The Ancient History Thread

Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by jonathan hernandez13, Aug 21, 2009.

  1. jonathan hernandez13

    jonathan hernandez13 Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    5,039
    Likes Received:
    64
    Location:
    Mount Vernon New York
    If one were to search deep enough one can envision an infinitude of different periods of human history divided by an even more infinite number of breakthroughs and revelations.

    I also had an architecture class where a Professor mentioned flushing toilets in Crete and I was like "bull****". Sometimes we measure success by the luxuries we can afford. I consider flushing toilets an accomplishment at least on par with the printing press. Good old crappers ^^



    Part II


    f)Religion

    The Minoans worshiped goddesses. Although there is some evidence of male gods, depictions of Minoan goddesses vastly outnumber depictions of anything that could be considered a Minoan god. While some of these depictions of women are speculated to be images of worshipers and priestesses officiating at religious ceremonies, as opposed to the deity herself, there still seem to be several goddesses including a Mother Goddess of fertility, a Mistress of the Animals, a protectress of cities, the household, the harvest, and the underworld, and more. Some have argued that these are all aspects of a single Great Goddess. They are often represented by #serpents, (The serpent is a powerful symbol of life conquering death, because as comparitive mythology expert Joseph Campbell noted “ the shedding of the snake’s skin is life emerging from death”. The holiness of the snake is also seen in Hinduism as the Nagarajah, or serpent king) birds, poppies, and a somewhat vague shape of an animal upon the head. Some suggest the goddess was linked to the "Earthshaker", a male represented by the bull and the sun, who would die each autumn and be reborn each spring. (compare to the myths of Attis of Phrygia or Adonis of west semetic origin, both of which finding their way into Greek culture by adoption. Both were agricultural culture based, with handsome young men symbolic of the agricultural cycle of birth-death-rebirth. Though the notorious bull-headed Minotaur is a purely Greek depiction, seals and seal-impressions reveal bird-headed or masked deities.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    (above: the ubiquitous snake goddess and a Labyrys double sided axe, no doubt a symbolic representation of the moon)

    A major festive celebration was exemplified in the famous athletic Minoan bull dance, represented at large in the frescoes of Knossos and inscribed in miniature seals. In this feat that appears extremely dangerous, both male and female dancers would confront the bull and, grasping it by its sacred horns, permit themselves to be tossed, somersaulting over its back to alight behind it. Each of these sequential movements appears in Minoan representations, but the actual significance of the bull dance in Minoan cult and cultural life is lost beyond retrieval. What is clear, however, is that there is no inkling of an antagonistic confrontation and triumph of the human through the ritual death of the bull, which is the essence of the surviving bullfight of Hispanic culture; rather, there is a sense of harmonious cooperation.
    Interpretation of Minoan icons can easily range too far: Walter Burkert warns:
    "To what extent one can and must differentiate between Minoan and Mycenaean religion is a question which has not yet found a conclusive answer"
    and suggests that useful parallels will be found in the relations between Etruscan and Archaic Greek culture and religion, or between Roman and Hellenistic culture. Minoan religion has not been transmitted in its own language, and the uses literate Greeks later made of surviving Cretan mythemes, after centuries of purely oral transmission, have transformed the meager sources: consider the Athenian point-of-view of the Theseus legend. A few Cretan names are preserved in Greek mythology, but there is no way to connect a name with an existing Minoan icon, such as the familiar "serpent”-goddess. Retrieval of metal and clay votive figures— double axes, (labyrs) miniature vessels, models of artifacts, animals, human figures—has identified sites of cult: here were numerous small shrines in Minoan Crete, and mountain peaks and very numerous sacred caves—over 300 have been explored—were the centers for some cult, but temples as the Greeks developed them were unknown. Within the palace complex, no central rooms devoted to cult have been recognized, other than the center court where youths of both sexes would practice the bull-leaping ritual. It is notable that there are no Minoan frescoes that depict any deities. Minoan sacred symbols include the bull and its horns of consecration, the labrys (double-headed axe), the pillar, the serpent, the sun-disk, and the tree(The bull is a very old idol seen among many ancient cultures, both agricultural and nomadic pastoral/herding. When Moses came down from mount Sinai he found his Hebrew peoples worshipping idols of calves much as their ancestors had done for centuries. The semetic cattle gods, Moloch notable among them, were significant among people with lunar based calendars as the horns of the bull were symbolic of the crescent moon, and as the ancient Hebrews were a shepherd people their livelihoods often depended on their livestocks).

    -Possibility of human sacrifice?

    Evidence that suggest the Minoans may have performed human sacrifice has been found at three sites: (1) Anemospilia, in a MMII building near Mt. Juktas, interpreted as a temple, (2) an EMII sanctuary complex at Fournou Korifi in south central Crete, and (3) Knossos, in an LMIB building known as the "North House." (explanation of abbreviations)
    The temple at Anemospilia was destroyed by earthquake in the MMII period. The building seems to be a tripartite shrine, and terracotta feet and some carbonized wood were interpreted by the excavators as the remains of a cult statue. Four human skeletons were found in its ruins; one, belonging to a young man, was found in an unusually contracted position on a raised platform, suggesting that he had been trussed up for sacrifice, much like the bull in the sacrifice scene on the Mycenaean-era Agia Triadha sarcophagus. A bronze dagger was among his bones, and the discoloration of the bones on one side of his body suggests he died of blood loss. The bronze blade was fifteen inches long and had images of a boar on each side. The bones were on a raised platform at the center of the middle room, next to a pillar with a trough at its base.

    The positions of the other three skeletons suggest that an earthquake caught them by surprise—the skeleton of a twenty-eight year old woman was spread-eagled on the ground in the same room as the sacrificed male. Next to the sacrificial platform was the skeleton of a man in his late thirties, with broken legs. His arms were raised, as if to protect himself from falling debris, which suggests that his legs were broken by the collapse of the building in the earthquake. In the front hall of the building was the fourth skeleton, too poorly preserved to allow determination of age or gender. Nearby 105 fragments of a clay vase were discovered, scattered in a pattern that suggests it had been dropped by the person in the front hall when he was struck by debris from the collapsing building. The jar appears to have contained bull's blood.

    Unfortunately, the excavators of this site have not published an official excavation report; the site is mainly known through a 1981 article in National Geographic (Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellerakis 1981, see also Rutter).
    Not all agree that this was human sacrifice. Nanno Marinatos says the man supposedly sacrificed actually died in the earthquake that hit at the time he died. She notes that this earthquake destroyed the building, and also killed the two Minoans who supposedly sacrificed him. She also argues that the building was not a temple and that the evidence for sacrifice "is far from ... conclusive." Dennis Hughes concurs and also argues that the platform where the man lay was not necessarily an altar, and the blade was probably a spearhead that may not have been placed on the young man, but could have fallen during the earthquake from shelves or an upper floor.
    At the sanctuary-complex of Fournou Korifi, fragments of a human skull were found in the same room as a small hearth, cooking-hole, and cooking-equipment. This skull has been interpreted as the remains of a sacrificed victim.

    In the "North House" at Knossos, the bones of at least four children (who had been in good health) were found which bore signs that "they were butchered in the same way the Minoans slaughtered their sheep and goats, suggesting that they had been sacrificed and eaten. The senior Cretan archaeologist Nicolas Platon was so horrified at this suggestion that he insisted the bones must be those of apes, not humans."
    The bones, found by Peter Warren, date to Late Minoan IB (1580-1490), before the Myceneans arrived (in LM IIIA, circa 1320-1200) according to Paul Rehak and John G. Younger. Dennis Hughes and Rodney Castleden argue that these bones were deposited as a 'secondary burial'. Secondary burial is the not-uncommon practice of burying the dead twice: immediately following death, and then again after the flesh is gone from the skeleton. The main weakness of this argument is that it does not explain the type of cuts and knife marks upon the bones.

