View Full Version : Are ambakaro epones historically correct ?
Barry Soteiro
09-24-2008, 20:22
I mean it's a bit stupid for a skirmishing cavalry to have a facemask. :sweatdrop:
I'm sorry. Your argument against our archaelogical and textual evidence is that its stupid.
I've made up my mind now. You are a troll.
However, to give your overworked mind some rest I'll just mention the following - they aren't skirmisher cavalry, they are medium cavalry equipped with javelins (as many cavalry are wont to do in this age). Not all soldiers would have worn facemasks, but archaelogical evidence suggests that some did. As we cannot give different helments to soldiers in the same unit we went for the facemask option because its quite a beautiful object that hadn't appeared on any soldier thus far.
Foot
Dear fellow, not to draw too fine a point, however...
http://www.romancoins.info/f-2005%20parade-mask-cavalry.jpghttp://www.romancoins.info/IMAG0064.JPG
http://www.romancoins.info/milit-cavalry-mask.JPGhttp://www.romancoins.info/a-2005-helmet%20(20).JPG
http://www.romancoins.info/a-2005-helmet%20(5).JPGhttp://www.romancoins.info/b-2005-niederbieber4.JPG
http://www.romancoins.info/Saalburg-0611.JPGhttp://www.romancoins.info/Edinburg-0611%20(11).JPG
I believe the interiors were lined; overall used to protect the face against missiles and the cold?
CmacQ
Mediolanicus
09-25-2008, 16:49
I mean it's a bit stupid for a skirmishing cavalry to have a facemask. :sweatdrop:
And I think it's a bit stupid to fight naked in the middle of winter...
So I'm sure that makes the Gaesatae completely unhistorical too.
Lysimachos
09-25-2008, 18:09
And I think it's a bit stupid to fight naked in the middle of winter...
So I'm sure that makes the Gaesatae completely unhistorical too.
I think it's a bit stupid to fight. Does that make wars unhistorical :laugh4:
And I think it's a bit stupid to fight naked in the middle of winter...
So I'm sure that makes the Gaesatae completely unhistorical too.
Thats why most countries campaigned during the warmer months.
Mediolanicus
09-25-2008, 20:26
Thats why most countries campaigned during the warmer months.
Yeah, I know. :yes:
I just like sarcasm and a nice hyperbole now and then.
I could have written the part about fighting and war being a bit stupid, but I was a bit too stupid to come up with that :idea2:
fatsweets
09-26-2008, 01:01
I haven't seen this unit yet, which factions can this unit be recruited by?
ThePianist
09-26-2008, 01:54
Read this page: https://www.europabarbarorum.com/factions_lusotannan_units.html
They are Elite Medium cavalry, and it's on the website. Should have read the description on there before asking about historical accuracy.
And download this
Recruitment Viewer: https://www.europabarbarorum.com/downloads_misc.html
And download this
Recruitment Viewer: https://www.europabarbarorum.com/downloads_misc.html
Keep in mind that the recruitment viewer on the website is for EB1.0, not 1.1. The one that is included with the modification itself is for EB1.1, but does not contain the unit cards.
Eduorius
09-28-2008, 08:05
Done :P
Olaf The Great
09-28-2008, 18:12
In before the lock.
Anyway, the above poster..posted some interesting pictures. Obviously they would have moved up the facemask while throwing Javelins, but due to the Assery of CA we can't make them "Switch" like that:book:
Feels obvious man.
Assery? I am as disappointed as anyone about CA lack of helpfulness towards the modding community, but this is unreasonable. R:TW is a game, not a fully flexible modding platform, and it's unrealistic to expect it to be. I have yet to see a major video game without hardcodes of some sort.
Why would CA even include such a thing? None of their units used facemasks and even if they did the extra work to include such an option seems to far exceed the reasons for including it. Stop CA bashing just because you feel the need to. There are areas where I would have liked to have seen more help from CA, but this is certainly not one of them. All in all CA are probably one of the few developers who actually give a rats arse about their modding community.
Foot
Dutchhoplite
09-29-2008, 16:06
Hmmm, are those movable visors??
