All Empires Magazine is looking for Contributors - History Forum ~ All Empires

OK, red, Here is a partial missive of mine for inclusion!

Please have all of your editors look it over?

It was and is just a copy of my own Word Perfect document, and it does not do well in the current scheme of thins, but here it is, nontheless!

The following is from a missive of mine and might well provide one with some questions and some answers!

It touches upon some problems in our consensual history and chronology, concerning the use of or the death of a number of “kinghts”or “heroes” whose number is, or was, close to the number 300!   Rome, it seems, is part and parcel of this exhibit. Funny that Athens/ Greece, is less representative, at least in this partial thread of my missive..

The first source is;

“July 31, 2009
The Epitome of Roman History by Florus
published in the Loeb Classical Library,
1929, as translated by William P. Thayer, and found at;

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Florus/Epitome/home.html

The text is in the public domain

“From the direction of Etruria the Veientines were persistent enemies who attacked each year; so much so that the single family of the Fabii undertook to form a special force and waged a private war against them. The disaster which befell them is well, all too well, known.

Near Cremera three hundred of them, an army of patricians, p39 were slain, and so the gate which sent them forth to the battle was branded with the name of the Evil Gate. But for this disaster atonement was made by great victories, when the strongest cities were captured under different leaders and with different results. The Falisci surrendered voluntarily; Fidenae was consumed by its own flames; Veii was thoroughly plundered and destroyed.

When the Falisci were being besieged, the honourable conduct of the Roman commander was a subject of admiration, and not without reason; for he actually sent back in chains a schoolmaster who offered to betray the city, together with the boys whom he had brought with him. For, being a man of integrity and wisdom, he knew that the only true victory is that which is won with untainted honour and unimpaired dignity.

The people of Fidenae, not being a match for the Romans with the sword, had armed themselves with torches and had put on vari-coloured fillets resembling serpents, in order to inspire terror, and had marched forth like furies; but their funereal attire was an omen of their overthrow. The ten years' siege which Veii sustained is an indication of its strength. It was the first occasion on which a Roman army spent the winter under tents of skin, and winter service was compensated by special pay, and the soldiers at their own suggestion were bound under an oath not to return until the city had been captured.
The spoils won from Lars Tolumnius, the king, were brought back in triumph and dedicated to Jupiter Feretrius. In the end the fall of the city was brought about, not by scaling-ladders or assault, but by a mine and underground p41 stratagems. Lastly, the booty appeared so rich that a tithe of it was sent to Pythian Apollo, and the whole of the Roman people was summoned to plunder the city. Such was Veii in those days. Who now ever remembers its former existence?
What remains or traces of it are left? Our trust in our annals has a difficult task to make us believe that Veii ever existed.”

All material on this site not covered by other copyright and not explicitly marked as public domain is copyright © William P. Thayer”

With the formalities out of the way, I will now attempt to extract material from the above translation that may well be related to other events of our consensual history which are within the approval of modern thought, now separated by both time and place.

Thus Thayer continues;

“From the direction of Etruria the Veientines were persistent enemies who attacked each year; so much so that the single family of the Fabii undertook to form a special force and waged a private war against them. The disaster which befell them is well, all too well, known. Near Cremera three hundred of them, an army of patricians, p39 were slain, and so the gate which sent them forth to the battle was branded with the name of the Evil Gate.”

First of all, we see that from Etruria the Veientines were persistent enemies who attacked each year, this indicated that during the warring season Rome was attacked each year by the Veientines. Just who were these people?

First of all it seems that it is hard to find anyplace on the internet or in my dictionary whereby one can see any kind of specific definition of these people. Thus everything is determined via relationships with Rome or other peoples who lived somewhere in the lands called “Etruria!”
From now on, one must religiously follow the directions to sites that will support or supply necessary information. So ignore my sources at your own discretion?

