Onasander

First page of this thread, minus Caldrail's posts, made me nearly shit myself. Just no. No...no no no no no no. Caldrail, whether he is aware of it or not, is echoing Du Picq. This is a good thing, I havent met anyone beneath the rank of captain who even paused in recognition that the name was important. My copy ended up in permanent dusty display in the colonels office to trick people into thinking he reads and is very knowledgeable. You only need to go to Airborne School in Columbus, Georgia Monday mornings during the introduction speech to figure out how PTSD works, the 507th are masters at exploiting it to break off guys prone to it. Everyone is sat in the bleachers on the far side of the field across from jump towers. One of the cadre is standing infront of you, doing his skit. One is being prepared at the bottom of the jump tower to be towed up, you see him go way up in the air, and is released, floating down, landing. Another goes up, there is a technical problem, and they try to fix it..... once fixed , he is released, parachute doesnt work, and he falls screaming until he impacts..... people come running over. Dead. My reaction.... sucks to be him. How do I avoid that. What is interesting is the most bad assed, aggressive bullies from basic dropped out that moment. They gave a impressive array of excuses, like their dad wanted them to become a Ranger, but it wasnt really their dream, etc. The faux testosterone level definately dropped after that day, and I didnt come into contact with it again until they marched us up to ranger batt where everyone was suddenly full of shit again. The guys most full of shit were the ones worst effected in Iraq. Certain exceptions.... the guy who did the friendly fire was always mellow. He became withdrawn afterwards. The guy with PTSD from before joining the army, losing his family, openly worship satan as a result, was promoted to head of the scouts (in a arctic airborne unit) but managed himself otherwise, ane earned most peoples respect save a couple. Those few framed him for murder, and he looked the part, and the army was looking for scapegoats to do a"A Few Good Men" shit for the liberal angst back home. The hardest thing about PTSD is our individual misconceptions and cultural misconceptions do not line up with our psychological reality. Our rhetoric and identity in roll playing soldier and victim is very deceptive. Its make believe, something we embrace everyday in our lives. Where does PTSD take place outside of killing? Rape. What happens to attractive women repeatedly raped? They hate their beauty, turn against it. They change their identity, their rituals, how they rollplay in society. How about the homeless. Many current and former homeless crack under mere discussion of homelessness, exhibiting all the symtoms of PTSD. The situation doesnt even need to be present, the ideal is enough to throw them into tantrums. The sound and din of battle isnt the cause of PTSD. If it was, we would have teenage boys hiding under their beds everytime a deathmetal song plays. Its a conditioned response that triggers a behavior related to a larger situational scheme. If it was the small matter of the light and sound, then people would get it in basic training on that firing line where explosives are going off, tracers overhead, and your crawling under wire. If that was the case, they would just camp us out there all night till those prone to snapping would do so. Luckily, it doesnt work so simply. It means conditioned response is but a aspect, and not the whole , of PTSD. Lucky, because it means we can train to avoid it, to cope with it, to use it to become better. The hardest aspect of Cynicism wasnt giving up my material possessions..... you get used to it. It wasnt the hardship. Wasnt the weather. It was the morning after a storm, in the most intensely beautiful of settings, when I realised I had at that point no future. A literal point of no return. I would become a scavenger of worms and grubs in tatters., unable to shave or become employed, have a wife, etc. After 2 years.... snap. It was giving up finally on one identity that caused the crush of overwhelming dread and bereavement. I became afflicted horribly. By the end of the day, I had sorted the issues through. Intellectualized who I was, what I was to do, in the kaleidoscope of my experiences. That night was the best for me. That morning was the worst. Its extremely hard to get guys to confront themselves. Even if the eye to self analysis is there, we are.still holding onto something. The cause of our insanity is that little bit of sanity we arent even aware we are clutching to. However, it become obvious afterwards our whole life was measured by it. It might very well be the one thing that keeps you alive, but it can also destroy you. Its not the easiest thing to come into contact with either. Did anyone get the point of the Shawshank Redemption? Yes, the Romans got PTSD. We know this from the brains they had, and the psychological effects such formations had up until the 19th century. Same hardwired brains, same tactical aims, same results. Its just Pavlov ringing the bell.