Tellos Athenaios
09-29-2008, 16:55
Movable in the sense: you can move your helmet in its entirety to the back of your head? Similar to a hood? Apparently, yes. But I do not see any mechanism to make it work the way you probably meant -- I see no (possible) moving parts on those pictures. The face masks appear to be directly integrated with the main components of the helmet.
Olaf The Great
09-29-2008, 16:57
Assery? I am as disappointed as anyone about CA lack of helpfulness towards the modding community, but this is unreasonable. R:TW is a game, not a fully flexible modding platform, and it's unrealistic to expect it to be. I have yet to see a major video game without hardcodes of some sort.
I just needed to have some sort of reason to say "Assery"
But yes basically what I meant was that it was impossible :P
Dutchhoplite
09-29-2008, 17:29
http://www.alabarda.net/uniformes/esp/inf/clonard/imagenes/inf_clonard_3.jpg
Well i'm sure the helm *could* be tilted back from the forehead but when i see the position of the neckguard it seems to be sitting normally on the head and with the facemask clapped up :)
And i see "something" that look like hinges ;)
Where are these pictures from?? They seem quite old.
Well i'm sure the helm *could* be tilted back from the forehead but when i see the position of the neckguard it seems to be sitting normally on the head and with the facemask clapped up :)
And i see "something" that look like hinges ;)
Where are these pictures from?? They seem quite old.
clonde de clonard, 1861, IIRC. I use them to make spanish uniforms for the seven years war, along with the album de taccoli; these plates are from the associacion de modelissimo de Alabarda, so I'd like to ask the moderator to remove those pics; there is no permission to use them, and they are copyrighted (I and my boss had to wrte to them for permission to use, copy or distribute these). unless the guy who posted them is a member of course.
here is a work of mine (the template)
http://www.kronoskaf.com/syw/index.php?title=Toledo_Infantry
MeinPanzer
09-29-2008, 18:53
clonde de clonard, 1861, IIRC. I use them to make spanish uniforms for the seven years war, along with the album de taccoli; these plates are from the associacion de modelissimo de Alabarda, so I'd like to ask the moderator to remove those pics; there is no permission to use them, and they are copyrighted (I and my boss had to wrte to them for permission to use, copy or distribute these). unless the guy who posted them is a member of course.
here is a work of mine (the template)
http://www.kronoskaf.com/syw/index.php?title=Toledo_Infantry
If these images were published in 1861 then they are in the public domain now.
If its 1861 those pictures are surely not under copyright any more. Besides, I'm pretty sure they would fall under a fair use policy.
Foot
General Appo
09-29-2008, 21:36
For once, Foot got owned.
For once, Foot got owned.
hardly...he's 100% correct about the copyright issue
If its 1861 those pictures are surely not under copyright any more. Besides, I'm pretty sure they would fall under a fair use policy.
Foot
actually, ownership is still expressed. I'm well aware that this is beyond the c.75 years post mortem of the author(s), but the Alabarda associacion claims it as property-so no, no publishing. we are lucky at kronoskaf to have a few pages of the conde to display outside of the Alabarda; we cannot publish a single page of the Album de taccoli, from 1759. that one is owned by Mr. Torres. nice guy- really helpful. only he, my boss, and myself ever looked inside of it. and I swore not to show a single page-just the result.
so in summation: fair use applies if the author was dead for over 75 years, and ownership/ claim was not made on the work. sorry. I'd normally say yes, but the works are claimed, so plz.
actually, ownership is still expressed. I'm well aware that this is beyond the c.75 years post mortem of the author(s), but the Alabarda associacion claims it as property-so no, no publishing. we are lucky at kronoskaf to have a few pages of the conde to display outside of the Alabarda; we cannot publish a single page of the Album de taccoli, from 1759. that one is owned by Mr. Torres. nice guy- really helpful. only he, my boss, and myself ever looked inside of it. and I swore not to show a single page-just the result.
so in summation: fair use applies if the author was dead for over 75 years, and ownership/ claim was not made on the work. sorry. I'd normally say yes, but the works are claimed, so plz.
fair use (only applies when there is a valid copyright. if a work is no longer under copyright, fair use is not applicable and the work can be used freely
http://www.library.yale.edu/~llicense/definiti.shtml
Fair Use
The right set forth in Section 107 of the United States Copyright Act, to use copyrighted materials for certain purposes, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair: (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
I see. then I'll ned to have a talk with someone...
but it raises the question: why not let us publish the stuff(Album and what have you), without permission? I mean, If indeed what you say is true (and it is), why the ban? I even have the letter from torres copied by the boss.