The time-line of the above events, found at;

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/5th_century_BC#encyclopedia

http://books.google.com/books?id=vZ0MAAAAYAAJ&pg=RA1-PA739&lpg=RA1-PA739&dq=killing+of+the+300+fabians+veii&source=bl&ots=pG75idftg6&sig=ykN5fVvBTxTdYSkcnheAYYfWads&hl=en&ei=4i9lSsCcA963twet-5myAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1
October, 485 BC — Xerxes I succeeds Darius I of Persia

“Darius I or Darius the Great was the son of Hystaspes and Persian Empire from 522 BC to 486 BC. Darius is the dominant Latin language spelling used by the Roman historians....
as King of Persia.

484 BC — Athens , the Capital and largest city of Greece, dominates the Attica periphery; as one of the List of cities by time of continuous habitation, its recorded history spans around 3,400 years....playwright Aeschylus was an Ancient Greece playwright. He is often recognized as the father or the founder of tragedy, and is the earliest of the three Greek tragedy whose Play survive extant, the others being Sophocles and Euripides....
wins a poetry prize.

484 BC — Xerxes I abolishes the Kingdom of Babel and removes the golden statue of Bel.
(mythology)

Bel , signifying "lord" or "master", is a title rather than a genuine name, applied to various gods in Babylonian religion. The feminine form is B?lit 'Lady, Mistress'....
Marduk was the Babylonian language name of a late-generation god from ancient Mesopotamia and patron deity of the city of Babylon..

484 BC —Persian Empire
The 'Persian Empire' was a series of successive Iranian or Persianization empires that ruled over the Iranian plateau, the original Persian homeland, and beyond in Southwest Asia, South Asia, Central Asia and the Caucasus....regain control of Egypt.
483 BC - Gautama Buddha died.

483 BC — Xerxes I of Persia starts planning his expedition against Greece.

481 BC — The Congress at the Isthmus of Corinth
The Congress at the Isthmus of Corinth took place in 481 BC, under the presidency of Sparta, and brought together a number of the Greek city states....ends a war between Athens and Aegina.
Aegina is one of the Greek islands of Greece in the Saronic Gulf, 17 miles from Athens. Tradition derives the name from Aegina, the mother of Aeacus, who was born in and ruled the island.

480 BC — King Xerxes I of Persia sets out to conquer Greece
480 BC — Cimon and his friends burn horse-bridles as an offering to Athena
480 BC — Pleistarchus, king of Sparta from 480 to 458 BC. He was the son of Leonidas I and Gorgo . For the early part of his reign, his cousin Pausanias , acted as regent because Pleistarchus was not of age....succeeds his father Leonidas I., as King of Sparta.
Leonidas I, was a king of Sparta, the 17th of the Agiad line, one of the sons of King Anaxandridas II of Sparta, who was believed to be a descendant of Heracles, possessing much of the strength and bravery that made his ancestor famous.

August, 480 BC — Battle of Artemisium

The Battle of Artemisium was a series of naval engagements over three days during the second Persian invasion of Greece. It took place simultaneously with the more famous land battle at Battle of Thermopylae, in August or September 480 BC, off the coast of Euboea....
The Persian / allied fleet fights an inconclusive battle with the Greek fleet.

August 11, 480 BC — The Battle of Thermopylae , took place over three days during the second Persian invasion of Greece. It took place simultaneously with the naval battle at Battle of Artemisium, in August or September 480 BC, at the pass of Thermopylae ...., a costly victory by Persians over the Greeks.
(You will note that it was reported that 300 brave Spartans, along with others, fought to the death in this battle as I have mentioned earlier.)

September 23, 480 BC — Battle of Salamis
The Battle of Salamis , was a naval battle fought between an Alliance of Greece city-states and the Achaemenid Empire of Persia in September 480 BC in the straits between the mainland and Salamis Island, an island in the Saronic Gulf near Athens....between Greece
and Persia, leading to a Greek victory.

