Civ: Dominate Romans (late Rome)

[Lion.Kanzen]

13 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Depends. The barbarians that usurped the Western Empire thought of themselves as "Romans" too, carrying on its traditions. The collapse was rather slow though. From the death of Commodus (the end of the "High Empire") to the overthrow of Romulus Augustulus took 280 years.

The previous one, which marked the era, was the collapse of the Bronze..From Assyria to Rome.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Rebellions of the poors.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bagaudae

 

Bagaudae (also spelled bacaudae) were groups of peasant insurgents in the later Roman Empire who arose during the Crisis of the Third Century, and persisted until the very end of the western Empire, particularly in the less-Romanised areas of Gallia and Hispania, where they were "exposed to the depredations of the late Roman state, and the great landowners and clerics who were its servants".[1]

 

The invasions, military anarchy, and disorders of the third century provided a chaotic and ongoing degradation of the regional power structure within a declining Empire into which the bagaudae achieved some temporary and scattered successes, under the leadership of members of the underclass as well as former members of local ruling elites.

 

The name probably means "fighters" in Gaulish.[2] C.E.V. Nixon[3] assesses the bagaudae, from the official Imperial viewpoint, as "bands of brigands who roamed the countryside looting and pillaging". J.C.S. Léon interprets the most completely assembled documentation and identifies the bagaudae as impoverished local free peasants, reinforced by brigands, runaway slaves and deserters from the legions, who were trying to resist the ruthless labor exploitation of the late Roman proto-feudal colonus manorial and military systems, and all manner of punitive laws and levies in the marginal areas of the Empire.

[Lion.Kanzen]

The Panegyric of Maximian, dating to AD 289 and attributed to Claudius Mamertinus, relates that during the bagaudae uprisings of AD 284–285 in the districts around Lugdunum (Lyon), "simple farmers sought military garb; the plowman imitated the infantryman, the shepherd the cavalryman, the rustic harvester of his own crops the barbarian enemy". In fact they shared several similar characteristics with the Germanic Heruli people. Mamertinus also called them "two-shaped monsters" (monstrorum biformium), emphasising that while they were technically Imperial farmers and citizens, they were also marauding rogues who had become foes to the Empire.

[Lion.Kanzen]

The Panegyric of Maximian, dating to AD 289 and attributed to Claudius Mamertinus, relates that during the bagaudae uprisings of AD 284–285 in the districts around Lugdunum (Lyon), "simple farmers sought military garb; the plowman imitated the infantryman, the shepherd the cavalryman, the rustic harvester of his own crops the barbarian enemy". In fact they shared several similar characteristics with the Germanic Heruli people. Mamertinus also called them "two-shaped monsters" (monstrorum biformium), emphasising that while they were technically Imperial farmers and citizens, they were also marauding rogues who had become foes to the Empire.

 

Bagauda revolts, which occurred in Gaul and Hispania during the Lower Empire and continued to develop until the 10th century. Their members were mainly soldiers deserting the legions or colonists evading their tax obligations, runaway slaves, outlaws or indigents who faced the labor oppression of both the military system and the "pre-feudal" system of large landowners that emerged in the Lower Empire. The word may have a double origin, either a Latin root meaning "revolutionaries" or one of Celtic origin meaning "warrior".

 

According to Eduardo Manzano Moreno, the bagaudas were "bandits whose ranks were fed by those dissatisfied with the oppressive Roman social order, and whose assaults seem to have reached a violence proportional to their degree of desperation.... It is also recorded that they sometimes made common cause with bands of Swabian warriors in their campaigns of pillage."

 

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Yes, like the Brotherhood Without Banners from Game of Thrones.  

[Lion.Kanzen]

2 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Yes, like the Brotherhood Without Banners from Game of Thrones.  

A couple of things come to mind.

They could be a "revolution".

You convert your peasant into this outlaw rogue. 

They would have a high capacity to loot.

It would serve to rush. Pure spamming.

