Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Ave!
#1
Hello Roman Empire fans!

I have always been passionate of Roman World History and here after you can find a website on which I am working:
RomanEmpire.cloud

Please visit it and let me know what do you think of it. Don't hesitate to send suggestions Smile
[Image: romanempire.php?Period=Marcus%20Ulpius%20Ner...ue&Scale=4]
Reply
#2
Perhaps you should wait a bit before publishing this because most pages do not seem to work or have content?
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
[Image: artgroepbutton.jpg]
Reply
#3
Umh... which pages?

Probably because you need to fill in the filters in the Map and Topics page.

For example, with the following address you will reach Augustus section:
https://www.romanempire.cloud/history?l=...20Augustus

Then you can see this map:
[Image: romanempire.php?Period=Gaius%20Iulius%20Caes...us&Scale=4]
And you will be able to read related history, or to play with the map adding cities (with the names which change according to the period), rivers, or regions, or also comparing the maps of two different periods.

In the timelapse sub-section you can use the timelapse feature to see the evolution of the empire:
https://www.romanempire.cloud/history?l=...eBy=PERIOD

Instead, in the section Cities essential timeline and comparisons I am working to create an essential timeline of the empire cities, here for example with Rome, Carthago and Alexandrea:
https://www.romanempire.cloud/history?l=...Alexandrea

Please let me know if you are experimenting issue Smile
Reply
#4
(09-17-2018, 06:10 PM)CaesarAugustus Wrote: Umh... which pages?


Umm.. all the pages in your index?

If I click on 'project' I get a page with a lot of writing but none with a link.

Of I go to 'maps' I get a blank page suggesting I click on filters but when I do that (for example Rome) I get a timeline with some tekst but never a map. same with other cities.
When by chance (clicking on white space) I get a map I cannot return to the previous page (that happens on all the pages and is quite annoying).
When I again enter that page and choose timelapse there is no map to choose from.

The news section mentions what you added but no links to what you added.

What do you mean by API?

Oh and, mods notice:
Please add your first (real) name to your signature (in your profile). it's a forum rule.

(09-17-2018, 06:10 PM)CaesarAugustus Wrote: For example, with the following address you will reach Augustus section:
https://www.romanempire.cloud/history?l=...20Augustus

Then you can see this map:
[Image: romanempire.php?Period=Gaius%20Iulius%20Caes...us&Scale=4]
And you will be able to read related history, or to play with the map adding cities (with the names which change according to the period), rivers, or regions, or also comparing the maps of two different periods.


Actually - that link gets me a page in Italian. perhaps your English pages are not working properly?
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
[Image: artgroepbutton.jpg]
Reply
#5
On project section there is the possibility to change the content (providing a source to justify the change), or send other requests/notes etc. And also there is a summary of what I am planning to add. So, no links to search.

In the Map and Topics section there is the core site content, but you have to select the filters Smile
For example, selecting Timelapse -> Period, it will be possible to show the map and start a timelapse period by period, or move from a period to another using the buttons.
Selecting Period -> One of the Periods (monarchy, repubblic, ...) -> one of available periods, it will be possible to show the map related to the period and associated history content. It is also possible to compare maps from different periods, adding cities to the map (they changes according to the period) and so on. If you change with the following url, you will be able to see in english the previous link : https://www.romanempire.cloud/history?l=...20Augustus

The site is based on a single page application, do not expect a lot of links, so do not search for them in News and so on Smile  (I could add because I take the parameters from the URL, but for now I would avoid)

For API: Application Programming Interface, a set of services exposed by the website. Currently the service exposed is used to retrieve the maps that can be used in external websites (the maps are dynamically built). In future I could add other services, for example to return chronological information Smile

If you go to the focus section (clicking on a map in the period section, if you click on a map in the timelapse you will be moved to the related period, and after able to click again in order to move to the focus section (for now a full size map)), it is possible to go back with the arrows on the left side of the screen. But probably in the case of no selected map (probably you have selected only one or two filters in the period section) there is badly correctly handled situation, I will check.

Consider that I am planning to create maps for all the years of the empire (for now up to the fallen of the WRE), including the military and exploration expeditions and so on, it is not immediate to do and actually the website will be never finished Smile
- CaesarAugustus
www.romanempire.cloud
(Marco Parente)
Reply
#6
(09-19-2018, 08:04 PM)CaesarAugustus Wrote: On project section there is the possibility to change the content (providing a source to justify the change), or send other requests/notes etc. And also there is a summary of what I am planning to add. So, no links to search.