480 BC — Battle of Himera (480 BC), supposedly fought on the same day as the more famous Battle of Salamis, or on the same day as the Battle of Thermopylae, saw the Greek forces of Gelo, King of Syracuse, and Theron, tyrant of Agrigento, defeat the Carthage force of Hamilcar the Magonids, ending a Carthaginian bid to restore the deposed tyrant of Himera....the Carthaginians are defeated by the Greeks.
480 BC — Roman Republic troops march against the Veientines.
Veii, a famous city of the Veientines.

Veii was, in ancient times, an important Etrurian city 16 km NNW of Rome, Italy; its site lies in the modern comune of Formello, in the Province of Rome.”
.
From the above translation we see another case of what has become a familiar number in history, as it is presently shown to us. That number is 300 (three hundred warriors/knights) men, who are usually featured in a special force which fought against Rome or Persia or Macedonian or ?.

Please take the time to do one of the infamous, Fomenko calculations, with the above date of 480 BCE?

That is, just add about 1,778 or 1,800, or 1,810 years to the above date. Just what approximate date is left?

Another killing, of a famous 300, or in this case 306 Fabians at the Cremera River.

http://ancthist-nsgill.blogspot.com/2009_01_01_archive.html

“The fifth section is The Conflict Between Rome and Veii.
Veii was an Etruscan city that shared a border with Rome on the right” (meaning correct?) “ bank of the Tiber. There were three Veientine wars.

The first, from 483-474, favored the Veii. It was in this war that the Fabian clan, defending their own territory, lost 306 people -- all but one of their men, at the Cremera river.
Cornell notes that details seem to have been borrowed from the Battle at Thermopylae, which was almost contemporaneous.

A truce gave the Veientines Fidenae. This became the focus of the second Veientine War. The second Veientine War began in 437 when 4 Roman ambassadors were murdered on orders from the tyrant of Veii. The rare spolia opima was awarded Cornelius Cossus for killing the tyrant in single combat. Roman soldiers entered the citadel of Fidenae by means of a tunnel in 435.”

One might note the mention of a “tunnel” used above to enter the “citadel of Fidenae” and capture it in 435 BCE. Could a “tunnel” be considered as a “mole?”

Actually I need to show you two definitions of “Mole!”
http://thinkexist.com/dictionary/meaning/mole/

1. “(n.) A mound or massive work formed of masonry or large stones, etc., laid in the sea, often extended either in a right line or an arc of a circle before a port which it serves to defend from the violence of the waves, thus protecting ships in a harbor; also, sometimes, the harbor itself.”

2. “To form holes in, as a mole; to burrow; to excavate; as, to mole the earth.”

Maybe the tunnel under the “citadel of Fidenae”, as quoted above, is just a misrepresentation of the siege of Tyre by Alexander? You will notice that Alexander supposedly built a “mole”, which we now consider to be the Roman word for “wall” or a man made “ or “causeway”, or “roadway”, built by filling in water with stones, etc.” (See meaning number one above.)

But, if some other historian mistook “mole” as meaning “a tunnel digging animal” (See meaning number two above.) , might not he write “tunneled” instead?

Could not any text undergoing copying or translation that said “ a mole was built to attack the city of....” or “a mole was constructed to..” or “a tunnel was constructed..”, etc, easily be confused with “tunnel” or just the opposite?
In such a case the attack of Alexander upon the Island City of Tyre, which might well have been discovered just because it is connected to the mainland by a “causeway” type “mole!”, could be entirely wrong? He certainly could not tunnel underwater? This of course totally changes the possibility that the city we now consider as Tyre was besieged by Alexander!

