Favonius Cornelius

Aurelian the Hammer--and he actually defeated enemies of Rome rather than the senate and people of Rome itself. To my mind, it's self-evidently anti-Roman to proclaim the defeat of Romans more splendid than the defeat of lunatic potentates like Zenobia, Queen of the East. They would have it so Cato...

But unless they're virtually uncontroversial, modern examples don't help your point. More importantly, if you force yourself to argue the same points strictly with Roman examples, we'll all learn something interesting even if we disagree with your conclusions. Then you cannot use Gresham's Law, the Quantity Theory of Money, or any other modern concepts when judging his efforts...

What does that mean? Is there a movie with such scenes? Apologize for I seldom watch historical films so I am not very familiar with them =w=" The film was nicknamed "Queer Eye for the Macedonian Guy" , but frankly the homo-erotic sub plot was just hilarious . The battle scenes are quite good, mainly because the actors have stopped spouting hammy dialogue. I didn't care much for the battle scenes myself. A lot of epileptic nightmarish cinimatography to make up for not setting up a full battle.

I might not consider the creation of the follis as a debasement necessarily. All modern coins for instance are not made of any valuable material. The follis could just be a way to fill in monetary unit areas which were not adequately covered, like the range between the as (penny) and sestercius. Primus know what value the follis was suppose to be?

To echo Cato, and what of the new cults of Isis and Magna Mater, Mithras etc?

It seems not so unreasonable to have the reform empire wide. Maybe he believed that you could not enact this sort of reform on only one area of the empire due to the fact that the people in whatever microcosim he might choose to work on could see it as unfair, and the business of that area moved to another area, thus warping the model he might have hoped to work with. An emperor had to be as fair as possible, such a revolutionary move say in Britannia, could give local governers all the excuse in the world to rebel. Empire stability clearly was not what it once was in this day. Previous emperors probably did not attempt these controls since they were for the past 100+ years a bunch of arrogant generals with little care for economics. Diocletian clearly was a more thoughtful man, if misguided in his attempts.

Cato, you use contemporary economics to explain your points... Anyway, didn't Diocletian attempt to revalue coinage? I am almost certain that he did. The clipping you speak of are efforts of previous and probably later emperors to stabilize the economic situation.

That is indeed an important consideration of the aspect of winter. Snow and rains make the land difficult to move through. Also it makes foraging difficult, since people's crops are not growing, animals hibernating, and fruit waiting for sping. The hoplite tactics you speak of are certainly a part of the early Roman experience, but I think would belong to the very next stage of evolution of the Roman art of war, which I'll post on in the next few days.

About 9/11, I ask of you readers only one thing. Mark well who is doing the politicing on a day like today and who is doing the remembering.

It's easy to judge people in history with the hindsight of millennia, but harder to judge a man by putting his shoes on and seeing his world through his own ancient eyes...

Hard to say without more information on the nature of its finding, but my guess would be what you see there was on the forehead, bound to the head with some sort of cord or chain or whatever else, not included. Maybe the cord was made of organic material.

I bet in this early period also that warfare could practically be made during any time of the year. Most folks tend to think of 'campaign seasons' since indeed the winter did suppress the ability to organize masses of men. In these days, a group of a hundred was not a logistical difficulty! It also helps if your raiding is only conducted in a 50 mile perimeter.

Someone work on this scoring system yet? Would be interesting to see the results. I am reading a new book on Caesar these days, almost done. That's right, the big JC. Who among the Caesars can say they were victorious in Hispania, Britannia, Germania, Gaul, Italia, Africa, Aegyptus, Asia Provincia, Pontus and Macedonia? I choose the Divine Julius as the greatest Caesar!

I read a book on Diocletian a while back, and it seemed to stress that one of his measures of change was to make the status of Emperor even larger than ever seen, well away from the principate to something of a God-King of the old style. Maybe another measure to stave off rebellion by making the concept of attaining the purple beyond the scope of a mortal. People like to rag on Diocletian since his reforms all pretty much failed, but you have to admire his attempt.