http://newstrackindia.com/newsdetails/176084

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salmeniko_Castle Im looking over the Morea for holdouts AFTER the fall of Trebizond. This castle looks like it has possibilities, as it lasted the longest. I can't find exact dates. The only place I can find still remaining a imperial possession after this would be Monemvasia, I assume Thomas, the last claimant to the throne, sold it AFTER Trebizond fell, but am uncertain when the Pope actually bought it. Any point after 1461 officially extends the final end of the Roman Empire. Of course, there were countless islands without a turkish garrison, fighting off turkish pirates for centuries, but never heard any claims of continuation from the greek community here via any island. So, is this castle, or the seizure of Trebizond the last battle of Rome? Is this island the very last imperial possession?

Great, knowing 300, she'll have a beard, hunchback, eye patch and face tattoo.

Same topic, from the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25088960

Romans didnt have shoulder yokes. They yoked the neck, padding it so as not to choke the animal. Tests were done back in the late 19th century to prove this, the horses pulling the loads bent their necks just like the ones on trajans column. I dont think rock collecting, latrine duty, or kitchen duty were of consideration to historians period. However, you get it wrong, the consequences are. Phenomena without roots. I remember having to pull a Ahkio loaded with tools up in Alaska, or the requests by a Lt. for a bunch of sandbags for a winter triathlon, in the middle of a winter, being handed pick axes and shovels. It doesnt work that way, minus dynamite in the winter up there. Its a common cruel punishment to tell guys to dig a hole a foot deep, and your finished..... it can take the whole day, and you wouldnt dent it. I think historians look at the legions from the vantage of the officers. I look at it from bottom up, and I know half the tasks are much more complicated than we give credit for.... hence why they stuck so strongly to a merit based system of gradual promotion. And I naturally include fortifications in my understanding of camp. I lived in a FOB for over a year, and most towns grew up around forts here.... I cant imagine setting up camp without fortification, or at the very least taking a strong natural position. Even when I was a Cynic sleeping each night outside, I took this. Its impossible for me to imagine myself doing otherwise. I cant see the Romans being any different. The camp is more the defence than the tents. I could care less if they sleep exposed to the rain, so long as its not exposed to threat.

My town is in the middle of a ongoing process of tearing down what used to be the largest steel mill on the planet. Plants were always assaulting it, trees even growing on the metal roofs. Now, its as if even the flora is fleeing. If you watch the movie Super 8, the fake town of Lillian is actually here. They have the foolish idea once they 'clean up', it can be reopened as industrial or commercial land. It will become a wilderness.... the coal, sulfur, and iron ore spinkled everywhere will make for a poor return to the old apple orchards once there.

Ummm..... I did not say there were no learned men anywhere, just in the particular of the pagan becoming Bishop. They largely fled, as anyone with a combination of knowledge and wits would, to more secure locations. I am of the understanding the legal schools remained intact during this era in Palestine. Its from a commentary on Justinians' Laws I read long ago. Just, such men are rather useless when the imperial administration essentially evaporates. Bishops had much influence and leadershicleadershipcapacity, but honestly, were they trained in their traditions to consider police actions, run the courts, collect taxes beyond voluntary tithes, punish criminals, etc? There are elements beyond merely being a bishop necessary to rule a city. Especially ones with a constitutional tradition, and a threat of invasion. Bishops are highly intelligent, but also at the same time specialists. Its not a matter of a dark age lead by stupid men, but of the unexpected wrong kind of intelligent men suddenly gaining power. Now.... can you have a competent Bishop who knows statecraft? Yes, but at first they will be few and far between. Its not unknown even imodern eras for this to happen, such as Cyprus. But its not natural via the Christian tradition. I doubt lawyers had much of a role for this reason. What use could they be to a wide eyed Bishop uncertain with the sudden reality of administrative power? They lack a powerbase, coups and assassination a constant possibility.... stuff is not working despite ordering it fixed..... someone with a understanding of old legal customs is superfluous under such circumstances.

