Lion.Kanzen

some additional stuff. tools for create a cross.

Tree Crosses. The Greek word for cross is σταυρός "stauros": "literally cross, an instrument of capital punishment, an upright pointed stake, often with a crossbeam above it, or intersected by a crossbeam (MT 27.32); (2) by metonymy, as the means of atonement punishment of the cross, crucifixion (PH 2.8); as a religious technical term representing the significance of the atoning death of Jesus in the Christian religion cross (1C 1.18); metaphorically, the dedication of life and the self-denial that a believer must be prepared to take on himself in following Christ (LU 14.27)" There is no use of the word "tree" (δένδρα "dendra") in reference to the cross. If that is so, then why do some Bibles translate it into the word "tree" when referencing Jesus' crucifixion? For that, let's look at a third word. Wood Sometimes the Greek word for wood is used of the cross. The word ξύλον "wood" occurs a total of 20 times in the New Testament. Types of Crosses. The Latin Cross The Latin Cross, or Crux Immissa, is a type of the cross in which the vertical beam, or stipe, sticks above the crossbeam. It is also referred to as "Crux Capitata" which translates into "cross with a head." In Christianity this cross reminds us of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as it is said by this instrument he died upon. This cross was not widely used during the first two centuries of Christianity as many followers were reluctant to use it as an icon as they saw it as the gruesome method by which the Savior was slain as well some early church leaders condemned its use due to its pagan origins. It wouldn't be until around the 4th century that the cross would become more and more used over the previously used Lamb and Fish (Ichthys). For centuries the Latin Cross was also used as the basic floor plan of churches and cathedrals. The Latin Cross is also seen outside of Christian sects and has been found in Etruscan, Tiryns, Mycenaean, and Cretan cultures. The Greek Cross The Greek Cross, (also known as Crux Immissa Quadrata or Cross of the Earth) is similar to the Latin Cross except that all four arms are of equal length. It is said this is the most ancient of the cross symbols used and with many interpretations that was used around the world. Saint Andrew's Cross St. Andrew's Cross, or Crux Decussata, is in the form of a diagonal cross (like the letter X). This cross also resembles the Greek letter Chi which is represented as 'X' which is one of the symbols Constantine saw in a dream which led him to victory against Maxentius at the battle of Saxa Rubra, and which led Constantine to his legendary conversion to Christianity. This cross is named after Saint Andrew as it is said that he was martyred on such a cross. This design is also referred to as a saltire since the intersecting lines do not meet at a 90° angles. The Crux Simplex or Stiper, being a simple upright post, does not have the transverse beam found on other forms. The ancient Greek word for stake is stauros (n.) andstauroo (v). This simple post was common for crucifixions until the Phoenicians added a cross beam. Historians and etymologists have debated whether the scaffold in early Scriptures meant Jesus was executed on a Stipe simple upright post, or a post with a cross beam (either a ✞ shaped Latin Cross, a 'Y' shaped Forked Cross, an 'X' shaped St. Andrew's Cross or a 'T' shaped Tau Cross). The common belief is that it was not a simple upright post, but the distinction is nowhere nearly as important as the reason why Jesus was executed. The Bible says that Jesus was hung on a tree1. Whether it was an actual rooted tree or an upright wooden post set into the ground (see Broken Cross), the common consensus is that a transverse beam (patibulum) was then added. A usual crucifixion method was to bind the condemned person's wrists to a beam and then attach that beam to a tree or stipe, thereby forming a cross (crux composita or crux acuta). The Greeks apparently used the word 'stauros' to represent a wide range of wooden structures used for executions, but Jehovah's Witnesses and a few others interpret the word to mean Jesus was executed on a post without a patibulum. The Furka Cross is referred to as the thieves or robbers cross as it is believed that in Roman controlled Judea criminals were crucified on a forked cross, but such crosses would be costly to build so it is unlikely it was actually used. The three arms of this cross remind us of the Holy Trinity and the attributes of God: omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence. This forked cross also resembles the Greek letter Upsilon which capitalized looks just like the English letter "Y". The Greek Upsilon is often called Pythagoras' letter as it is said he used it as a symbol to demonstrate human life where the two horns of the letter represent the two paths of vice and virtue. We all travel down a road in life, but it is not always the easy road and we come to a split into the road where we must choose where we will take our life. Will it be down the road of virtue or the one to ruin? These are just some of the variations of the four basic types of crosses, but there are many more like the cross used in the Order of Christ, Bolnisi Cross of Georgia, Florian Cross, Pisan Cross, Occitan Cross, Calvary Cross, Canterbury Cross, and the Cross of St. Thomas. The cross has been used, adapted, and varied since the beginning of time and like all symbols have been used or and were interpreted for just as many reasons as there are types and variations of crosses.

