City of Rome Founded - Great Future Predicted!

According to the Official History of the Roman Republic, today in 753 BC Romulus founded the City of Rome


From the History Teachers at History for Music Lovers





Topic: Rome

Beware the Ides of March

And a little context from the History Teachers at History for Music Lovers

Constantine the Great

From the History Teachers at Music for History Lovers


Flavius Valerius Aurelius Constantinus was born on February 22nd possibly in 272, a capable Emperor though a far from a model human being. Famous for his victory at Milvian Badge after a vision of a cross predicting “in this sign you shall conquer”. He issued the Edict of Milan decreeing tolerance of Christians and Pagans alike thus ending the horrific Diocletian persecutions of Christianity. However Paganism remained the official religion until the last part of 4th century and even then a statue of the a Roman Goddess graced the Roman Senate for years. He renamed the city of Byzantium as Constantinople and make it the capitol of the Eastern part of the Empire. He called the First Council of Nicaea which rejected Arianism after which he supported the Arian party and near his death he was baptized by an Arian bishop.


Constantine is blamed by someone or other for every thing wrong or perceived to be wrong from 50 AD to 500 AD, a feat he could only have accomplished with a Star Trek type transporter/time machine.

I WANT ONE!.

Hannibal

I always thought History was fun, dispite the efforts a teacher or so to induce boredom. But there is fun and there is FUN!



From the History Teachers at Music for History Lovers.

Book Review: Celibacy in the Early Church

“Priests were married in the early Church, they had children!” “Wasn’t celibacy an arbitrary decision of some Pope in the later Middle ages?” “We should let priests get married! Like in the Early Church” Or, perhaps, the persons making those statements missing the context of the early Church.

Celibacy in the Early Church: The Beginnings of Obligatory Continence for Clerics in East and West
Stefan Heid
Ignatius Preess (April 2001)

Orginal edition
Zolibat in der fruhen Kirche: Die Anfange einer Enthaltsamkeitspflicht fur Kleriker in Ost und West
Schoningh (1997)
Translator Michael J Miller



Fr. Stephen Heid of the Pontifical Institute of Sacred Archeology presents a detailed history of the clerical discipline regarding marriage and celibacy of the higher clergy from the time of the Apostles to the Seventh Century. He starts out by changing the question from "could priests be married” to “what was the discipline of the early Church.” . Christian Cochini (Apostolic Origins of Priestly Celibacy) postulated that total sexual continence of the higher clergy was the norm in the early Church . That is Deacons, Priests, and Bishops totally abstained from sexual relations, even with their lawful wife (the willing permission of ones wife was required for ordination.) Heid tests this theory and the opposing theories that the higher clergy had no more serious discipline than the chastity expected of any Christian couple, or at the most practiced Liturgical Continence i.e. on days when they celebrated the liturgy, against the record of the Church. With some minor quibbles he finds the evidence supports Cochini.


Scripture describes the Church as The Bride of Christ. The clergy when leading the Church in worship are understood to be acting for Christ. In analogy they are married to the Church. For a priest to get married is in the analogy the equivalent of adultery. With this understanding Heid describes the discipline as of the Early Church follows:

- Celibacy was the ideal, but to prevent a shortage of clergy married men could be ordained.
- To be ordained the candidate must “be the husband of one wife” 1 Timothy 3:1-7) That is unmarried or only married one once.
- Once ordained he could not marry.
- Married clergy were continent, that is abstained from marital relations with their wife.
- The cleric was still married, and was expected to live with his wife and provide for her support.


The practice was apparently the universal norm universal across the church, though he points out that in some out of the way areas their may have only been ritual continence. This and other break downs of church discipline was the often the case during persecutions or in areas disrupted by heretical movements. In the West the practice gradually shifted to celibacy for all higher clergy which became the norm long before the medieval decrees on the subject, which were calling wayward clergy back to the customary norm not imposing a new requirement. The East followed the same practice until the Council of Trullo which ruled that Bishops had to be celibate and if married he could no longer live with his wife though he still had to provide for her support. Married priests and deacons were to only practice ritual continence. This practice is still in effect in Orthodox and Eastern Catholic Churches, and by exception in the Latin Rite .


Fr. Heid explains this was not quite as counter cultural then as it would be today.
- Ritual continence and fasting before leading worship was the requirement in the Old Testament and the norm in most religions. This is not a statement that sexual relation or food are bad but rather a total dedication to preparing for the higher calling of leading worship.
- The ancients had a higher opinion of human ability to control sexual desires than is common today.
- continence for various other reasons was a not to common but socially acceptable practice, of which there are several documented instances.

Ordination was usually a “second career.” People married in their teens, candidates would not be ordained until their children were out of the house. it was realized this is not a discipline for hormone crazed teenagers. This also insured that those ordained, married or not, were mature with a long track record of responsible behavior.

Enforcement was passive. That the couple was following the practice was assumed, only if there was flagrant conduct or the wife became pregnant would any action be taken. Usually limited to removal from office though they remained in good standing in the Church .

Total continence requires two to not tango. Women who lived in the Early Chruch community probably shared the ideal of priestly continuance even if they did not want their husband to participate. Fr. Heid proposes several practical reasons why a wife might agree to their mutual continence.
- Time needed to serve effectively in clerical office would leave the wife with a larger role in the management of her household.
- Being the wife of a member of the clergy brought position and prestige in the community
- The death rate for women in childbirth was much higher then than now and late pregnancies had still a higher rate. On average this would increase her life expectancy.

Rome Reports has this video of a recent conference on priestly celibacy with Fr Hieid as one of their interviewees‘.





Analysis

Much comment on the subject has been colored by a legend reported as fact by the usually reliable Church historian Socrates (d. before 439.) One Paphnutius, allegedly a monk and bishop from Egypt at the Council of Nicaea in 325 is said to have intervened against a proposal for complete continence by recommending continuing the existing pratice of not having a Church wide policy, even though he was celibate. The proposal was allegedly voted down on his recommendation. In 1968 was demonstrated that Socrates was the victim of a hoax. Paphnutius, if he existed ,was a monk in Egypt probably not a bishop and he did not attend the Council of Nicaea. While the every detail of the Council was commented on by somebody or other starting with the closing gavel, there was no reference to this intervention by Paphnutius until Socrates reports it one hundred years later. It is inconsitent with what the Council did approve, and there are other major problems. This mistaken report caused people to assume there was no point in researching the topic. With the realization that this was not the case, scholars started to reexamine the data.