    Like much of the archaeology of the Bronze Age, burial remains constitute a substantial proportion of material and archaeological evidence for the period. By the end of the Second Palace Period Minoan burial practice is dominated by two broad forms: 'Circular Tombs', or Tholoi, (located in South Crete) and 'House Tombs', (located in the north and the east). Of course, there are many trends and patterns within Minoan mortuary practice that do not conform to this simple breakdown. Throughout this period there is a trend towards individual burials, with some distinguished exceptions. These include the much-debated Chrysolakkos complex, Mallia, consisting of a number of buildings forming a complex. This is located in the centre of Mallia's burial area and may have been the focus for burial rituals, or the 'crypt' for a notable family.

    These tombs often evidence group burial, where more than one body is deposited. These may represent the burial crypts for generations of a kin group, or of a particular settlement where the individuals are not closely related and shared in the construction of the tomb. The 'house tomb' at Gournia is a typical example, where the construction consisted of a clay and reed roof, topping a mud-brick and stone base. At Ayia Photia certain rock-cut chamber tombs may have been used solely for the burial of children, indicating complex burial patterns that differed from region to region. Mortuary furniture and grave goods varied widely, but could include storage jars, bronze articles such as tools and weapons, and beauty articles such as pendants. Little is known about mortuary rituals, or the stages through which the deceased passed before final burial, but it has been indicated that 'toasting rituals' may have formed a part of this, suggested by the prevalence of drinking vessels found at some tombs.

    In later periods (EM III) a trend towards singular burials, usually in clay Pithoi (large storage vessels), is observed throughout Crete, replacing the practice of built tombs. Equally, the introduction of Larnake or Larnax burials emerges, where the body was deposited in a clay or wooden sacrophagus. These coffins were often richly decorated with motifs and scenes similar to those of the earlier fresco and vase painting tradition. However, rock-cut tombs and Tholoi remained in use even by the LM III period, including the site of Phylaki.
    The distribution of burial sites varies in time and space. Some functional demands may have influenced the decision to locate a cemetery: the Late Minoan rock-cut tombs at Armeni utilise the geography of the area for structural support, where chambers are dug deep into the rock. Generally, cemeteries tend to cluster in regions close to settled areas. The Mochlos cemetery, for example, would have served the inhabitants of that island who settled in the south of the area. The cemetery itself has been interpreted to indicate a visible hierarchy, perhaps indicating social differentiation within the local population; larger, monumental tombs for the 'èlite', and smaller tombs, including some early Pithoi burials, for the larger part of the population.
    The German geologist Hans Georg Wunderlich argued that the Palace of Knossos itself was a mortuary temple. This interpretation is strongly rejected by mainstream archaeology


    g)Language

    Knowledge of the spoken and written language of the Minoans is scant, due to the small number of records found. Sometimes the Minoan language is referred to as Eteocretan, but this presents confusion between the language written in Linear A scripts and the language written in a Euboean- derived alphabet after the Greek Dark Ages. While the Eteocretan language is suspected to be a descendant of Minoan, there is not enough source material in either language to allow conclusions to be made. It also is unknown whether the language written in Cretan hieroglyphs is Minoan. As with Linear A, it is un-deciphered and its phonetic values are unknown.

    Approximately 3,000 tablets bearing writing have been discovered so far in Minoan contexts. The overwhelming majority are in the Linear B script, apparently being inventories of goods or resources. Others are inscriptions on religious objects associated with cult worship? Because most of these inscriptions are concise economic records rather than dedicatory inscriptions, the translation of Minoan remains a challenge. The hieroglyphs came into use from MMI and were in parallel use with the emerging Linear A from the eighteenth century BC (MM II) and disappeared at some point during the seventeenth century BC (MM III).

    In the Mycenean period, Linear A was replaced by Linear B, recording a very archaic version of the Greek language. Linear B was successfully deciphered by Michael Ventris in 1953, but the earlier scripts remain a mystery. Unless Eteocretan truly is its descendant, it is perhaps during the Greek Dark Ages, a time of economic and socio-political collapse, that the Minoan language became extinct.

    [​IMG]
    The Phaistos disc above is of an unknown script similar to Anatolian Heiroglyphs and "Linear A", as yet undeciphered.
     
  2. jonathan hernandez13

    jonathan hernandez13 Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    5,039
    Likes Received:
    64
    Location:
    Mount Vernon New York
    partIII


    h)Art

    The collection of Minoan art is in the museum at Heraklion, near Knossos on the north shore of Crete. Minoan art, with other remains of material culture, especially the sequence of ceramic styles, has allowed archaeologists to define the three phases of Minoan culture (EM, MM, LM) discussed above.
    Since wood and textiles have vanished through decomposition, the most important surviving examples of Minoan art are Minoan pottery, the palace architecture with its frescos that include landscapes, stone carvings, and intricately carved seal stones.

    In the Early Minoan period ceramics were characterized by linear patterns of spirals, triangles, curved lines, crosses, fishbone motifs, and such. In the Middle Minoan period naturalistic designs such as fish, squid, birds, and lilies were common. In the Late Minoan period, flowers and animals were still the most characteristic, but the variability had increased. The 'palace style' of the region around Knossos is characterised by a strong geometric simplification of naturalistic shapes and monochromatic paintings. Very noteworthy are the similarities between Late Minoan and Mycenaean art. Frescoes were the main form of art during these time of the Minoan culture. These frescoes are basically the only record we have of the Minoan civilization.

    While the Egyptian painters of the time painted their wall paintings in the "dry-fresco" (fresco secco) technique, the Minoans utilized a "true" or "wet" painting method, allowing the pigments of metal and mineral oxides to bind well to the wall, while it required quick execution. The nature of this technique encouraged improvisation, spontaneity, and the element of chance. Since they had to work within the time constrains of the drying plaster, the painters had to be very skillful, and their fluid brush strokes translated into the graceful outlines that characterize minoan painting.

    For this reason, this method of painting was most appropriate for the fluid moments of life and nature scenes that the Minoans favored, which contrasted sharply with the strict stylization and stereotyping typical of frescoes from other Mediterranean cultures of the same time.
    The figures of Minoan frescoes are depicted in natural poses of free movement that reflect the rigors of the activity they engage with, an attitude characteristic of a seafaring culture accustomed to freedom of movement, liquidity, and vigor.

    At the Middle period III of the Neopalatial period (1700-1600 BC) the Minoans learned the painting with forms from the Aegeans, but Aegeans took from the Minoans the representations with the horses gallop, individual patterns (fishes), and modalities of representation (representation of territorial levels). In Crete now is beginning to flourish, in a magnificent manner, a more naturalistic formal art in frescoes (scenes of gardens, such as the "Crocus gatherer" and representation of marine fauna). In ceramics (white painting on a dark background) appear forms (fishes) next to the ornament element (continuous whorls).

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Later (1550-1450 B.C.) at the last flourishing of the palaces, the social and courtier life information is given by the impressive performances with forms in frescoes (scenes from gardens, celebrations, dance scenes, jumping bulls, on cups from Vapheio (Lakonia), sacrifice scenes in temples which were located in hills, sporting events, also a military scene). Fine examples from this period are the Minoan Lady known as "La Parisienne" and the "Prince of lilies" from the palace of Knossos. Shortly after 1400 BC is originated the famous sarcophagus from Aghia Triadha, with combined Minoan and Mycenaean religious scenes.

    Very little sculpture from Minoan Crete has survived since most of it was not monumental, and instead consisted of small artifacts dedicated to gods or kings. One of the best known examples is the Snake Goddess fetish which exhibits many stylized conventions with the geometric division of the body and dress, while its frontal pose reminds us of Mesopotamian and Egyptian sculpture. The extended arms holding the snakes however add animation to the static pose. The statuette appears to be a goddess or high priestess, and the dress which covers the body all the way to the ground while leaving the breasts exposed was typical of Minoan female attire and is repeated in frescoes. Some of these models were conserved by re-shaping and re-painting, and underwent several modifications.