High level of capturing buildings. (Civilians)

But they would be weak against towers and 2-3 exp soldiers. Or Champions.

 

 

a light copy of the AoE revolution 3.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Quoting @Flavius Aetius

Exactly. People think that they adopted this stuff from the Germanics, but it's in fact the opposite. The Romans adopted tight-fitting trousers and stuff from the Persians and Alans, and then the Barbarians adopted the Roman fashions.

Quoting other users.

From some of the pictures shared, you can see that the Romans had abandoned the toga (which was really only worn by the upperclass anyway over their tunic) and wore a tunic (many of which we can tell had embroidered patterns) with trousers and close-toed shoes or boots. The upperclass might wore a cape or cloak over their tunic instead, and you could expect the rich to have their tunics more richly decorated. One of the most noticeably new parts of the Roman outfit were the trousers, which Magister Militum explained were of Iranian origin by way of Persia or the Alans. A Roman might've also wore a cap, like short round hat made of cloth or fur (not a box), or a floppy Phrygian cap.

.

 

Regarding the Romano-British, one would expect their trousers to be longer than ones found closer to the Mediterranean. The Romans had a tendency the extend the length of their pants the colder the region was, so perhaps around Britain those pants would go all the down to the ankle, while in Italy or Hispania you might only see them reach just past the knees. The Romano-Britons would've dressed heavier anyway as well, bundling cloaks and coats to protect from the winter, and I wouldn't be surprised if fur was worn more often for warmth. The Romano-Britons would also augment their Roman dress with more traditionally local clothing of Celtic origin.

 

 

 

The clothing and equipment of the Roman military would've also been far different as well. The Romans had abandoned the rectangular scutum shield in favor of an oval-shaped one inspired perhaps somewhat by the Celtic and Greek thureos, but I could be wrong. The armor was no longer the plated Segmentata, but rather chainmail overcoats, mostly as a result of the fact that segmentata was too costly and difficult to manufacture and maintain at a time when the Roman military had to downgrade. Germanic-style helmets were adopted throughout the army. The standard infantry weapon would've been the spatha, which was perhaps Germanic in origin and introduced to the the Roman army by auxiliary cavalry. The spatha was noticeably longer that the traditional gladius.

[Lion.Kanzen]

 

In the period of the Tetrarchy and subsequently a distinctive type of round, brimless hat known as the Pannonian cap (pileus pannonicus) was worn as part of a Roman soldier's costume, though it also seems to have been worn by non-military bureaucrats. It was flat topped and resembled the more recent 'pillbox hat'.

 

 

Mentioned with this name by Vegetius in his Epitoma rei militaris, the pileus pannonicus was the main hat of the Late Roman soldier.

 

It was also used by emperors, as testified in the famous statue of the Tetrarchs now in Venice, dated to the end of the 3rd century.

Historically, the precursor to the pillbox hat was military headgear. During the late Roman Empire, the pileus pannonicus or "Pannonian cap" – headgear similar to the modern pillbox hat – was worn by Roman soldiers. A similar hat was popular with the Flemish in the Middle Ages. In some countries, especially those of the Commonwealth of Nations, a pillbox-like forage cap, often with a chin strap, can still be seen on ceremonial occasions. The Royal Military College of Canada dress uniform includes such a hat, and similar caps were standard issue for the Victorian era British Army. Another cap called a kilmarnock is a modern version of the traditional headdress worn by members of virtually all Gurkha regiments.

Materials: Wool, lined in linen.

Edited February 6, 2022 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

A richer form of tunic, formed during the late Empire, was dalmatica, woolen, linen or linen; with one-piece wide sleeves. Next to her, the Romans also wore a sleeveless tunic (colobium). In the 3rd century AD, the Romans began using a long-sleeved tunic (tunica manicata). Putting on such a garment before this period was considered a manifestation of effeminacy. A similar effect was caused by putting on a very long tunic, falling to the feet (tunica talaris).