From the fourth century there are a number of references to total clerical continence as a requirement. These are often in decrees of local councils on rather mundane matters restating and/or clarifying long time practices of the church. The basis for continence was the cited as the long established practice of the Church from the time of the Apostles. There is no evidence that these decrees were challenged as innovations. The context would suggest that the authors of those councils did not consider continence rules to be a new innovation.

In the First to the third centuries the evidence is less clear. The authors are not as specific but their comments on related subjects make much more sense if total continence is the assumed background for their comments.

Biblically the early authors cited the Pastoral epistles especially, using them as stating the requirements for ordination. The repeated requirement of “the husband of one wife” (1 Timothy 3:2, 3:12, Titus 1:6) and “the wife of one husband” (1 Timothy 5:9) was seen as formulaic statement for some one who is never married or married once and is still married or never remarried. Paul’s various comments on marriage and ministers makes good sense in this case. They also would site Jesus’s comment about those who are “eunuchs for the sake of the Kingdom” (Mathew 19:12) as referring to continent clergy. While these and the other scrpture cited are certainly capable of other meanings, this interpretation a makes a consitant expalnation of much contested verses and makes good sense with the history and pratice of the Church, which accepted these writtings as cannoical. In the Eastern authors it is the understanding of people who spoke biblical Greek as their first language.

Overall Fr. Heid eliminates any possibility that that celibacy was an imposed practice or that the discipline expected of the upper clergy was no different than that of married lay couples, rather the discilpine grew out the the belief and partice of the Apostalic Chuch. He presents a strong case for a total continence discipline for the upper clergy as the universal norm and in general practice. The evidendce is short of a 100% lock for the biblical support and the first centuries, and I think his discussion leaves open possibility there was a less comprehensive "back county" discipline that eventually came to fore in the Council of Trullo. But still a strong and compelling argument.

The modern calls for a change in discipline, even if they have merits for other reasons, cannot be supported by the belief and pratice of he early Church.

Though it is a well footnoted scholarly work that, of necessity, sometimes spends space on technical items of translation and context, the main text is very readable and accessible to a general reading audience. If you are interested in the subject it is highly recommended.



=====================

While we are sort of on the subject why not.

Book Review: The Four Witnesses

“It’s ALL Constantine’s fault!” The primitive Church of the first Christians was lost with the Donation of Constantine in 313 AD. -- So say many critics offering mutually exclusive and often improbable views of the early Church. But just what do we know about the early Church?



Book Review: Four Witnesses: The Early Church in Her Own Words

Rod Bennett


Ignatius Press, 2002



“The early Church is no mystery.” Thus Rod Bennett begins his narrative through the first two hundred years of Church History.

The early Church is one of the most assessable parts of ancient history and Roman society. Recorded in the Anti and Post Nicene Fathers and a number of other works which are on line and even before the internet, the essential writings were available in reasonably priced books.

Bennet follows the story with the lives and writings of Four Witnesses, Clement of Rome, Ignatius 0f Antioch, Justin Martyr, and Irenaus of of Lyon. woven into a easy to follow narrative. He tells the story of the Church discovering, once the Apostles had died; the heritage they left, how the Church was to exist as hostile society, worship, and deal with challenges inside and out. All four were in churches that faced major persecutions. Two of his witnesses were martyred and the other two may have been. The threat of a persecution was always with them. But it is also of people who grew in the love and service of the Lord. The issues they faced were remarkably similar to today’s issues as are proposed solutions.



When I first read the Fathers of the Church I found them reinforcing what I had learned about the Catholic faith from more modern sources. Bennet had a rather different experience. As an Evangelical he had been raised with a different understanding of Church History but also with the Evangical idea that the early Church should be the model for the modern Church. When he discovered the Church fathers he dug in to them so he could learn about the early Church and Jesus from those who were much closer to him in time. As he read he discovered that the Early Church was not modern Evangelicalism it was Catholic. Since his Witnesses were writing a hundred to two hundred years before Constantine the “blame it on Constantine” line did not work. His story of working through this is a compelling story in itself.

This book is intended for those just learning about the early Church, but can hold the interest of those well read on the subject. He provides a good introduction of the Early Church, it’s faith, and also a glimpse of the Roman Empire not normally seen in the usual Roman histories. And no Constantine.


Also:
Frank Capra: It‘s a Wonderful Life Bennett’s review of the work of Frank Capra.

Related:
Perpetua and Felicity - Martyrs
They were martyred in Carthage shortly after this period

Book Review: Rome's Greatest Defeat

Two thousand years ago this month the Roman Army in Lower Germany, three legions strong with auxiliaries, was was wiped out, almost to a man. The battle of the Teutoburg Forest is one of Rome’s largest and most famous defeats. Until recently very little was known about the battle, even it’s exact location, except for a few second hand reports from Roman authors. Recently a number of archeological discoveries have shed light on this battle.




Rome’s Greatest Defeat: Massacre in the Teutoburg Forest
Adrian Murdoch
Sutton Publishing, 2006

Murdoch's Bread and Circuses Blog
The Blog's Teutoburg Posts

Imperium Konflict Mythos Official 2000th Anniversary site.
Kalkriese Museum





Adrian Murdoch describes the tangle of political, cultural and military affairs that led to this battle and the consequences. The account of the battle is just a chapter but with a judicious reading of the ancient sources and modern research he presents a very common sense account of the events leading up to the battle , the battle, and it‘s consequences.

