Maty

There was also Megastides who was with the Spartan force, though he was an Arcarnanian. (On the other side of the Saronic gulf on the west coast). Dunno if he counts.

Polybius took a long hard look at this. Basically, the situation appears to be this - a stationary phalanx can't be got at from the front - the legionaries just can't get past the sarissas (pikes. The Romans proved this against the Pontic phalanx at Charonea in the 80s BC. But if you are going to have a stationary phalanx, you need so)mething like Alexander's cavalry on the flanks. At Charonea, what the pontic phalanx got was Murena's legionaries after they had seen off the Pontic brazen shields after some broken field play on the Pontic right. And legionaries on a phalanx flank are like sharks in a school of tunny. On the other hand, a phalanx going forward can't match legionaries going backwards, as was shown in the Macedonian wars. In scenario 1 there is a macro dislocation, as at Cynoscephalae, when one phalanx went forward faster than its companion, allowing Romans to peel off the side of the legion retreating more slowly and hit the Macedonians of the faster moving phalanx in the rear. Or in scenario 2, there are micro-dislocations such as at Pydna, when the advancing phalanx slowly lost its coherent hedge of spears as some parts of the legion retreated faster and others were more stubborn. And as soon as the legionaries could get in through a break in the spear-hedge and amongst just one file of phalangites, the whole thing went to hell in a handbasket. So generally, the phalanx was doomed standing still, because the Romans could thin their attacking lines and get around its flanks, and it was doomed going forward, because it was impossible to keep the lines perfectly dressed in a battle situation, even allowing for perfectly smooth terrain. And the phalanx had no reverse gear. There's a book on the Macedonian wars by Pen & Sword coming out towards the end of the year that examines the matter in some detail.(By the bloke who did the Mithridatic wars for them last year, I believe.)

As I understand it, this tomb is some 50km outside Alexandria http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/04/19/c...ark-antony.html

Sorry Paulinus ... it's going to be Canada's turn this year. I've a small bet on the Canucks. We'll know more after the game on Friday.

Wandering outside my area of expertise once more ...With weaponry I'd assume you can use coal to make the original 'bloom' for smelting the iron from the ore, as the ore is in a container and will not therefore directly absorb sulphur and the high temperatures obtainable with coal make it very cost-effective. Obviously you need charcoal for the steel-making part as you need carbon from the charcoal, and definitely not contaminants from the coal. How about baking bricks and roof tiles? It assume this can be done with wood, but more effectively with coal.

I hate you with a passion you can only imagine!! May the fleas of a thousand camels infest your armpits. Unless, of course, you're willing to sell ... ? The book, no. but I can give you an excellent deal on 1000 camel fleas I've recently acquired.

You sound like a good candidate for a netbook. These little machines come in at about $300 on amazon, and are good for both writing and net use. Add a standard USB keyboard and mouse and plug in your old monitor - you probably won't notice the difference to a machine ten times the cost if that's all you are using it for. And you have the advantage that you can unplug the thing and drop it into a rucksack for computing on the move. The thing with hard-to-find books is that the only people who will pay those prices are those who need them immediately. Others either go to a large classics library (and those who need that kind of book often have such access) or already have the books in question through years of haunting the classics section of second-hand-bookstores. I've got several of the books you mention which I acquired in that way, and I also particularly treasure my copy of Cheeseman's auxilia of the Roman Army which I found in a house clearance sale.

Just tossing in some quotes from Caesar's DBG ... His soldiers hurling their spears from the higher ground, easily broke the enemy's formation. Once that was broken up, they made a charge on them with drawn swords. It was a great hinderance to the Gauls in fighting, that, when several of their shields had been penetrated by the spears and pinned tight together [ this sounds like overlapping shields getting stuck], as the point of the iron had bent itself, they could neither pull the spear out, nor, with their left hand entangled, fight with any competence; so many of them ... chose rather to throw away the shield , and fight unprotected. 1.25 on the left wing, on which the twelfth legion was positioned, although the enemy's first ranks fell, transfixed by the pila of the Romans, the rest resisted ferociously 7.62 (Note, by the way, that Caesar is pretty casual in using 'pilum' or 'hasta' when describing the weapon.)

I've been doing some work on this topic lately (anyone interested can see the result coming out as 'Legionary' later next month) Therefore, I'll offer two other points to consider - anyone receiving a pilum as part one of a legionary charge is going to have little time to fiddle about with the pilum - bent or otherwise- in his shield/anatomy. Part two of the charge, featuring the legionary himself, is probably on the way and requiring urgent attention. A siege pilum (and this is hypothetical) can be heavier as it is not designed to be carried far (remember a legionary on the march has about 60lb -27kg - of other kit to carry as well) and if hurled down from a defensive position, being heavier, its harder to throw back up. I'd tend to agree with Goldsworthy that pila were not *designed* to bend, but why harden the shank when it may well bend and possibly do some good in the process?

A quick clarification - a certain type of female prophet was called a Sybil by the Italians, so there were several of them. Sybils, like other mortals who prophesied, did so under the influence of a God, who usually only pronounced at a particular place. This place where the God spoke was an oracle. So you get a (not the) Sybil who pronounced at an oracle. Pronouncements were not necessarily prophesies - many questions to the oracles were about the present or the past, or asking for guidance rather than a vision of the future. There was a particular Sybil who rendered a number of prophesies into books (presumably at her oracle) and flogged them off to King Tarquin of Rome. These are the famed Sybilline books, which again were prophesies in only a limited manner. Many appear to have said 'If X happens to Rome, the following religious ceremonies are required.' The 'prophesy' you have there sounds like an extract from one of many books of revelations which were popular in the Middle East in the first centuries BC and AD, and these books were big on numerology, religious cryptography, and above all death and destruction.

One of the things I've always liked about these busts is that the heads were made by a portrait specialist, and then fitted on to a generic body type that journeymen knocked off by the dozen. So the effect was rather like the seaside attraction where you put your own face in a cut-out for someone on the other side to photograph. I saw a great one of some mid-fifties rather severe looking Roman lady's sat atop of a statue of Venus preparing for her bath. In terms of realism, I note that though often described as bald, Caesar seems to sport a reasonable crop on top of his head in his surviving busts ...

If it's just the assembly of legions you want, I think Actium was even larger. Admittedly, most of those present did not fight, but the best place in a battle is on the sidelines.

Some of my colleagues are currently working in Italy at Rome and Pompeii. If you are interested in getting news of events there as they happen this might be interesting http://bloggingpompeii.blogspot.com/ Some of the posts are in Italian, but as Pompeii is in Italy and some of the archaeologists are Italian - dovremmo aspettarla!

I'm not sure that we do 'know' this. In fact I'm sure that anyone who could prove it would gain considerable kudos in the field. As you know, there's an ongoing academic dogfight between the literalists, who think that the early history of Rome is basically accurate, and the hyper-criticals who think that everything before the first Punic war is a made-up story. (Personally I am of the hyper-hyper criticalist school, which believes that all of Roman history was made up by medieval monks with too much time on their hands.) Is there any particular reason why a surname cannot endure for 400 years? After all, we know that in non-literate societies - which was most of Rome at this point - have an astonishing ability to retain a strong verbal tradition, and if we are going to discredit this, it should really be on the basis of showing it to be wrong, rather than saying it can't happen, when it demonstrably can. After all, the thing that really annoys the hyper-critical school is that archaeology stubbornly refuses to prove the literalists wrong - and if anything seems to support them. And remember, the earliest bit of Roman writing we have is on a stone dug up from the forum which bears less resemblance to Latin than Chaucer does to modern English. And if I remember rightly, it contains a name which was both on the ancient fasti and in the first century - namely Valerius. (with apologies for the pun) Also many of the early names on the fasti are not repeated later, some are definitely archaic, the prosopography in the fasti supports a credible pattern of demography in the way families appear and produce offspring, and some have been shown to have clear roots in other languages such as Oscan and Etruscan which suggests that the tradition of early Rome keeping open house was correct. Perhaps indeed, these were made up by people who worked really hard to make them credible to later historians. But we would need to show some evidence. I'd agree, however with your final words "Alas, we will never know the truth !" But not with the 'Alas!' bit. If we knew for certain who did what, when and why, history would be really boring.

Or possibly Metellus Pius, who managed to keep the highly competent Sertorius at arm's length, and even rescued Pompey when Sertorius was getting the better of him.

A great review Nephele! Let's hope that the play does well, and introduces more people to the ancient world. As an aside, Pompey was sometimes accused by his enemies of being effeminate. Since Caesar died at the feet of Pompey's statue, I can only assume from the scene depicted that Pompey's detractors were correct.