Remember this definition; “Tyrrhenian ,1660, "pertaining to the Etruscans," from L. Tyrrheni, from Gk. Tyrrenoi "Tyrrhenians," from tyrsis "tower, walled city" (cf. L. turris "tower"). Earlier Tyrrhene (1387).” Please note that the origin is said to be from “tyris” meaning “tower”, spelled with only one “r”, as is the word “turan!” and “tyrant.” It thus seems a good possibility that the double “r” was instituted so as to separate “Tyre” from “Tyrr-heni” (one may note that the “h” in Tyrrheni” is usually silent) since a great distance in geography separated the two. This separation might well have happened about 1660 CE?

Even the Tyrrhenian Sea could be translated as “The Sea of the Lord?” See next!

Note, also that the “tyrant of Veii” is mentioned.
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=tyrant

This is how our current etymologists have construed the word tyrant, which it appears only became extant (in English at least) in 1297 CE!;

“1297, "absolute ruler," from O.Fr. tyrant (12c.), from L. tyrannus "lord, master, tyrant" (cf. Sp. tirano, It. tiranno), from Gk. tyrannos "lord, master, sovereign, absolute ruler," a loan-word from a language of Asia Minor (probably Lydian); cf. Etruscan Turan "mistress, lady" (surname of Venus).

‘In the exact sense, a tyrant is an individual who arrogates to himself the royal authority without having a right to it. This is how the Greeks understood the word 'tyrant': they applied it indifferently to good and bad princes whose authority was not legitimate.’ [Rousseau, ‘The Social Contract’]

The spelling with -t arose in O.Fr. by analogy with prp. endings in -ant. Fem. form tyranness is recorded from 1590 (Spenser); cf. M.L. tyrannissa (1372).”

Note that the above site offers an Etruscan possibility, i.e. “Turan!”, which I assume is another version of the word “Toscan?”, i.e. Etruscans or Tyrrhenians! Notice that Tyr(r)(h)enian is but two letters from being Tyrian / Tyrenian!

This is what the current etymologists from the same site have to say;

“Tyrrhenian
1660, "pertaining to the Etruscans," from L. Tyrrheni, from Gk. Tyrrenoi "Tyrrhenians," from tyrsis "tower, walled city" (cf. L. turris "tower"). Earlier Tyrrhene (1387).

Also see; http://sci.tech-archive.net/Archive/sci.lang/2004-12/3934.html   And; http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Tyrrhenian

The meaning of the word “tyrant.”

One must conclude that “absolute lord”, or “Premier Lord”, might well be a good translation, even if his rule was not considered as legitimate. Note that the use of the word tyrant seems to have started about 1279 CE! Or the late 13th century! And the possible time of the change of spelling might have occurred about 1660 CE.

It should be noticed that the Tyrrehenian Sea is the name for that part of the Mediterranean Sea that exists on the Western coast of Italy and due West of Rome, the Pontifical States, and Latium itself.

Since Rome (the city) was considered as the “See (seat / home or a “position”) of Peter (I.e., the pope)” or “the Bishop of Rome”, and in a greater sense “the Seat of God”, then it makes very good sense to make a connection that the nearest sea would be called “The Sea of the Lord / God / or his designated representative on the Earth, E.g., the pope!”
Let us look at the meaning of See?

“see (n.)
‘position of a bishop,’ 1297, from O.Fr. sied, sed, from L. sedem (nom. sedes) "seat, abode," related to sedere "to sit" (see sedentary).” There also exists the connection to the old word “sitten”, which can be seen here;

http://historic-cities.huji.ac.il/switzerland/sion/maps/braun_hogenberg_I_37.html

Just look at the high-resolution view and read the Latin of the day!

A little look at the history of this town, which still exists in a remarkable similar condition today, and you will find out that it was a “see” or “seat” of a Bishopric, and its name today is Sion /or Zion, and on the representation, one mount is called “Sitten!” Could one assume that at one time the words “Sion” or “Zion” might also have merely or even “importantly?” described the “seat of a Bishop?”, even the “Bishop of Rome?” Certainly “Sitten” does so!