    A variety of ceramic, bone, clay and stone figures have been recovered from Minoan sites, many of which have been excavated from communal tombs and peak sanctuaries. Schematic depictions of human individuals and various animals in a range of attitudes have been recorded, though due to the friable nature of baked clay many survive in fragments rather than coherent shapes. Some of these figures have been treated with layers of paint, either in a binary black and white, or shades of red. It has been demonstrated that the visual profiles of the clay figures, with their arms raised or crossed, could have represented a technique for individuals to reach an altered state of consciousness (ASC) in conjunction with sound and light stimulation.

    Other common gestures observed in figures include the 'Minoan salute' (i.e., one fist raised to the forehead whilst the other remains at the side) and the 'hands-on-hips'. The latter attitude is often represented in a female figure who has been given multiple interpretations: the epiphany (appearance) of a deity, a religious official, and a worshiper. Whatever the meaning (if there is only one), it is clear that gestures and posturing were important aspects of Palatial culture and Minoan ritual.

    Through their interaction with other civilizations of the middle east, the Minoans were aware and utilized the art of metalworking. Their skillful jewelry creations adorned the collections of noble palace inhabitants and were even exported around the Mediterranean.
    The archaeological museums in Crete present a number of gold artifacts, along with an assortment of copper instruments that date back to 2300 BC.

    Copper was a much sought after commodity during this time, and it does not appear naturally in Crete. Most likely the Minoans imported copper from Cyprus.
    The skill of the Minoan metal smiths was renowned in the ancient world, and many artisans worked abroad in mainland Greece and the Aegean islands. The Mycenaeans learned the art of inlaying bronze with gold from the Minoans


    i)Warfare and Peace


    Though the vision created by Sir Arthur Evans of a pax Minoica, a "Minoan peace", has been criticised in recent years, it is generally assumed there was little internal armed conflict in Minoan Crete itself, until the following Mycenaean period. As with much of Minoan Crete, however, it is hard to draw any obvious conclusions from the evidence. However, new excavations keep sustaining interests and documenting the impact around the Aegean.
    Evans argued that there is little evidence for ancient Minoan fortifications.

    But as S. Alexiou has pointed out (in Kretologia 8), a number of sites, especially Early and Middle Minoan sites such as Aghia Photia, are built on hilltops or are otherwise fortified. As Lucia Nixon said, "...we may have been over-influenced by the lack of what we might think of as solid fortifications to assess the archaeological evidence properly. As in so many other instances, we may not have been looking for evidence in the right places, and therefore we may not end with a correct assessment of the Minoans and their ability to avoid war."

    Chester Starr points out in "Minoan Flower Lovers" (Hagg-Marinatos eds. Minoan Thalassocracy) that Shang China and the Maya both had unfortified centers and yet still engaged in frontier struggles, so that itself cannot be enough to definitively show the Minoans were a peaceful civilization unparalleled in history. In 1998, however, when Minoan archaeologists met in a conference in Belgium to discuss the possibility that the idea of Pax Minoica was outdated, the evidence for Minoan war proved to be scanty.

    Archaeologist Jan Driessen, for example, said the Minoans frequently show 'weapons' in their art, but only in ritual contexts, and that "The construction of fortified sites is often assumed to reflect a threat of warfare, but such fortified centers were multifunctional; they were also often the embodiment or material expression of the central places of the territories at the same time as being monuments glorifying and merging leading power" (Driessen 1999, p. 16).

    On the other hand, Stella Chryssoulaki's work on the small outposts or 'guard-houses' in the east of the island represent possible elements of a defensive system. Claims that they produced no weapons are erroneous; type A Minoan swords (as found in palaces of Mallia and Zarkos) were the finest in all of the Aegean (See Sanders, AJA 65, 67, Hoeckmann, JRGZM 27, or Rehak and Younger, AJA 102).

    Keith Branigan claimed that 95% of so-called Minoan weapons possessed hafting (hilts, handles) that would have prevented their use as weapons (Branigan, 1999); more recent experimental testing of accurate replicas has shown this to be incorrect as these weapons were capable of cutting flesh down to the bone (and scoring the bone's surface) without any damage to the weapons themselves. Archaeologist Paul Rehak maintains that Minoan figure-eight shields could not have been used for fighting or even hunting, since they were too cumbersome (Rehak, 1999).

    And archaeologist Jan Driessen says the Minoans frequently show 'weapons' in their art, but only in ritual contexts (Driessen 1999). Finally, archaeologist Cheryl Floyd concludes that Minoan "weapons" were merely tools used for mundane tasks such as meat-processing (Floyd, 1999). Although this interpretation must remain highly questionable as there are no parallels of one-meter-long swords and large spearheads being used as culinary devices in the historic or ethnographic record.

    About Minoan warfare in general, Branigan concludes that "The quantity of weaponry, the impressive fortifications, and the aggressive looking long-boats all suggested an era of intensified hostilities. But on closer inspection there are grounds for thinking that all three key elements are bound up as much with status statements, display, and fashion as with aggression.... Warfare such as there was in the southern Aegean EBA early Bronze Age was either personalized and perhaps ritualized (in Crete) or small-scale, intermittent and essentially an economic activity (in the Cyclades and the Argolid/Attica) " (1999, p. 92).

    Archaeologist Krzyszkowska concurs: "The stark fact is that for the prehistoric Aegean we have no direct evidence for war and warfare per se" (Krzyszkowska, 1999).
    Furthermore, no evidence exists for a Minoan army, or for Minoan domination of peoples outside Crete. Few signs of warfare appear in Minoan art. "Although a few archaeologists see war scenes in a few pieces of Minoan art, others interpret even these scenes as festivals, sacred dance, or sports events" (Studebaker, 2004, p. 27). Although armed warriors are depicted being stabbed in the throat with swords, violence may occur in the context of ritual or blood sport.

    Although on the Mainland of Greece at the time of the Shaft Graves at Mycenae, there is little evidence for major fortifications among the Mycenaeans there (the famous citadels post-date the destruction of almost all Neopalatial Cretan sites), the constant warmongering of other contemporaries of the ancient Minoans – the Egyptians and Hittites, for example – is well documented (the battle of Kadesh is one example of a competition bewteen rival kingdoms that culminated in one of the oldest recorded battles in history).


    j)Architecture and Building


    The Minoan cities were connected with stone-paved roads, formed from blocks cut with bronze saws. Streets were drained and water and sewer facilities were available to the upper class, through clay pipes.
    Minoan buildings often had flat tiled roofs; plaster, wood, or flagstone floors, and stood two to three stories high. Typically the lower walls were constructed of stone and rubble, and the upper walls of mudbrick. Ceiling timbers held up the roofs.

    The materials used in constructing the villas and palaces varied, and could include sandstone, gypsum, or limestone. Equally, building techniques could also vary between different constructions; some palaces employed the use of ashlar masonry whilst others used roughly hewn megalithic blocks.

    The first palaces were constructed at the end of the Early Minoan period in the third millennium BC (Malia). While it was formerly believed that the foundation of the first palaces was synchronous and dated to the Middle Minoan at around 2000 BC (the date of the first palace at Knossos), scholars now think that palaces were built over a longer period of time in different locations, in response to local developments. The main older palaces are Knossos, Malia, and Phaistos.

    Some of the elements recorded in the Middle Minoan 'palaces' (Knossos, Phaistos and Mallia, for example) have precedents in earlier styles of construction in the Early Minoan period. These include the indented western court, and the special treatment given to the western façade. An example of this is seen at the "House on the Hill" at Vasiliki, dated to the Early Minoan II period.

    The palaces fulfilled a plethora of functions: they served as centres of government, administrative offices, shrines, workshops, and storage spaces (e.g., for grain). These distinctions might have seemed artificial to Minoans.
    The use of the term 'palace' for the older palaces, meaning a dynastic residence and seat of power, has recently come under criticism (see Palace), and the term 'court building' has been proposed instead. However, the original term is probably too well entrenched to be replaced. Architectural features such as ashlar masonry, orthostats, columns, open courts, staircases (implying upper stories), and the presence of diverse basins have been used to define palatial architecture.