General Appo
09-29-2008, 22:20
hardly...he's 100% correct about the copyright issue
I was referring to the fact that Foot´s post was preceded with a very short time by another poster saying pretty much the same thing. Foot owned me in the same way a few days ago. Revenge is sweet.
I see. then I'll ned to have a talk with someone...
but it raises the question: why not let us publish the stuff(Album and what have you), without permission? I mean, If indeed what you say is true (and it is), why the ban? I even have the letter from torres copied by the boss.
well if its their own personal property, they can do (or not do) whatever they want with it. if there are already images of the plates in circulation, then they have no say over how those are used.
I was referring to the fact that Foot´s post was preceded with a very short time by another poster saying pretty much the same thing. Foot owned me in the same way a few days ago. Revenge is sweet.
Tell us what his underwear smells like, Appo.
General Appo
09-29-2008, 22:34
Cherries. With banana icecream. Fabulous.
ambakaro epones look amazing. The masks even make them a wee bit scary, wich i really like
oudysseos
10-05-2008, 20:50
I have seen it asserted that the face masks were not worn in battle, but used in parades and such like occasions. Although that makes sense to me, I don't know whether the author of the book I read has anything to back his claim.
well, archeologists supposedly did find a mask at the teuteburg wald from the romans, proving that they at least marched with it. time travellers: archeology (a show-very good for its day, allbeit short. there was also a website, now I have to find it)
EDIT: got it:
http://www.geocities.com/reginheim/maskkalkriese.jpg
Eduorius
10-06-2008, 04:49
Maybe they were Corinthian helmets badly drawn. Corinthian helmets can be pulled over and look like that.
Maybe they were Corinthian helmets badly drawn. Corinthian helmets can be pulled over and look like that.
the helmet is too early for the timeperiod (mostly out of use by the 4th century BC). also wrong region (this is Spain, not greece)
Dutchhoplite
10-06-2008, 21:39
Agree with the first part but not with the second ;)
One mid sixth century Greek helmet has been found in Spain (Huelva, Andalusia) =>
http://fanaticus.org/DBA/armies/Variants/westgreeks01.jpg
Tellos Athenaios
10-06-2008, 21:44
I have seen it asserted that the face masks were not worn in battle, but used in parades and such like occasions. Although that makes sense to me, I don't know whether the author of the book I read has anything to back his claim.
It doesn't make much sense to me; after all I can imagine that it is a wee bit uncomfortable with a mask 'on' but heck of a lot better protected against most annoyances of battle such as dust, all sorts of flying objects etc.
Though I'm certainly no expert, and merely talk from what seems to make sense to me (more).
It's the usual library archaeologist bullshit categorical statement, much in the same vein as "lancers are impossible without stirrups", "that's too ornate to be worn in battle" and "longswords can't be drawn from the right hip". Similar openings on helmets were used by medieval knights, and yes they could be uncomfortable, but it doesn't mean that they did not use them in battle.
Dutchhoplite
10-06-2008, 22:10
By the way...
Is there any clue to whom the Kalkriese mask may have belonged to??
Standard Bearer?? Cavalry officer?? Or will this be another guessing game??
Agree with the first part but not with the second ;)
One mid sixth century Greek helmet has been found in Spain (Huelva, Andalusia) =>
http://fanaticus.org/DBA/armies/Variants/westgreeks01.jpg
this is most interesting. I never knew about that. a new discovery for me. have a balloon:balloon2:
but either way: its simply unlikely that the masks are misrepresentations of the corinthians:book:
as for the kalkreise mask: IIRC it was an officers(what type:?). I'd have to recheck my sources about this.
oudysseos
10-07-2008, 10:00
Sarcasm, that seems a little aggressive.