Crucifixion (or impalement), in one form or another, was used by Persians, Carthaginians, Macedonians, and Romans. Death was often hastened. "The attending Roman guards could only leave the site after the victim had died, and were known to precipitate death by means of deliberate fracturing of the tibia and/or fibula, spear stab wounds into the heart, sharp blows to the front of the chest, or a smoking fire built at the foot of the cross to asphyxiate the victim. ome Christian theologians, beginning with Paul of Tarsus writing in Galatians 3:13, have interpreted an allusion to crucifixion in Deuteronomy 21:22-23. This reference is to being hanged from a tree, and may be associated with lynching or traditional hanging. However, Rabbinic law limited capital punishment to just 4 methods of execution: stoning, burning, strangulation, and decapitation, while the passage in Deuteronomy was interpreted as an obligation to hang the corpse on a tree as a form of deterrence Alexander the Great is reputed to have crucified 2000 survivors from his siege of the Phoenician city of Tyre,[68] as well as the doctor who unsuccessfully treated Alexander's friend Hephaestion. Some historians have also conjectured that Alexander crucified Callisthenes, his official historian and biographer, for objecting to Alexander's adoption of the Persian ceremony of royal adoration. Crucifixion was used for slaves, pirates, and enemies of the state. It was considered a most shameful and disgraceful way to die. Condemned Roman citizens were usually exempt from crucifixion except for major crimes against the state, such as high treason.[citation needed] Notorious mass crucifixions followed the Third Servile War in 73–71 BC (the slave rebellion under Spartacus), other Roman civil wars in the 2nd and 1st centuries BC, and the Destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. To frighten other slaves from revolting, Crassus crucified 6,000 of Spartacus' men along theAppian Way from Capua to Rome.[78] Josephus tells a story of the Romans crucifying people along the walls of Jerusalem. He also says that the Roman soldiers would amuse themselves by crucifying criminals in different positions. In Roman-style crucifixion, the condemned could take up to a few days to die. The dead body was left up for vultures and other birds to consume. A cruel prelude was occasionally scourging, which would cause the condemned to lose a large amount of blood, and approach a state of shock. The convict then usually had to carry the horizontal beam (patibulum in Latin) to the place of execution, but not necessarily the whole cross.[citation needed]Crucifixion was typically carried out by specialized teams, consisting of a commanding centurion and four soldiers.[citation needed] When it was done in an established place of execution, the vertical beam (stipes) could even be permanently embedded in the ground.[citation needed] The condemned was usually stripped naked—all the New Testament gospels describe soldiers gambling for the robes of Jesus. The Cross of Tau, named after the Greek letter it resembles, is a form of the Christian cross symbol.[1] It is also variously St. Anthony's Cross, Old Testament Cross, Anticipatory Cross, Cross Commissee, Egyptian Cross, Advent Cross, Croce taumata, Saint Francis's Cross, Crux Commissa.[citation needed] The shape of the letter tau or T was interpreted as representing a crucifix from antiquity. The staurogram, from Greek ΣTAΥPOΣ "cross", was a tau-rho ligature used to abbreviate the Greek word for cross in very early New Testament manuscripts such as P66, P45 and P75.[2] The tau was also considered a symbol of salvation due to the identification of the tau with the sign which in Ezechiel 9:4 was marked on the forehead of the saved ones (וְהִתְוִיתָ תָּו עַל־מִצְחֹות הָאֲנָשִׁים "set a mark (tav; after the Phoenician cross-shape ) on the forehead of the men"), or due to the tau-shaped outstretched hands of Moses inExodus 17:11.[2]

ERROR: JavaScript error: maps/random/lake.js line 301 ReferenceError: tTie4Terrain is not defined @maps/random/lake.js:301 ERROR: CMapGeneratorWorker::Run: Failed to load RMS 'maps/random/lake.js' Engine exited successfully on 2014-01-22 at 19:21:11 with 407 message(s), 2 error(s) and 0 warning(s).