    Often the conventions of better-known, younger palaces have been used to reconstruct older ones, but this practice may be obscuring fundamental functional differences. Most older palaces had only one story and no representative facades. They were U-shaped, with a big central court, and generally were smaller than later palaces. Late palaces are characterised by multi-story buildings. The west facades had sandstone ashlar masonry. Knossos is the best-known example. See Knossos.

    Further building conventions could include storage magazines, a north-south orientation, a pillar room, a Minoan Hall system, a western court, and pier-and-door entrance ways. Palatial architecture in the First Palace Period is identified by its 'square within a square' style, whilst later, Second Palace Period constructions incorporated more internal divisions and corridor.

    It is a common architectural standard among the Middle Minoan 'palaces' that they are aligned with their surrounding topography. The MM palatial structure of Phaistos appears to align with Mount Ida, whilst Knossos is aligned with Juktas. These are orientated along a north-south axis. One suggested reason for this is the ritual significance of the mountain, where a number of Peak Sanctuaries (spaces for public ritual) have been excavated (i.e., Petsophas). The material record for these sites show clusters of clay figurines and evidence of animal sacrifice.

    One of the most notable contributions of Minoans to architecture is their unique column, which was wider at the top than the bottom. It is called an 'inverted' column because most Greek columns are wider at the bottom, creating an illusion of greater height. The columns were also made of wood as opposed to stone, and were generally painted red. They were mounted on a simple stone base and were topped with a pillow-like, round piece as a capital.

    A number of compounds interpreted as 'Villas' have been excavated in Crete. These structures share many features with the central Palaces (i.e., a conspicuous western facade, storage facilities, and a 'Minoan Hall') of the Neopalatial era, and may indicate either that they performed a similar rôle, or that they were artistic imitations, suggesting that their occupants were familiar with palatial culture. These villas are often richly decorated (see the frescos of Haghia Triadha Villa A).
     
  3. jonathan hernandez13

    jonathan hernandez13 Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    5,039
    Likes Received:
    64
    Location:
    Mount Vernon New York
    part IV: the end, at last > <


    k)Stock and diet


    The Minoans raised cattle, sheep, pigs, and goats, and grew wheat, barley, vetch, and chickpeas, they also cultivated grapes, figs, and olives, and grew poppies, for poppyseed and perhaps, opium. The Minoans domesticated bees, and adopted pomegranates and quinces from the Near East, although not lemons and oranges as is often imagined. They developed Mediterranean polyculture, the practice of growing more than one crop at a time, and as a result of their more varied and healthy diet, the population increased.

    This method of farming would theoretically maintain the fertility of the soil, as well as offering protection against low yields in any single crop. Furthermore, Linear B tablets indicate the importance of orchard farming (i.e., figs, olives and grapes) in processing crops for "secondary products". The process of fermenting wine from grapes is likely to have been a concern of the "Palace" economies, whereby such prestige goods would have been both important trade commodities as well as culturally meaningful items of consumption.

    Equally, it is likely that the consumption of exotic or expensive products would have played a role in the presentation and articulation of political and economic power. Farmers used wooden plows, bound by leather to wooden handles, and pulled by pairs of donkeys or oxen. The importance of marine resources in the Cretan diet is equally important to consider: the prevalence of edible molluscs in site material, and the artistic representations of marine fish and animals, including the distinctive "Octopus" stirrup jar (LM IIIC), indicate an appreciation and occasional use of fish within the economy.

    However, doubt remains over the functional significance of these resources in the wider Cretan diet, especially in relation to grain, olives and animal produce. Indeed, the intensification of agricultural activity is indicated by the construction of terraces and dams at Pseira in the Late Minoan period.
    Not all plants and flora would have a purely functional or economic utility. Artistic depictions often show scenes of Lily gathering and performances within 'green' spaces.

    The fresco known as the "Sacred Grove" at Knossos, for instance, depicts a number of female figures facing towards the left-hand-side of the scene, flanked by a copse of trees. Some scholars have suggested that these depictions represent the performance of 'harvest festivals' or ceremonies, as a means to honour the continued fertility of the soil. Further artistic depictions of farming scenes are observed on the Second Palace Period "Harvester Vase" (an egg-shaped rhyton, or pouring vessel), where 27 male figures, led by another, each carry hoes. This suggests the importance of farming as an artistic motif.

    Much debate has been animated by the discovery of storage magazines within the palace compounds. At the second 'palace' at Phaistos, for instance, a range of rooms in the western side of the structure have been identified as a magazine block. Within these storage areas have been recovered numerous jars, jugs and vessels, indicating the role of the complex as a potential re-distribution centre of agricultural produce.

    Several possibilities may be suggested, including a model where all economic and agricultural produce was controlled by the Palace and re-distributed by it. At sites such as Knossos, where the town had developed to a considerable size (75 ha), there is evidence of craft specialisation, indicating workshops. The Palace of Kato Zakro, for instance, indicates workshops that were integrated into the structure of the palace. Such evidence contributes to the idea that the Minoan palatial system developed through economic intensification, where greater agricultural surplus could support a population of administrators, craftsmen and religious practitioners. The number of domestic, or sleeping, chambers at the Palaces indicate that they could have supported a large population of individuals who were removed from manual labour.


    L)Decline


    The Minoan eruption on the island of Thera (present-day Santorini about 100 km distant from Crete) occurred during the LM IA period. This eruption was among the largest volcanic explosions in the history of civilization, ejecting approximately 60 km3 of material and rating a 6 on the Volcanic Explosivity Index. The eruption devastated the nearby Minoan settlement at Akrotiri on Santorini, which was entombed in a layer of pumice.

    Also, it has been suggested that the eruption and its effect on the Minoan civilization was the origin of the Atlantis myth, via Egyptian historical accounts. It is further believed that the eruption severely affected the Minoan culture on Crete, although the extent of the impact has been debated. Early theories proposed that ashfall from Thera on the eastern half of Crete choked off plant life, causing starvation of the local population.

    However, after more thorough field examinations, this theory has lost credibility, as it has been determined that no more than 5 millimeters (0.2 in) of ash fell anywhere on Crete. Recent studies indicate, based on archaeological evidence found on Crete, that a massive tsunami, generated by the Theran eruption, devastated the coastal areas of Crete and destroyed many Minoan coastal settlements. The LM IIIA (Late Minoan) period is marked by its affluence (i.e., wealthy tombs, burials and art) and the ubiquity of Knossian ceramic styles. However, by LM IIIB the importance of Knossos as a regional centre, and its material 'wealth', seem to have declined.

    Significant Minoan remains have been found above the Late Minoan I era Thera ash layer, implying that the Thera eruption did not cause the immediate downfall of the Minoans. As the Minoans were a sea power and depended on their naval and merchant ships for their livelihood, the Thera eruption caused significant economic hardship to the Minoans. Whether these effects were enough to trigger the downfall of the Minoan civilization is under intense debate. The Mycenaean conquest of the Minoans occurred in Late Minoan II period, not many years after the eruption, and many archaeologists speculate that the eruption induced a crisis in Minoan civilization, which allowed the Mycenaeans to conquer them easily.

    Several authors have noted evidence for exceedence of carrying capacity by the Minoan civilization. For example archaeological recovery at Knossos provides clear proof of deforestation of this part of Crete near late stages of Minoan development

    (As I already mentioned earlier in Part I, I believe that the raiding and looting activities of foreign sea people contributed strongly to the decline and eventual destruction of several civilizations. Had the Minoan civilization begun its decline due to other factors, such as the Thera eruption, they would have made an easy conquest for the militaristic sea people who were strong enough to offer combat with the Egyptian kingdom under the reign of Ramses III, a virtual superpower of the ancient world).



    That concludes the class for today folks, feel free to comment and nitpick. For anyone interested in further studies into these curious and beautiful people I recommend some sites.

    “New chronology proposed for Minoan civilization” From the “Passionate about history”

    http://passionateabouthistory.blogspot.com/2007_02_01_archive.html

    …a sample…

    "It’s generally thought that these cultural developments in the eastern Mediterranean occurred during the 16th century B.C., along with the New Kingdom period in Egypt, when Egypt expanded its influence into western Asia.
    The new studies suggests that these developments probably took place instead during the preceding “Second Intermediate Period,” when Egyptian power was weak and a foreign Canaanite dynasty even conquered northern Egypt for a while.
    According to the new chronology, the Late Bronze Age civilizations in the Aegean and on Cyprus may have developed in association with 18th- and 17th-century Canaanite and Levantine civilizations and their expanding maritime trade world. These cultures were very different from the Egyptians’ in terms of culture, language and religion.
    For more than a century, archaeologists have developed the chronology for this region by painstakingly comparing the various civilizations’ artifacts and artistic styles, such as how spirals were painted on pots or how metalwork was done. To pin the cultural periods to calendar dates, they then linked them to the accepted dates for the Egyptian pharaohs.
    Since the 1970s, scientists have been measuring radiocarbon dates from the same areas, which don’t match with this artifact-based timeframe. Because of uncertainty about the dating methods, however, the radiocarbon results haven’t been convincing enough to overturn the archaeologists’ conclusions."

    Check the site out for yourselves, it has some cool stuff, also, this site

    http://www.mlahanas.de/Greeks/History/Minoans.html

    Has some good historical info with cool pics, links, and sources ^^
     
  4. Shadow Dragon

    Shadow Dragon Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2008
    Messages:
    3,483
    Likes Received:
    26
    Location:
    In the land of the gods
    Wow Jonathan, you've difenetely done your research. The Minoan's were a cool group of people. I tend to focuse more on the Greeks and Romans. With the possible exception of Egypt, the Minoans may have been the most advanced civilization of it's era.

    Since most of the history posts involved the west/near east or the far east, so how about a big event that effected both? There have been a few cases of this happening in ancient and medieval periods. Such as the Battle of Hydaspes between Macedon (being led by Alexander the Great) and Paurava (an Indian kingdom led by King Porus).

    This was the strongest kingdom left in Northern India, so Alexander had to destroy it to keep marching east. Alexander had his phalanx and heavy calvary combonation that he used to conquer Persia and had added the use of light infantry and calvary archers to support his heavy forces to counter the speed of the Asian horse tribes that he recently battles in Central Asia. All in all, he had thirty four thousand infantry and seven thousand calvary. The size of King Porus's force is a little iffy, but it's predicted that he had thirty to fifty thousand infantry, two thousand to four thousand calvary, one thousand war chariots and two hundred war elephants. Unlike most battles in India, this took place during the rainy season, so the ground was soft making the chariots a lot less manueverable, greatly diminishing their usefullness. And it kept the Indians from being able to use their bamboo bows, which require the one end to be placed on the ground when firing.

    In the beginning, both sides lined up along the two shores of the Hydaspes River. King Porus was basically daring Alexander to cross under a storm of arrows. Alexander and some of his calvary started moving up and down his side of the shore; King Porus assumed that he was looking for an easier place to cross. For the first few days, he had a force mirror Alexander's movement, but after awhile decided to stop, figuring that just keeping tract of Alexander's main force was more important than followeing Alexander's scouting force around. And this was exactly what Alexander wanted. Come night fall, he did a phased withdraw of his forces, leaving enough behind to keep Porus in the same spot.

    [​IMG]

    The forces with Alexander went farther down the river and crossed at a place that had a couple islands to help the crossing. King Porus's scouts discovered this and reported it to him. Upon hearing about this King Porus was torn on what to do. He didn't know which group of Macedonians were the main force and which was just the distraction. At the end he decided that the forces still across the river were the main force being led by Alexander and just sent out a small force to deal with Alexander's further up the river. This force was led by King Porus's son, Prince Porus (I guess they didn't have that many names in ancient India :p). Anyways, Alexander destroyed this group and killed Prince Porus.

    Indian scouts went back and reported this to Porus; letting him know that this force was the one being led by Alexander. Deciding that the group of soldiers across the bank werent the biggest threat, he and the majority of his forces went north to find better and drier ground to fight on. Though he did leave behind some of this force to prevent Alexander's second force from crossing and surrounding the Indian army.

    Alexander's forces were tired out from the crossing and the small battle, so decided to rest them for a bit. He sent out his calvary archers to harrass Porus's forces and keep them pinned to one spot. It's not known if he thought this was a set up to an ambush or if he just liked the battle ground he picked, but either way, he decided to wait there for Alexander's force to come instead of pressing an attack against the calvary archers.

    After their rest, Alexander's force marched on Porus's forces. When he got a bit closer, King Porus's scouts reported that all of Alexander's calvary were on his right flank, so Porus rearranged to forces similarly to keep from being out flanked. After Alexander's scoutes reported this, Alexander took half his calvary and put them back on the other side of his forces, and they keep going, eventually getting behind the Indian line, which was unknown to Porus's forces at the time. Right at the start of the main fighting, Alexander led his group of calvary in a charge against the Indian calvary, at the same time as Alexander's second group of calvary hit the Indian calvary from the rear. This utterly distroyed Porus's calvary units, and from there it was academic for Alexander. Just like with the Persians, he attacked the front of Porus's battalion with his Phalanx, and hit the rear with his heavy calvary.

    [​IMG]

    After the battle Alexander was greatly impressed with Porus's courage and put him in charge of Macedon's newest province/Porus's former kingdom.
     
  5. jonathan hernandez13

    jonathan hernandez13 Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    5,039
    Likes Received:
    64
    Location:
    Mount Vernon New York
    Well done Shadow Dragon. I believe that if King Alexander were with us today he would be proud of the way that you honored him and his men. I bequeath to thee an award.

    [​IMG]

    It was a custom of the Ancient Egyptians to bestow on their great soldiers a golden biting fly, as a pest, the best fighter frustrates his enemy with his talents as a fly would. Since this is an ancient history thread, I can think of no better award to continue a very old tradition. May we honor the men of Kemet.

    -Egyptian Golden Biting Fly. Military Award, c. 1200 BC


    "Gold fly of valor" - a military award for bravery in battle in ancient Egypt.


    Biting flies were symbols of determination, preserverence, valor, gold medals in the shape of the flies were given to soldiers. Golden fly pendants were military awards, representing the behaviors of biting flies that attacked humans.


    Length 13 mm.
     
  6. Gallowglass

    Gallowglass Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,615
    Likes Received:
    92
    Location:
    Loch na Seilg, Alba
    That depends where you go in Europe. In places there was no hierarchy (or wasn't supposed to be), and people were equal to their chiefs (the chiefs just held more power over their realm, and not individuals).

    And I don't know why people still think the Dark Ages were somehow barbaric and brutal. They weren't, not even on the 'edges of civilisation' in the British Isles, where the Irish kings were busy practicing democracy and working on equality for women, as well as doing important things such as discovering America, according to both the Irish themselves and possibly references from Norse sagas. The amount of literature that the Irish, who many historians today still think were actually illiterate despite thousands upon thousands of pages, both from that era and written down later, of Irish records.

    I'm not going to say whether other places in Europe were any less modern, as that is something which is impossible to define, but you have to admit that the ancient Celtic races (yes, not just the Gaels here - in fact the Picts were probably better than us when it came to women's equality) to have complete equality for any race and religion, and significant rights for women, in ancient Ireland, is incredible. It is something that the Romans didn't manage, which is also important where everyone seems to think the Romans pretty much created the modern world and gave us important stuff such as central heating, steam power, and the Internet ;)
     
  7. jonathan hernandez13

    jonathan hernandez13 Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    5,039
    Likes Received:
    64
    Location:
    Mount Vernon New York
    For championing the causes for the Gaelic peoples and pioneering the crusade to instruct all of the grace and respect that the Celtic people truly deserve, I hereby nominate you as a Bard of the oldest and highest tradition.