In J.E. Lendon, Soldiers and Ghosts, I read,
...a description of the use of these masks survives in Arrian... Such masks were not used in battle but in equestrian military displays. Wearing them in the display was a mark of rank or excellence in horsemanship.
But the Mask has...a surprising secret [it] depicts the face of a woman. Such female masks are not rare. Of the surviving masks -over a hundred- catalogued through 1996 nearly a fifth are female: they have been found from Scotland to the Balkans...Roman soldiers carved their names and units on it.
Lendon goes on to say that ceremonial cavalry displays often included the participants dividing up into two teams, perhaps for mock combats, and that perhaps the female masks were meant to mark one of the teams as Amazons. He quotes Arrian some more and goes on to develop his theme that the late Imperial Roman Army looked to classical Greek influences for inspiration. Some of the pictures that he has in the book are the same as in Cmacq's post.
Of course, the more than a hundred masks catalogued that Arrian says were used ceremonially are late Roman, and do not necessarily demonstrate anything about Iberian Cavalry from 3 to 4 hundred years earlier. It's totally plausible that it was the Iberians who started the custom of awarding face masks to cavalry and that the Romans picked it up from them. But that's just speculation on my part. Or is it the usual library archaeologist bullshit?
Are there any face masks that are Iberian and from the right time period?
Dutchhoplite
10-07-2008, 16:44
Similar openings on helmets were used by medieval knights, and yes they could be uncomfortable, but it doesn't mean that they did not use them in battle.
So you're saying:
(a). Ancient facemasks are very similar to medieval visors.
(b). Medieval knights wore them in battle so it's very possible that Romans (or..) used them in battle and did not use them solely for parades.
Correct me if i'm wrong :)
His argument was not one aimed to prove the proposition that facemasks were worn into the battle, there is plenty of primary evidence that this was so. His argument was instead critical of the opposing argument that facemasks were worn only in parades because they would not have been suitable for battle. The argument need not be construed as a positive confirmation of the use of facemasks in battle for the onus is on those who think the facemask could only have been worn in parades.
Foot
oudysseos
10-07-2008, 17:54
I have to point out that Lendon is not arguing that the masks were only ceremonial because in his armchair opinion they could not have been suitable, but because Arrian (who not only wrote history but actually commanded the kinds of troops in question) says that the masks were ceremonial. However, I have been unable to find a copy of Arrian's Art of Tactics online (all I have is his Anabasis), which is the work Lendon claims as the source of his statement, so the strength of this position is unconfirmed.
Furthermore, while I am not questioning the accuracy of the depiction of the Ambakaro Epones, I would be very interested to see some of that primary evidence that Foot mentioned. All the photos posted by Cmacq are in fact late (2nd to 3rd century CE) Roman masks of the kind mentioned by Arrian, and prove nothing either way about Iberian cavalry from the 3rd century BCE.
Surely, if it's a question of onus, would not such a thing be on the person making a positive statement (face masks were worn in battle by the Ambakaro Epones in particular, f'r instance) rather than on those who wonder if that's true?
Again, I don't doubt that there is plenty of primary evidence that such is the case, just saying we haven't seen any of it yet. I, purely out of curiosity, and to kill some time as I'm laid up with pneumonia, would love to get a few hints as where to find such evidence. For one thing, the bibliography is sadly lacking in any sources for the Lusotannan. (edit- fixed this)
Oho! I found Arrian's Art of Tactics online. In Greek. http://books.google.com/books?id=KxoPAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22Arrian%22&lr=#PPA104,M1
Mine is not good enough to do much more than follow chapter heads, but I think the bit about cavalry is on page 135.
Celtic_Punk
10-10-2008, 10:48
Jesus Christ, nobody is making money off it. So don't press a copyright issue... That's so ass inane. You are rebutting someone's remark, and showing proof. The deceased, and those who (do not deserve to - as they never drew it themselves... friggin theives) claim property of should be honoured one decided to use it as a source. The man's been dead for 200 years... let it go.
