This. The Roman Peace was neither Roman, nor peaceful.https://twitter.com/jpnudell/status/1266148060725420038 …
-
Also, how much of the low level Kashmir-border style violence with Bastarnae and Dacian tribes went unreported?
Probably a lot, but then our evidence suggests that violence would be happening with or without the Romans. Rhine/Danube region looks pretty violent (inter-state/non-state anarchy) pre-Romans.
-
-
Again, we're working with poor evidence bases, but what we know when we can glimpse interactions in the non-state zone, is quite a lot of warfare and violence. Archaeology seems to support - lots of military votives (spoils), warrior burials, high status for warriors, etc.
-
Note: Not saying the Romans were peaceful! They were the biggest, nastiest thugs. But violence can decrease as a consequence of one group of thugs moving out all of the others and setting up a stable protection racket, as the Romans did.
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
This is a guess. The violence might also have been differnent (more drastic? Less drastic?) due to the nature of how warbands organize to steal women/livestock versus how the Romans set tactical objectives. I’m telling you man - There’s a killer book here.
-
Probably, but I have like...four books on my to-do list already!
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.