Lower Germany was in the process of being integrated into the Empire. Murdoch describes this process, involving a forced change in the culture politics and economy of the province. It was always complicated with winners and losers at many levels of socity and sometimes resulting in a revolt, usually defeated with much bloodshed. He tells the story of Sextus Quinctilius Varus a proven governor, able administrator, and competent general who was apparently under orders to speed up the process; and Arminius a German noble, an officer in the Roman army, and secretly a leader of the anti-Roman faction. Arminius managed to set up an alliance of several tribes, despite opposition in his own and the other tribes, while convincing Varus of his loyalty and preparing a trap for the Roman Army. There was a report of a revolt and Varus and the Army set off to deal with it and marched into the carefully laid trap, for three days they fight to escape and are finally annihilated at the recently discovered battle field at Kalkriese. The defeat rocks the Roman world, and the resulting Roman punitive expedition wrecks the hostile tribes for generations. The Romans make no effort reestablish a permanent presence on the east side of the Rhine. The impact of the failure to Romanize German culture has been debated for centuries. Much later Arminius becomes a hero in the development of German nationalism. Arminius gets the rare distinction of being a general who defeated the Romans: but is not killed by Rome or dies in their captivity.

Defeated generals are always easy targets for blame, Murdoch shows that despite the accusations of incompetence heaped on Varus, he was in fact a competent governor and general, selected for both ability and loyalty the Emperor. He had extensive experience as governor of the tumultus province of Syria. Many of the criticisms of his action are based on 20/20 hindsight but his actions were quite reasonable in the circumstances.

Arminius had learned soldiering from the Romans, but a was also master of the German tribal politics. There were many in the tribes, including members of his own family, who favored cooperation with Romans, ether because they saw an advantage or it was the lesser of two evils. Arminius managed to convince enough of the leadership in the tribes to join him. Since Arminius was a central contact for Roman contact with the Germans he controlled much of the information going to Varus. Murdoch thinks that Varus dismissed the reports that got to him as attempts to draw him into the internal politics of the tribes, which he declined.

Murdoch’s encyclopedic knowledge of the classical world, his easy writing style and common sense analysis provide a clear explanation of the events that is assessable al l readers. This is by far the best of the recent books on this battle that have been published in English. Strongly Recommended.

See Also

Book Review: The Battle That Stopped Rome by Peter Wells
Book Review: Quest for The Lost Legions by Tony Benn

The Advance Guard Fiction

Related
Book Review: Eagle in the Snow
Book Review: The Fall of the Roman Empire




Analysis and opinion.

What happened, this is my assessment.





One thing is certain is that Varus did not get his route from Google Maps, but it is a best case close approximation and gives an idea of what was involved. [See comment from Delta V] He was moving to put down a revolt was in what is now the northern Netherlands or extreme northwest Germany. It is sixty kilometers from Minden to Kalkriese and another ten to Bramsche. 100 kilometers more to the legionary fortress at Haltern or 150 kilometers to the base at Xanten on the Rhine, He would have been expecting to march for about six hours 20 to 24 kilomters a day with column of about 12,000 solidiers, at least the same number of camp followers and 5000 horses or oxen. Quite possibly the advance guard would be marking the evenings camp as the rear guard was exiting last nights camp. Given the large amount of equipment they carried they would have at most five days of food.

This is the shortest route with the least hills, we forget how important that was when everything moved by sore muscles and aching backs. The route is mostly open farmland making it possible for the Army to get at least some of it’s food locally. Tactically it is reasonable ground, with only one real choke point, the narrows at Kalkriese. The other possible routes were longer, had less farm land and more obstacles. I think that the first leg of his march was to the area of modern Bramcshe, where the army would have to spend a day on river crossing. From there he could send his excess baggage back to Haltern or Xanten with a small escort and the tactical part of the Army would move to suppress the revolt. He would have made a prior announcement that he will be buying food at Bramcshe for the next leg of the march. All this assumes he believed he was marching through friendly territory.

The tactical system of the Roman army was a combination of heavy and light infantry supported by cavalry. The legion provided the heavy infantry. The legion can be compared to a steam roller. Nothing could stand in front of it. But it was slow and awkward to move, subject to flank attacks and required an enemy who was willing or forced to stand in front of it. Rough terrain could break it’s formation reducing it’s effectiveness. If the enemy had fortifications the legions engineers would overcome them with time. The other half of the team was the light infantry. This was either Roman auxiliary cohorts or forces provided by allies. They would scout, protect the flanks, clear enemy scouts, and with luck push the enemy under the steam roller. The light infantry would guard the legions march into hostile territory where the legions would attack a political, cultural or economic location that the enemy must defend, i.e. stand in front of the "steam roller" and hope to win. The important thing is that the legions of this period could not act alone they needed their light infantry support. The light infantry could operate alone but they would seldom be able to defeat an enemy unless they out numbered them or they had some unusual advantage. It was the team effort that make the Roman armies formidable. A common statistic in Roman history is the light and heavy forces were approximately equal strength. Varus’s Army did not have enough auxiliaries to provide the light infantry part of the team. The other auxiliary cohorts were garrisoning forts throughout the province. Varus was depending on his German allies to provide the light infantry.



In August Varus received word of the revolt. He started his preparations and called back his scattered garrisons to Minden, which is a good concentration point and possibly his headquarters. I think, since the route was known he had engineers out improving the road and had his German allies secure the route and occupy critical points such as the narrows at Kalkriese (with fortifications?). The word was sent out where he would be buying food along the route. The Allied tribes were called to come join him, either at Minden or Bramsche. The warnings he had received probably seemed to be part of the background noise that happens in any occupied province, but nothing so significant as to arouse suspicion, or make him distrust Arminius.

The Army moved out. I would think they would have made twenty to twenty four kilometers, and built a camp. The next day the advance guard had moved another twenty to twenty four kilometers and was at or close to it’s intended camp for the night when the attacks started. The front of the Army started to set up a camp and the rest closed in on it. There would have been hundreds of little attacks, each not causing much damage but the total would add up. The ground was still open enough that the Romans could move off the road and clear flanks. The baggage trains were probably hurt worse than the troops. This would be a nightmare for Varus and the senior commanders, the Army was spread out along the road there was little they could do to influence the battle. It was a centurions and soldiers battle, if the army was not well disciplined and trained it might not have survived the first day.