Perfect. Go forward with the next

Ok some references. I was thinking about take game grass and modify to convert it into wheat

Of course that is clear, but the question is how perform this Roman way how do this possible?

yeah like that, but and if we add to diplomacy a truce in order regrouping your units and improves your economy before the engagement again?

My idea or the idea from Romulus ?

thst why i use defenses. And temple to have better efficient army. When we have formations like testudo can be more efficient for infantry units. In December I suggest improved formation and include news that are not seen before in RTS.I paste this from Wikipedia. At the command orbem formate, the legionaries assumed a circle-like formation with the archers placed in the midst of and behind the legionaries providing missile fire support. This tactic was used mainly when a small number of legionaries had to hold a position and were surrounded by enemies. You can imagine this in the game form a circle with infantry (human wall) and perform fire with ranged. Actually we don't have a circle formation or a empty box. Other observation the behavior like hold can be have bonus. Stand ground can be have more pierce armor and less hack armor. This can symbolized a unit holding with their shield a enemy projectile fire. Obviusly this in case of infantry, for ranged stand ground is more like a be strategical static attacked then defensive. Even a animation of soldier holding a position with the shield up to 45 degrees. With melee cavalry can be have none effect. For what reason can be practical this? If you want to do something like Spartans in Themopylae, I mean close a stretch path. May be the other infantry can't have this one is the pikeman, in this case for pikeman the attack bonus can be more high like a one kill for hitting cavalry.

Good. But not all maps you have a friendly topography I mean I love mountain maps and river maps, like Alpine Valley or Corinthian Isthmus. In Corinthian Isthmus You need do same but with a navy. Is very powerful defensive map. I remember had a team with Leper against other 2 guys , we defeat one of them but the last guy was really good with his Spartans. His tired ans surrender but wasn't a decisive victory. The other was Aegis using Persian was the best defensive combat that the Ai perform against me. Other map thst difficult to play are Zagros Mountain and Deep Forest. The siege machine are difficult to move in those and have too much forest. Easily to defend but hard to attack. Ok other quick tip. Ever and ever you need have a dock if it's possibly it's a good storehouse/farmstead that don't need territory expansion. A survive in Sicily map with this after lost my CC. Can be interesting if Aegis can build docks only for survive.

Is honor have a sonarles than me working in this. Obviusly is hard when the main game is not complete. But you save us. Save a lot of time. Atemneses have the last word, he is the expert in this timeframe. Is important contrasting with other existing games like AOE and AOEO and the Historic facts to have a well balance.

You do this with the Ai? Many players like me put many obstacles to avoid you do this. Example tower houses and walls. Now with escort option is more easy perform rush and defenses example you can protect civic center repair , as a way to kill the attackers.

May be I Need wait for an Automatic Build. Update.

We need put clear that.

We aren't commercial project

} By me: Ancient Saxon Dragon. http://lion-kanzen.deviantart.com/art/Dragon-Saxon-428425497?ga_submit_new=10%253A1390277813

Ok I update as Collaborator Zophim.

Update to Zophim as Document Civ Designer.

Civic Centre? Pagan Saxon Warrior.

http://www1.freewebs.com/axanor/svn.htm The Saxons When the Roman government of Britain collapsed in the early 5th century, the romanized native population struggled for a time to preserve its Roman way of life, but gradually this was sub­merged by invaders from the Continent. These invaders came from three powerful Germanic nations: Saxons from northern Germany and Holland; Angles from the south of the Danish peninsula, an area still known as Angeln; and Jutes from Jutland. At this time, the Migration Period, there were similar tribal movements taking place throughout Europe and it is probable that the Angles, Saxons, Frisians and possibly even the more independent Jutes were by this date more or less identified with each other, forming an Anglo-Saxon people of mixed stock but with a number of common characteristics. The invaders are thus usually termed Anglo-Saxons for convenience. The first Anglo-Saxons to reach Britain came by invitation, possibly even before the Roman govern­ment had collapsed. They came in war bands, under their own chiefs, as mercenaries to help defend Britain against attacks from Ireland, Scotland and the Continent. These first small groups later combined into larger units and began to colonize Britain, sending word to their home­lands of the easy pickings. Larger-scale invasions followed. The most important invasions by these mer-cenaries-@#$%-colonists were c. 440-460. Legend­ary leaders, such as Hengist and Horsa, employed originally by King Vortigern in the south-east to repel the Picts and Scots, soon rebelled against their employers and began to establish petty kingdoms. The native population put up a considerable resistance to the expansion of these kingdoms, particularly under such military leaders as Am-brosius Aurelanius and Arthur; but gradually, over a century and a half they were reduced to a subject people, or fled into the hills of the Celtic lands to the west and north. By the time of the Augustinian mission to England in 596 (felt necessary to rescue Christianity in what had now become a pagan landthe land of the English) the Anglo-Saxons controlled the whole of the south coast from Kent to east Dorset, from the east coast (from the Thames to the Humber) across to the lower Severn, modern Staffordshire, Derbyshire, most of Yorkshire, and part of Northumbria and Durham. There is much confusion over which tribes settled where, but broadly speaking the Jutes controlled Kent, the Isle of Wight and part of Hampshire; the East, West and South Saxons controlled Essex, Wessex and Sussex respectively; and the Angles controlled East Anglia, Mercia and Northumbria. By the beginning of the 7th century there were about a dozen independent kingdoms, with the main power in Northumbria, and in the first half of the century the Northumbrian kings almost estab­lished themselves as permanent overlords for the whole of England. But in 658 the Mercians revolted and ended all hope of unity for another century. Gradually in the second half of the century the centre of power shifted from Northumbria to Mercia, with Essex, East Anglia and London being absorbed into that kingdom by 670. Sussex, Wessex and the Isle of Wight subsequently became subjected to Mercian rule and by the reign of Offa (757-796), the strongest of the Mercian kings, he was able to describe himself in one of his charters as 'King of the whole of England. His successor died in 821 and there followed a series of campaigns by the king of Wessex, until all those lands formerly ruled by Mercia were subject to Wessex. From then until 1066, apart from twenty-six years of Danish rule (1016-42), the kings of the royal house of Wessex controlled a united Anglo-Saxon kingdom, though towards the end their grip on the reins was loosened by Earl Godwin. In 1051 Earl Godwin and his sons rebelled against Edward the Confessor and were banished from England. They returned the following year and drove into exile many of Edward's Norman adherents (Edward was related to the Duke of Normandy through his aunt). Thereafter Edward's rule became largely nominal, and after the death of Earl Godwin in 1053 England was controlled mainly by his son Harold Godwinson. Edward the Confessor died on 5 January 1066, leaving three contenders for the throne of England: William, Duke of Normandy; King Harald Hard-raada of Norway; and Earl Harold Godwinson. Harold had himself crowned the same day that Edward was buried: the scene was set for the final act in the formation of the English nation. Was the country to remain Saxon, or to come under the diametrically opposed influences of either Scandi­navia or Latinized Normandy? The decision, as we all know, was made in the early autumn of 1066, when the three cultures clashed at Stamford Bridge and Senlac Ridge.