 

Usually one tunic was worn, but from the third century BC a second one was started (tunica interior or subucula). During the winter, during the cold season, several tunics were put on. For the poorest, slaves and children, the tunic was the only cover.

 

The tunic was worn primarily at home, while every exit to the streets required an additional robe, called a toga. The gown was made of white, woolen material, about 3 meters wide and 6 meters long.

 

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

Feminalia is the legionnaires' breeches. Every legionary must have a pair.

Originally, the Romans did not wear trousers, but as they moved to colder climes, they found they had a use for them. The trousers should be tight and go below the knee, with splits in the outer seam.

 

Material.

Color: Solid grey or brown. Pure red. (There is some variation in the interpretation of "grey or brown").

Fabric consumption: approx. 1.5 metres. Accessories: String to tie the trousers at the waist.

Another Source.

Feminalia were snugly fitting knee-length pants, or breeches. Though the name might suggest that they were worn by women, in fact they were worn most often by men. They were called fem-inalia because the pants covered the length of the thighbone, or femur.

 

During the Roman Republic (509-27 B.C) men had generally avoided wearing trousers or pants of any kind, considering it a barbaric costume. They had good reason for this idea, for the people they saw wearing clothing on their legs were the barbarians who lived on the outskirts of the areas controlled by Rome, especially the loosely organized Gauls who lived in the colder north, in present-day France. During the Roman Empire (27 B.C.-476 AD.), however, Roman soldiers ventured further and further north in pursuit of conquest. Eventually they made their way to Britain, where many men wore pants to protect themselves from the cold. Soon, Roman soldiers, especially horsemen, adopted the short, close-fitting pants of the barbarians, and they returned home with them.

 

Feminalia never became as popular as the main men's garments, the toga and the tunica, or shirt, but they did become acceptable wear for work or for travel to colder climates. Mounted soldiers, called cavalry, usually wore leather feminalia, similar to the chaps worn by cowboys in the western United States in the nineteenth century. Civilians wore feminalia made from a variety of materials, including wool and cotton. The most famous Roman to wear feminalia was the emperor Augustus Caesar (63 B.C.-14 A.D.), who wore them through the winter to protect his sometimes fragile health.

Edited February 6, 2022 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

From the 2nd century onwards, the Roman tunicae were influenced more and more by the Germanic style because of the many Germanic auxiliae in the Roman army. This type of tunica was worn between the 2nd - 3rd century and is found back in, for example, Syria and Egypt.

 

Cotton Tunica Manicata with stitched black decoration in four sizes

Authentic replica of a Late Roman tunic, so-called Tunica Manicata. It is embroidered with typical Roman motifs, e.g. sun symbols and dolphins. We have deliberately chosen a natural base colour, so that the tunic can be dyed at pleasure.

The basic garment for both genders and all classes was the tunica (tunic). In its simplest form, the tunic was a single rectangle of woven fabric, originally woolen, but from the mid-republic onward, increasingly made from linen. It was sewn into a sleeveless tubular shape and pinned around the shoulders like a Greek chiton, to form openings for the neck and arms. In some examples from the eastern part of the empire, neck openings were formed in the weaving. Sleeves could be added. Most working men wore knee-length, short-sleeved tunics, secured at the waist with a belt. Some traditionalists considered long sleeved tunics appropriate only for women, very long tunics on men as a sign of effeminacy, and short or unbelted tunics as marks of servility; nevertheless, very long-sleeved, loosely belted tunics were also fashionably louche and were adopted by some Roman men; for example, by Julius Caesar. Women's tunics were usually ankle or foot-length, long-sleeved, and could be worn loosely or belted.

Edited February 6, 2022 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

Vindolanda boots.

This is a reconstruction of a pair of Roman boots from Vindolanda, Chesterholm, North England from the 3rdto 4thcentury AD. They were mainly worn by the auxiliae. This pair of boots is also suitable for re-enacting early Germanic people.

