiterate texting gibberish. Instead, they spend too much time trying to reach out and enforce educational equality (some of this mandated by the necessity for the schools and individual teachers to record certain "testing" qualifications), while the best and brightest are left to achieve on their own merit. I understand the reasoning for why public schools do things the way they do, I just don't personally like it. Freedom provides the opportunity, not the guarantee. That's my ultra-(US)constitutional viewpoint anyway.