In the camp they got ready for the next day. The Army was in trouble but it was not defeated. Wagons and excess baggage were burned. This shortened the length of the column and make it eaiser to bypass obstacles. To make matters worse the fierce autumn German thunder storms started soaking every thing and making the roads much less usable. The Army rested as much as it could, reorganized and came out fighting. They moved a lot slower because they were in a tactical formtion partly off the road, the Germans destroyed advance work of the engineers, the rain, and fighting off constant attacks. By nightfall they would have been lucky to have advanced ten kilometers. they established a new but a vary hasty and improvised camp. The Army knew it was not going to get home. Varus and his top aides committed suicide, the cavalry tried to ride out, some tried to surrender. In the morning the Army moved out in a forlorn hope on broken ground and came to the ambush at Kalkriese. Most of the army perished here. Only a handful got back to Roman territory.


Once Arminius united the tribes and attacked the Army, the Army was lost, every thing else was details. The Army was, at best, seven to ten days march on half rations from nearest fort. The closest possible relief force was at Mainz a months march away. The tactical system was broken, without light infantry the legions would be would be worn down in a series of small actions. They were north of the Wiehengebrige ridge and their bases were on the south side. Forcing any of the gaps in the ridge would require light infantry. A wall had been constructed at Kalkrese, the engineers could defeat it with time, but a retreating army on half rations does not have time. A Gaius Julius Caesar might have brought that army home, but Sextus Quinctilius Varus was simply a competent general in a situation where genius might not have been enough.

The defeat was more political than military. The credit is Arminius’s as a political leader for uniting tribes and the defeat is Varus’s as governor for failing to prevent it.


Note: The exact size of the Army and how much road space it took, can’t be determined from the existing data. I made a number of assumptions, but small changes make big changes in the result. The Roman legions were probably between 2000 and 4000 men present for duty, I think closer to 3000. The auxiliaries were probably another 3000 men. The number of camp followers was usual about the same as the number of soldiers. They other big factor is how wide was the road. I am assuming it was wide enough to march four abreast, which would also be wide enough for a wagon. There would be an interval (size?) between units, necessary to keep the army from bunching up an spreading out on hills and turns. While the Romans were masters at it, moving an Army this size was difficult to manage under the best of circumstances.
For those who want to crunch their own numbers.

Field Manual 21-18 - Procedures and Techniques of Foot Marches

The March

Book Review: The Fall of the Roman Empire

Why did the Western Roman Empire fall? The rise of Christianity, corruption, the decadence of the ruling classes, over taxation, changes in military policy? Or was it simply the Barbarian invasions?


The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians


Peter Heather
Oxford University Press, 2007







Peter Heather attributes the primary cause to exogenous shock caused by the barbarian migrations into the Empire in the late fourth and early fifth centuries. If these shocks had occurred earlier the Empire would have fallen and if they had not come the Empire would have lasted several more centuries. The Empire was a stable entity, with internal problems, as has any political entity, but they were within the outer limits of what it could manage and still function. The rise of the Persian Empire in the East in the third century had created a superpower challenge that required heavily reinforcing the eastern borders. This was successfully done, but doing so greatly stretched the resources of the Empire so that it had little surplus resources to handle a new crisis. The migration and invasion of the barbarians provided that crisis.


Heather sees the Empire as a symbiotic relation of several components:

The Landowners were Roman citizens who had a common education and culture that provided a homogeneous “Romanness”. They, more than the residents of the City, were the Romans. Whether they were of the old Roman families or provincials from cities that had obtained Latin rights they spoke and wrote common “Classical Latin”, shared common values provided the civil and military officers that staffed the empire, and provided leadership at the middle levels of society.

The Central Government taxed trade and land and used the revenues to pay and equip the Army. The Army protected trade and agricultural activities against outside threats and internal disorder. With an assurance of safety against outside threat and internal disorder agricultural activities and trade could produce enough wealth to provide higher standards of living and pay the taxes to support the Army. While the system primarily benefited the landowners there it must have also produced enough safety and income to be preferable to the alternative for most of the population.

The Army saw (as did most every one else) it’s first job was to defend the Empire against the Persia. During the fourth century 20 to 25 percent of the Army was directly deployed opposite Persia. The rest of the Army was either in border garrisons defending the long frontier or in the field armies that constituted a reserve to reinforce against attacks on the border or counter attack. While the total army was probably about 600,000 men the maximum field army that was available west of Constantinople to deal with the invasion on the Rhine-Danube line was about 80,000 spread among several field armies belonging to both parts of the empire. When matched against the nations migrating with their full strength, as opposed to raiding and border skirmishes, the numbers available to both sides were similar, and until reinforcements could arrive, could favor the invaders.

The Exogenous Shock.

The Germanic Tribes in the 1st Centuries BC and AD that the Romans came in contact with were economically hunters and “slash and burn” farmers. Every ten or twenty years a village would exhaust its fields and move. Heather thinks that the real reason for the Romans stopped at the Rhine was not the defeat of Varus in 9 AD at Tueutonburger Wald but that the region could not produce enough taxes to support the Army. Though not conquered the Germans learned from the Romans. They developed a stable agriculture, which supported a much larger population than slash and burn farming, and permitted the development of trade and manufacturing. This improved economy allowed them to field larger and better equipped armies. The service of many Germans in the Army had taught them the military skills to use the larger force. In the Late 4th Century the Huns started to invade the homelands of these nations forcing them to migrate and the only place they could go was into the Empire.

The Huns were a warlike tribe of nomads that came off the steppes and invaded the area of the German tribes forcing them to migrate. The Hunic economy and political structure did not allow them to settle in one location; they kept attacking westward forcing more dislocations until they were fighting the Romans themselves, though eventually defeated by the Romans the damage had been done.

The Migrations of the Germanic tribes into the Empire to escape the Huns in the 376 and 402-10 started the unraveling of the relationships that held the Empire together. War and invasion would put farms out of production temporarily or permanently depriving the Government of the taxes to support the Army. This made it harder for a reduced/weakened Army to recover lost lands or protect those that were left. Which would result in more land going out of production. The loss of this protection made it expedient for landowners to support the invaders to keep their lands rather than support the central government. Slowly over about 100 years the Western Empire unraveled.


