The subject matter of Romanarmy.com/RATv3

[Praefectusclassis]

Romanarmy.com currently is only about ancient Rome's military, while RAT has limited forums for Greece and allies and enemies of Rome. Should this be changed?

[Robert Vermaat]

I voting to keep it as it is. Romans, Greek, enemies, even up to Medieval times. But no more.

I mean, we could start discussing Chinese and Mayas or whatever as 'warring civilizations up to 600', which IMHO is not a good idea - there are board for those, i'm sure.

[Praefectusclassis]

So actually you meant option 2 or 4, Robert? Remember, we're talking about the scope of the entire site, not just RAT!

[Robert Vermaat]

No, I doodn't.

Option 2:
"about all warring civilizations up to 600 AD in North Africa, Europe and the Near East":
I agree that most of those civilizations are discussed here, but only in the context of Roman and Greek warfare. And although I've seen a bit about Hittites and Myceneans stroll by, there is so far no section that discussed any of the peoples unrelated to Greeks and Romans at length. No Slavis section as yet, so to speak, or a massive discussion about the wars between Assyria and Egypt!

Option 4:
"about warfare in the ancient world up to 1453, the Fall of Constantinople":
Although we occasionally stray into late Medieval times, it's only occasionally. We haven't discussed the enemies of the Byzantine Empire at length, either. I'm not sure i'd wish for that, either - interesting sure, but not for this board.

Like you said, that's the forum, not the entire site, which is still mainly about the Roman Army, right?

So therefore - keep it as it is!

[Praefectusclassis]

Perhaps I need to make another posting that, wut sez that in Romanarmy.com / RAT v3 the distinction between the forum and rest of the site will either become very blurry or will disappear completely.
Still, keeping the subject matter exactly the same as it is now, means no projects outside the forum itself. No Greek helmet database, for instance...

[Carlton Bach]

I like RAT just fine the way it is now, but I voted for 'all aspects of ancient civilisations' because I think the military should be put in its context. So I'm not advocating a 'Mummification and Funerary Ritual' subform, but I would support some more breadth. Including actively, as time allows..

[Magnus]

Ain't broke...ne pas fixer. lol

[Paullus Scipio]

I too, don't like any of the above options.....
I would like to see:-

Rome: Warfare in all aspects , history, equipment, re-enactment....but extended as now to civil matters as well, Roman culture, society, all aspects etc( one should study a subject"in the round" as it were...right down to "what was garum and what did it taste like?")
Greece: as above.
Enemies of the above: as above - the same extended to the actual enemies of Greece and Rome

I feel that this represents the 'Goldilocks' option...not too much, not too little....just right. There needs to be some extension/adjustment to 'rationalise' our present subject range, but equally we should be concentrated enough to still be a 'special interest group'....let others study 'Burmese warfare 600B.C. to 600A.D.'

I think Greece and Rome should go together because their cultures, warfare, and even enemies significantly overlap, to the point of being inextricable at times.

I guess I am more or less in Robert's camp ! D

[Praefectusclassis]

Hi Paul,
What you're describing is what I mean by option 2, perhaps with exclusion of earlier civilizations. Whether it fits or not, it is NOT the same as it is now, mostly because it'd require a serious restructuring of the content outside of the forum. As I told Robert: be careful what you wish for. Same as now = no Greek helmet databases...!

[Paullus Scipio]

Option 2:about all warring civilizations up to 600 AD in North Africa, Europe and the Near East.
...sorry Jasper maybe it is just semantics, but I don't see this as the same as what I (and maybe Robert) are advocating, I am notadvocating same as now....although it is close ! I am advocating expanding RomanArmy.com to expand to match the forum, more or less, but not too far beyond....! D

Agreed it requires significant expansion outside the forum...it means expanding Roman Army.com to match/marry up with the forum...thus there would need to be 'Greek Helmet' data, and ultimately 'Enemies of Greece and Rome' Helmet/armour data, and other things, too !

I hope that is what Robert means too...expanding the site to more or less marry up with the forum, but not significantly beyond.....if not, then perhaps he and I are in different camps after all ! Certainly Option 2 is close, almost, but not exactly what I am thinking of..... 8)

[Iagoba]

I would avoid clearly the Middle Ages...there is a risk of being drowned by Viking themes...

Limited aspects of european warfare in the Dark Age (or Byzantine..) would be admitted, as the shade of Rome is still present in that perid.

[Ron Andrea]

I support leaving it as it is now, understanding that as people are added the discussions necessarily follow what they are currently interested in and the site will grow.

If the heart of the site expands much beyond the Roman Empire and later than AD 600 you risk diluting the forum. The ratio of meat (and vegetables) to water is pretty high now. Wouldn't want to water it down.

The world is full of interesting topics, but if the name of this site is Roman Army, maybe that should be its focus, too.

[Ron Andrea]

BTW, I think a repeat of the director links near the bottom of each page would be helpful. Why scroll all the way to the topic just to perform some other function? :wink:

[vergilius]

Being new I would say don't just focus on the military. Civil live and the army went hand in hand in those days. You can't have the one without the other.
Some topics can be discussed seperatedly perhaps. But , let's say the roman roads are a very interesting topic which isn't purely military perhaps. But I wont agree with those who"ll say it's not interesting. Then why not discus it here?

[Ron Andrea]

I agree they go hand in hand, but such topics already grow organically from our current focus.

It is hard to imagine Rome defending Britannia, for example, without the roads. But, just as we should not make Hadrian's Wall the focus of the forum even though it figured largely in both the defense of Britannia and the eventual fall of the empire, roads or food or clothing or rituals will naturally be explored as they relate to the army.

Let the participants "vote" with their postings--just as all politics is local, so all topics come from the interests of the partpicipants--but keep the site focus on the military.