Weren't Hannibal and Saguntum involved in some way? You refer to the third, naturally, when the Numidians knew that whatever they did to Carthage, Rome would adjudicate in their favour. Tthe Romans had insisted that all Carthaginian disputes with Numidia be arbitrated by the senate when they made a peace treaty after the second Carthaginian war. Thereafter the Numidians used Rome's indulgence to plunder Carthaginian lands at will, knowing that Rome would not only find in Numidia's favour in a dispute, but sometimes also made Carthage pay a fine to Numidia for being plundered by the Numidians. Finally the Carthaginians tried a bit of unilateral military action to stop the Numidians (from besieging one of their cities, no less). Not only did this finally give Rome it's excuse for war, but the Numidians also defeated the Carthaginian force sent against them. Even when the Roman army landed, the Carthaginians kept agreeing to whatever surrender terms the Romans demanded, and their generals had to keep making the terms harsher and harsher until the Carthaginians realized that there would be war no matter what, so they might as well repudiate the terms and get it over with. A 'just' war only in the very strictest of legalistic definitions ...

I'll definitely second this one, That would have been an awesome spectacle to behold. I'm starting to feel a little bit sorry for the lame old men now, the midgets have now got cavalry mounts while the lame old men have nothing, so I'm going to propose that we give the lame old men a squadron of one armed archers to even things up a bit!!!!! Now that's entertainment!! Speaking as a lame old man, I'm going to insist on several batteries of those Roman bolt throwers that fire off twenty arrows at a time, or I'm not setting foot in the arena. I'm thinking that those dwarves on boarback are like the wargs in The Two Towers - so there's a thought. Cancel the bolt throwers and give me the Fellowship of the ring for backup. With battles I'd like to be a Parthian at Carrhae, knocking a bit of humility into the legions. It's a tough job firing arrows at people who can't shoot back, but then I'm only in favour of a fair fight as long as I'm not in it.

A quote from the Bible which might be relevant here - Isaiah 14.12 'How are thou fallen Lucifer, son of the morning.' I'm not a Bible scholar, but this suggests that Lucifer the light-bringer is also known to the Judeo-Christian tradition.

It's pretty hit and miss - I found sometimes I can put them in certain places (such as between the towers over the gate) but sometimes they won't work there. I also found that you can put them in the street to shoot over the walls, and one crew will work the ballista whilst another right next to them will not - even if you get them to change places. It's a bit quirky.

Smells certainly seemed to matter to the Romans. One writer (Martial?) commented on someone who breathed on on some perfume and turned it to liquamen (a particularly pungent sauce made from decayed fish). With Claudius, I recall reading a comment in Seneca that one of the side effects of whatever Claudius ate that killed him was extreme flatulence. Given that Seneca was not, to put it mildly, a Claudius fan, it is possible he added this comment to further debase the memory of a man he appears to have despised.

Not only can you put ballistas on, but you can sometimes get to sortie several times per turn. Even if you don't leave the city walls, you can barbecue a lot of horses with fire arrows every time, as the barbarians always fall in under your walls at the start of the sortie. When they attack you , if you can't defend the walls, pull back to the city's central square with all your troops. The opposition take a pasting from the automatic fire from the walls, and arrive at the city centre in dribs and drabs and your forces, even if smaller overall, can defeat them in detail. Finally, if you are playing the Eastern empire, go for cataphracts against infantry and foot archers against the blasted horse archers. And when fighting Persians make sure you have artillery for the climbanii - they are not called immortals for nothing.

Which is why 'Callan' was in Angola rather than the British army. Professional soldiers join up for a steady job with a pension and a bit of adventure. People who join up to kill are not generally popular. 'Funny enough, I've been asked that question before. Not having been part of a military regime, it's impossible to answer. I would like to think I would behave with as much decency as I could, but warfare does sometimes force decisions on people they would rather not have to make.' - which is where some of the PTSD comes in I'd guess. Anyway, fascinating as this discussion has been, I feel we may stretch our fellow forum member's patience if we drag it out too long. However, if you would like to continue, Caldrail, I'll look forward to getting a message from you.

You miss the point. Those teenagers were in a kill zone. They had no chance. The relevant part is the officer who *should* (for a given value of should) have opened the proceedings by shooting one of those teenagers through the chest - and at that range he could not miss - could not do it. And when they ignored his calls to surrender he could not shoot them, or order his men to shoot them, as they ran away. Would you? I suspect friend Saturninus would not have lost sleep over the decision - and that's part of where modern society is different, and better for it.