The result

A controversy in recent years asks was The Fall really a fall or just a change in the political arrangements with life going on pretty much as before. Some point out that many institutions survived, there was a definite Roman characteristic in the successor states and there were people who called themselves Romans for a long time after the fall. Heather argues, I think successfully, that while it was a process over time with important survivals, The Fall was really a fall and a hard fall. While for most any one other than poor Romulus Augustus, the last emperor, who was removed on September 4, 476, September Fifth was not much different than September Third; but the Western Europe of 576 was vastly different from the Western Europe of 376 when the migrations started. While some people must have come out ahead the vast majority of the reduced population was much impoverished with far less physical and economic security.


Analysis

This is a well written book explains the story of the Fall of The Roman Empire in a way that treats both the available data and the persons involved with respect and reaches conclusions without forcing the data. While he gives a varied review of the different explanations for the Fall of Rome many support his explanation as part of the reason the Empire was overstretched. Unlike most commentators he believes the economy was able to support the Empire so long as it did not have to deal with extraordinary events. He tells the story of people with ordinary ability trying to control and reverse events that were to large for them to control. One thing I liked was his account ties together the different parts of my limited knowledge of the Roman Empire into a coherent whole.

It will certainly not end the debate over the causes of the Fall of Rome but it is a major contribution to the discussion, whether future historians agree with him or not this is an explanation that cannot be ignored. The book has good pictures and maps that support the text. Strongly recommended.


Related: Eagle in the Snow by Wallace Breem. Review of a fictional account of the Barbarian invasion across the Rhine in 406/407

Topic: All my Rome posts

Book Review: The Quest for the Lost Legions

The Emperor Augustus looked at the severed head of Publius Quinctilius Varus and cried

“Give me back my legions!”

Varus was long past answering, but for centuries people have pondered the question of just how did he go about losing three legions of professional soldiers to what is essentially a tribal militia. This book describes the latest chapter in the The Quest for the Lost Legions.




The Quest for the Lost Legions, Discovering the Varus Battlefield
Author: Major Tony Clunn
UK Publisher: Spellmount Limited, Staplehurst, Kent, 2005
US Publisher: Savas Beatie, New York, New York, 2005

Tony Clunn’s webpage
Kalkriese Museum
Imperium Konflikt Mythos
Official 2000th Anniversary site.



The Battle of the Teutoburger Wald in the fall of 9 AD, though always listed as one of the most important battles in world history, was an event of some mystery since the location of the battle was somewhere in German Forests and the historical sources are summaries written by later authors. It was known that Varus lost three legions and auxiliaries to a coalition of German tribes lead by Arminius an auxiliary officer in Roman service, the political shock to Rome was tremendous, and precipitated a change of frontier policy by Rome. In 1989 the author Tony Clunn, a British Army officer stationed in Germany, and an amateur archeologist, discovered some Roman coins in the vicinity of Kalkriese in Northern Germany. Additional discoveries proved his theory that this was the location of the Teutoburger Wald battle. This is one of the most significant archeological discoveries in recent times.



The book has two story lines, the discovery of the battle site and Clunn’s other explorations in northern Germany interweaved with a fictional reconstruction of the Battle

The Search.

Clunn tells the story of his discovery, armed with an avocation for Roman history a metal detector and some military common sense, discovers the long lost battlefield. He rather downplays that he had already done the available archive research on the subject, talked with the last person who had found a Roman coin at the site. Using this information and a soldier’s eye for looking at the ground; his selection was an informed estimate rather than a lucky guess.

He provides a good example of how an amateur should work with professional archeologists. First he got required permissions to conduct a survey and then kept the professionals informed. When enough evidence came to light to make this an official project he kept in the background, maintaining an interest and helping but never working at cross-purposes. A major dig is expensive, where as Clunn could just get the permissions and search on his free time. One of his biggest achievements was to do the preliminary searches on his own and find the discoveries that could justify a major project. He also tells of his subsequent efforts to find related sites which will take further searching to confirm his theories.

Clunn’s telling makes the story of the archaeological discovery an adventure.


Reconstructing the Battle.

The principle Roman character is Marcus Aius the Tribune second in command of the Army. (Cloak clasps belong to a Marcus Aius were found in Kalkriese though real Marcus was of a much lower rank.) A professional solider to Varus’s politician he tries to convince Varus to maintain a more combat ready posture and he also suspects that something is wrong and that Arminious is behind it but he does not have the hard evidence that will convince Varus. After Varus and many of his top commanders committed suicide he leads the legions in a last desperate attempt to escape and unknowingly leads them into the ambush at Kalkriese.

The principle German character is Arminius who has been working for a least a year to destroy the Varsus's Army, building alliances with the tribes, giving advice to Varus that leaves the Romans exposed, training his forces and preparing the battle site. He knows the tribes cannot stand in open formation against a Roman legion so he plans to draw them into a route where the Romans can be ground down in many small attacks and ambushes culminating in a major trap at Kalkriese where it will be destroyed. All the while pretending to be loyal officer in Roman Army.

This is a possible reconstruction that explains how one goes abut losing three legions. It does a good job of integrating the historical sources and the archeological discoveries. The route he picks seems to be very long but not impossible. The best features of this account are seeing the ground and situation with a soldier’s eye, and giving the feel of a professional army to the Roman command.



The book tells both stories with a clarity that can engage the general reader but still be informative to readers with more background. The photographs add to the story. The maps are adequate. Recommended.




Related:
The Battle That Stopped Rome by Peter S. Wells
Book Review: Rome's Greatest Defeat By Adrian Murdoch
Eagle in the Snow by Wallace Breem
Friday Snippet


Topic:
Rome

Ancient Faces

When we read and here of places far away in time and distance it is easy to forget that the people who were there are every much as human as we are. A beautiful reminder.


From the accompanying comments.

Very little portrait art survives from the ancient world. This video displays a few examples of these portraits, as recovered by archaeologists from sites such as Al Fayyum in Egypt, and Pompeii and Ravenna in Italy.

The vast majority of the portraits displayed here come from the famous 'Al Fayyum' mummies which were discovered in Egypt about a century ago. Most of these portraits date from the height of Roman power in the first century to the Empire's decline in the fifth century AD.

Other examples come from wall paintings from villas in Pompeii, or from late Roman sites at Ravenna in northern Italy


HT: Mike Aquilina at The Fathers of the Church

Book Review: Eagle in the Snow

Book Review: Eagle in the SnowGeneral Maximus and Rome’s Last Stand.
Author Wallace Breem
Orion Books, DBA Phoenix books, London, UK 1970



In the winter of 406-407 the Rhine froze solid. The German tribes crossed on the ice into Roman territory. Not a just a raiding party, but a migration of entire nations who’s invasion completely disrupted the Western Empire. The provinces of Gaul never recovered, Britain passed from Roman rule, eventually Hispania, and North Africa and Italy were invaded. This novel is the story of the Roman commander’s account of the defense of the Rhine and his eventual defeat.


Paulinus Gaius Maximus was what we would call an Army brat. Of Equestrian (knightly) Roman stock he was raised in legionary garrisons as his father rose through the ranks to be the Legate of the Legio XX Valriea Victrix. He followed his father into the Army first as an Equestrian Tribune in his father’s legion before moving on to other assignments. From his father and this service learned the ideals of an earlier Rome and Roman Army, a loyalty he will serve the end.

Maximus is the son of a military family that ended up on the wrong side of imperial politics, a pagan when favor was increasingly going to Christians, but talented well above average and apolitical himself he is appointed as the Prefect (Commander) of a cohort at a critical fort on Hadrian’s Wall . A dead end job he will hold for over thirty years but he performs it well and occasionally with distinction. He learns the skills that will do him well on the Rhine

Sometime after 395 Flavius Stilicho, Commander of the Roman Armies in the West, visits Britain, and impressed with Maximus he offers him command of his fathers old Legio XX Valeria Victrix, which he is talking out of Britain to help defend Italy. The XXth has been allowed to run down to the point that is a parody of its old self. Maximus has a year to recruit it to full strength restore it as a fighting force, not the old heavy infantry legion but a modern force with both heavy and light infantry as well it’s own cavalry. A year later when he joins Stilicho he has force of 6000 men including 1500 cavalry disciplined to the standards of the old roman Army and trained for the new warfare.. After campaigning in Italy for five years Stilicho gives him a new mission in Germany. The Rhine is only garrisoned with enough forces to restrict raiding. The German tribes east of the Rhine are being displaced by the Huns and want to migrate into Roman territory, a migration that Rome does not have the ability to absorb. The mission is possible in theory because there is only one stretch of the Rhine from Worms to Koblenz where whole tribes could migrate as opposed to launching raids. This is for only a few months of the year in spring and fall, and without bridges there is a limit to how many can cross at one time. Unless the Rhine freezes.

For a year and a half Maximus struggles to make a backwater command into a fighting force, and uses bluff and bluster to convince the Germans not cross until he has built the army. He gets little willing support from the local governments or from the government in Gaul. Gradually he builds the army, the XXth as the strike force and enough Auxillaries to hold defenses. His single mindedness and integrity win the respect and even some support from the local government as well as the very grudging respect of the German leaders. But then in December 406 the Rhine freezes and on the thirtyfirst the tribes cross. After three weeks of fighting, holding with bravery discipline and skill, losing to numbers and treachery, he makes the last stand. The Eagle of the Legio XX Valeria Victix, which lead the legion for over 430 years, is melted to prevent capture while they await the final charge.


I think a point the modern reader should take away is how fast civilization can dissolve and how terrible the result would be. The introduction begins:

In the deep valleys between the black rain-lashed mountains of the western coast there is little to do of a winter’s night if you belong to a beaten people. Defeated sick of heart and afraid, you sit huddled in tattered cloak round the great sputtering fires and dream of a tomorrow that will never come. The women nurse wailing children and long for warm huts and a world in which milk is always plentiful; the young warriors sharpen their dulled spears and pray for just one victory against the men from the sea; while the old remember a time when no fires betrayed a burning village to the night sky, and there was peace in the lands from which they are now exiled for ever.

Seventy, even fifty years ago one would never see a village burning in the distance, a general peace from the Pillars of Hercules to the wall of Hadrian, from cliffs Brittany to the mountains of Italy. Men who did not join the army did not have to dream of defeating an all to likely enemy, and mothers could be sure they had enough food to have milk or could find a wet nurse. Old men remebered long ago harvests and places they safely gone and returned.

What brought this about? Well many factors but one that is key to the novel is that the upper classes of Rome had stopped believing in the ideals that made Rome. And not believing they did not act. We should not forget the if we lose the ideals that made western society and our country we could be not to many years from a similar collapse.


This is an excellent novel, well set in the larger reality of the time and place. The suspense is not in how it will end, (it’s in the notes on the cover) but in the fight against man nature and events. Maximus is a very believable character; the depictions of events ring true. The author served in the British Indian Army on the North West Frontier in World War II, which brings a strong sense of reality the account of border duty and role of the Auxiliary units. There is a good map that makes the major action clear as well as lists of key terms characters and historical events.

Strongly Recommended.

Related
Book Review: The Fall of the Roman Empire

Book Review: Rome's Greatest Defeat
Book Review: The Battle That Stopped Rome
The Advanced Guard

Friday Snippet

Gabriele of The Lost Fort is participating in Holly Lisle’s Friday Snippet meme where people post snippets of their fiction writing.

This Friday Snippets thing encouraged me to try. I know it’s awful. This is my first attempt at fiction since required class assignments in school. Suggestions for improving would be appreciated. Thanks to Gabriele for help with names.


The Advance Guard

Background: In 9 AD a Roman Army under Publius Quinctilius Varus was ambushed by German Tribesman lead by Arminius a former officer of German troops in the Roman army. The main part of the battle is at Kalkriese in the Teutobergerwald. There is some question as to the actual sequence of events; this is based on a possible scenario.





Centurion Gaius Antonius, commanding the advance guard, turned in the saddle looked back on his Cohort. – The bottom dropped out of stomach as it tied in knots. He was dead, his men were dead, their families, his children, his precious Lalage, all dead except for dying. And a voice in the back of head was saying, “just march, you didn’t see anything, just march, no one will know, just march, let some one else die”.