You might even want to view this version?

http://historic-cities.huji.ac.il/switzerland/sion/maps/munster_lat_1550_338.html

And look at this site, which may be really important;
http://books.google.com/books?id=TdWwnp6v4z0C&pg=RA3-PA278&lpg=RA3-PA278&dq=tyrrhenian+etymology&source=bl&ots=KW-_-Fh8RE&sig=PZMaIKO2xFHCwdDOaO7uyre_ViA&hl=en&ei=K9XcSc3eLYuWMaivyOQN&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10

Concerning the naming of seas, Isidore of Seville (from the site above) writes;

“They may be named from their position with respect to the sky, such as the Upper (superum) and the Lower (inferum) Seas– because the east is upper and the west is lower–that is, the Tuscan (i.e. Tyrrhenian, known as (Mare Inferum) and the Adriatic (Superum).” These words have a profound effect upon me! Is the use of “east is upper” and “west is lower” related to the Sun?
That is, does its basis, consist of the fact that the Sun comes “up” in the east, and “sets” or “lower(s)” or becomes “lower in the sky”, in the west? Could this be the simple explanation? Or could it be related to certain antique portolans which have the charts with South at the top (up), and North at the bottom (lower), which then places East on the right (starboard) and West on the left (Port?)

Can we not consider that the word “sea” and “see” were sometimes confused or possibly used interchangeably? Certainly in the past certain descriptive words were used to state the position of a city, relative to its surroundings, that is; “XXX city, “sits” upon/overlooking, the sea, etc.”

The narrative continues;

“The third Veientine War (406-396) began when the Romans attacked Veii. The city was captured by the dictator” (would not the word Tyrant work just as well) “ M. Furius Camillus. The areas was included in the ager Romanus. The 10 year span seems to be another example of the romanticism/epic-ism since it copies the length of the Trojan War.

Corenll doesn't think it odd that other Etruscan cities failed to come to the aid of Veii when the city most needed them. Instead of being a military league, Cornell thinks the Etruscan league may have been religious and there seems to have been hostility among the Etruscan groups.

In the last half of the 5th century, Rome became more aggressive. This is a time when Rome reformed the army and instituted a stipend for soldiers, property tax, and indemnities on the defeated. This probably corresponded with a reform of the centuriate system.”

Thus we see a possible connection to what some people call the “Fable of the Trojan War”, via the 10 year siege, as well as what might well be the beginning of payment to the Roman soldiers via salt, i.e. a “salary!” (But I would suggest that the salt might well just be a stipend, for their own interest, or for trade, etc., much like giving WWII soldiers cigarets and chocolates, which were usually in high demand by those people already subjugated, and thus worth quite a lot in local trade, etc.)

Check into Fabian tactics here;

http://www.archive.org/stream/historyofancient00good/historyofancient00good_djvu.txt

“356. The Legends of These Struggles, — Many stories of heroic exploits were told about these early wars of Rome with its neighbors: When the gates of the city had been shut against him, Tarquin the Proud immediately set about recovering his power. At first a plot was formed within Rome among the noble youth who felt that they were under restraint in the new conditions. But just as they were about to spring their trap, they were betrayed by a slave who over- heard their treasonable communings. Even though the sons of the consul, they were not saved from summary execution inflicted under their father's direction. Whereupon Tarquin, having solicited aid from the cities of Etruria, came against Rome with an army from Veii and Tarquinii.

In the battle, Brutus, the consul, and Aruns, Tarquin's son, found death in single combat.
Help was then sought by Tarquin from Lars Porsena, king of the powerful city of Clusium, who led down from the north a mighty host against Rome. He would have forced a passage over the Sublician bridge had not a brave warrior, Horatius Codes, supported by two companions, held the entrance against the enemy, never retiring until the Romans cut (Legends of the Wars 303) down the bridge behind him; then plunging into the Tiber he swam safely back to his friends.