@OP - masks have been used for a long time. Their helmets would be tilted back(or if they were as complex to include hinges, lifted up) when they prepare to loose javelins or bows. masks were used when they closed to close combat, to incite fear into the enemy, and perhaps convince them they were facing an army of clones or demons perhaps (this is my own speculation). Perhaps the same reason was used that today's paramilitary's use- To hide the identity of the combatant. A faceless enemy strikes more fear into one than when you can see the man you lock blades with. Especially if you survive the encounter, lasting nightmares would probably ensue.(perhaps more so than if you fought a battle against those without masks -again obviously more speculation, but not unfounded.) Some masks were fitted with insulating cloth (as stated above) to protect the wearer from the cold, as you would have to fight battles in the most unforgiving weather sometimes (rain, snow, frost, chill, ect.). Facemasks were probably more common in rich armies then one thinks. If my memory serves me correctly, the ancient Chinese and Japanese were quite fond of facemasks, literally shaping them into demonic faces.
oudysseos
10-10-2008, 15:43
Didn't mean to reply, hit button by mistake. Anyways.
Celtic Punk, speculations aside, do you have any access to primary sources that show or describe armored face masks being used by Ambakaro Epones in the 3rd cebtury BCE? I'm not trying to flog a dead horse, but I really am interested as the research that I have been able to do hasn't turned much up. I haven't turned up anything at all actually. The only face armor that I know of at the moment (western europe) are the Roman Cavalry masks we've already discussed. Is there anything else?
Didn't mean to reply, hit button by mistake. Anyways.
Celtic Punk, speculations aside, do you have any access to primary sources that show or describe armored face masks being used by Ambakaro Epones in the 3rd cebtury BCE? I'm not trying to flog a dead horse, but I really am interested as the research that I have been able to do hasn't turned much up. I haven't turned up anything at all actually. The only face armor that I know of at the moment (western europe) are the Roman Cavalry masks we've already discussed. Is there anything else?
Given what has been posted,
I’m not entirely sure what your question is? Are you asking if there is direct evidence that individuals living in an area well within the Hellenistic sphere had access to Hellenistic type war gear, in the 3rd century BC? Otherwise I believe Foot answered this question?
Regardless, I have a question.
Foot
Does the source of the graphics showing the tiltable facemask (jpeg 1-3) posted by Eduorius, provide what evidence these depictions were based on? Given the date of said publication (1860s), my guess would be maybe yes or maybe no. Interestingly, I’ve always found that the hallmark of a good researcher is their ability to follow the meager bread crumbs. With that said its well understood that the Romans invented very little. Returning however, If the direct source was not cited and as archeology was in its infancy at the time, its most likely these were the result of antiquarians, thus based on examples found in sculpture. If so, this may be confirmed by a review of the 3rd century BC, Iberian sculpture recovered and/or documented in the 19th century AD, if one were so inclined. I, for one, am not so inclined.
http://www.geocities.com/reginheim/maskkalkriese.jpg
Kalkriese, AD 9. From this well developed example, a case of extreme chance preservation, at least a 1st century BC use can well be assumed. Additionally, for the usual library archaeologist, please read 'Hellenistic Architectural Sculpture' by Web, for information on the 4th century BC, Hellenistic facemask.
CmacQ
oudysseos
10-10-2008, 22:29
Look, the OP was a bit of a troll maybe, but no, the specific question raised has not been answered at all, at least not with any citations or evidence. Although I thought it was clearly stated before,
Did the Ambakaro Epones, in the far west of the Iberian peninsula, in the 3rd century BCE, wear armored face-masks into battle?
Foot and Celtic Punk have asserted that there is "plenty of primary evidence" that they did so. If that is the case, then surely it would be possible to cite some, or throw out a few 'breadcrumbs' for an interested researcher?
That face-masks existed at all is not at issue, but when, where, and how were they used?