That morning.

Lalage pulled her husband to the side. “Don’t give me that ‘Centurion’ look. I’ve been a soldier’s daughter since I can remember, a soldier’s wife, your wife, for five years, something’s wrong! It’s not our turn for advance guard, families don’t move with the advance guard!

“Lalage sweet, quite down, no one follows a doubtful command. Senator Varus says the situation is delicate and maintaining a bluff like nothing is wrong is best.” Lalage noticed he used the civilian Senator not the military Legate. ”Staying at Minden would have been more dangerous. Families have been with the lead cohort for three days, if they aren’t today it is signaling we know something is wrong. When you bluff, bluff big. Or it won't work."

“And if it doesn’t work! We can’t hire villagers to help with the baggage, they won’t sell us food, nothing is right, we should be marching ready to fight!”

"I think it’s all right. The Fifth Cherusciorum is scouting in front of us. If Arminius’s old cohort can’t find an enemy they’re not there. I have half the men guarding our wagons and families. If the other half can’t get them out of any trouble they find it will take the whole Legion. Besides, your father recommended us, said he wanted the best cohort on advance guard, now you can’t argue with the Primus Pilus.”

“I can’t? Father’s right, your cohort is best, but if he puts families in front tomorrow; I will talk with him.”



Antonius had been told the last stretch for the day went through a place called ‘The Narrows’, A steep hill to the left a swamp to the right, in between ten feet of road that could carry a wagon!. The Fifth was sending scouts to both sides and he saw them give the all clear, and post guards to keep it clear. The wagons and families were in the middle of the Cohort and a thousand feet behind that the legion, “Damn Varus” he thought, “if the Fifth gets in trouble here I can’t support them and defend the wagons”.


In the center of the Narrows Antonius looked back, the Cohort was in good order, The princepales’s were keeping the troops in line. The men were maintaining as even a pace as the ground allowed, despite orders he had had them wear helmets and unsling their shields. -- He froze.-- From his mounted perch the afternoon light was just right. There was a wall, trampled vegetation behind it, javelin tips just over the edge. Arminius’s Fifth was guarding an ambush not the road. His four hundred in a trap to kill four thousand, do his duty and everything that was his would be gone, and a voice saying “’Just march’ like you saw nothing, the cohort will be clear the when legion dies. ‘Just march’”


Lalage had the wagon master wondering just who was in charge of the Cohort. Every one was armed; she made sure every one knew their part in ambush and laagering drill; stragglers weren’t allowed.

Lalage looked up at Antonius’s screamed command. “DROP packs! AMBUSH drill LEFT!” A surprised volley of javelins; the alarm trumpets sounding; legionaires forming ranks to attack, more javelins this time finding their mark; getting the family’s and children under cover. The Barbarian charge came in for the kill led by the Fifth Cherusciorum. She last saw Antonius leading the survivors, screaming hate and despair, into the Fifth.

Related:

Book Review: The Battle That Stopped Rome By Peter Wells
Quest for the Lost Legions By Tony Benn
Book Review: Rome's Greatest Defeat By Adrian Murdoch
Eagle in the Snow by Wallace Breem

Perpetua and Felicity – Martyrs

Today is the Feast day of the Perpetua and Felicity and Companions. They were martyred in Carthage in 203. The account of there passion is widely anthologized. When I first read it in a public library (pre-internet) I had to fight back the tears. Widely popular in the early Church, so much so that Augustine had to remind his congregation it was not part of Scripture. Of note is that part of the account is in Perpetua’s own words, one of the very few examples of a feminine voice in the early Church or from that era of history.

Most often the martyrs death in the arena is excerpted, instead I am excerpting Perpetua’s account of the trial. Note that at any point she could have offered a token sacrifice to the Emperor and walked away free.

If the current trends of trying to force medical persons to engage in abortion and handle contraceptives against their will, requiring religious institutions to support gay marriage contrary to thier faith as a condition to operate, and generally praticing religious intolerance in the name of tolerance, this sort of scene may be reenacted all to often.


[W]e were still under legal surveillance and my father was liked to vex me with his words and continually strove to hurt my faith because of his love: Father, said I, Do you see (for examples) this vessel lying, a pitcher or whatsoever it may be? And he said, I see it. And I said to him, Can it be called by any other name than that which it is? And he answered, No. So can I call myself nought other than that which I am, a Christian.

Snip

A few days after, the report went abroad that we were to be tried. Also my father returned from the city spent with weariness; and he came up to me to cast down my faith saying: Have pity, daughter, on my grey hairs; have pity on your father, if I am worthy to be, called father by you; if with these hands I have brought you unto this flower of youth- and I-have preferred you before all your brothers; give me not over to the reproach of men. Look upon your brothers; look upon your mother and mother's sister; look upon your son, who will not endure to live after you. Give up your resolution; do not destroy us all together; for none of us will speak openly against men again if you suffer aught.


This he said fatherly in his love, kissing my hands and grovelling at my feet; and with tears he named me, not daughter, but lady. And I was grieved for my father's case because he would not rejoice at my passion out of all my kin; and I comforted him, saying: That shall be done at this tribunal, whatsoever God shall please; for know that we are not established in our own power, but in God's. And he went from me very sorrowful.

Another day as we were at meal we were suddenly snatched away to be tried; and we came to the forum. Therewith a report spread abroad through the parts near to the forum, and a very great multitude gathered together. We went up to the tribunal. The others being asked, confessed. So they came to me. And my father appeared there also, with my son, and would draw me from the step, saying: Perform the Sacrifice; have mercy on the child. And Hilarian the procurator - he that after the death of Minucius Timinian the proconsul had received in his room the right and power of the sword - said: Spare your father's grey hairs; spare the infancy of the boy. Make sacrifice for the Emperors' prosperity. And I answered: I am a Christian. And when my father stood by me yet to cast down my faith, he was bidden by Hilarian to be cast down and was smitten with a rod. And I sorrowed for my father's harm as though I had been smitten myself; so sorrowed I for his unhappy old age. Then Hilarian passed sentence upon us all and condemned us to the beasts; and cheerfully we went down to the dungeon.