Porsena brought the city low by a blockade; he was persuaded to give up his hostile endeavors only through the heroic act of Mucius, who, in disguise, entered the Etruscan camp in order to kill the king. By a mistake he killed the king's secretary and, when arrested and brought before Porsena, he declared that there were three hundred other Roman youth, like himself, sworn to kill the king. In proof of his determination, he thrust his right hand into the fire that was lighted for the sacrifice. Hence he was after- ward called Scasv'o-la, "the left-handed." Porsena, moved with admiration and fear, dismissed the youth unharmed. Soon he made peace and retired.

But the people of Veii continued to war with Rome, harassing them with frequent raids. On one occasion, the noble family of the The Fabii offered to proceed against them and conduct the war. So they marched out three hundred and six strong amid the prayers and praises of the people.
Arrived at a strong place at the river Crem'e-ra, they (the Fabii) fortified it, and for a time fought the Veientes with great success.

But, at last, growing confident and careless, they (who / the Fabii) were ambushed by the enemy and cut off. Only one of them, and he a child, was left to represent his family. A few years after, peace for forty years was declared between the two states. Then the war broke out again with the going over of Fi-de'nae, a Roman colony, to Veii. In the battle that followed, Aulus Cornelius Cossus slew, with his own hand, Tolumnius, king of Veii, and hung up the royal spoils beside those dedicated by Romulus in the temple of Jupiter Feretrius.” (Is this but not another example of one on one knightly honor?)

“Not long after, Fidenas was taken by storm. But the war continued with varying success, until the other Etruscan cities decided to give no more help to Veii. Then the Romans resolved to lay siege to the siege of city. For ten years their armies lay before it, but the city was defended with vigor.
In despair the Romans sought an oracle from Delphi (§ 128), and were told that victory depended on letting out the waters of the Alban lake. When this was done, Marcus Furius Ca-mil'lus, the dictator, solemnly invited Juno, the goddess of Veii, to abandon the doomed city and come to Rome; then the assault was made and Veii fell.”

Wow, what a story! It seems to have a little bit of everything going!
Please notice that the siege reportedly lasts for “10 years!"
It is considered that the siege of Troy existed for at least nine years with Troy falling in the tenth year!
It seems that gods and goddesses were a part of the story of both places, and the entering of the cities by both victors was determined after a strange event. Similarly it is reported that Bagdad was taken (by Cyrus the Persian) after the river was diverted from the city and the invaders (Persians) entered within the dry river bed!

As regards the goddess Juno abandoning the City of Veii, it can be considered that Juno, is some times considered to be Roman version of Hera, and others contend that this is a false assertion, but considering that the two goddesses were comparable it is interesting to note this assertion concerning Hera and her attitude towards Troy!;

http://messagenet.com/myths/bios/hera.html

In the above account it seems that both Hera and Athene (Athena) were antagonists of Troy and worked for its fall! Is it possible that Juno felt the same about the citizens and city of Veii?

Another example;

During the Crusades, when Simon de Montfort was baliff of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, during the childhood reign of the emperor Conrad,

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4ADBR_enUS315US315&q=charismians+khan

Khwarezmianshttp://books.google.com/books?id=08FmAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA399&lpg=PA399&dq=charismians+khan&source=bl&ots=p-XUdCQNoY&sig=AgzieOYsXQALyxOM7-6XpwdEcbc&hl=en&ei=_OgPSu_bD4bDtwffzOWMCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4#PPA400,M1

Count Walter deBrienne joined Ismail of Damascus' army under the generalship of El-Mansur to form a coalition against the Charismian / Khwarezmian army.
Near Gaza” (just down river from Memphis and the Roman city/fortress of Babylon) of on October 14, 1244 this coalition army was routed by the Charismians / Khwarezmian and "of the Templars, who numbered three hundred, only four knights survived, .."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barakah

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khwarezm

I do not know how the word "Charismian" became identified with the word "khwarezmian?" Perhaps it had to do with the "charisma" supposedly within the body of the great Khan?

But a lot of Christians have been well known as "Charismatics!"

Then there are these words of Owen Rees;
“Firstly Florus.
If there was not so much historical information on him I might be tempted to agree with you in many ways. Although, we know he is meant to have come from Africa (according to Virgilius Maro at least) and he does not hide the fact he is using Livy's work - the title of his great piece is An Epitome of the Histories of Titus Livy (there is a nice post about him at; http://www.livius.org/am-ao/annius/florus.html).

Also, I think I'm right in saying that Florus would be his Cognomen and so could just be a nickname of him or his father. Not sure what would warrant the nickname, maybe his poetry?

As for the Theban Sacred Band, the best source is Plutarch's life of Pelopidas but obviously comes with the usual problems with Plutarch (very idealistic, out of date, can be more folklore than history in some circumstances). The Band was set up by Gorgidas, it is alleged to be the pairing of 150 male lovers, he used them to raise morale in the ranks; dispersing their number throughout his army. When Pelopidas used them he kept them as a single elite unit and it was this unit who was able to defeat the Spartan army at Tegyrae in open battle whilst outnumbered approx. 6-1.

This indominable force was at the centre of the famous Theban victory at Leuktra (Xenophon, Hellenica 6.4.3.) And they finally met their match when the Greeks faced Philip II at Chaeronea. The Macedonian victory is marked by their supposed appreciation for the 300 Thebans who died bravely; according to Plutarch Phillip even shed a tear over their deaths. The spot where they died was marked by the Lion monument on the battlefield - although it should be noted that excavations of the site have revealed only 254 skeletons arranged in neat rows. This could be because some fled the field, some bodies were removed for some reason, the unit was under strength or that the history writers wanted to use the number 300 due to the connotations but in fact maybe the unit always numbered less (say, 250 or 260)

The tactics of the battles are interesting, if a bit unreliable, but are more relevant to the evolution of Greek warfare as opposed to the Sacred Band; worth a look if you are interested though, especially the battle of Leuktra.

The Spartan defeats also bring into question how well trained the Spartans really were, or if being a full time army had given them the edge and when the Sacred Band was set up as a full time force it took only a decade or two to become just as good if not better.
http://owenrees.co.uk

And my reply;

Thanks for the above post! I might well post more about these valiant warriors sometime, but you did seem to get the gist of it!

But, have you ever heard of a band of 300 knights of Franks, who also fought to the last?

As I remember it happened in Sicily! And the leader of this crew of 300 also had a mighty pedigree!

His first name, as our currently accepted history gives us was "?"

Hint, the first letter was "H!", as I remember!

Perhaps you might well look closely at this list of historical events?

http://www.allcrusades.com/CHRONOLOGICAL/chrono-1200-1249.html

More information;

By the way, since the entirety of this particular thread concerns the number 300, then perhaps in your need to read my long post above quickly, you might have missed this little clue?

"http://www.archive.org/stream/historyofancient00good/historyofancient00good_djvu.txt

“356. The Legends of These Struggles, — Many stories of heroic exploits were told about these early wars of Rome with its neighbors: When the gates of the city had been shut against him, Tarquin the Proud immediately set about recovering his power. At first a plot was formed within Rome among the noble youth who felt that they were under restraint in the new conditions. But just as they were about to spring their trap, they were betrayed by a slave who over- heard their treasonable communings. Even though the sons of the consul, they were not saved from summary execution inflicted under their father's direction. Whereupon Tarquin, having solicited aid from the cities of Etruria, came against Rome with an army from Veii and Tarquinii.
In the battle, Brutus, the consul, and Aruns, Tarquin's son, found death in single combat. Help was then sought by Tarquin from Lars Porsena, king of the powerful city of Clusium, who led down from the north a mighty host against Rome. He would have forced a passage over the Sublician bridge had not a brave warrior, Horatius Codes, supported by two companions, held the entrance against the enemy, never retiring until the Romans cut (Legends of the Wars 303) down the bridge behind him; then plunging into the Tiber he swam safely back to his friends.
Porsena brought the city low by a blockade; he was persuaded to give up his hostile endeavors only through the heroic act of Mucius, who, in disguise, entered the Etruscan camp in order to kill the king. By a mistake he killed the king's secretary and, when arrested and brought before Porsena, he declared that there were three hundred other Roman youth, like himself, sworn to kill the king. In proof of his determination, he thrust his right hand into the fire that was lighted for the sacrifice. Hence he was after- ward called Scasv'o-la, "the left-handed." Porsena, moved with admiration and fear, dismissed the youth unharmed. Soon he made peace and retired."