In the Map and Topics section there is the core site content, but you have to select the filters Smile
For example, selecting Timelapse -> Period, it will be possible to show the map and start a timelapse period by period, or move from a period to another using the buttons.
Selecting Period -> One of the Periods (monarchy, repubblic, ...) -> one of available periods, it will be possible to show the map related to the period and associated history content. It is also possible to compare maps from different periods, adding cities to the map (they changes according to the period) and so on. If you change with the following url, you will be able to see in english the previous link : https://www.romanempire.cloud/history?l=...20Augustus

The site is based on a single page application, do not expect a lot of links, so do not search for them in News and so on Smile  (I could add because I take the parameters from the URL, but for now I would avoid)

For API: Application Programming Interface, a set of services exposed by the website. Currently the service exposed is used to retrieve the maps that can be used in external websites (the maps are dynamically built). In future I could add other services, for example to return chronological information Smile

If you go to the focus section (clicking on a map in the period section, if you click on a map in the timelapse you will be moved to the related period, and after able to click again in order to move to the focus section (for now a full size map)), it is possible to go back with the arrows on the left side of the screen. But probably in the case of no selected map (probably you have selected only one or two filters in the period section) there is badly correctly handled situation, I will check.

Consider that I am planning to create maps for all the years of the empire (for now up to the fallen of the WRE), including the military and exploration expeditions and so on, it is not immediate to do and actually the website will be never finished Smile

Thanks for the reply. It actually takes some learning to use the site, and even then it's not easy.

Also, check your translations: 'low empire' is not a term used for the late Roman period, same with 'high empire' and 'medium empire'- no matter the term used in Italian. Wink


@ year-by-year map:
How? Where do you think you can can find such detailed information so that you can base a year-by-year map on it? Lots of it would be based on hypothesis?

I'll give it a go but so far the site is not very user-friendly from where I access it.
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
[Image: artgroepbutton.jpg]
Reply
#7
Well, I know it is not simple, but we are talking of Roman Empire, it cannot be simple Smile

The division between low, medium and high empire is done by myself. I don't have found other good way to divide that huge period and I would avoid to give a very long list of Emperors, so I have arranged that division. Please tell me if there are other kind of divisions.

For the year-by-year, Some part base on hypothesis for sure. I am trying to compare different sources, also from archeology, to try to figure out the evolution of the boundaries. And, there is also the difficulty that often the boundaries were not fixed but approximate. I will try to highlight where there are assumptions and where the certainties.

Part of my activities is also related to the will to visually show that there are a lot of wrong concept around the empire, for example the fact that after Trajanus the Empire was in a defensive position without expansions.

Anyway, to show correctly the maps you need a computer, with a mobile phone you can have an idea, but you cannot study maps, chronologies and so on on a little screens Smile
- CaesarAugustus
www.romanempire.cloud
(Marco Parente)
Reply
#8
(09-21-2018, 07:45 PM)CaesarAugustus Wrote: The division between low, medium and high empire... Please tell me if there are other kind of divisions.

The usual one in English historical writing is between Principiate and Dominate (the division being the reign of Diocletian).

There's also 'early imperial', 'middle imperial' and 'late imperial', if you prefer.

The problem with 'high' and 'low' is that it reinforces the idea that the later empire was debased, corrupted or in the process of collapse, which certainly was not the case for much of the period.
Nathan Ross
Reply
#9
I know the division in Principate and Dominate, but I think it is not a good division, for which I have not adopted it. In my opinion, the differences between the first 2 centuries and half (more or less) and the Military Anarchy are too big to include them in the same period.

I could adopt the division in early, middle and late, if the time boundaries are compatible:
Early: 27BC-235AD
Middle: 235AD-363AD
Late imperial: 363AD-476AD/486AD
- CaesarAugustus
www.romanempire.cloud
(Marco Parente)
Reply
#10
(09-22-2018, 10:21 AM)CaesarAugustus Wrote: I know the division in Principate and Dominate, but I think it is not a good division, for which I have not adopted it. 

Why would you use something based on your own opinion and not something everybody is already familiar with for over a century?



(09-22-2018, 10:21 AM)CaesarAugustus Wrote: Middle: 235AD-363AD
Late imperial: 363AD-476AD/486AD


What happened in 363 to warrant such a division?
What happened in 486 to end the late period?
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
[Image: artgroepbutton.jpg]
Reply
#11
The fact that a thing is already familiar does not mean it is true, or valid. All divisions by period are arbitrary and subject to debates and opinions. If we agree in the fact that the name "high empire" can enforce the idea of the later empire was debased, corrupted or in the process of collaps, at the same time the division in Principate and Dominate can enforce the idea of an empire almost ideal (the Principate) corrupted by the transformation in the Dominate. Also, the Dominate can be considered just as the period relative to the Tetrarchy, so for now I would avoid to use it, unless I decide to split into more periods.

The 363AD was the year of the death of Claudius Iulianus, the last non-Christian ruler of the Roman Empire and the last emperor who tried to ripristinate the old religion and related principles.

The 486AD is the end of the last Western Roman Empire part, the so called Domain of Soissons.
- CaesarAugustus
www.romanempire.cloud
(Marco Parente)
Reply
#12
(09-22-2018, 07:14 PM)CaesarAugustus Wrote: All divisions by period are arbitrary and subject to debates and opinions.

True enough - and any attempt at periodisation is going to fail under some criteria. But if there are going to be divisions, they need to work on as many different levels as possible, and be as widely accepted as possible too.

