Lion.Kanzen

The Dominate-era lanciarius Тукеев П.Д. It is believed that the Roman heavy infantry formation of the Dominate era consisted of six ranks (ordines). The first, second, third, and sixth ranks were composed of hastati spearmen. The fourth and fifth ranks could consist of archers (sagittarii) and skirmishers (lanciarii). The latter will be discussed in this article. Even in the time of Pompey and Caesar the Roman army lacked light infantry capable of operating in loose formation as skirmishers, scouts, and pursuers. According to the available information, the auxiliary cohorts could not fully meet the need for light infantry, and some of the legionnaires, mostly young, fast and hardy, were allocated to the antesignani, a temporary light infantry unit. By the start of III century CE the need for light infantry had only increased, especially in the east, where Rome's opponents, the Parthians and later the Sassanid Persians, traditionally used a lot of missile infantry and cavalry. In addition, the heavy infantry of the Roman army was now mostly used defensively, which only increased the army's need for skirmishers. Therefore, since the end of the third century CE lanciarii, light infantry armed with several javelins (light or heavy) and shields, became the constant part of legions and auxiliary cohorts. For these fighters mobility and stamina meant much more than passive protection from armour, so lanciarii could go into battle not only without body armor, but even without helmets. In combat the lanciarii could, depending on the circumstances, either stand in the fourth rank of the heavy infantry formation and throw javelins from there, or act in a loose formation in front of a phalanx of hastati. The lanciarii also performed scouting and pursuing retreating enemies. According to Ammianus Marcellinus, the hastati were expressly forbidden to leave the formation for pursuit, a task assigned to the lanciarii and cavalry. The great importance of the lanciarii is also confirmed by the fact that there were many independent army units consisting entirely of lanciarii, some of which later received the status of Palatine, the elite ones. Equipment The equipment of the lanciarii of the Dominate era may include the following elements: Fabric and leather products: Upper sleeved tunic (tunica manicata), made of wool Underwear sleeved tunic (tunica manicata), made of wool Pannonian cap (pileus pannonicus) Leggings (bracae) Cloak (sagum or chlamys) Military boots (campagi militaris) Cingulum Focale Socks Windings Elements of protective equipment made of metal and wood: Helmet Shield Weapons: Spatha Light javelin (lancea) Heavy javelin (spiculum) Plumbatae Other elements: Clasp (fibula) Bag The lanciarius set may not contain all of the aforementioned items. The javelins might be of just one type, light or heavy, and the sword might not be present at all

Less income meant less military budget, and both the weapons and the training of the soldiers declined as Rome neared its end. Thanks to falling wages and worsening conditions of service the army became progressively barbarized, until it was indistinguishable from the invaders crossing the Rhine and Danube. At the same time segmented armor, piles and convex shields were abandoned in favor of weapons that were cheaper to manufacture and maintain, such as chain mail and flat shields, which eliminated Rome's technological advantage over its enemies. Without motivation to train, the formations of the past fell into oblivion, with the new legionaries fighting on a shield wall bristling with spears. These changes were accompanied by a new combat doctrine based on large phalanxes of spearmen, who hurled a hail of darts and javelins at the enemy before charging with barbaric shouts. While reserves were maintained, the abandonment of the rotation system prevented the front line from being relieved, so that second-rank units were now used to fill gaps. The aggressiveness of Sassanid Persia led to new wars in the East against horsemen, so that Rome had to significantly increase its cavalry with catafracts and mounted archers, who now had a greater weight in combat, acting as hammer on the anvil of the spearmen. The introduction of the stirrup in the 4th century by the Huns accelerated this medievalization of the battle, passing the decisive role of the infantry to the armored knights formed by nobles and bodyguards of great leaders. https://historia.nationalgeographic.com.es/a/ejercito-romano-combate_19648 From Spanish.

A weather god or goddess, also frequently known as a storm god or goddess, is a deity in mythology associated with weather phenomena such as thunder, snow, lightning, rain, wind, storms, tornadoes, and hurricanes. Should they only be in charge of one feature of a storm, they will be called after that attribute, such as a rain god or a lightning/thunder god. This singular attribute might then be emphasized more than the generic, all-encompassing term "storm god", though with thunder/lightning gods, the two terms seem interchangeable. They feature commonly in polytheistic religions, especially in Proto-Indo-European ones. Storm gods are most often conceived of as wielding thunder and/or lightning (some lightning gods' names actually mean "thunder",[1][2][3] but since one cannot have thunder without lightning, they presumably wielded both). The ancients didn't seem to differentiate between the two, which is presumably why both the words "lightning bolt" and "thunderbolt" exist despite being synonyms. Of the examples currently listed storm themed deities are more frequently depicted as male, but both male and female storm or other rain, wind, or weather deities are described. Canaanite edit Ba'al, Canaanite god of fertility, weather, and war. Hadad, the Canaanite and Carthaginian storm, fertility, & war god. Identified as Baʿal's true name at Ugarit. Early forms of the Jewish Yahweh worship Egyptian Horus, the Egyptian god of rainstorms, the weather, the sky and war. Associated with the sun, kingship, and retribution. Personified in the pharaoh. Set, the Egyptian chaos, evil, and storm god, lord of the desert. Perun, Slavic god of thunder and lightning and king of the gods. Thor, Norse god of thunder/lightning, oak trees, protection, strength, and hallowing. Also Thunor and Donar, the Anglo-Saxon and Continental Germanic versions, respectively, of him. All descend from Common Germanic *Thunraz, the reflex of the PIE thunder god for this language branch of the Indo-Europeans. Jupiter, the Roman weather and sky god and king of the gods. Zeus, Greek weather and sky god and king of the gods Indra, Hindu God of the Weather, Storms, Sky, Lightning, and Thunder. Also known as the King of gods https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_god

https://beautifulbooks.info/2019/04/angus-mcbrides-legendary-beasts/ Here are some illustrations of famous beasts, you have to see what they exist or existed.

Here I am going to leave ideas for generic statuses of gods that are worshiped in many cultures and sacred beasts( myths). The 7-headed serpent. The Seven-headed Serpent (from Sumerian muš-saĝ-7: snake with seven heads) in Sumerian religion was one of the Heroes slain by Ninurta, patron god of Lagash, in ancient Iraq. Its body was hung on the "shining cross-beam" of Ninurta's chariot (lines 55–63[1]). Lotan (ltn) is an adjectival formation meaning "coiled", here used as a proper name;[7] the same creature has a number of possible epitheta, including "the fugitive serpent" (bṯn brḥ) and maybe (with some uncertainty deriving from manuscript lacunae) "the wriggling serpent" (bṯn ʿqltn) and "the mighty one with seven heads" (šlyṭ d.šbʿt rašm).[4] Lotan (Ugaritic:LTN, meaning "coiled"), also transliterated Lôtān,[1] Litan,[2] or Litānu,[3] is a servant of the sea god Yam defeated by the storm god Hadad-Baʿal in the Ugaritic Baal Cycle.[3] Lotan seems to have been prefigured by the serpent Têmtum represented in Syrian seals of the 18th–16th century BC,[4] and finds a later reflex in the sea monster Leviathan, whose defeat at the hands of Yahweh is alluded to in the biblical Book of Job and in Isaiah 27:1.[4][3] Lambert (2003) went as far as the claim that Isaiah 27:1 is a direct quote lifted from the Ugaritic text, correctly rendering Ugaritic bṯn "snake" as Hebrew nḥš "snake".[5][6] The myth of Hadad defeating Lotan, Yahweh defeating Leviathan, Marduk defeating Tiamat (etc.) in the mythologies of the Ancient Near East are classical examples of the Chaoskampf mytheme, also reflected in Zeus' slaying of Typhon in Greek mythology,[8] Thor's struggle against Jörmungandr in the Gylfaginning portion of the Prose Edda,[9] and the vedic battle between Indra and Vritra (from Sanskrit , vṛtrá, meaning enveloper, cover and therefore obstacle) who is accused as a dragon of hoarding the waters and the rains, as a dasa of stealing cows, and as an anti-god of hiding the Sun,[10] concentrating on Vritra several demonization processes, the pattern of good versus evil, darkness versus light (hiding the Sun), and comparisons to forces of nature and monsters whose tentacles span the earth. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotan Sacred bull from the Middle East. Winged snakes. Chimeras. According to Hesiod, the Chimera's mother was a certain ambiguous "she", which may refer to Echidna, in which case the father would presumably be Typhon, though possibly (unlikely) the Hydra or even Ceto was meant instead.[4] However, the mythographers Apollodorus (citing Hesiod as his source) and Hyginus both make the Chimera the offspring of Echidna and Typhon.[5] Hesiod also has the Sphinx and the Nemean lion as the offspring of Orthus, and another ambiguous "she", often understood as probably referring to the Chimera, although possibly instead to Echidna, or again even Ceto. God of thunder (Baal, Zeus, Thor) Mother Earth (mother goddess)

