Pertinax

dare I say it? King Crimson -Vroom Vroom

and the answer is both at the same time-just been stumbling around in my first battle in "total realism" what a good looking game!

Tacitus records in the Annals the savagery of formerly mutinous Legion's turning on those who provoked mutiny, and note that the blame for the mutiny is laid upon "town " slaves drafted into the Legion who are at once both more cunning and lazier than the "rustic" legionnaires.

history of war The link above is food for thought -the table is rather crude but gives an indication of how many bodies were in close proximity in combat and how alien ancient battlefields are to us in combat appreciation. I think Lost Warrior may be proved right in his statement-sheer numbers might get you trampled in an "ancient" army and anyone whos boxed , fenced or played hard contact sports knows even the toughest have a time limit on strength and adrenaline. A truce seems a logical and honourable method of casualty extraction

Bellona was of course the guiding deity of Sulla- he never forgot that he had been remembered by female friends at his lowest ebb( being left a legacy by a famous courtesan). His first summons of the Senate was in Bellona's temple below the ruins of Jupiter's, with the massacre of Samnite prisoners mentioned by Favonius Cornelius (above).

Perhaps Hannibal's difficulty was the utter implacability and intrasigence of the Romans. This does not mean that I suggest he was weak or defective in strategy or action. If we recall the fate of the Samnites after the "passing under the yoke" humiliation ,we seem to see in Rome a totally implacable attitude to warfare (perhaps an echo of assyria?) . Why wage war other than to utterly destroy an enemy-witness the implacable annihilation of enemies,cattle and pet animals in defeated cities( look at the fate of not very threatening Corinth)If defeated do not surrender whilst you have any means to fight with in any way possible ,even if lives are consumed on a huge scale .If an ally doesnt seem to keen ,kick them where it hurts-Rhodes for example. It seems the Roman mindset was perhaps something not entirely comprehended by others the utter conviction of their superiority as a Republic and as "citizens".

My copy of Galen -"on food and diet" has arrived I will see how that ties into the "Roman Table". Galen I really should have read a long time ago , though the survivng work is only a fragment.

Reading Rubicon alongside watching "Rome" is interesting-the pleb/patrician clash is nicely described and the show echoes the book in its reflection of social attitudes.

This overlaps with the same punishment for dereliction of sentry duty-the basic principle in that case being a person who has jeopardised the lives of his comrades is struck down by those same persons he has neglected.

this is an interesting strand because it poses quite a few questions -namely (1) who carried the injured off the battlefield (2) who looked after them and for how long,in the field and (3) who transported them and how. These are big logistical problems for early armies without fast /heavy transport capabilities and they impact on fatalities heavily as well. If we accept that a lot of modern day contact is designed to maim and thus impede combat capability by requiring either combatants or medics to tend to the injured or at least "be distracted " by them what was ancient combat aimed at ? total destruction of opposing forces that could not be kept in the field for long?

what no complaint about chopping the sacrificial animal up and rolling around in blood? I suppose our friend behind the tree with the shepherdess was gratuitously daft.

I can only imagine that you use two spears as stretcher arms with shield lashed between-this is one of those areas where practical work is needed-you would imagine it would be seriously tough work even with an elongated shield.

a terrible moral conundrum -Total War and Rubicon arrived simultaneously this morning-do I feed the intellect or start hacking through bloodstained combat?

Rome's Northern Frontier AD 70-235 Nic Fields illus by Donato Spedaliere (Osprey fortress series 2005) Perhaps this is a slightly esoteric book dealing with such a seemingly remote , cold and misty place (within the Empire). This is a scholarly work put together with measured and balanced language, Nic Fields is discreet enough to value Tacitus but not to swallow his rhetoric whole. The actual text is acutely observant and gives some very good detail on local "opposition" and the make up of Auxiliary units. The anatomical features of The Antonine Wall and Gask Ridge are explored and reported with soild scholarship and excellent expository drawings, it also gives a useful introduction to how the Wall was used ie: not as a fighting structure/platform but rather as a delaying device to allow a build up of fluid Roman forces to counter a perceivd threat.Small scale raids and policing seem to be very much the reality of the time-indeed such raiding was the cultural norm for the Caledonii. There are useful notes on whose units/vexillations were where. As members will know the Osprey series are more "technical pamphlet" than reading matter ,this is a very good piece of work indeed and I reccomend it to those wanting in depth notes on the "edge of civilisation" Being among the Brigantes I will not now wear woad all the time -I might well wear a malachite green skin stain so I would be "Pretani" ( a painted one) survivng in the name "Pict" which Fields suggests might be a derogatory Roman adaptation of the indigenous word.