When and Where
All the pictures that Cmacq posted are from http://www.romancoins.info/MilitaryEquipment-Facemasks.html. All are Roman. None are dated earlier than the 1st century CE. None are from Spain. (There are over 100 masks catalogued; some may have been found in Spain, or not. Does anyone know for sure?)
Cmacq says that we can assume a 1st century BCE use. Even if you like to assume things like that (why should you?), how does that get you to 272? He also advised the 'usual library archaeologist' (is that ad hominem?) to read Webb, Hellenistic Architectural Sculpture. Google Books to the rescue!
The bearded face-mask helmet raises the question as to whether the weapon-reliefs could date to the Roman Imperial period, for this type was a relatively common Roman parade helmet.
She goes on to conclude that she finds it likely that the reliefs are related to 4th century Thracian helmets. Hardly an unequivocal endorsement of early use, and anyway, she is commenting on the Pergamon friezes, found in Turkey, almost 3,000 kilometers in a straight line from western Iberia. What does this have to do with the Lusotana?
SO, nothing shown yet that face masks were used during the EB time frame. And all the masks cited, besides being far too late, are Roman or possibly Hellenistic. Not Iberian.
Now, just because the Romans wearing masks on parade doesn't prove that the Ambakaro Epones wore masks into battle 300 years earlier doesn't mean it isn't true anyway, just as exhibits of Roman caligae doesn't prove that the Iberians did or did not wear shoes. The Roman masks have nothing to do with the Lusotana.
All I'm asking, is did the team that made the Lusotana units have any specific evidence, archaeological, numismatic, epigraphic, whatever, that they were as depicted? I'm not sure that one can assume
that individuals living in an area well within the Hellenistic sphere had access to Hellenistic type war gear. If you do, then why not Iberian pike phalanxes or anything else you want? There must have been a reason why the unit was given a face mask. Again, if there is proof available, why not share it?
How
They [Kalkriese, Vechten and Nijmegen face-masks] were never intended for use in battle. These are the cavalry sports helmets, worn on parade and in displays. From The Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 3 1992, Roman face masks from the Kops Plateau, Nijmegen, The Netherlands, W.J.H. Willems. http://209.85.135.104/search?q=cache:fwFibInsU0AJ:https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bitstream/1887/10000/1/1_953_037.pdf+dating+the+kalkriese+face-mask&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=ie&client=firefox-a
Webb also refers to the Roman masks as Parade Helmets, and of course there's J.E. Lendon already quoted, with a link to the original Arrian text. So there is some written evidence that the Roman face-masks were not battle gear. Is there any hard evidence to the contrary? I know Foot says that there is. Could he point me in the right direction?
Can I just say that I don't care if the Ambakaro Epones unit is speculative or derivative in some way. You have made hundreds of beautifully detailed units: there is just not enough hard evidence left to make each one 110% rock-solid irreproachably authentic. And it's a game, not a PHD dissertation. But if that is the case, can the answer not be candid? Look at the Persian Cataphracts answer (post no. 11) on this thread: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=108413. Polite, informative, honest. Not a bother on him, as we say here.
I only pursued this thread 'cos I actually wanted to know about that primary evidence that Foot has mentioned, not because I think there's something wrong with the unit. I guess I should just let it go if there are no real answers.
P.S. I used to live in Bremen, not too far from Kalkriese. The pics don't do it justice.
MeinPanzer
10-10-2008, 23:43
Any discussion of proper Hellenistic facemask helmets (proper as in not having the mask composed of two separate cheek pieces) is kind of silly since there is really only one source - the Pergamene example. We only have that one example, and so discussing "the Hellenistic facemask" as some sort of institution of Hellenistic military equipment is a bit disingenuous.
Anyone who is interested in Iberian history should PM either Sarcasm or Urnamma, both of whom may lead you in the right direction. However continuing to post here is going to make you come off like Lobf and Elmetiacos, both of whom are not much liked for their pestering.
Foot
You're a demanding little bugger aren't ya? I do have a job, and after a 24 hour shift, it's only irritation over your continuous insinuations that's making me reply to you. Politeness, after all that, has really no point. You *can* wait a bloody day for an answer. Believe it, there's no subterfuge when dealing with me - what you see (or rather, read) is what you get.