    [​IMG]

    As a warrior poet you will carry on traditions, tales, and record for us and all time the deeds of the past. This is also a very fine old tradition and very suitable for an ancient history thread methinks.


    Glaine ár gcroí (Purity of our hearts)
    Neart ár ngéag (Strength of our limbs)
    Beart de réir ár mbriathar (Action to match our speech)

    -mottoes of the Fianna...

    Rise, Bard!
     
  8. Gallowglass

    Gallowglass Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,615
    Likes Received:
    92
    Location:
    Loch na Seilg, Alba
    And write the high king's speeches? No, thanks, I'll just take the sword ;)
     
  9. Shadow Dragon

    Shadow Dragon Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2008
    Messages:
    3,483
    Likes Received:
    26
    Location:
    In the land of the gods
    This is the Irish we're talking about. The speech could just be having the guy that's dyed blue shouting "They can never take our freedom!" :p
     
  10. Sabreur

    Sabreur Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    Messages:
    1,119
    Likes Received:
    39
    Location:
    At the combination pizza hut and taco bell
    Mel Gibson is not a valid historical representation of the Gaels :p
     
  11. Gallowglass

    Gallowglass Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,615
    Likes Received:
    92
    Location:
    Loch na Seilg, Alba
    Good fantasy, though ;)
     
  12. Shadow Dragon

    Shadow Dragon Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2008
    Messages:
    3,483
    Likes Received:
    26
    Location:
    In the land of the gods
    Actually this reminds me of an episode of Deadliest Warrior. They compare warriors from different eras to see who would win in a one on one fight. In one episode they decided to pick specefic people from the past and did Willian Wallace vs Shaka Zulu. Wallace one.
     
  13. Gallowglass

    Gallowglass Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,615
    Likes Received:
    92
    Location:
    Loch na Seilg, Alba
    A victory for the Anglo-Norman guy, then...he's not a Gael, he didn't speak Gaelic, he would never have worn a kilt, or played the bagpipes...even if he was Gaelic, and not the descendant of a Norman immigrant ;)

    Just thought I'd mention it ;)
     
  14. jonathan hernandez13

    jonathan hernandez13 Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    5,039
    Likes Received:
    64
    Location:
    Mount Vernon New York

    Deadliest Warrior is a great show, I think that the fights they have are a tad bit exaggerated, but they are pretty informative and show live weapon demos that are so cool! (ballistics gel dummies with fake blood rules)

    Have either of you guys seen or watched a show called Time Commanders? (most episodes are available to view via Youtube) It came on the BBC in 2003 but was cancelled after 2 seasons. It used a Rome: Total war engine to recreate ancient battles. They brought in 4 people to take the place of Generals and Captains to see how they would fair against the sims.

    Most teams got destroyed horribly. Also a very informative show, they had two historical experts on the show that made comments throughout. One of them is a senior lecturer in war studies at the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst, bright guy, named Dr. Aryeh Nusbacher. The other is a weapons expert named Mike Loades who works as a consultant for documentaries and period films. Mike Loades is my fav:p You can give him any weapon from any period and he instantly shows you how it was used and such, he gets so excited and acts out battles, he seems like he has alot of fun with what he does.

    In the near future I would like to do a show by show analysis of the recreated battles from Time Commanders, but it may be a major effort, so please be patient and keep your fingers crossed for me. :rolleyes:

    Also, I would like to do an essay on ancient Celts, and I'd better do my research because if not I'm sure that our resident Gael will let me know about how unhappy he is.;)

    PS: Gallowglass, does that mean that we can call you a Bard, or would you prefer that we don't? If not I can think of another award to confer onto you.

    PSS Shadow Dragon do you like your medal? Wear it with pride, but dont get a fat head:D

    PSSS Gallow, would I be correct in assuming that you prefer the name Gael because it is more authentic and probably derived from a Gaelic language where Celt is a term derived from non-Gaelic origins? IE the Greek "keltoi?"
     
  15. Gallowglass

    Gallowglass Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,615
    Likes Received:
    92
    Location:
    Loch na Seilg, Alba
    I watched that programme a while ago, but most of the people that went on it were complete idiots. Yes, cavalry charging right at your spearmen? Block them with archers! That'll work! It's similar to watching a two-year-old organise a response to an injury with their fake cars. Some were good, though, and they were always interesting to watch.

    I'm usually fine with anything other than the fantasy - kilts, haggis, bagpipes, tartan, etc. You can write about how we ate our own children if you feel the need to (although we didn't, as far as I know...), just avoid the tourist cliches and I won't light the crann-tara ;)

    I don't mind being called a bard; that's essentially the same as a sennachie, anyway.

    The words Gael and Celt are not interchangeable. There are two major groups of Celtic races - Gaelic, which includes the Highlanders, Irish, and the Manx, and Brythonic, which includes the Welsh, Bretons, Cornish, and Picts. Those each had their own languages, and most still do (only Pictish is no longer spoken natively). Most had, and still have, their own cultures. The Celts were never a single race, unless you go back to when every European country and nationality was the same Proto-Indo-European group in the Caucasus.

    Gaels and Scots are not interchangeable, or at least haven't been for about a thousand years, because the feudalisation of the Lowlands in the 12th century and the immigration of Normans led to a complete change in the language, religion, and ethnicity of the Scottish Lowlands in comparison to the Gaelic Highlands, which were culturally opposite with a largely independent king.
     
  16. Shadow Dragon

    Shadow Dragon Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2008
    Messages:
    3,483
    Likes Received:
    26
    Location:
    In the land of the gods
    Your guys' posts just reminded me of something actually. Gallowglass, you have played Medieval Total War 2? One of it's expansion packs is call Britannia. You play as one of the major forces in the British Isles (England, Scotland, Ireland, Wales and the Vikings, I forget if it's the specifically the Denmark vikings or Norway).
     
  17. madhoca

    madhoca Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,604
    Likes Received:
    151
    Location:
    the shadow of the velvet fortress
    Your post was interesting Gallow--but I've never heard anyone call themselves a 'Gael' before as frequently as you do (I'm a mixture but basically English/Cornish and was educated mostly in England). I'm not saying it's not perfectly valid to describe yourself in this way, I just wondered if it's all that usual...
     
  18. Gallowglass

    Gallowglass Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,615
    Likes Received:
    92
    Location:
    Loch na Seilg, Alba
    I play it on multiplayer, although I had to make a mod that includes the Lords of the Isles, and that's not finished yet. I might put a link in my sig when it is. And, as far as I know, it's meant to be the Kingdom of Mann, which was a vassal of Norway.

    Actually, if anyone cares, the weapons and clothing are mostly historically accurate ;)

    Usually only Gaelic-speakers use it, as the language doesn't really give that many options. It's not used to refer to Lowland Scots. But on the Isle of Man and Ireland, as well as in largely Irish communities around the world (most of the east coast of America), it's used by people regardless of what language they speak.
     
  19. jonathan hernandez13

    jonathan hernandez13 Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    5,039
    Likes Received:
    64
    Location:
    Mount Vernon New York
    Alright gang; as I said before, I was checking out the show “Time Commanders” which recreates ancient and middle age battles. I thought it would be interesting to see how modern day people untrained in military tactics or strategy would do in simulated warfare.


    More often then not the teams lose, and often by overwhelming margins. The teams often make common and repeated mistakes.

    1)They often divide their forces in the face of an attack. This can be risky, as armies before the advent of muskets tended to work best as a cohesive unit. They also half their forces even when outnumbered, which is suicide, as both halves can easily be surrounded.

    2)They often hold fast to old military maxims and clichés such as “seizing the high ground” to the point of obsession. Some teams erroneously assumed that by retaining the position that “all was well” and that “nothing else matters” even when factors other then terrain would play crucial roles.

    3)The teams more often then not failed to fully grasp the abilities and weaknesses of either their units or of the enemies’. For example, they allowed Phalanxes, which are vulnerable at the flanks, to expose themselves to the enemy, sacrificing security for the opportunity to strike. They would make unsupported attacks on overwhelming or larger targets. They often attempted to halt cavalry charges with archers, or make head on cavalry charges against deep ranks of spearmen.