 

This boot, c. A.D. 100, is another item found at the Vindolanda dig site.

In armies throughout the ages, the marching boot has been a prized possession. Weapons will only be needed in times of war, but the boot is needed every single day. Command sends the soldier into awful terrain on a regular basis, for long periods of time, often to cover very large distances. Earlier legionaries wore the caligae, open sandal-like boots that had thick soles held together with hobnails. From the late 1st century onwards the army began to equip itself with calcei, an enclosed boot more often used by civilian workers. This transition may reflect the fact that more recruits were coming from the northern frontiers, where enclosed boots are of great benefit, or it might reflect changes in the supply system, with legions turning to civilian sources for their footwear. 

 

Whatever the reason, calcei were ubiquitous in the British provinces. At Vindolanda the wet conditions have preserved many examples of Roman footwear, civilian and military, adult and child. A great proportion (of all types) have hobnails hammered into the soles, a technique which binds the thick soles strongly together, which reduces wear and tear, and which gives an excellent grip akin to wearing modern football boots!   

 

Each calcei was made up of three major parts, an insole and an outer sole as well as one large upper. The flexible leather upper was curved around and then whip-stitched to the insole. After this, the outer sole was placed onto the bottom of the boot and hobnails were then hammered into the outer sole and bent over to bind the three pieces of leather together. Individual calcei have been found that are held together with more than a hundred hobnails! The upper part of each boot is brought together and stitched up the front and again up the heel. There are other stages, too, such as building up a heel with extra layers of leather between the soles (no Roman boot has an exterior heel), and inserting internal toe and heel strengtheners.

 

Wearing Roman marching boots day after day in rough terrain made the author aware of problems. Hobnails can come out, a situation which often occurs when negotiating rocks and boulders. Waterlogged leather is weak. When wet boots are caked in mud the extra weight on the bottom of the boot can create tears in the leather upper. Less of a problem when travelling across country is the effect that hobnailed boots have on smooth paved surfaces. The Roman marching boot is lethal on smooth surfaces, slipping easily and landing the over-burdened legionary on his back! This might seem amusing, but history suggests that more than one Roman foot-soldier has been killed by his boots. The Jewish chronicler Josephus, writing about the Roman siege of Jerusalem in AD 70, recounted the death of a centurion called Julianus who had seen his soldiers putting up a poor defence, and who had sprung forward to charge into the mass of Jewish rebels single-handed. He killed many and chased the rest to a corner of the inner court of the Temple. There was a reason that Roman roads were surfaced with gravel and not flagstones, for: 

 

"he was wearing the ordinary military boots studded with masses of sharp nails, and as he ran across the pavement he slipped and fell flat on his back, his armour clanging so loudly that the runaways turned to look."

 

His men were too terrified to go to the rescue, and so: "the Jews crowded round him and aimed blows from all directions with their spears and swords ... Even then as he lay he stabbed many with his sword;...but at last, when all his limbs were slashed and no one dared come to his aid, he ceased to struggle."

https://romanrecruit.weebly.com/boots.html

 

Edited February 6, 2022 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

I found some references for artistic reasons in wargaming figures.

https://www.firstlegionltd.com/lateromanempire.aspx

Centurion.

The army.

I quite liked this one.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Edited February 21, 2022 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

 

In the late 3rd century, a complete break in Roman helmet design occurred. Previous Roman helmet types, based ultimately on Celtic designs, were replaced by new forms derived from helmets developed in the Sassanid Empire. A closely related form to the Roman ridge helmets is represented by a single helmet from Dura Europos which is of similar construction, but has a much higher-vaulted skull. It probably belonged to a Sassanid warrior of the 3rd century. This reinforces the evidence for a Sassanid origin of this type of helmet.[1] Two main forms of helmet construction were adopted by the Romans at much the same time: the ridge helmet, described here, and the spangenhelm, which was likely adopted from the Sarmatians.[2] The earliest confirmed example of a Late Roman ridge helmet is the Richborough helmet, which dates to about 280 AD.[3]