I found good source info for this Project. http://www.regia.org These Illustatrations by Liz Daborn show examples of Saxon and Viking Rondel embroidery designs suitable for embroideries for court clothes as worn by the highest classes of English society around the 10th Century

Beth Peters Anglo-Saxon and Merovingian bird brooches. These were worn by women, often in pairs one above the other, to fasten the vertical front-opening on a gown. Each region produced its own variants of the bird brooch: note the sleek lines of the Anglo-Saxon birds on the left and the angular appearance of the Continental examples on the right. Continental birds always face to their left (the viewer's right), but Anglo-Saxon ones can face in either direction. The two birds from Kent have an animal motif

http://anglosaxonfragments.wordpress.com/2013/11/04/eagles-snakes-romans-and-anglo-saxons/ Source text: New on the Portable Antiquities Scheme database last week was this highly stylised Anglo-Saxon eagle and snake mount from Dean and Shelton in Bedfordshire, probably dating to the later 6th century AD. Its significant not only for its beauty, but because, to my knowledge, only about five similar objects have previously been found in England (see below). Little animal plaques like this are generally found on shields, though the Portable Antiquities Scheme record raises the possibility that this one may have been for a belt. In a bizarre coincidence, the publication of this find on the Portable Antiquities Scheme coincided, almost to the day, with the Museum of London announcing an astounding new Romano-British sculpture of precisely the same subject: an eagle clutching a snake. The eagle clutching/devouring a snake motif was common in the Roman world. The quality of the statue is indeed remarkable, but its artistic merits are not the subject of this blog. My real interest lies in its relationship with the above Anglo-Saxon mount. These new finds, taken together, weaken the cultural disparity we usually perceive between barbaric Anglo-Saxons and civilized Romans. They provide a rare opportunity to make a direct comparison. Of course, cultural continuity cannot be presumed purely on the basis of a common motif. Symbolic meanings adapt depending on context. So a statue of an eagle from a Roman mausoleum in Londinium would naturally have different meanings to a decorative mount for an Anglo-Saxon shield created 400 years later. Nevertheless, aspects of this symbol were probably shared. Whether or not the Anglo-Saxons of the sixth century AD used this icon in full knowledge of its classical ancestry is an important question. The question as to whether Anglo-Saxons even drew a fundamental distinction between their own culture and that of the late Roman Empire is even more crucial. Weve probably heard enough about how, in the Roman world, eagles represented all that was aggressive, triumphant, honourable and good in the world, and how snakes represented the lowly, slithery, weak and vanquished. Rather than talk about Romano-British statuary, of which I know very little indeed, Id like take this opportunity to offer a few words on the symbolism of snakes in the early medieval world, to show that the this new mount does not necessarily provide a direct transposition of Roman symbolism, but a syncretic transformation of it, surely holding some of the old connotations, but having picked up many new ones too. Eagles and snakes have a lengthy history in early medieval north-western European iconography. Contemporary eagle mounts like this one are known from Scandinavia, including contemporary examples from Skørping and Jelling in Denmark (Ørsnes 1966, figs.160 and 161), though both lack snakes. Other mounts like this are known from England. Theres a couple from Eastry in Kent, both of which are probably holding snakes, though the ornament is quite devolved (Dickinson, Fern and Richardson 2011, p.34, fig.33). Theres another matching pair from Eriswell, Suffolk (104,232, Dickinson 2005, 134, fig.12c and e). The closest parallel comes from Sutton Hoo (018,868, Dickinson 2005, p.119, fig.4d), which holds a figure-of-eight snake, very similar to this one. Theres another figure-of-eight snake cunningly disguised on the head-plate of this cruciform brooch fragment from the Portable Antiquities Scheme (LIN-58EC66, below). Look closely and Im pretty sure you can just make out an eye at the top. One of the earliest examples of Germanic art, the Gallehus horns (now lost, probably from the early 5th century AD) featured quite a few snakes. Both snakes and birds decorate the helmet plates on the helm from Mound 1, Vendel, Sweden (for a picture, see here). Here, the snakes are trampled by the warriors horse, while birds soar overhead, apparently accompanying the rider in his triumph, in scene potentially analogous with eagle clutching a snake. Birds clutching snakes, however, seem to be restricted to those few mounts described above. Potentially, they were a strictly Anglo-Saxon phenomenon. Though their symbolism was probably linked to this wider world of sinuous symbols, these little mounts testify to at least a thread of continuity between the Roman and Anglo-Saxon worlds. -------------- The Dragon is good option too, we can have both. One as banner and other as emblem.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-585423.html