    4)Some teams made poor plans, or, when the enemy began to move, they would allow their emotions to control their judgments and make hasty decisions. The teams would often make last minute troop deployments and adjust their plans on the fly as the enemy advanced, making themselves sloppy and easy targets for the enemy.

    5)There was often a very critical lack of communication between the team members; shouting, confusion, insubordination, and ineptitude on the part of the “generals”. The planners, even with time and resources beforehand to make detailed assessments, lacked a clear vision or understanding of what was actually taking place on the battlefield.


    That being said, let’s take a look at the first season of the show…

    [​IMG]

    Time Commanders was a television series of programmes made by Lion TV for BBC Two that ran for two seasons from 2003 to 2005. The programmes, originally hosted by Eddie Mair and more recently by Richard Hammond, features an edited version of the game engine behind the real-time strategy game Rome: Total War to recreate famous battles of the ancient world. The battles are replayed by 4-player teams from diverse backgrounds. The teams are unfamiliar with computer games, to make sure their gaming skills do not influence their success.

    After a brief introduction of the battle, including an overview of military units, terrain and available forces, the players have to develop a strategy and then deploy their forces. Two of the players are selected as generals, who will direct the battle and have access to a strategic map. The other two players are designated lieutenants in the first series, and captains in the second. The units are indirectly controlled by the lieutenants, who issue commands to program assistants, who in turn use the game interface to control the units.

    Troop deployment and battle follows, although in the second series, there is a small skirmish conducted as a separate event, to acquaint the players with the game mechanics and their units. In the second series the team also get strategic pauses where they can refine their strategies. The episode featuring Pharsalus featured Becky Ansell, who is a supermodel.

    During each game, a pair of military specialists analyze the performance of the players and explain how the real historical battle unfolded.

    1)Dr. Aryeh Nusbacher - Senior Lecturer on War Studies at the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst (from what I understand, the British equivalent of West Point).

    (note: as an interesting and up to date side topic, Dr. Aryeh Nusbacher had since undergone sexual reassignment surgery and is now a woman)

    [​IMG]

    2)Mike Loades - Military historian and weapons expert.

    [​IMG]

    3)Dr. Saul David - Military Historian and author.

    4)Mark Urban - Military Historian and author.

    5)Dr. Adrian Goldsworthy, Historian and author, the series' historical advisor.

    Notably, the series as televised contained no reference to the origin of the software powering the impressively realistic 3D visuals of ancient battlefields that were the show's mainstay. This is due to the BBC's rules against product placement (Creative Assembly were named in the credits of the show with a specific mention of them providing the Game Engine).



    PS, I have been told that there is an online movement prominently in the Facebook community trying to petition producers to bring Time Commanders back, I hope that they are successful.
     
  20. jonathan hernandez13

    jonathan hernandez13 Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    5,039
    Likes Received:
    64
    Location:
    Mount Vernon New York
    Season One

    Episode One

    -Host: Eddie Mair
    -Experts: Aryeh Nusbacher and Mike Loades

    The Team

    This battle was fought by a team of part time play dramatists. Interestingly, one of the team members was an award-winning chess player and may have had an innate tactical gift.


    Battle of the Trebia (original episode air date 4 September 2003)

    -Time: Winter solstice, December, 218 BC
    -Location: Trebbia River, present-day Italy



    Hannibal Barca is a Carthaginian General, and he’s marching into Italy with a muti-national and ethnic army of various mercenaries from scattered corners of the ancient world.. He has with him hardened troops that survived a brutal crossing of the Alps mountains with Rome in their sights. Not long before he laid siege to Saguntum, a settlement in modern day Spain that marked the boundary between what was then a Carthaginian province and the Roman Rebublic’s. The people of Saguntum were Roman allies, and by crossing the Alps it was an official declaration of war.

    The Romans in turn sent two Legions to deal with Hannibal, under the leadership of Consul Sempronius Longus. Interestingly, despite the Roman Legionnaires discipline, this army was full of raw recruits.

    On the march to battle Longus met up with two other Legions at a plain with a freezing cold river (this was Winter) named the Trebia running through it. (among the reinforcements were 20,000 Italic auxiliaries and an unknown number of Gallic Cenomani tribesmen).


    Longus was described as “impulsive and arrogant” by the narrator, someone wanting to end the battle quickly. A victory in battle can bring a Consul glory and political opportunities along with wealth, so he had certain motivations.

    If Hannibal can defeat this Roman army he can add to his fearsome reputation, kill more Romans, whom he hates, and continue his march into the heart of Italy.


    Carthaginian Army

    -20,000 heavy infantry (The crack elite infantrymen were his Libyan Spearmen, fighting in a Hellenistic Hoplite fashion, and with similar weapons and tactics such as the “Phalanx formation”. He also had with him Spanish/Celtiberian swordsmen who fought in a manner similar to Legionaiires insofar as their use of swords - probably Falcatas, typical pre-Roman Iberian swords ideal for chopping - and shields and opposed to spears. Weapons expert Mike Loades comments that in addition to swords the Spanish also had a solid Iron javelin called a Saunion. It was a heavy missile weapon with a range of about 20-30 meters that when launched en masse had a great capacity to disrupt enemy lines and were very effective at puncturing armor.)

    -9000 light infantry (Balearic island slingers and spearmen, used as Skirmishers)

    -11,000 cavalry (Divided between his Spanish Heavy Cavalry who fought with swords and shields and his Numidian Light Cavalry who fought primarily with Javelins using hit and run tactics).

    -unknown but “effective” number of war elephants


    Roman Army


    -16,000-18,000 infantry (The Legionnaires fought in large bodies of infantry called Cohorts, using tactics called “Manipular” warfare. The formations are arranged in checkerboard fashion and have considerable flexibility. The Legionairres carried a spear like pike called a Pilum, which was typically used as a missilie and often launched in massed volleys preceding a charge. The main weapon of the Legionairre was a short thrusting sword. At this stage the Roman army consisted of conscripts obligated by law into service from ages 17 to 46, so while well trained, many of them lacked initiative or esprit de corps)

    Note: One of the major weaknesses of the Roman Army in the Republic period identified by Dr. Nusbacher is that the senior leaders in the Army were politicians serving short service and lacked experience. Often the best leadership was seen among the lower ranked troops who could “get the job done” through resolve and excellent Roman discipline and training, despite their poor high level leadership. Of the 12 month Consulate tenure Longus was in his elevneth month and needed a victory in order to be remembered.

    -4,000 cavalry,(The Roman cavalry were not very effective in the Republic era. They were poorly trained and had no motivation. The people serving as Cavalrymen were wealthy elites who could affod the equipment necessary to field a horse and all the necessary accruements . Romans preffered to fight on foot to earn glory, the horsemen were often young sons of wealthy pressed into equestrian service thougt of it as a burden (as Dr. Nusbacher repeatedly comments “Roman cavalry are crap”).

    -20,000 Italic auxiliaries

    -Unknown number of Gallic Cenomani tribesmen
    The Battle is imminent…


    When shown a detailed map of the battlefield the team instantly spotted key features, such as the plain bisected by the river, and acknowledged that it might be essential for their use of cavalry.

    The team while scouting the enemy also identified a spot of wooded terrain on their right flank which could conceal hidden forces and serve as a means of ambushing the enemy. At the planning stage they decided to place some of their Numidian cavalry in place for an ambush.
    They placed roughy half of their heavier cavalry on the left flank, in a manner where they may go unnoticed as the Romans advanced.

    Unbeknowst to the team the Romans began to advance and cross the river in disciplined order (the river was cold but fordable). They had just sent some scouts to entice the Romans across the river as they began to move their forces into place. The Romans took the bait.

    Erroneously thinking that all of the Roman cavalry was on their right they reinforced their Numidian ambush with their Spanish heavy cavalry.

    The team at last began to move their army forward to meet the Romans who are moving ahead like a tank. One of the team’s Lieutenants was impromptu placed in charge of the infantry while the other led solely cavalry, alleviating the problems of lack of clarity in commands.

