DecimusCaesar

The film is based on Frank Miller's graphic novel, which did contain rather black looking Persians as well as a monstrous looking Ephialtes. It is obvious from watching the trailer that Zack Snyder (the film's director) has gone several steps further by adding all sorts of monsters and even a battle rhinocerous. I've read that Snyder has a liking for 'freaks' in his other films, which sort of explains why they feature so prominently in this new film. It certainly looks as if it's going to be an amazing action film, even if it is low on historical content. I watched a new trailer for this movie this morning. How many trailers does this film have? I've watched at least 3 or 4 in the last few months!

Moslems did serve in the Byzantine army, and the links between them could sometimes be peaceful. For instance, shortly before the Third Crusade, Saladin after he had captured Jerusalem, gave over many sacred Christian objects to the Byzantines. Thena again, he might have done this to annoy the Latin Christians whose Kingdom he had just conquered. EDIT: Oops, I wrote scared instead of sacred.

Sean Connery would be proud of you... :2guns: :sniper: Glad to see you had fun, and it's an added bonus if you raised money for charity!

I'm looking forward to the new series. I've been avoiding the other threads about series 2 just in case I come across any spoilers. From the activity that seems to be on this section of the forum, I'm guessing series 2 is shaping up to be just as good as the first one.

Congratulations Divi Filius! I have no doubt that you will enjoy your course.

Pharsalus, 48 BC: Caesar and Pompey - Clash of the Titans by Simon Sheppard is an excellent book which details this famous battle. The maps that come with it are some of the best I've seen - they include troop movements on a 3D gridline. There are also numerous photographs of the battlefield. The book also contains many original illustrations of legionnaires in battle by Adam Hook. I'm also reading Cleopatra by Michael Grant, which is excellenty written, as is all the books by him. I'd also recommend Pompeii by Peter Connolly, which is brilliantly illustrated as well as being informative. The book was originally intended for children/young adults, so it's rather short and easy to read.

Hmmm...It seems like they've gone down to the pub.

Sound the Cornicern! Make sacrifice at the Temples of Mars and Jupiter ! For off we go to war!! :horse:

Here's a birthday wish to Rameses the Great and FLavius Valerius Constantinus! Hope you two have lots of fun!

Belisarius made an epic effort to rebuild the Western Roman Empire. The amount of territory he conquered was vast. Most of Vandal North Africa, some parts of Spain as well as Italy. And that's not to mention his campaigns against the Persians. For the Roman period I would go for Flavius Aetius, seeing as he made a lot out of nothing. He managed to defeat Attila and his hordes with only a broken army and barbarian allies. Considering the resources he had at his disposal he managed some very surprising successes. For the Republican era I'd go for Scipio. Scipio Africanus I would rate as one of, if not the greatest Roman strategists. His campaigns against the Carthaginians in Spain, as Hannibal marched across Italy, would have seemed a disastorous desicion for a lesser general, yet he succesfully pulled it off.

Zoroastrianism did have some influence in the Eastern Roman Empire. For instance the Zoroastrians made 'martyrs' of some Christians, some of whom were persecuted to death and later became saints. Constantine wrote to King Shapur of Persia to inform him of Christianity, while at the same time warning him not to harm the christians of Mesopotamia. He even thought of launching a war to liberate them at a later time. Later on during the reign of Theodosius II, Christians ransacked and destroyed Zoroastrian shrines around the year 421/2 AD, leading to Persia declaring war on the Roman Empire. Later on peace was made as Rome had to deal with Hunnic incursions in the west. The peace agreement stated that Christians would be allowed to live in peace, and would no longer suffer persecution under the Zoroastrian Sassanid government. Zoroastrianism also coloured the Persians view of the Roman Empire. It was the Lord Ahura Mazda who was the light of the world and it was he who battled the forces of drakness. As far as the Persians were concerned they were the light and the Romans were the darkness, and it was therefore considered to be a kind of holy war to battle the Romans. The feud between the Zoroastrians and Christians would continue into the Byzantine era. During one occasion it led to a massacre in Jerusalem during Heraclius reign as the Zoroastrians spread rumors that the Romans were planning to destroy the Jews. The Jews reacted by attacking and killing many Christians, including Priests and Nuns

Thanks for posting Maladict! The new pictures seem to show what looks like a ceremonial spear. Constantine I also carried a similar one, although that was the so-called 'spear of destiny'.

Hope you have a good night's rest! And good luck.

You made a very good point there Caldrail. One reason that I believe Hero's inventions failed to take off, is that the Romans and Greeks had a completely different mindset to ours. To us it is only logical to improve on established ideas, for instance, if we wanted to improve a car we would think: How can I make efficient use of fuel? How can I improve comfort, speed etc? The ancients on the other hand wouldn't have thought much of this approach. Unless a flaw became apparent in a machine they would'nt attempt to change or improve it. I'm sure that they believed in the old saying "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". One example of this would be Roman warships. They were not changed significantly throughout the entire period, seeing as they worked pretty well to begin with. Roman arms and armour on the other hand did change frequently, considering that the Romans came across numerous enemies with different weaponry and fighting styles. Many of the old style arms and armour were made obsolete against these new opponents, thus military hardware need to be updated. This field is probably best reserved for cognitive archaeologists. I'm sure they would come to the conclusion that Hero's steam machines would have been seen in a different light by the ancients. While modern man would try to fit wheels on to his machinery and call it a 'steam engine', I'm sure the Romans and Greeks would have thought of it as nothing more than a amusement. Afterall, many of Hero's other inventions served no practical purpose, such as his 'singing bronze birds' and his 'mechanical amusement show'.

Finally we have one picture! I'm guessing that the sphere on top of the sceptre represents planet Earth. The base looks as if it has rusted.

Anyone able to feed 5,000 people with only scraps of bread and fish, other than Jamie Oliver?

I suppose I would have to go with a bit of everything as well. My main intrests when I came to this site were Rome's military as well as her foreign policy, especially towards Britain and the Hellenistic World. Lately I have become more interested in Roman society and it's development throughout the epochs. I have been reading more on daily life for ordinary folks as well as life in Pompeii. I've also began reading more on the development of religion and how Rome went from a pagan society to a Monotheistic one.

No problem! Being an Osprey book it's bound to have plenty of illustrations of the artillery pieces. In one of the Osprey books I have, it contains tables and lists that shows the weights and sizes of projectiles that Catapults and Ballistae could fire. They are full of useful information, including graphs that detail the calculated trajectories of missiles fired by catapults as well as diagrams displaying the workings of trigger mechanisms on ballistae etc. They are very in-depth.

One book dealing with the early confrontations between Muslims and the Eastern Roman Empire I was hoping of getting is: Yarmuk by David Nicolle. Although the main focus of the book is the actual battle that took place between these two forces, I am sure it will mention the Byzantines' attitudes towards the Muslims. Either way, according to Steven Runciman in his History of the Crusades vol.1, the Byzantines had a very bitter and pessimistic attitude towards confrontation with the Muslims in the early days, after coming out of a long and bloody war with the Sassanid Persians. Even so, The Emperor Heraclius saw the threat that they posed to the Empire and therefore set about organizing his damaged armies to confront the new threat. I believe that later on, the Byzantines were on good or at least neutral terms with the Muslim Arabs but there were frequent hostlities between them and the Muslim Turks.