Anyway, I'll head straight to the point. The EB1 initial Iberian roster was already well developed before I joined the mod, and so besides the few last units and modifications (most of which were not completed to my specifications by the way, for reasons that I won't get into with people outside the group) I had no real involvement in the creation of the remaining units. Since the people responsible for the Ambakaro units have left by this point, I really have no way of knowing what legitimate information they used to create the unit (if any).
That being said, most modern representations of Lusitanians do have a facemask included in the sets, so it must have some truth in them. Despite the fact that my extensive research has not turned up any clues as to how they became such a symbol for an elite Lusitani warrior, I still do believe that something must be eluding me. So far, the only real evidence for combat face masks in Iberia were in Augustan coins as part of the usual victory stands (is that the right way to call them even?) that represent the arms of the defeated people - in those cases, the Cantabri and Asturi.*
Does that warrant the inclusion of facemasks in the elite cavalry and infantry of the Lusitani? In EB1, that's a moot point by now, in EB2 we'll see....there's still plenty to read on my shelf.
The real problem is time. Now if you excuse me, I'm going to bed.
*And yes, they were representing native weapons » bipenne axes, spears, falcatas, triangular daggers, triple-crested helmets with facemasks, chainmail and caetras
oudysseos
10-11-2008, 00:39
Thank you. Question answered. Case closed (for my part). I am truly sorry if I came off as demanding, although I fail to see where I made any demands at all, and I didn't start the name-calling. I just asked a few questions, as I thought politely, and didn't think that I got particularly great answers, not so politely. I did not expect anything within any kind of time frame nor did I intend any insinuations. Certainly I never intended any criticism of the work itself (and said so several times), which is amazing, and in fact in tribute to the quality of your work wanted to know where it came from. If that is pestering, then, Gentlemen, I am sorry.
P.S. The comparison to Lobf is really unfair. I posted twice in one day on this, which hardly constitutes harassment.
Frostwulf
10-11-2008, 05:44
To call or elude to Oudysseos being a troll is not even close to fair. He was simply asking questions and using a reference/citation to a possible similar situation(Roman mask/Lusitanian mask). His question was never truly answered but answered as best as possible for now.
I hope you don't mind me making a suggestion that could help out in future situations, it was something Sarcasm said, which is similar to what Foot said awhile back:
In EB1, that's a moot point by now, in EB2 we'll see....there's still plenty to read on my shelf.
My suggestion is making a sticky akin to this:
"EB team will no longer be supplying answers to historical based questions. We are in the process of making EB2 and most of our team that supplied the information for EB1 is no longer with us, therefore we don't have the time to deal with questions of historical accuracy. With EB2 we will provide source materials for you to check on, thank you for your interest".
I'm sure someone with a more poetic way with words will do much better, but the idea is there.
Anyone who is interested in Iberian history should PM either Sarcasm or Urnamma, both of whom may lead you in the right direction. However continuing to post here is going to make you come off like Lobf and Elmetiacos, both of whom are not much liked for their pestering.
Foot
lol
Edit:
That being said, most modern representations of Lusitanians do have a facemask included in the sets, so it must have some truth in them.
Also lol
You are of course a douche bag with little to do, and obviously limited cognitive skills or you would understand exactly what I meant with that.
Oudysseos being compared to you was unfair indeed.
oudysseos
10-11-2008, 14:54
I hope someone locks this soon.
You are of course a douche bag with little to do, and obviously limited cognitive skills or you would understand exactly what I meant with that.
Oudysseos being compared to you was unfair indeed.
Douche bag? Really? From a team member? Makes me want to say something like "Fuck You." But I would never.
Anyways, how should I glean the real meaning out of a sentence that says something else?
And I don't really care how you guys feel. All I've done is press for sources, and it sucks that that gets you so angry. (as demonstrated perfectly in this topic) But that's not my problem. So I'll continue to play your fantastic game, and you can continue to be outraged by skepticism. :2thumbsup:
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.