From my understanding from questionable secondary sources, the Bishops only held municipal power for a short time in the 5th century given a lapse of capacity in the Constantine Dynasty to continue to police the cities and collect taxes... Bishops were the only ones around. They couldn't control the self defence gangs turned vice patrols that survived.... there is always a militant faction in every society, and these boys had a understandable grudge, and were often ignorant (see the movie Agora). A Christian Bishop usually isn't a Caliph.... a martial theocracy, and so we're in a pickle in terms of how to deal with these zealots. I don't think legal thinking was much a factor in this era, not at least until the Eastern Empire got its fortunes back under control and took back control. I recall in Greece, a Pagan Philosopher was drafted into the position of Christian Bishop..... the government collapsed, he was the only intellectual around and so did it for the good of the Empire. It's only one of two times I am aware of that a open Pagan was given the rank of Bishop, the other during the final collapse a thousand years later. I assumed mass secularization myself. I've started putting law questions in the religious section of this site for this reason, but assumed the middle and late imperial era had secularized the law profession. It was hereditary for a while there.

I came across two coincidences of law men becomming Bishops, one a patriarch, in the last day..... One is in the Biography of the Roman Philosopher Michael Psellos: "Among his fellow teachers and close friends one should include Ioannes Xiphilinos, who specialized in law. Around 1045, Monomachos conferred on Xiphilinos a new office, nomophylax, in an act drafted by Mauropous. Later, he too became patriarch (Pope of Constantinople)." That is from Stratis Papaioannou's "Michael Psellos", from the free sample portion you can download from kindle, loc 453 Last night, I find in Philip Schaff's Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 6, again on the free portion provided by kindle, the commentary on Gregory Thaumaturgus, that he studied to become a lawyer first, met Origin, studied both pagan and christian philosophy under him, and later theology, and the converted. He returned home to Pontus, apparently completely oblivious to the Flavians having concocted Christianity , and settled down to do some lawyering..... when he was tricked into becomming Bishop. After playing a few rounds of really bad knock knock jokes with invading Goths, he left his mountain hideout with his flock and returned to pontus, the vast majority of the pagans having since converted under his leadership. So..... outside of it being a actual imperial appointment, within his immediate court, how would gregory as a lawyer priest differ from, say the former? Was this a pagan tradition of local leaders being both lawyer and priest? Is there a tradition of making lawyers or canonists into bishops, popes, or pagan priests?

http://scitech.foxnews.mobi/quickPage.html?external=2420484.proteus.fma&page=43773&intcmp=obinsite

That would be great Number Six, if it was true. Damn near every history historically of value began in explaining their method and objective. Historians ignorant of this are either pop historians, or massed produced rabble who's works are genre specific in methodology, such as the billion works published on the Nazis, and endlessly refer to one another, rarely introducing a new fact. I can care less for the herd. I want the elite. Primary sources or the best thinkers. Not some history major who writes without insight to himself or the world around them.

I'm not participating in the other thread because it has become little more than a hate fest, however deserved, it's still not how we should challenge history. I'm more than willing to write you off for the time being as a quack, given your combination to assert, while admitting to your inability to express your methods. I'm left to assume your methods are unscientific, and whatever systematic rigor you may hold is clothed in your own bias and ignorance on how to approach history. Notice in this thread, I am NOT attacking your ideas, but asking you to present the methods of your diagnostic logic. I requested a review of them to arrive at the soundness of them. To offer critique via peer review. There is no time limit to this. You can finally get around to it someday, but know I am the only person here who offered you this chance, to essentially accedentialize you and your methods. History in my view will continue to evolve in its tools and methods. We shouldn't be automatically prejudiced, nor fall prey to our lesser nature in trying to ostracized or hound writers like jackles to defend history as a profession. It's not going away, don't sweat it. There is a larger, and more embarrassing psychological phenomena occurring here. Everyone is feeding Gilius and his Martyrdom Complex. It's not proper nor necessary. Not for historians. We have tools, methods, and disciplines. If someone introduces themselves as Gilius has, making websites and eventually books, we shouldn't push them into the shadows because they arrived to absurd ideas via absurd methods, but rather, introduce them to elements of the science. Give them portions at first, and in time, the entirety of our arsenal. Introduce such people to new concepts, ask them to explain what they are doing in their thought process. As I said, on a personal level, you disappoint me Gilius. Not for your ideas, but your own admitted lack of coherency in understanding your own ideas to the extent of explaining how others can arrive to similar conclusions. We are here in search of a common held history, that can be found and universalism by the diverse many..... not a mystery cult who's understanding is reserved to a esoteric few capable of interpreting the texts. Once you come around to meeting the challenges in this thread, do so. Until then, it stands as justification for anyone to source against you. I did try here. You only let yourself down. Enjoy the masochistic strife you and the others are otherwise, embarrassingly engaged in. It has the truth seeking capacity of a medieval mob screaming witchcraft. It's not how we should do things.