The Etruscans certainly had their effect on Roman society, and the extent or importance of which is open to debate I suppose. They are worth looking at, but if you really want to sink your teeth into a topic of depth we have so much more for the Romans. The Etruscans probably had religious influences as seen in the nature of the augurs. Politically the early forms of the republic had many aspects of an Etruscan nature, and art and architecture were also affected. You could say that the Etruscans probably introduced the Greek hoplite method of warfare, which was the stepping stone to future Roman military expansion. Perhaps you could say that the 'tyranny' of the Etruscans caused the republic to form in the first place, and from there the dominos kept falling...

Interesting article my friend. While I agree that dynastic continuity was a problem, during the Byzantine age didn't some dynasties last for quite a long time? What is the bench mark length in time for a dynasty to be robust?

Ursus, you include religions who's existance removed power from the state cult and concentrated it within. What of philosophies, did the Romans ever find reason to suppress doubtful philosophies? "We will derive nature's first principle from this: nothing is ever created by divine power out of nothing. The reason that dread constrains all mortals is that they cannot visualise a rational explanation for the causes of many things they see happening in heaven and on earth. And so they think these things happen through some divine power. But once we have seen that nothing can be created from nothing, then we will more accurately perceive what we are seeking, both the source from which each thing can be made and the manner in which everything happens without the working of gods." -Lucretius, 'On the nature of things' 1.149-158

With garum as popular as it was, probably everything smelled fishy, with an leathery, olive oil accent.

Very interesting! Was purple still a restircted color during the empire?

Woke up this morning to a fright. My computer would freeze itself in a thinking mode while I got to stare fruitlessly at the icons on my desktop. After finally getting through to the Microsoft Indian technical support, it corrected itself. Truth be told, in the back of my soul I was hoping it would stay that way. Then Lady Tania would not have a problem with me dropping a grand on a new system. I would just need a new motherboard, chip, tower and a nice big harddrive. Problem is I have that fancypants RAM, the Rambus ram. It does indeed seem faster than other ram if I can compare other similar computers, but I have not yet been able to find a new modern motherboard which uses it. Any suggestions?

Hopefully you got a stipend to carry you over for a few months?

I'd like to try an experiment by investigating each step of the evolution of the Roman military machine by following its progress in chronological order. In each post of this series, if this should prove to be fruitful, I'll outline the important events, battles and innovations of the Roman people, and pose questions to the general community. Hopefully we can stir up some interesting conversation and all learn a thing or two! Roman Military History Timeline 900 BC - 575 BC; The Birth of Rome Villages were founded on the hills which would later coalecse into the village of Rome. Rome's position in Italia provides little in the way of protection other than the Tibur to the north which could serve as a general line of defense from armies marching south. This ensures the possibility of invasion and conflict in all directions. The military warbands formed by Rome were most probably armed with spears mostly (a good tool for hunting as well as making war), though some may have been armed with Greek style swords. For armor, helmets and pectorials could be avaliable, with ancile shields a commonly seen form. In these early days little can be said for sure, but it is possible that the Salii brotherhoods, the obscure religious colleges popularly known to be reinstated by Augustus, is a reflection of village Rome's military preparations. The two colleges, the Salii Palatini as connected with Mars, and the Salii Collini as connected with Quirinus, can be seen as an element of the gradual joining of communities on the Palatine and Quirinal hills. The martial nature of these brotherhoods suggest an origin of warrior bands bound by oath to serve their god of war. The requirement in joining this brotherhood in later Republican times of having both parents alive suggests actual military service, and of being a Patrician also reminds one of the propertied requirements of later legionaries who would have to equip themselves. Possibly the early military organization of the village of Rome consisted of the sons of the leading families united in warbands, loosly skirmishing with whichever border communities were hostile at the time under the protections of the god of war. Cavalry at this time was probably mostly unknown. Questions: Was Rome created as a Latin buffer to the expanding Etruscans in the north? Was Etruscan influence truly as the legends tell, were the kings really the overlords of Latium and Rome? Did these Etruscan kings rule Rome and Latium as colonies, or could they be seen politically as a part of greater Etruria? The Harper Encyclopedia of Military History

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by 'long pointed gracefully curved blade.' It sort of sounds like you are speaking of the falcata, but Roman armies either never used it or at least only used it right in the beginning of their use of the gladius short sword, since it's likely that the weapon's effectiveness was learned and adapted during wars in Iberia or while fighting the Carthraginians (and their Iberian allies/mercenaries). Or are you speaking of the tip of the gladius?

Go for it Antiochus!

Option 1, without a doubt.