HT: Amy Welborn’s Open Book

Update (09/19/2009):

Catholic Hero’s of the Faith has produced a video on St Perpetua. Avaliable at Amazon

Intended for younger people 8 and up, but it seems suitable for all ages. There is also a documentary and a Fun Page

Checkout the trailers


HT: Fathers of the Faith

The Battle That Stopped Rome

Somewhere east of the Rhine, Province of Lower Germany, September, 9 AD.

It’s stopped raining for now. Sixty pounds of equipment are not lighter for being wet. The Legion marches or rather slops along the trail. A swamp to the right, a forested hill to the left, the ground would be soft in sunny weather. At least they are the lead legion; several thousand pairs of feet haven’t already chewed up the ground. Eight hours marching yesterday, five today and who knows how many until they get to a place to build a camp. Four or five more days of sore muscles, aching backs, and maybe a fight to get home.

The Centurions are calling to
“Keep formation;” “how, the trail is barely wide enough.”
“Watch your sectors;” “right, this is allied country, who but poor legionnaire would be out in this weather.”
“A perfect place for an ambush;” “come on, the auxiliaries already cleared the road or we wouldn’t be here.”
"At least they aren’t saying to unsling shields and weapons."



War cries break the air.
A shower of javelins.
Even without orders the well rehearsed drill tries to assert itself:
unsling shields and weapons, drop packs, move off the road, form a shield wall.
The javelins rip though the ranks. When they do not hit flesh they remain stuck in the equipment so it can’t be moved without hitting another solider.
Slipping in the mud, tripping over bodies, climbing over packs they struggle to reach the side of the road and form a line.
Another yell; every warrior in Germania swarms out of the woods.
The shield wall never forms.
Those who don’t die outright, mostly die of exsanguation or hypothermia.




Book Review:
The Battle that Stopped Rome
Peter S Wells
W. H. Norton 2003

Kalkriese museum

In 9 AD a Roman Army of three legions and nine cohorts of auxiliariescommanded by Publius Quinctilius Varus was destroyed in the “Teutoburger Wald” by the German leader Arminius some place in northern Germany. The event has come down in history as one of the "Great Battles" but where it was fought was unknown. In 1989 the site of this battle was found. This book is a beginners Archeological/Anthropological/Historical study of the battle using the new information.



The battle took place at the base of what is now called Kalkriese hill about 10 miles north of Osnabruck in Lower Saxony, Germany. The archeological remains combined with the sketchy information in the sources allow for several reasonable reconstructions of the battle. The most notable discovery is that the ambush had been planned for a long time. The trail as it would have existed at the time would have been a narrow stretch of sand and clay soil along the base of the hill just wide enough for the Roman column to march. A sod wall had been built along the uphill side of the road and the vegetation allowed to grow so it looked like part of nature from the trail. In Wells reconstruction, the attackers hid behind the wall until the lead legion was parallel and then attacked with javelins followed by a charge. With a small amount of warning a Roman column with an unexpected enemy on the flank could easily drop it’s packs, grab its weapons, and form a line on the threatened flank. Once they had formed a shield wall they had a tactical superiority over any possible enemy. Arminius, the German commander had commanded an auxiliary cohort in the Roman Army and a number of his key subordinates had also served with the Romans. They set an ambush that placed a legion in the worst possible situation, no warning time and no room to form ranks. The wall was the length of one legion. My vignette above is most likely what happened to the lead legion, about 4000 to 5000 men. The Roman commander considered Arminius to be an ally and accepted his suggestion for a route.

A modern reconstruction of the Kalkriese "narrows" at the Kalkriese
Museum. In front, the bog; then, a small strip of land,
and finally the slopes of the mountain, fortified with a wall.

The battle stopped Augustus’s attempt to push the Roman boundary to the Elbe. A larger Army was needed to garrison both the Rhine and Danube lines than would have been required for the Elbe line. Since the Army was larger and closer to Rome it could more easily use it's strength in electing Emperors, changing for the worse the state of Roman politics. The difference of several hundred years of Roman rule still is a cultural dividing line for many things in Europe. The Reformation/Counter Reformation ended with territories close to this line. Whether beer or wine is usually had with dinner also follows this line. Depending on your point of view it was either a major defeat to European unification or a key event in the forming of the German nation. Actually, I think both are correct.

In twelve easy to read chapters with basic maps and some good photographs Dr. Wells describes the events leading up to the battle, the battle, and it’s aftermath. It is especially strong on the archeology of the site and the anthropology of northern Germany. Since I already know a good bit of Roman military history I learned the most from his description of the peoples of northern Germany. His descriptions make the German participants alive rather than the stereotypes that most histories make them out of ignorance. It did much to provide context for other reading on the subject.

Not a military historian, the Dr. Wells made extensive research to understand the event as military history. He almost succeeded. He did make good use of John Keegans the Face of Battle in his analysis. His conclusion that the other two legions were destroyed with in an hour of the first is imimplausible, doesn’t agree with the ancient sources, is not tactically sound, and seems unlikely from the topography. The archeological evidence he describes does not require it and would support other conclusions. It seems more likely that the ancient account is close to correct, these legions had the time to form ranks and then establish a fortified camp that evening, then were destroyed piecemeal as they tried to fight their way home. Other more probalble theories assume the battle began several days earlier and the Romans were driven into this trap and finally destroyed.

The book is intended as an introduction for those without background, and I think especially to introduce people to his favorite field of Anthropology. In this he succeeds admirably. The reader with more background will find the book interesting, while wishing for a more extensive and critical examination and analysis of the battle itself.

See Also


Book Review: Quest for The Lost Legions by Tony Benn
Book Review: Rome‘s Greatest Defeat by Adrian Murdoch
In my opnion, this is the best book in English on the subject. I appended my analysis of the battle.

The Advance Guard Fiction

Related
Book Review: Eagle in the Snow
Book Review: The Fall of the Roman Empire

The pictures are from Livius website were made by Marco Prins and Jona Lendering, and can be downloaded and used for non-commercial purposes, but you have to acknowledge Livius.

Updated 18 May 2007