Make it stop snowing

Alexander the Great did, he also invented Rome to control the Etruscans.

Are you sure the ratio of soldier to oxen to pull the carts balanced against the supplies supplies against the carts was enough to allow for a work detail to use the excess carts in conjunction with other duties that require cart pushing? Factors in this question: 1) Romans had to use Oxen, not Horse, to pull the carts, due to the fact horse collars had yet been invented, and any load added to a cart pulled by the horse would be pulled by a noose around the next, choaking its windpipe. Rocks are fucking heavy. 2) In order to maintain mobility, especially when away in campaign, the majority of supplies would of remained in cart. This means only a faction of the carts at any time could be unloaded, such as tents, and cookware, slaver carts (assuming the army owned such things) ir empty carts dedicated for ambulances (again, assuming). In order to quickly turn out, commanders in many cases would of been wary of dumping all his supplies on the ground and sending his troops out into 7 different functions prior to a more defencable position being errected: 1)Guard the Camp builders 2) Build the camp 3) Scavenge for supplies food 4) Guard the food scavengers 5) Look for rocks 6) Guard the rock gathera 7) Scouting missions, and other operations. The rocks being in marshes isnt as unreasonable as you might thing. Many factors guide this judgment: Though marshes are unhealthy, and on flood plains (flash flooding bad for camps) they sit on the end flow of water, where rocks since glacial times would build up, already rounded to a certain extent. Secondly, the wet environment makes it easier to pry them up. Thirdly, marshes tend to be near streams, along flat or gradually increasing elevation, allowing infantry to scavenge for game and move around its ranges with ease, while acting as a sort of defence against complex ambush from its environments. Here in the upper ohio river valley, rocks are available in three spots: Upper portion if the hills, but NOT the top or bottom portion of the hills. This is due to the type of rock there, as well as glaciers cutting its path. The lower portions lack it due to superior dirt erosion from above outpacing the natural tumble of rocks, covering them up quickly. In marshes, because the water and flash flooding exposes them, At the exits of creeks into rivers, especially during drought. Rocks very slowly migrate. A marsh, or cross creek junction, would if been a essential supply and defensive point nany commanders of the era would of choosen lacking higher ground, especially in woodland environments, given they possess many of the camps essential needs, as well as give confused or lost, or even routed soldiers a landmark route back to camp. I personally, in setting up camp, would want my big guns up and ready ASAP, not just to hold my line, but also to free up carts. But those carts are carrying lumber, game and greens, or if your lucky fruit in competition to rock gathering. How well can oxen pulling a cart scale hillsides? Or travel in marsh where the easiest rocks can be pryied? Yes, looking out, it seems there are rocks everywhere. And there are.... but short of a chisel, or long hours shoveling, your left with select gathering locations. Ox gave to get to it and back, but in many cases not ALL the way to it. Hence, the bitchwork if the legionaire unfit even for a slave. Hence also the need for a understanding of geology. Not all rocks shape right, some break easy, or are hollow. Some are bad to light on fire. Your average young soldier isnt going to know this. A rock is a fucking rock. They are everywhere. His main concern is getting camp up, his shoes off, and wondering when his first watch is going to be. Hes not going to react to kindly to the artillery officer press ganging him into a absurd duty of trying to pull rocks out of the clutches of a frosty ground. Especially if its really cold, all the pick axes are being used to build the camp, he cant use his sword, and he has numb hot dog fingers from his efforts to pry.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/south-asia/New-finds-at-Lumbini-may-push-Buddhas-birth-to-6th-century-BCE/articleshow/26406078.cms Oh, and besides finding these roots, they also confirmed Buddhism existed two centuries earlier than commonly thought.

