View Full Version : Accuracy of Osprey book "Early Roman armies"
Kongeslask
11-08-2008, 04:09
Just thought I'd ask about this, seeing how knowledgeable you people are: Though most of the book concerns times earlier than EB, there is a colour illustration depicting Hastati fighting one of Pyrrhos' elephants, and they look remarkably similar to the EB Camillan Hastati, except for the fact that they seem to be carrying thureos-type shields. It says the illustration is based on "aes grave" coins. I am looking for input on this; was the scutum-type shield more common in the EB timeframe or whatnot?
Also, it would be interesting to know if someone familiar with the book is able to point out serious errors in the other depictions.
MeinPanzer
11-08-2008, 05:46
Just thought I'd ask about this, seeing how knowledgeable you people are: Though most of the book concerns times earlier than EB, there is a colour illustration depicting Hastati fighting one of Pyrrhos' elephants, and they look remarkably similar to the EB Camillan Hastati, except for the fact that they seem to be carrying thureos-type shields. It says the illustration is based on "aes grave" coins. I am looking for input on this; was the scutum-type shield more common in the EB timeframe or whatnot?
The scutum is just the Latin name for the thureos. What do you mean when you write that they carry thureos-like shields instead of scutum-like shields?
Kongeslask
11-08-2008, 12:06
The shields in the illustration are oval in shape and flat, like the shields the thureophoroi have, while the EB scutum is more rectangular with rounded edges and curved as to be semi-cylindrical. There is a definite difference.
Olaf The Great
11-08-2008, 17:50
More likely the illustrator misinterpreted what he was given and drew it flat, rather than a historical error on the books part.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
11-08-2008, 19:10
No the illustration is, in this case, valid. The full-body shield is something of a late developement, relatively speaking, we are currently discussing what shields exactly to give our Camillian units. The problem is that Scutum is, as noted, the catch-all Latin for "shield", will the Argive shield is distinguished as a Clipius, or as Argive. So a Scutum in the text may not be the same as the large, curved full body shield.
MeinPanzer
11-08-2008, 20:59
The shields in the illustration are oval in shape and flat, like the shields the thureophoroi have, while the EB scutum is more rectangular with rounded edges and curved as to be semi-cylindrical. There is a definite difference.
We have depictions of Italian scuta as being oval and flat and Greek thureoi as being rounded and curved, so there wasn't just one type of Italian or Greek (or Celtic, etc.) shield. In the same vein, while it seems Roman shields were overall larger than eastern thureoi by the second century BC, there is a huge variability in size in depictions (and actual finds) of thureoi - the imprint of a thureos found in the arsenal at Ai Khanoum, for instance, showed that the shield was about 1.3 metres long, which is slightly longer than the 1.28 metre shield from Kasr el-Harit (which is usually taken to be Roman).
Kongeslask
11-08-2008, 21:21
Interesting. In EB the Camillan Hastati and Principes both have the curved lozenge "scutum" shield, though with slightly different patterns on them. Would it be possible in EB II to vary the shield shape within a unit so that some have the current "scutum" and other have a flat oval "thureos"?
Interesting. In EB the Camillan Hastati and Principes both have the curved lozenge "scutum" shield, though with slightly different patterns on them. Would it be possible in EB II to vary the shield shape within a unit so that some have the current "scutum" and other have a flat oval "thureos"?
I think its possible.
Intranetusa
11-09-2008, 05:59
You should check out some of Osprey's other books.
I find their books on armies from East Asia to be a bit strange. In one of their editions, they depicted all of the soldiers with extremely small and squinty eyes. :juggle2:
Constantius I
11-09-2008, 16:36
When did Rome (if ever) wear the classic "hollywood" style uniforms?
I just read a small introduction to the period "roman warfare" but it did not show these types of gear until on a column maybe 150AD
Pontius Pilate
11-09-2008, 21:15
When did Rome (if ever) wear the classic "hollywood" style uniforms?
I just read a small introduction to the period "roman warfare" but it did not show these types of gear until on a column maybe 150AD
When you say "classical hollywood style uniforms" I think you mean Lorica Segmenta which was used during the first and second centuries A.D. so 150AD would fit in its timeline.
You should check out some of Osprey's other books.
I find their books on armies from East Asia to be a bit strange. In one of their editions, they depicted all of the soldiers with extremely small and squinty eyes.
What the heck are you talking about??
What the heck are you talking about??
the Osprey addition for east asia (china, mongolia, Japan). All the depictions really do have beady eyes, kinda like larry linville, only beadier.
I think the artist was trying to depict the east asian's (again, chinese, japanese, etc) eyes. needless to say, his results were less than satisfactory.
Pontius Pilate
11-09-2008, 21:59
the Osprey addition for east asia (china, mongolia, Japan). All the depictions really do have beady eyes, kinda like larry linville, only beadier.
I think the artist was trying to depict the east asian's (again, chinese, japanese, etc) eyes. needless to say, his results were less than satisfactory.
no offense to anybody, but um well, aren't east asians supposed to have beady-like eyes?:sweatdrop:
no offense to anybody, but um well, aren't east asians supposed to have beady-like eyes?:sweatdrop:
you got me wrong. you see, asians don't really have beady eyes in the Osprey sence: they have slits for eyes, but not like osprey's depiction.
I wish I could show you, but that's against forum rules.:shame:
Conqueror
11-09-2008, 22:40
I think the proper term for this is eyelids with epicanthic fold.
Intranetusa
11-09-2008, 22:50
no offense to anybody, but um well, aren't east asians supposed to have beady-like eyes?:sweatdrop:
Well, you must not know a lot of East Asians because most of them don't.
Take a look at Jackie Chan, for instance.
The only ones with remotely 'beady eyes' are those from the really cold places such as Siberia and Mongolia.
TWFanatic
11-09-2008, 23:02
Beady-ness is in the eye of the beholder.
Intranetusa
11-09-2008, 23:07
So is the effectiveness of the sarrissa pike against arrows fired by crappy western & Persian bows.
theoldbelgian
11-10-2008, 01:16
mmh a sarissa in the eye of the beholder
must hurt i think
Pontius Pilate
11-10-2008, 02:04
Well, you must not know a lot of East Asians because most of them don't.
Take a look at Jackie Chan, for instance.
The only ones with remotely 'beady eyes' are those from the really cold places such as Siberia and Mongolia.
Seriously, I think you all need to relax. Why is everyone on this forum so sensitive about everything? Can't even ask a question without being flamed. In case you didn't read my previous post I said "no offense anybody". When I wrote beady eyes I should have phrased it "slits for eyes", okay. And about me not knowing any east asians, hahahaha, funny you should say that.
So is the effectiveness of the sarrissa pike against arrows fired by crappy western & Persian bows.
Wow. Is this your idea of a joke about the post I made about sarissa phalanxes/arrow effectiveness a few weeks ago? Anyway, if it is, not a very good joke.:thumbsdown:
"... William wondered why he always disliked people who said 'no offence meant'. Maybe it was because they found it easier to say 'no offence meant' than actually refrain from giving offence."
- Terry Pratchett, The Truth, p. 95.
Foot
Pontius Pilate
11-10-2008, 02:41
"... William wondered why he always disliked people who said 'no offence meant'. Maybe it was because they found it easier to say 'no offence meant' than actually refrain from giving offence."
- Terry Pratchett, The Truth, p. 95.
Foot
:thumbsdown::thumbsdown:gee thanks for just adding more fuel to the fire. that really helped. But seriously, I had no malicious, or cruel intentions, but now that Foot says I did, well I guess I did (even though I really didn't)
"no offence meant" is not a get-out-of-jail-free card. Going up to an african-american and calling him/her "a n-word, but no offence meant" is not going to win you any friends. Using the phrase "beady eyes" (a slur that was quite popular in the west when referring to asian people) and furthermore using it as a catch-all phrase to refer to asian people as a general group (thus stereo-typing an extremely large and varied population) is tantamount to racism. You may not have meant it in an offensive manner (and I believe you), but that does not excuse you from careless and inappropriate language. A question: if you did not consider it offensive yourself, why did you clarify your remark with "no offence meant"? If you did consider it offensive, why didn't you be more careful in phrasing?
Foot
Pontius Pilate
11-10-2008, 03:13
A question: if you did not consider it offensive yourself, why did you clarify your remark with "no offence meant"? If you did consider it offensive, why didn't you be more careful in phrasing?
Foot
Well, I am of east asian descent and I am what americans would call "asian american". Hopefully I did not break any forum rules by revealing this.:oops:
Intranetusa
11-10-2008, 03:28
Seriously, I think you all need to relax. Why is everyone on this forum so sensitive about everything? Can't even ask a question without being flamed. In case you didn't read my previous post I said "no offense anybody". When I wrote beady eyes I should have phrased it "slits for eyes", okay. And about me not knowing any east asians, hahahaha, funny you should say that.
Read Osprey next time. And being East Asian doesn't automatically make a person knowledgeable about Asian related topics.
Wow. Is this your idea of a joke about the post I made about sarissa phalanxes/arrow effectiveness a few weeks ago? Anyway, if it is, not a very good joke.:thumbsdown:
Uhh no. I actually brought up the issue of sarissa vs arrows back in mid 2007.
Well, I am of east asian descent and I am what americans would call "asian american". Hopefully I did not break any forum rules by revealing this.:oops:
Do you have beady eyes? Whether or not you do or don't, the majority of East Asians don't. And I'm not referring to the epicanthic eye lid fold here.
Pontius Pilate
11-10-2008, 03:50
Read Osprey next time. And being East Asian doesn't automatically make a person knowledgeable about Asian related topics.
Uhh no. I actually brought up the issue of sarissa vs arrows back in mid 2007.
Do you have beady eyes? Whether or not you do or don't, the majority of East Asians don't. And I'm not referring to the epicanthic eye lid fold here.
I never said I was knowledgable in Asian related topics, remember, this is all about the comment on the eyes. No I do not have beady eyes or slit eyes or epicanthic eyes or anything else like that.
This whole thing is OT, and stupid, and pointless, and I frankly don't even care anymore.
Aemilius Paulus
11-10-2008, 04:31
Friends, RomansOrghas, countrymen, lend me your ears!
:focus:
This thread is going way off topic and and if the current state of - :hijacked: - does not end, this thread will be :closed::dancinglock:!
MarcusAureliusAntoninus
11-10-2008, 08:02
This thread started out as off-topic and has gotten arguably rascist. I'm closing it just to be safe.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.