Trajen's remark about Pompey is interesting because thats the very charachter I was wondering about -I think Kenneth Cranham is a good choice but it depends how he will play the role;Cranham can do floppy haired English academics and tough guy enforcers, his face looks like an old soldiers , seamed and lived in.Pompey we are lead to believe was popular enough but his manner was mocked as "mincing" by some. Many other facets of the programme where excellent, it just so happens that its one of the best guides to English class attitudes I have ever seen transposed into a wholly believable antiquity, and that "Old World" was brought alive by the airing of those attitudes and manners. I know Mark Antony personally-he exists as the nephew of a friend, bright ,straight limbed ,charming, manipulative ,totally self centred and has lived a life of privelige. All the others were visible as of a particular class and attitude. The sex scenes were cleverer than I thought -they showed sex as power politics and manipulation not just an on screen bonk.I would also single out some very deft little touches (which ill study again on replay) which gave excellent little moments of authenticity or acute observation-the overhead shot of the Legion's front line filtering seamlesley back to bring fresh men to the point of contact, and the strike with the shield and gladius blow:short , brutally neat and effective no flourishes back to ready posture : the scene where Pompeys prospective bride (the patrician widow) says it is not appropriate for her to be present given the presence of a lewd woman; and Octavians casually nasty slappping of a slave . Seeing al those thing I thougt -yes that could be how it was. So far then im impressed.

and very correct contact with use of shield and gladius -someone has done homework on that .

Frateres! I come from Rome post haste, -brilliant , at once accurate in thoughtful detail of Rome gone by and probably the best satire of English social class behaviour i have ever seen.I take nothing away from the programme as regards its understanding of social mores in Rome but someone is a genius,they have interpreted Roman power politics as a dynastic clash in either Jacobean or Georgian Britain. I will comment further when I have stopped roaring with appreciative laughter. Salve! and I would happily share a trench with our two main charachters

On that note I wil post a small review of "Rome's Northern frontier ad 70 -235 " very soon.

Salve! well weve been waiting long enough-tonights the night Rome is beamed into the huts of the Brigantes by strange ethereal sorcery! Are the Auguries correct? Im off to get some woad slapped on , a supply of beer brewed by the Belgae from the taberna, an exotic dish of meats flavoured by spices from the Indus , put extra dung on the fire, pen the cattle against wolves and leave the learned rhetoric of Tacitus to loftier intellects.

http://www.pompeisepolta.com/english/garum.htm this links shows the ubiquitos amphora -though in this case a 2000 year old sealed one containing garum in a smal shop in pompei which has been analysed as to its contents. The author does not say if the garum was particulary tastey.

I am wading through blood in Gaul and listening to weasely senators -so Tacitus is speaking to me .When I read this book as a schoolboy I thought the language was arcane (like the St James' bible) heavy,rolling and portentus but the battle scenes were vivid and direct and the narrative seemed to pick up speed and be totally absorbing. Now I realise that because I was a kid I wanted battles and heroic fights not what seemed like the ramblings of accountants and bookkeepers. I havent finished the Grant translation yet but I have to say now that I savour the language and the very subtle portraiture of individuals by use of well crafted phrases; the battle scenes are just as vivid as when I first read them ,I shivered alongside Germanicus' troops as they grimly buried the remains of Varus' legions. My observations so far-excellent , probably should be read aloud rather than studied by an individual because the language is that of rhetoric speaking through a very subtle translator. Ok I dont think Tacitus liked Tiberius at all and the litany of corrosive comment makes you feel that you must perhaps take a look at Tiberius from other points of view. For now I leave this passage "A galdiator show was given in the name of Germanicus and Drusus.The latter was abnormally fond of bloodshed.Admittedly it was worthless blood ,but the public were shocked" Worthless blood-an interesting moral judgement from a prominent and thoughtful person,phrases like these are the little windows into the differentness of the Roman soul.

Lacertus' link to greek fire is interesting as the illustration toward the head of the page is of Mamluk incendiary troops .These troops used the "naft" fireworks in their elaborate ceremonial games and displays but were also deployed as naft throwers -not on any great scale though they were deployed against the Mongols on a large scale in 1299.I presume naft is a possibly some sort of emulsified petroleum product? Does anyone have knowledge of the use and deployment of this weapon?

Yes the second part of "around the Roman Table" is full of authentic recipes Garum is highly salted fish sauce related to soy sauce ,the Romans had garum factories and they did not smell good.A type of garum called collata is still eaten in Italy today, being a by product of the Amalfitani anchovy processing industry.If youve ben fortunate enough to visit Napoli and Pompei you may have wandered a little further south to Capri or Positano, the sea is alive with the tiny silver anchovies if you sit and look into the harbour water. "The best Garum called haimation is made as follows :take the innards of a tuna, with the gills, the juice and blood and scatter with salt.Place everything in a ( clay)vessel. Seal it. After about two months pierce the vessel-what flows out is the best garum" (geoponcia XX, 46).

I firmly intend to try some of the Roman recipes- I thinkthe critical problem with them may be that they are very strongly flavoured ,the amount of pepper mentioned in most of the recipes is fearsome never mind the "garum" for which I do have a sub-recipe. Ordinary eel is flavoursome if you get a a quality fish ,though it can taste a bit muddy otherwise, Moray is heavier and fleshier somewhat like eel crossed with hake.

The Gods favour the Crustaceans ther are no recipes!