    As the spearhead of the Roman army begins to march in the team springs their cavalry ambush on the right flank, perhaps a bit too early. They commit their Numidians and Spanish still thinking that there were no other Roman cavalry units left (the rest of the Roman cavalry was on the other side of the field). The Roman left, consisting of horse and foot units, were slammed into and engaged.

    The attack manged to draw off part of the Roman left to deal with it, but the rest of their army continued to march on while the Roman left fixed and contained the early attack. The team also sent in the other half of their cavalry on their left to meet the Roman cavalry on its right. Again, the surprise attack was hatched too early, and because of poor placement they had a long exhausting charge before finally closing with the Romans, who calmly turned to meet their attack.

    Withdrawing their cavalry from both flanks, the Generals gave orders to the Lietenant con trolling the cavalry to keep pace with the Roman troops without engaging them. Being slow to disengage them, the Spanish cavalry on the right was left standing still under attack and was routed.

    The war elephants were sent charging into the Roman front lines and into their heavy infantry, who are least ideal to deal with an elephant charge. Shortly after all of the Carthaginian infantry began to engage the Romans, who begin to take significant casualties.

    The team correctly identified a group of legionairres advancing on their left and charged at them with their war elephants, and also managed to identify the remaining Roman cavalry on their left.

    The Carthaginian cavalry on the left was ordered to engage the remaining Roman cavalry to have dominion over that part of the battlefield.

    The military experts at this point commented on how scattered and broken up the Roman formations appeared, and that it was a credit to the tactics of the team which broke it up with their attacks.

    The elephants were also used in a tactical way by attacking from behind a Roman group and pushing them towards a group of Libyan hoplites. At last the team’s and enemy’s cavalry met on the left flank, shortly after the Roman horses retreated, giving the team cavalry superiority on the field.

    As isolated pockets of Roman infantry struggle against the Carthaginan army the remaing horsemen are sent against formations uncommitted, and more Roman casualties pile on. The Numidians were correctly used in a hit-and-run effect, to prevent them from getting bogged down with troops, as the cavalry are best used as a mobile force.

    At a critical moment of the battle when the Romans were at half strength, the center was meeting stiff resistence from the Triarii. The Roman Triarii were the best and veteran soldiers who were typically at the back of a formation. They were the typical “last line of defense” that could win or lose a battle with their sway. Sensing trouble, the team commits their tactical reserve infantry and send them against the Triarii.

    Adding insult to injury the Roman rear at that point became encircled by the remaing Numidian and Spanish horsemen. Seeing many Romans being slain, formations lose their discipline and retreat. Even the Roman General Sempronius Longus is encircled by light infantrymen. Weapons expert Mike Loades commented that the team was actually doing better than Hannibal did at the real battle.

    It was not long before the team of amateur actors won the first major battle of the second Punic war, a battle originally won by a military genius.


    The team was praised afterwards by the historical experts for their assessment of the battlefield, identification of key terrain features, good communication, and the initiative of their Lieutenants.

    After the hearty critique of their planning the historical experts began to recreate how the battle was fought in 218 BC with counters on a map.

    The Actual Battle

    The night before the battle, Hannibals younger brother Mago leads a small group of 1000 skirmishers and 1000 Numidian cavalry to an area nearby that the team used earlier as an ambush. This detachment concealed themselves in the underbush of the above-mentioned water-course under the cover of night, and prepared an ambush for the Romans (Numidian horsemen were said to be able to get their horses to lay down flat and remain silent).

    The next day, early in the morning, Hannibal sends some of his remaining Numidians into the Roman camp across the river. They shout at the Romans who are still waking, throw spears at them, all in the hopes of provoking them to cross the river and fall into Hannibal’s trap.

    Here is an assessment of the crossing of the Trebia by Lieutenant Colonel Theodore Ayrault Dodge, a United States Army officer of the Civil War era:

    The day was raw; snow was falling; the troops had not yet eaten their morning meal; yet, though they had been under arms for several hours, he pushed them across the fords of the Trebia, with the water breast-high and icy-cold. Arrived on the farther side, the Roman soldiers were so chilled that they could scarcely hold their weapons. Hannibal was ready to receive them. His men had eaten, rubbed themselves with oil before their camp-fires, and prepared their weapons. He might have attacked the Roman army when half of it was across, with even greater chances of success. But when he saw his ruse succeeding, he bethought him that he could produce a vastly greater moral effect on the new Gallic allies, as well as win a more decisive victory, by engaging the whole army on his own terms.


    As the Romans made their crossing the skirmishers engaged in light warfare as the bulk of the armies on either side closed and arrayed themselves. As the army came within striking distances the skirmishers of both sides withdrew. The numerically superior cavalry of the Carthaginians, arrayed on either flank and with War Elephant support, charged at and chased the Roman cavalry from the battlefield, leaving their infantry unprotected (horses are terrified of Elephants and cannot even stand the smell of them).

    There was a great struggle in the center where many Celtiberian and Libyans on the Carthaginian side were being cut down by Roman swords. As the rear lines of the Roman army passed the ambush site, Mago charges forth heroically into the rear of the Roman army, as the war elephants and cavalry wreak havoc among the wings of the Roman formation. Seeing that they have been surprised the Romans, taking heavy losses (as high as 75% by some estimates - mostly among the recruits and allies) retreat from the battlefield and march for the nearest fort. Sempronius survived and later boasted that he had in fact killed Hannibal. Hannibal would go on to win other battles with the Romans in Italy until his defeat later in North Africa at the battle of Zama.

    [​IMG]

    Enjoy this essay, feel free to comment and nitpick ad libidum. I shall prepare the next episode shortly. Hopefully you find it as enjoyable as I did.
     
  21. Shadow Dragon

    Shadow Dragon Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2008
    Messages:
    3,483
    Likes Received:
    26
    Location:
    In the land of the gods
    I figured certain things would be standard knowledge about battle, so it's hard to believe some of those mistakes. Though it's understandable that people would misuse phalanx battalions. They're a powerful type of infantry, but they do have several weaknesses, particularly their manuverability. However, things like using spearmen against horsemen and guarding your flanks would be understood.

    As for keeping the high ground, yeah it's important but there should be more to your strategy than that. It gives archers and artillery (such as catapults and ballistas) more range, plus some fighting up hill against heavy infantry or phalanxes is practically suicide, but if you don't have those things, then it isn't going to do you much good.
     
  22. jonathan hernandez13

    jonathan hernandez13 Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    5,039
    Likes Received:
    64
    Location:
    Mount Vernon New York
    Hark, is that General ShadowDragon I hear? Illustrious winner of the revered golden fly decoration?

    :p
    sup
     
  23. Shadow Dragon

    Shadow Dragon Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2008
    Messages:
    3,483
    Likes Received:
    26
    Location:
    In the land of the gods
    Ha, not much. I was recently playing Rome Total War as the Scythians and defeated a large Macedonian force using horse archers. Here's another one, lightly armored phalanx batalions versus horse archers attacking both flanks is a clear mismatch. :p

    Yeah, due to being a bit of a history nerd and playing a lot of Total War probably gives me a bit more knowledge about ancient warfare tactics than the average person. :p Though I tend to favore Alexander's standard anvil and hammer strategy. Hit them in the front with heavy infantry/phalanx and nail their flanks and rear with heavy calvary.
     
  24. jonathan hernandez13

    jonathan hernandez13 Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    5,039
    Likes Received:
    64
    Location:
    Mount Vernon New York
    i wish we could play a strategy game here in the forum, but the rpg sec is dead these days.:(
     
  25. Shadow Dragon

    Shadow Dragon Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2008
    Messages:
    3,483
    Likes Received:
    26
    Location:
    In the land of the gods
    Oh my gods. I'm watching the second episode of Time Commanders, the Battle of Watling Street, and they willing gave up the high ground despite being out numbered by light more manurable infantry. :rolleyes:
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice