DecimusCaesar

The tousled hair and pointed beared does make it look like the bust might date back to the Severan era. I have to agree with Bryaxis that the slender looking face does remind me a bit of Lucius Verus, although I can't find any evidence that he wore his beard in such a way. There is this bust of Verus that does look similar though:

I hope everyone here at UNRV has a great year ahead in 2013. Happy New Year everyone!

I saw this in a bookshop while Christmas shopping, I would have bought it then and there if I had the money. Definately going on my birthday list. I find the subject very interesting, as it seems many areas of Roman Britain, such as Cornwall and some parts of Devon as well as Dyfed in south Wales, show very little sign of Roman occupation. I had always understood that this was because the Romans were on good terms with the local tribes, but what if they never really bothered with those areas in the first place? One thing I do find hard to believe is that Stuart Laycock has in another book brought up his hypothesis of inter-tribal rivalries bringing about the downfall of Roman Britain. I find this difficult to accept considering there is very little evidence of the tribes mentioned in Ptolemy's Geographica surviving into post-Roman or early medieval Britain, let alone that their hatred for each other simmered for 400 years during the Roman occupation of the island.

Happy Birthday Doc, and have a happy new year!

Take a look at http://www.comitatus.net :)/> We performed to over 20,000 people this year. The era may be less popular than the earlier centuries for reenactors, but the general public love our displays, and we help equip our members with group equipment. It's not all as expensive as you might think. If you can make it yourself! There is lots of research into the Late Roman era, which allows us to make great reconstructions. You may enjoy some of the vast research on our website: http://comitatus.net/reconstructiongallery.html http://comitatus.net/research.html http://comitatus.net/photos.html Hope that helps! Thank you Ammianus for all your help.

I think terrain, morale, etc play their parts. The early Renaissance Spanish managed to beat the Swiss pike squares because they used a combination of arms. The Spanish tercios included arquebusiers armed with handguns, crossbowmen and swordsmen hidden within the ranks of their own pike blocks. That way they could pelt the Swiss with missiles while they advanced. When the two pike squares would meet, the Spanish could unleash their swordsmen to wreak havoc, while soldiers could crawl beneath the raised pikes on both sides to slash at feet or bellies of the Swiss with daggers. As for Roman dominance of the Macedonians, the rough terrain at Pydna led to the break up of the Phalanx formations, and some Macedonians dropped their sarissas and switched to their secondary weapons - swords. Face to face with the superior swordsmen of the Roman Legions the Macedonians were beaten. Other aspects played their part in Roman victory over the Macedonians, from better morale, more experienced troops, better generalship, the attrition of Macedonian troops in battles with their neighbours, even luck.

Merry Christmas, Saturnalia, Channukah etc to everyone here at UNRV! I hope you are all enjoying yourselves.

The Creative Assembly have now started releasing information about the factions included in Rome 2. So far those featured include the Romans and Carthaginians (obviously!) Interestingly it seems that this time round we could play the Romans as a single faction, instead of the ahistorical Julii, Brutii, Scipii and SPQR factions. Roman families will appear in the game, but I'm not sure in what context. Either way I hope the Creative Assembly stick to this decision as I'd rather control the Romans as a whole rather than individual families. The new screenshots look impressive as well, including what looks like Carthaginian troops in Hellenistic gear. Rome 2 - Carthage Faction Features

Maybe it's there way of getting back at the Onion declaring Kim Jong Un the sexiest man alive.

I'm not sure that there were etiquette manuals so to speak, but ancient writers did give advice about the proper way to present yourself to higher society. Most of this was drilled into elite men through lessons in oratory, and one of the most important lessons was not to appear effeminate in any way. Such writers as Quintilian gave advice about the tone of voice, the bearing, what was acceptable to say or not. He even gave advice about how direct your eyes: "The eyes should never look rigid or bulging, languid, torpid, or lasciviously rolling. They should not swim about looking watery and voluptuous, with sidelong sexy glances. Nor should they ever look as if they were asking or promising anything." While this advice, and others like it too, was directed at students of oratory, I think they would have applied in social situations among the elite too. Whether there was a sense of etiquette among the lower classes is harder to say, although the graffiti on the walls of Pompeii might give us some insight into how the plebeians interacted with each other socially.

A slave's life was horrible by any standards, but even more so if you were forced to do cheap labour such as working down the mines. Even if you were a slave in a well to do house your life could still be utterly miserable. Roman aristocrats would often take out their anger on their slaves, which was accepted as normal at the time. One famous example is the Emperor Hadrian (one of the good emperors) who in a fit of rage poked out the eye of a nearby slave with a stylus. It just goes to show that even if you were lucky enough to find yourself in the court of one of the more humane emperors, you were still subject to brutal behaviour on a whim. Slavery was a brutal business whether you were worked to death in a gold mine or whether you lived in constant fear and stress on a nobleman's estate.

My statement below could be considered a gross oversimplification, so keep that in mind... The Romans began adopting heavily armoured cavalry due to their encounters with the Persians. In earlier Roman history the Romans had light cavalry, often in use as scouts, or to pursue and harass the enemy off the field. It wasn't until the later Roman era that heavily armoured cataphracts began to make their appearance. Many changes to the traditional legion took place because of the long losing wars against the Sassanid military during the 'Age of Anarchy' in the third Century AD. The Romans began experimenting more with different troop types such as heavy cavalry, but such units were never dominant. In earlier times the Romans had recruited different troop types (think Syrian archers, Balearic slingers) but these types became more prominent when it was apparent that traditional legionary/auxiliary infantrymen could not defeat mobile/light cavalry such as horse archers or the heavily armoured clibinarii. The late Roman army after the reforms of men like Diocletian and Constantine had more heavily armoured cavalry, but these were never as prominent as the infantry, which was just as good as they had been in earlier times, despite the Late Roman army's undeserved reputation for being poor. Cataphracts proved successful against Germanic tribes who invaded the empire though, but the increasing 'Germanisation' of the army would eventually lead to the Western Empire's downfall as the German infantrymen turned against their Roman masters. No amount of heavy cavalry could turn the tide against the loss of territory and revenue, desertion, or the destruction of legions; despite the success of the cataphracts/clibinarii in the field.

Very interesting link, thanks. For some reason I'd always imagined the game as being something along the lines of a 'text' based adventure MMO, with players creating their own adventures. I had no idea it was fully 3D where you could create your own settlements etc. I only joined this forum in 2005, about 2 years after the game had come to an end.

I've had this film on DVD for so many years now I forgot where I put it. You have the bravery of a Spartan Ursus, because I still haven't drawn the courage to sit down and watch this film.

This is still one of my absolute favorite books on Roman history after all these years! This has been on my wish list for a while, but the price has somewhat put me off getting it for sometime. Thanks for the recommendation, as it looks like the price may be worth it after all.

Nice video, you're very lucky to be able to visit such a famous site on what looks like a beautiful day, shame about your illness though! It must have been a terrible sight with all the blood and gore in 216 BC; it really was a horrific slaughter.

It seems that Late Antiquity books tend to be far more expensive than their Republican/Principate counterparts. Could it be that the obscurity of the era leads to less sales than other Roman history books, and that they therefore need to increase the price to justify the research costs?

It seems that Erik the Red is vindicated afterall. I wonder how far inland the Vikings got in America ?

Fantastic footage. And all the more mouth watering when you consider that it's Pre-Alpha work, and there's still about a year or so of development on the game until release. Just look at some of the Beta-footage of the original Rome: Total War on shows like Time Commanders in 2004 and notice how much it improved by the game's release only a few months later.

Yes it is surprising how it manages to keep you warm. I've worn the lorica segmentata outside at night (briefly) and I felt warm enough, although that might've changed if I had stayed out for a long time. I feel sorry for the poor legionaries who had to wear this during Corbulo's campaigns in Amrenia, or during the siege of Masada, or in the many frequent wars against the Sassanid Persians. It must have been hellish.

I agree, what a shame that it costs a bomb!

I've worn a replica of a lorica segmentata, and it really does pinch, especially around the shoulders, while in combination with a woollen tunica underneath, it can also leave you feeling rather hot. I haven't run in it, but I've found the shoulder guards a bit of a nuisance (although I must admit the armour was a somewhat poor fitting). I've never worn a lorica hamata or squamata, so I have nothing to compare my experience with. Anyone here tried all three? I've heard some say they'd take the hamata over the segmentata any day.

Happy Birthday Caldrail. I hope you enjoy your day!

The colour tone certainly is different from the older games in the series. Shogun 2 was very bright and was filled with garish colours, but it worked because they reminded me a bit of Akira Kurosawa's samurai movies like Kagemusha and Ran. The brownish colour palette is supposed to represent the game's grittier tone. The Creative Assembly has already mentioned they are gearing the battles towards being like a Roman version of Saving Private Ryan, although personally I find some aspects of it off putting, but at other times I'm glad that the Total War is leaving the brightly coloured scheme of the past behind. I for one couldn't stand to see another representation of the Parthians in bright pink pyjamas.

It does seem questionable in the extreme. We can't know precisely how many people were killed by the Romans in wars across several centuries, and we can't even be sure how many were killed with spears, javelins, stones from slings and catapults, bolts, arrows or other weapons. Also when discussing Roman swords it's worth remembering the Romans had different types, for instance the Cavalry used the Spatha in Imperial times, while the short stabbing Gladius used by legionaries fell out of use by the Dominate period.