joe

My new book The Roman Empire's Greatest Victories has just been released on amazon. It covers 10 of the most important Roman victories from Actium to the Catalaunian plains, as well as giving extra information on the major military forces involved. Please check it out and spread the word. watch this space for offers and giveaways.

He is said to have had a group of Irish exiles in his entourage who could have provided intelligence and provided support if he invaded. He would have probably been planning to install severaal of these as client kings to give him a base and allies. Additionally I doubt the hill forts would have been any more difficult to what they had already faced in Britain. We do know there was at least some Roman presence there later as a Roman fort has been found near Dublin. Haven't had any luck fnding popuation figures yet.

Agricola said that with one legion and as many auxiliaries he could have conquered Ireland. Could he really?

Agricola said that with one legion and as many auxiliaries he could have conquered Ireland. Could he really?

I have been living in verona for a while now and recently picked up a book on the Roman town. It stated that there was a large temple of Isis and serapis, a temple of harpocrates, a sphinx and "several other smaller egyptian temples". I have done some independent research which has confirmed this. The question is why was there so much. I know that verona was a large and important roman city. I. Also know that Isis worship was important, although more in the form of cults than large temples of her and serapis. Any ideas? Was there simply a large egyptian population there, and if so. Why? Am I mistaken in thinking this is a rare occurrence, were there many egyptian temples outside Egypt?

The number of alemanni is probably exaggerated in the texts, as they often are. But even so it is unlikely they would have all been inside the city, it certainly couldn't have billeted/housed them all, though they may just have been able to stay inside for the length of a battle. They may have been divided, some in the city, some camped outside and maybe even some out foraging, thus the ability of some to escape and the alemanni to return several years later. This situation may have led them to be spread out and surprised when the Roman force arrived. The road network in that area was pretty extensive by that point so an attacking force could have arrived quickly and surprised them. All supposition though, and we don't even know if The alemanni were still besieging when the Romans arrived. A divided German army does allow for the Roman victory however.

that's given me a lot to think about. thanks. the link seems to be wrong, it is to a much earlier battle.

Thanks for the tips. It's actually for a book I'm writing, I have found plenty on the background and consequences/results of the battle, but almost nothing on the actual battle itself. Battle lines, formations, tactics, etc.

Doing some research into the Battle of Mediolanum, any ideas where I can get some info?

damn you're right about julian, i must be confusing him with someone...

I've been considering doing an article on battles and campaigns the romans almost fought. for example caesar was planning a parthian campaign before his assassination; Agricola wanted to invade Ireland, Nero Sudan; and I believe Julian the Apostate was planning to invade Sassanid Persia. any other ideas?

i did some research into this a few years ago, and found some evidence. if you have a look at jstor.org you can find a few papers discussing this, it is mentioned by suetonius and a few other roman historians. he did send an expedition to meroe (the ancient kingdom in sudan) and possibly further south to axum (ethiopia). in all likelyhood he was trying to get money and hoping to score an easy victory or at least improve trade. he is also said to have sent an expedition into the western desert possibly in the hopes of reaching lake chad although this expedition was lost, and another east of the rhie to find the source of the amber they traded with the germans, but they turned back when they realised how far it was (somewhere on the baltic coast i believe) although there is less evidence for these expeditions.

I am currently doing some research into the development and use of the plumbata. Would anyone be able to give me some suggestions as to where to get some more info, books, journals or online. Thanks.

Very plausible that modern Angels having wings was influenced by Roman mythology and it doesn't surprise me if Victoria was the basis or among the more influential Roman mythological figures influenced the modern view of Angels. Real Angels look nothing warm and gentle like they're portrayed in recent literature and popular media.In fact the bible describes them as looking like TERRIFYING MONSTERS. Here are what real angels look like. firstly, angles come from the persian gods. Secondly romans, etruscans and greeks did have demon, but not angles. Demons or rather daemons, as the greeks called them were the semi-divine, demi-gods/spirits not gods. they would therefore include all monsters, and creatures such as furies muses and nymphs and satires. This was my thesis by the way, so it is a well researeched ideas. I can recommend some bokks on the subject if you like. Please do!Much of what I read so far were exclusively on the internet and the Bible. Please give me some books on the subject! The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation: Including the Demotic Spells: Texts Arcana Mundi: Magic and the Occult in the Greek and Roman Worlds: A Collection of Ancient Texts Magika Hiera: Ancient Greek Magic and Religion The Ancient Mysteries: A Sourcebook of Sacred Texts off topic a little but very interesting is- http://www.amazon.com/Magic-Ancient-Egypt-Geraldine-Pinch/dp/0292722621/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1319820628&sr=1-1 and look at the works of Mary Beard there might even be something in the golden bough, trying to find more, but my thesis is on floppy disk! must be old. i'll post some more when i think of them. Another quick point to remember is that, as the romans romanised the gods of the conquered peoples by combining them with roman gods and renaming them, the early christians did the same with many pagan gods, by turning them into demons angels and saints.

Very plausible that modern Angels having wings was influenced by Roman mythology and it doesn't surprise me if Victoria was the basis or among the more influential Roman mythological figures influenced the modern view of Angels. Real Angels look nothing warm and gentle like they're portrayed in recent literature and popular media.In fact the bible describes them as looking like TERRIFYING MONSTERS. Here are what real angels look like. firstly, angles come from the persian gods. Secondly romans, etruscans and greeks did have demon, but not angles. Demons or rather daemons, as the greeks called them were the semi-divine, demi-gods/spirits not gods. they would therefore include all monsters, and creatures such as furies muses and nymphs and satires. This was my thesis by the way, so it is a well researeched ideas. I can recommend some bokks on the subject if you like.