[Lion.Kanzen]

Equites Stablesiani

The equites scutarii go back to the 3rd Century and were created during the mid 250's by the Emperor Gallienus as part of the expansion of the cavalry arm. It is understood that they had large shields and may have been either unarmoured or armoured. The scutarii came to mean guard troops. There were the Schola scutariorum prima, Schola scutariorum secunda, Schola scutariorum tertia, but not all equites scutarii were guard troops. In fact there were many equites scutarii to be found both in the limitanei and field armies.

https://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?323395-Scutatii-Stablesiani

 

Edited February 21, 2022 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

.

 

 

that the late Roman faction could have buildings with more sloppy textures giving it a certain or realism very similar to that of the Italian faction in age of Empires 2.

In fact, I remembered because there was a photo I recently saw of a colonial house here in my country.

My general idea comes from this image that I found casually on the internet.

 

a decadent and poor Rome.

 

 

Edited October 18, 2022 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

equipment. 

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

On 17/10/2022 at 10:03 PM, Lion.Kanzen said:

[Genava55]

 

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

[Lion.Kanzen]

Hunnish Mercenary

It should be the improved version of Hippotoxotoi.

Maybe swordmen (cavalry)when we have the secondary attack available.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Economic historians point to the emergence of Feudalism here.

 

 

he Roman Road to Feudal Serfdom

...was an imperial road.

Monday, October 10, 2016

 

 

Donald J. Boudreaux

Politics Ancient Rome Regulation Taxation

 

Here’s a post from ten years ago; it features some important history from ancient Rome – history that’s important because of the relevant warning that it offers to us today, namely: government economic interventions in general, and mandated price controls in particular, are barbarous.

 

Feudalism Sparked by Rome’s Regulations

On pages 642-643 of Will Durant’s remarkable book Caesar and Christ(1944) he discusses Diocletian‘s economic policies. (Diocletian reigned from 282 to 305 A.D.)

 

In years of peace Diocletian, with his aides, faced the problems of economic decay. To overcome depression and prevent revolution he substituted a managed economy for the law of supply and demand…. To ensure the supply of necessaries for the cities and the armies, he brought many branches of industry under complete state control, beginning with the import of grain; he persuaded the shipowners, merchants, and crews engaged in this trade to accept such control in return for government guarantee of security in employment and returns…. In 301 Diocletian and his colleagues [joint rulers of an administratively divided empire] issued an Edictum de pretiis, dictating maximum legal prices or wages for all important articles or services in the Empire…. The Edict was until our time the most famous example of an attempt to replace economic laws by governmental decrees. Its failure was rapid and complete."

 

------

It would be interesting to have a loyalty system with some units, if you raise taxes to a very high level your units lose loyalty and become foragids and bagaudae, like neutral player (Gaia).

You could capture it again or they would simply walk around the map creating problems in exchange for money.

You would have fewer units in exchange for money, it is like exchanging population space for money, Obviously it should have limits.

Maybe it could be a mechanic on some single player map.

 

-----

 

 

Durant goes on to explain how these economic regulations, combined with higher taxes, caused people to engage in unprecedented levels of hiding their productive activities from the state and in to fleeing Rome. Medieval feudalism, Durant argues, finds its chief root in the restrictions that Diocletian and his successors imposed as they attempted to tie people to the land in order to prevent them from fleeing:

 

"It was probably to check this costly mobility, to ensure a proper flow of food to armies and cities, and of taxes to the state, that Diocletian resorted to measures that in effect established serfdom in fields, factories, and guilds [p. 644]."

 

Durant concludes this discussion with the sorrowful observation that relatively few Romans protested, as they apparently were hoodwinked into believing that in exchange for their freedom they were gaining greater security.

 

https://fee.org/articles/the-roman-road-to-feudal-serfdom/

 

Edited January 29 by Lion.Kanzen