Very interesting unit, even terrifying. I would like a faction from Mesopotamia in the mythology mod.

https://x-legio.com/en/wiki/saggitarius-dominatus The Dominate-era sagittarius Тукеев П.Д. By the end of the III - beginning of the IV century CE the military machine of the Roman state underwent drastic changes, including archers. There were many of them in the Roman army of the principate era too, but in that days archers were provincials without Roman citizenship and served in auxiliary cohorts (auxiliaries). Roman citizens preferred to serve in the legions, which lacked archers of their own. However, at the beginning of the III century the Emperor Caracalla extended the rights of Roman citizenship to all free inhabitants of the imperium, destroying the main difference between legions and auxiliary cohorts, because now only Roman citizens served both in legions and auxiliaries. Then the increased threat from the Sassanid Persians on the eastern borders of the state, traditionally famous for quality and quantity of their shooters, on foot and on horseback, led to significant increase of archers' number in the Roman army, especially in the east, both as part of auxiliary cohorts of sagittarii (where citizens of any Roman provinces, not only eastern ones, now served) and legions, now having their own archers. According to Vegetius, the archers stood in the fourth or fifth rank of the Roman heavy infantry formation and fired from the canopy. The name "sagittarius" comes from the Latin word "sagitta" - arrow. There is not much written evidence about sagittarii, and there is no clear description of their equipment, apart from the bow, which was their main weapon. At the same time it is not specified exactly what from and how these bows were manufactured, and whether they differed in design depending on whether they were used as army weapons or hunting equipment. Of the archaeological finds one can name the bows from Dura Europos and the Qustul. That, as well as the preserved images of bows, allow us to conclude that the Roman army bow belonged to the type of compound recursive bows of the Eastern subtype. Unlike the era of the principate the Dominate era bows were mass-produced in imperial factories, mentioned in the Notitia Dignitatum - a document of the late IV - early V century CE, listing units of the Roman army and imperial factories that produced equipment for army needs. The few surviving images of archers of the Dominate era allow to conclude that their protective equipment was no different from that of the hastati: helmet, chainmail or scale armor. The shield, greaves and manica were not used. A helmet with body armor may also be absent. A standard army spatha could be used as an self-defence weapon, as shown by archaeological evidence of spathas in archers' graves. The quiver, according to the images, had a cylindrical shape and, according to some versions, was used exclusively for transporting arrows. It is assumed that in battle the arrows could be removed from the transport quiver and placed in a leather bag on the archer's belt or stuck into the ground in front of him. However, there are archaeological finds of quivers of the Dominate era, which could hung on a belt and used in battle, for example, a wooden quiver from Nidam or the leather quiver from Qustul settlement. Equipment The equipment of the Dominate-era sagittarius could consist of the following elements:: Fabric and leather items: Upper tunic-manicata (tunica manicata), made of wool Underwear tunic-manikata, made of linen Pannonian cap (pileus pannonicus) Leggings (bracae) Cloak (sagum or chlamys) Military boots (campagi militaris) Cingulum Focale Socks Windings Subarmalis Elements of protective equipment made of metal and wood: Helmet (cassis) Lorica hamata or Lorica squamata Elements of offensive weapons: Bow Arrows Quiver Spatha

Archer units are denoted in the Notitia by the term equites sagittarii (mounted archers) and sagittarii (foot archers, from sagitta = "arrow"). As in the Principate, it is likely that many non-sagittarii regiments also contained some archers. Mounted archers appear to have been exclusively in light cavalry units.[20] Archer units, both foot and mounted, were present in the comitatus.[159] In the border forces, only mounted archers are listed in the Notitia, which may indicate that many limitanei infantry regiments contained their own archers.[160]

The limitanei (Latin, also called ripenses), meaning respectively "the soldiers in frontier districts" (from the Latin word limes meaning frontier) or "the soldiers on the riverbank" (from the Rhine and Danube), were an important part of the late Roman and early Byzantine army after the reorganizations of the late 3rd and early 4th centuries. The limitanei, unlike the Comitatenses, palatīni, and Scholae, garrisoned fortifications along the borders of the Roman Empire and were not normally expected to fight far from their fortifications. The limitanei were lower-status and lower-paid than the comitatenses and palatīnī,[1] and the distinction in role and status between scholae, palatini, comitatenses, and limitanei had largely replaced the older one between praetorians, legionaries, and auxiliaries.[2] The limitanei and palatini both included legionary units alongside auxiliary units.[3] The nature of the limitanei changed considerably between their introduction in the 3rd or 4th century and their disappearance in the 6th or 7th century. In the 4th century, the limitanei were professional soldiers,[4][5][6] and included both infantry and cavalry as well as river flotillas,[3][7] but after the 5th century they were part-time soldiers,[4] and after the 6th century they were unpaid militia.[8][9] Equipment M.C. Bishop and J.C.N. Coulston, in a major work on Roman military equipment, do not distinguish that of the limitanei from that of the comitatenses and palatini.[62] It is doubtful whether there were any universal differences between the equipment of the limitanei and of the other forces. The late Roman empire had centralized fabricae, introduced by Diocletian, to provide arms and armor for the army.[7][62][63][64][65] The 4th century limitanei included both light and heavy infantry,[note 2] as well as light and heavy cavalry,[note 3] and river flotillas.[3][7] Depending on the specifics of a particular section of the limes, limitanei could include in their composition infantry legions and auxilia, in the 4th century including both heavy line infantry and archers and slingers, alae and vexillations of cavalry, river vessels up to galleys, throwing weapons with their calculations, and so on. The limitanei are in Rome Total War: Barbarian Invasion as an infantry unit that can be recruited by any Roman faction. They are a cheap and easily trained unit that has poor attack, but very high defense, simulating their role in holding the frontier and bogging down enemies while the field armies mobilized. In Civilization VI: Rise and Fall, limitanei are available as a military policy. The policy causes military units to increase the loyalty of the city they are garrisoned in. In Age of Empires IV, limitanei are cheap anti-cavalry infantry available for the byzantines.

I think an upgrade from Limitanei to Pseudo Comitatenses would be good. Spearman to heavy swordman.

The units of the field armies, including palatini, comitatenses, and sometimes pseudocomitatenses, were based in cities when not on campaign, and could be based in temporary camps when on campaign. But it seems that did not usually occupy purpose-built accommodation like the city-based limitanei. From the legal evidence, it seems they were normally compulsorily billeted in private houses (hospitalitas).[134] This is because they often wintered in different provinces. The comitatus praesentales accompanied their respective emperors on campaign, while even the regional comitatus would change their winter quarters according to operational requirements. However, in the 5th century, emperors rarely campaigned in person, so the praesentales became more static in their winter bases.[135] The Western comitatus praesentalis normally was based in and around Mediolanum (Milan) and the two Eastern comitatus in the vicinity of Constantinople Pseudocomitatenses were a class of regiment in the Late Roman army. Although they were attached to the comitatus (higher-grade mobile armies), they enjoyed lower status and pay to the comitatenses, the regular regiments of the comitatus. This is because their regiments had originally been classified as lower-grade limitanei ("border troops"), but at some point attached to a comitatus for a particular campaign and subsequently retained long-term. There is indication that at least some of the pseudocomitatenses were former auxiliary cohorts

However, historically it became the accepted (substantiated) name for those Roman imperial troops (legions and auxiliary) which were not merely garrisoned at a limes (fortified border, on the Rhine and Danube in Europe and near Persia and the desert tribes elsewhere)—the limitanei or ripenses, i.e. "along the shores"—but more mobile line troops; furthermore there were second line troops, named pseudocomitatenses, former limitanei attached to the comitatus; palatini, elite ("palace") units typically assigned to the magister militum; and the scholae palatinae of actual palace guards, usually under the magister officiorum, a senior court official of the Late Empire. Under the Tetrarchy, military commands were separated from administrative governorships for the first time, in contrast to the Principate, where provincial governors were also commanders-in-chief of all military forces deployed in their provinces. The main change in structure from the 2nd-century army was the establishment of large escort armies (comitatus praesentales), typically containing 20,000–30,000 top-grade palatini troops. These were normally based near the imperial capitals: (Constantinople in the East, Milan in the West), thus far from the empire's borders. These armies' primary function was to deter usurpers, and they usually campaigned under the personal command of their emperors. The legions were split into smaller units comparable in size to the auxiliary regiments of the Principate. Infantry adopted the more protective equipment of the Principate cavalry. The role of cavalry in the late army does not appear to have been greatly enhanced as compared with the army of the Principate. The evidence is that cavalry was much the same proportion of overall army numbers as in the 2nd century and that its tactical role and prestige remained similar. However, the cavalry of the Late Roman army was endowed with greater numbers of specialised units, such as extra-heavy shock cavalry (cataphractii and clibanarii) and mounted archers.[3] During the later 4th century, the cavalry acquired a reputation for incompetence and cowardice for their role in three major battles. In contrast, the infantry retained its traditional reputation for excellence. From the 3rd century are the first records of a small number of regular units bearing the names of barbarian tribes (as opposed to peregrini tribal names). These were foederati (allied troops under a military obligation to Rome) converted into regular units, a trend that was to accelerate in the 4th century.[33] The ala I Sarmatarum, based in Britain, was probably composed of some of the 5,500 captured Sarmatian horsemen sent to garrison Hadrian's Wall by emperor Marcus Aurelius in c. 175.[34] There is no evidence of irregular barbarian units becoming part of the regular army of the Principate until the 3rd century The later 4th-century army contained three types of army group: (a) Imperial escort armies (comitatus praesentales). These were ordinarily based near the imperial capitals (Milan in the West, Constantinople in the East), but usually accompanied the emperors on campaign. (b) Diocesan field armies (comitatus). These were based in strategic regions, on or near the frontiers. (c) Border armies (exercitus limitanei).[117] Types (a) and (b) are both frequently defined as "mobile field armies". This is because, unlike the limitanei units, their operations were not confined to a single province. But their strategic role was quite different. The escort armies' primary role was probably to provide the emperor's ultimate insurance against usurpers: the very existence of such a powerful force would deter many potential rivals, and if it did not, the escort army alone was often sufficient to defeat them.[26] Their secondary role was to accompany the emperor on major campaigns such as a foreign war or to repel a large barbarian invasion.[118] The diocesan comitatus, on the other hand, had the task of supporting the border forces of their diocese in major operations. The western structure differs substantially from the eastern. In the West, after 395, the emperor was no longer in direct command of his diocesan comitatus chiefs, who instead reported to a military generalissimo (the late Roman equivalent to a pre-industrial-era Japanese shōgun). This anomalous structure had arisen through the ascendancy of the half–Vandal military strongman Stilicho (395–408), who was appointed by Theodosius I as guardian of his infant son, Honorius, who succeeded him in the West. After Stilicho's death in 408, a succession of weak emperors ensured that this position continued, under Stilicho's successors (especially Aetius and Ricimer), until the dissolution of the Western empire in 476.[127] The generalissimo was generally known as the magister utriusque militiae (abbreviation: MVM, literally "master of both services", i.e. of both cavalry and infantry). This officer was in direct command of the single but large western imperial escort army based near Milan. Subordinate to the MVM were all the diocesan comitatus commanders in the West: Gaul, Britannia, Illyricum (West), Africa, Tingitania and Hispania. In contrast to their eastern counterparts, who all held magister militum rank, the commanders of the Western regional comitatus were all of the lower comes rei militaris ("military count") rank, save for the magister equitum per Gallias. This was presumably because all but the Gaul comitatus were smaller than the 20–30,000 typically commanded by a magister militum. According to the Notitia, all but two of the 12 Western duces also reported directly to the MVM and not to their diocesan comes.[121][128] However, this is out of line with the situation in the East and probably does not reflect the situation in 395.

