10-13-2002, 12:09 PM
Yeah. I too have seen maps with different inclusions of the areas you mention and also of north africa.<br>
<br>
The maps of north africa I like the most actually only give the east-west boundaries of the provinces while they place no precise southern boundary. I like these because it makes sense to me that in those places the control of deep territory was something that greatly fluctuated depending on the health of the romans and the activity of the tribes in the hinterland.<br>
<br>
Maybe the control of the far edge of the black sea was also unstable and periodic, depending on the positive pressure the romans could exert, something which varied as function of political stability and economic well-being, as well as on "barbarian" restlessness.<br>
<br>
The roman influence went far beyond the nominal boundaries almost in all cases, but what was actually under some sort of control, short of real occupation, is a very interesting topic, especially in certain areas that are rarely spoken of as the black sea. I am certainly interested.<br>
<br>
p.s. The politcal agenda of the recent roman history map makers has as also some influence. In the Italian Fascist period, maps of the roman empire tended to make it seem as big as possible compatible with the evidence. But evidence can be twisted enough to make things seem more than what an anti-roman propagandist would do to minimize roman influence on his pet culture. <p></p><i></i>
<br>
The maps of north africa I like the most actually only give the east-west boundaries of the provinces while they place no precise southern boundary. I like these because it makes sense to me that in those places the control of deep territory was something that greatly fluctuated depending on the health of the romans and the activity of the tribes in the hinterland.<br>
<br>
Maybe the control of the far edge of the black sea was also unstable and periodic, depending on the positive pressure the romans could exert, something which varied as function of political stability and economic well-being, as well as on "barbarian" restlessness.<br>
<br>
The roman influence went far beyond the nominal boundaries almost in all cases, but what was actually under some sort of control, short of real occupation, is a very interesting topic, especially in certain areas that are rarely spoken of as the black sea. I am certainly interested.<br>
<br>
p.s. The politcal agenda of the recent roman history map makers has as also some influence. In the Italian Fascist period, maps of the roman empire tended to make it seem as big as possible compatible with the evidence. But evidence can be twisted enough to make things seem more than what an anti-roman propagandist would do to minimize roman influence on his pet culture. <p></p><i></i>
Jeffery Wyss
"Si vos es non secui of solutio tunc vos es secui of preciptate."
"Si vos es non secui of solutio tunc vos es secui of preciptate."