From the goat sacrifice scene on, I became increasingly disturbed. Time to burn my cock off, I decided I dont want it anymore. Poor Asher, was rooting for him to become a senator....

When you say in a short amount of time, I get this image of me as a half naked legionaire spending days on end, dirty with my back nearly thrown out, pushing half broken carts along the edge of a swamp, with virgil sitting on a log, smacking a mosquito from his cheek, a little sweaty...... looking at my miserable state, rejecting my rocks as not being the right kind..... and just then it begins to rain. Your talking about collecting a bunch of rocks in a combat zone, extra to normal food scavenging duties. This being said, I am mostly in agreement with you, and I failed to take the breakdown of the armor into account. Ive seen 50 cal. rusted bad in Iraq, yet have seen muskets recovered here in impossible conditions in good shape, not to mention all the mediaeval armor still around. I recall vegetius calling for recruiting guys like leather workers and cobblers, but they are a much simpler craft, and easier to supply, than a blacksmith. Blacksmiths leave a obvious mark in the archeological record. Do we have any legionary finds of field blacksmithing?

I would actually, come to think of it, most any belief system, however absurd in places, have a avalanche of positive facts behind it, and a decent philosopher can usually counter arguments quite well. When we line our facts up logically for argument, its easy to forget there are TWO hemispheres, and each side is ego centric with blindsides to the other. I doubt any belief system could exist without a basis in provable facts and common sense intuition. Of course, every belief system also carries a Achilles Heel at its Crux. I always get a sick feeling when I know it, the person is in front of me, I want to say it, but also dont.want to break them pointlessly. Like telling a Mormon about Swedenborg, or a Buddhist about the Chandogya Upanishad.

I am honestly pro global warming, I see little long term loss in it, mostly advantage. Most of the land is up north, frosted over.

I ask this because even though its common sense, a book I downloaded on Gustavus Adolphous claims the ancients made no attempts to make munition bases before gunpowder.... which I dont believe, but have no proof of.

Two questions: 1) Did the Romans maintain replacement metal parts for its equipment? Say some barbarian smashed up your helmet to the point it is impossible to wear, and instead of returning back to Rome to buy a new one, your great and fearless commander decides to press to reward, WITH YOU. Do you get a new helmet, and if so, where? Or is there a mobile blacksmith? If so..... how does he do this mobile? The logistics of this isn't so simple.... or in my probable case in such a situation, told to stop being a woose and fight without a helmet, sword and shield from now on, just bite them, it's all about will power. Second question, I don't think the artillery could manage to build all its heavy ammunition. I'm guessing the infantry got drafted into this, it's a no brainer..... but how standardize was it? Did these machines vary in size, and each squad was left looking for different sized trunks for each machine, or different sized rocks? Was there a infantry NCO giving his men bad geology classes, on how to know if your rock was quality or hollow geo rocks that crumble on impact. I get this image of new recruits grunting, carrying rocks for miles, only to be rejected upon inspection. Or worst, they make a giant arrow, only to find it doesn't fit their machine, making them run machine to machine to find one it fits, looking like messed up ass in the process.

http://www.foxnews.mobi/quickPage.html?page=22995&external=2435058.proteus.fma Detroit is tearing up its neighborhoods, and is replacing it with farmland. Detroit was, and to a extent still is, a industrial powerhouse, but lost control when unions and socialism wrestled control of the 'power'. Since then, its been in a state of progressive decline,to the near 3rd world status is now has. I've always wondered how the actual process of converting urban terrain intofarmland worked. Constantinople is a classic example, before its final defeat, much of the city had been converted into farmland.

If these chickens had just played dead in the first place, I wouldnt of had to shoot them. They attacked shops like a swat team. One of the woodshop owners kept a british style plastic pellet gun on him at all times to nail the chickens coming in the side door, and cats through the roof, which pissed another tenant off, who kept those cats. I wonder how Emperor Tiberius would deal with this, after a storm rips up all the chicken coups on the island of capri..... chickens and stray cats everywhere..... Some stuff the historian just doesnt record.