The comitatenses and later the palatini were the units of the field armies of the late Roman Empire. They were the soldiers that replaced the legionaries, who had formed the backbone of the Roman military since the late republic. Units such as the Joviani and Herculiani had 5,000 soldiers and 726–800 cavalrymen. Many units' sizes would vary. There were three types of units, the heavy infantry, medium infantry, and light infantry. The comitatenses were the heavy infantry. The auxiliaries, auxilia palatina, and the peltasts were the medium infantry, and the psiloi were the light infantry. Comitatenses regiments consisted of 1,024 soldiers. Comitatenses legions could consist of 6,000 to 7,000 soldiers. Some of these soldiers would be lightly armed, while others would be heavily armed. During a battle the army would divide into 3-4 divisions. The army might use a double phalanx to protect its rear. Reserves would be located behind or between each division. In the Late Roman Empire the army was divided into two major units, the limitanei border guards and mobile armies consisting of comitatenses. The limitanei would deal with smaller raids, or, in the case of larger invasions, try to defend or stall long enough for the comitatenses legions to arrive. These comitatenses would be grouped into field armies.[2] This strategy has been described as "defense in depth." To conserve manpower, the general would do his best to avoid a pitched battle. Rather than attack the enemy, the legions would form a shield wall and wait for the enemy to attack the Romans. The Romans would use their superior coordination to defeat the enemy. The Emperor would command a comitatenses field army to put down rebellions. However, historically it became the accepted (substantiated) name for those Roman imperial troops (legions and auxiliary) which were not merely garrisoned at a limes (fortified border, on the Rhine and Danube in Europe and near Persia and the desert tribes elsewhere)—the limitanei or ripenses, i.e. "along the shores"—but more mobile line troops; furthermore there were second line troops, named pseudocomitatenses, former limitanei attached to the comitatus; palatini, elite ("palace") units typically assigned to the magister militum; and the scholae palatinae of actual palace guards, usually under the magister officiorum, a senior court official of the Late Empire. By the late 3rd century AD, the term "comitatus" still denoted the personal guard of the emperor. The designation "comitatenses" as a distinct class of soldiers is first attested in Emperor Constantine's decree of 325 AD, and it implies the most privileged part of the army. However, the context suggests that in 325 AD, the comitatenses were still soldiers who were currently serving directly under the emperor's command. Ammianus Marcellinus, a military commander and historian of the late 4th century AD, also mentions comitatenses as troops under the emperor's personal command and directly serving with him. Over time, as emperors ceased to personally participate in military campaigns and increasingly delegated the command to their generals, the term "comitatenses" ceased to denote the personal troops of the emperors. By the beginning of the 5th century, the term "Comitatensis" became a honorary title awarded to distinguished military units that were not part of the emperor's personal guard. This understanding of the term persisted until the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476 AD. For example, in the 4th century, Legio XIIII Comitatensis served on the Danube as part of the ripenses – a river fleet, infantry, and coastal border forces. This clearly classifies this legion of comitatenses as limitanei. Thus, the clear division of the late Roman army into stationary limitanei and mobile field armies of comitatenses, accepted since the time of Delbrück, now appears to be an oversimplification that may not fully reflect the actual situation .

Cool that late Roman soldier looks good.

I told you I was familiar with this idea. That's why I suggested at the time to have more options with the ones I named above.

Ok , good, now you must give visual examples in total war mods and from there details of the equipment.

Ideas for symbols.

It would be good to include the Lybo-Phoenician.

Exactly is lame compared with standard RTS. You are right. I don't know why people complain every time we change something that's wrong in the game design. People sometimes have to think that the game is not finished and that the mechanics are not that we are changing for the sake of doing so. We are changing because we are following the criteria that other games have.

They could be included although not all people in the Middle East are dark skinned that is a bit of a cliché. But it would be very good to have more varieties of skin, once I suggested it with the Carthaginians and again they almost hanged me.

Another reason why I want, for example, this gameplay in the game. It is to give that feeling of depth and of a living world rich in tradition and culture of 0AD. For example, in AoE 4 does not dare to raise religious issues( like a monastery a single cross or moon) so as not to offend someone. It's not that I purposely want to offend anyone but I like the playful pedagogical part, where you learn a little history by playing and having fun and artistically very beautiful too. Give that feeling of capturing a place like Caesar's mission in Britain. Also the idea of finding secrets on the maps is something that I really liked that the first game, That feeling of being a kind of archaeologist in a time machine.

In ancient Roman religion, a sacellum is a small shrine. The word is a diminutive from sacrum (neuter of sacer, "belonging to a god").[1] The numerous sacella of ancient Rome included both shrines maintained on private properties by families, and public shrines. A sacellum might be square or round.[2] . A cella (from Latin for "small chamber") or naos (from the Greek ναός, "temple") is the inner chamber of an ancient Greek or Roman temple in classical antiquity. Its enclosure within walls has given rise to extended meanings, of a hermit's or monk's cell, and since the 17th century, of a biological cell in plants or animals. Varro and Verrius Flaccus describe sacella in ways that at first seem contradictory, the former defining a sacellum in its entirety as equivalent to a cella,[3] which is specifically an enclosed space, and the latter insisting that a sacellum had no roof.[4] "Enclosure", however, is the shared characteristic, roofed over or not. "The sacellum", notes Jörg Rüpke, "was both less complex and less elaborately defined than a temple proper".[5

There are several references on FB searching for Shrine Roman and goddess/god. If anyone wants to contribute ideas, they are welcome.