One division between the 'early' and 'middle' empire might be AD161, the accession of dual emperors Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus - not only the first attempt at a system of collegiate rule, but the year of the disaster at Elegaia which began the Parthian wars, which led to the Antonine Plague sweeping Europe, closely followed by the Marcommanic wars, the Severan age and the third century crisis, and the beginnings of large scale barbarian movements and military reorganisation. In other word, the end of the lengthy 'Pax Romana' period.

This 'middle' imperial era could end with the accession of Diocletian in AD284, and the reorganisation of the 'late' empire under a new political and military system, which would endure more or less until the end of the empire in the west.


(09-22-2018, 07:14 PM)CaesarAugustus Wrote: the division in Principate and Dominate can enforce the idea of an empire almost ideal (the Principate) corrupted by the transformation in the Dominate.

As I understand it, the general difference is that the emperors went from being called Princeps to being called Dominus. There were outliers - Domitian, for example - but as a rough guide it works, and doesn't imply the later empire was necessarily worse.
Nathan Ross
Reply
#13
Well, I don't agree with the 161AD. This can easily creates the idea that the peak of the Roman Empire can be seen in the 161, while we well know that the economy and the trades of the empire continued to grow and be prosperous until the third century. Here a link to the Oxford Roman Economy Project, http://www.romaneconomy.ox.ac.uk/, it is a huge work and includes several publications which show that the economy continued to grow up in the third century, together with an increased use of innovations (probably to face a temporary reduction of the workforce).

Also, the so-called Pax-Romana was quite effective just under Hadrianus and Antoninus. The Parthian problem was a problem that was always there (Crassus, Marcus Antonius, Nero, Trajan). There was not a discontinuity in what happened under Marcus Aurelius period.
And, what made by Hadrian is quite debatable, especially in Dacia. So, if we want to speak about the period of the Pax Romana, we should create another period just for these two emperors.

For all these reasons I consider that the first real division with the start of the military anarchy. In my opinion, it has been triggered by the Severian reforms (mre power to the army and extension of the roman citizenship), but the divisions should be placed when the effects become visible and tangible.
- CaesarAugustus
www.romanempire.cloud
(Marco Parente)
Reply
#14
(09-23-2018, 05:48 PM)CaesarAugustus Wrote: I don't agree with the 161AD. This can easily creates the idea that the peak of the Roman Empire can be seen in the 161

The whole point of the early/middle/late division is that it doesn't suggest any kind of 'peak'. It's a purely chronological split, with variable parameters, and no implications of relative value.


Just as a further illustration of the difficulties of determining where artifical breaks in chronology should fall, the University of Oxford School of Archaeology divides the Roman imperial era into three periods:

Early Imperial, 30BC-AD 120
Middle Imperial, AD 70-250
Late Antiquity, AD 280-650

You can read their rationale for this on the webpage above. The 'middle imperial' dates seem a bit odd, but the other two act as decent brackets for the era, I think.

There is quite a good reason for placing the early-middle division around the accession of Hadrian though - the end of Rome's expansion and wars of conquest, and the shift to static frontiers and defensive wars, with power steadily flowing outwards from the centre towards the peripheries.

Almost everyone seems to begin the 'late empire' era around the reign of Diocletian though, and it's easy to see why - definite changes in imperial power structures, administration, provincial organisation, army structure, miliary equipment, art and architecture and religion, leading very soon to the beginning of Christianisation.
Nathan Ross
Reply
#15
Well, a really good reason not to set the division under Hadrian. Hereafter some maps:

Under Hadrianus:
[Image: romanempire.php?Period=Publius%20Aelius%20Ha...ue&Scale=4]
https://www.romanempire.cloud/history?l=...ivers=true

Under Marcus Aurelius:
[Image: romanempire.php?Period=Marcus%20Aurelius%20A...ue&Scale=4]
https://www.romanempire.cloud/history?l=...ivers=true

Under Caracalla:
[Image: romanempire.php?Period=Marcus%20Aurelius%20S...ue&Scale=4]
https://www.romanempire.cloud/history?l=...ivers=true

With Hadrianus the empire did not stopped the expansion. The expansion in middle Europe was stopped by Commodus, but the empire continued the expansion in the East. Also, in the south the Limes Tripolitanus was significantly expanded (an expansion that also Hadrianus continued). Also, we can consider that a great part of the "greatest expansion" of the Roman Empire under Trajan, was not kept until his death, but already when he was alive part of the territories were left under a client kingdom, taken back under Marcu Aurelius, Septimius Severus or Caracalla.
And there are also other places were the empire advanced, for example in the Limes Transalutanus in Dacia, or in Caledonia were there were several attempts to penetrate, finally creating the Votadini client kingdom.

So, with Hadrian the Empire did not stopped the expansion, simply started a reorganization, that in Dacia was also badly thought out.
- CaesarAugustus
www.romanempire.cloud
(Marco Parente)
Reply


Forum Jump: