History Major. Cripple. Vaguely Left-Wing. In pain and constantly irritable.

  • 4.91K Posts
  • 5.08K Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: March 24th, 2025

help-circle





  • : 1) was there really much of note that would have been shared by both Germans and Celts of this period?

    Oh, yes, certainly. One of the things often noted in the modern day about Caesar’s Commentarii is that he draws a much ‘stronger’ line between the peoples than actually existed. He might have wanted to contrast the “Noble, civilizable” Celts with the “Barbaric, dangerous” Germanics, or he simply might have been calling matters as he saw them through the ethnographic lens of an ancient Roman. Like most regions before concentrated state institutions, it’s not really a boolean “Celt/Germanic” so much as it is a gradient, with a lot of outliers. Not only that, but “German” is sometimes thought to be a Celtic word meaning, roughly, “neighbor” - the two cultures were geographically close and interacted on a regular basis.

    1. why were these (evidently) only found where Romans had a mixing / fringe presence, and not deeper in to Celt / Germanic territory?

    No clue, I’m afraid!



  • PugJesus@piefed.socialOPMtoHistory Memes@piefed.socialPROTIP: It was
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    You remember correctly that the rescue in battle was an actual event! But not nearly in the circumstances depicted.

    In the actual event, both of them were centurions, and both trying to outdo each other in feats of daring and valor during a long and eventless siege by Gauls. They were both being ‘Pullo’ in the opening scene, in a sense. By daring, they keep the morale of their men up during long periods of inactivity. Centurions were expected to do so when circumstances allowed - no breaking ranks in the middle of battle, but in quiet moments, starting trouble on your lonesome (or in a small group) was perfectly valid as long as it didn’t endanger the unit (or as long as it wasn’t completely reckless and throwing your life away).

    That kind of ‘combat by champion’ was very common in societies of that era, not to decide entire battles, but as small events before the big clash which could invigorate or dampen the spirits of the army as a whole. Centurions, as men from the ranks who were expected to be the hardest motherfuckers around, were to some degree expected to participate in daring actions like that, to reassure their men that they were being led by example (centurions also had horrific casualty rates).

    Anyway, if memory serves, in one of these skirmishes Pullo is hit by a javelin that narrowly misses impaling him, but fucks with his scabbard and stops him from drawing his sword as the enemy rushes him. Vorenus, who was watching up til this point (rather than assisting, since the two were rivals for promotion, and the point was each trying to show off their individual valor), rushes out of the fortifications alone to cover Pullo until he can unfuck his sword, saving his life. As the two of them withdraw, Vorenus loses his footing and almost gets killed by the Gauls, but Pullo valiantly saves Vorenus’s life in turn, helping him make it back to the safety of the fortifications.

    Their enmity ended after that, and everyone clapped the onlooking legionaries cheered to see a couple of brave centurions save one another and ice a half-dozen barbarians in the process.

    The show dynamic between Vorenus and Pullo is fantastic though, unironically, I’m glad they went with it instead.





  • The worst part is, the rational deterrent to this isn’t available because the fucking decisionmakers in the US aren’t fucking rational.

    I mean, under ordinary circumstances, the threat of simply handing over that kind of technology to whatever rivals of the US want to crack it open and get a good look inside would be more than enough to ensure at least a basic level of noninterference and cooperation from a rational regime. But if the emus invaded Aussieland tomorrow, and the Aussies failed to lick the orange’s shit-filled boots, his pants-pissing tantrum would end with demanding the maximum level of sabotage of American-made Australian military equipment, even if the Aussie military spelled out the threat for him in big, sharpie-printed letters.

    To be entirely fair, though, the only known ‘kill switch’ in question is “We’re no longer updating the software or providing parts for you”, which is somewhat different than what’s generally thought of as a kill-switch. I mean, by that definition, the F-14 had a ‘kill-switch’ that we flipped on Iran, and they still kept the F-14 fleet going for a good 30 years.



  • The actual event was significantly different - the only thing they really share is the names of the two people in question. But other than that (and the needless slander of Atia), the attention to historical detail and nuance was astounding, easily one of the best/most accurate Roman media out there, up with I, Claudius.










  • Richard is one of those unusual historically-relevant figures who really embodies that ancient ‘warrior ethos’ of many pre-modern societies, with all of its paradoxes. He will absolutely butcher your mass of peasant levies, or send in his mass of peasant levies to be butchered, without a second thought. He’ll start a war over a line in a feudal contract that can be disputed to his favor. He’ll gleefully split your skull with a battleaxe in NOBLE AND HONORABLE COMBAT, even if he may prefer the ransom of a capture.

    But he was also capable of great generosity of spirit, and largely (though not always - Richard’s temper was noted as volatile) acted in accordance with a kind of ‘golden rule’ treatment. If you were on the battlefield, he expected no more from you than he intended to give.

    Notably, his last act was to pardon and reward the Frenchman who killed him with the equivalent of a few years’ wages. The Frenchman, also notably, killed him with a crossbow, which was considered a brutal and cutting-edge weapon… which Richard was very fond of despite the constant moral condemnations of it. “Live by the sword…”

    Unfortunately, one of his more monstrous mercenary companions tortured said Frenchman to death once King Richard had breathed his last and could no longer interfere. One of the… caveats of keeping dangerous company is that you can no longer direct whom they’re dangerous towards once you’re gone…

    He was noted as very close with several of his military companions, who ran the gamut from common-born to lower nobility, and likewise from monstrous to chivalric. He suffered with his men on campaign, even when he could very easily have lived an easy life at relatively little additional cost, and was always noted as generous to his troops, at a time when monarchs cheating their men even of their promised pay was common.

    Some real Beowulf shit, ‘heroic’ and loyal to his friends, but not necessarily ‘good’.