So, indeed there seems to have existed another group of 300 sworn to "Kill the king!"

The number 300, which as far as I know does not have any real power in numerology, etc., seems to come into a lot of conversation!

If you really care about this position of mine, then you might well read this?

http://genforum.genealogy.com/bryan/messages/972.html

Above you will see the mention of another group of 300 knights?

And more information follows;

From the last internet site I left above you will find, amongst a lot of other good information, this;

"By the time he had reached the age of 60, according to traditional historians, or about 35-40, according to Buckley, Jean/John de Brienne had won recognition as a courageous, able, and determined knight, though he lacked any substantial fortune. This was demonstrated in 1208, when envoys from the Holy Land invited France's King Philip II Augustus (1165-1223) to select a husband for Maria, the daughter of Queen Isabella of Jerusalem and Conrad Montferrat, the heiress of the Kingdom of Jerusalem. Philip selected Jean de Brienne, who had previously taken part in the Fourth Crusade (1202-1204) during the papacy of Pope Innocent III.
Borrowing 40,000 “livres tournois” from King Philip and an equal sum from Pope Innocent III, Jean de Brienne and 300 knights left for Palestine. Landing at Haifa on 13 September, 1210, he proceeded to Acre. There he married Maria of Jerusalem on 15 September, 1210. On 3 October, 1210, he was crowned with Mary as King and Queen of Jerusalem at Tyre. A daughter, Isabella, was born to this marriage in 1212, but Maria died due to complications of childbirth. John continued to rule as regent for the heiress, his infant daughter…
According to historical and genealogical accounts, Jean de Brienne and his third
wife, Berengaria,had a son, Alphonse de Brienne. Alphonse was bom about 1224
or 1225, probably in Spain, the traditional home of his mother, or France. The
following information is found in the Historie Genealogique de laMaison Royale
de France, 6, published in 1730:
“Alfonse de Brienne, comte d’Eu, etoit Chambrier de France au mois de Janoier 1258. Il accompagna le Roi S. Loius au voyage d’Afrique; & mourut a Tunis le 25 aout 1270. le meme jour que Roi Saint Louis ... Il etoit fils de Jean de Brienne roi de Jerusalem, & de Bengere de Castille, don’t les ancestres”."

The key quote above being;

"Borrowing 40,000 “livres tournois” from King Philip and an equal sum from Pope Innocent III, Jean de Brienne and 300 knights left for Palestine. Landing at Haifa on 13 September, 1210, he proceeded to Acre. There he married Maria of Jerusalem on 15 September, 1210. On 3 October, 1210, he was crowned with Mary as King and Queen of Jerusalem at Tyre."

So, Jean/John de Brienne had 300 kinghts accompany him to the Levant!

Is there any reason to not believe he was a "knight Templar?"

As a sample of the problems involved in consensual history, have any of you ever heard of this? (The predecessor of Avigion?)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anagni

And perhaps you should also read this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crema,_Italy

Especially concerning the battle!

I was then asked a question.

“Is there an underlying hypothesis of yours as to why these appearances of the number 300 are important or connected? For instance the example of Jean de Brienne and his 300, they don't actually do anything as that number, like fight or die heroically so can't it just be an accurate portrayal of numbers and nothing more? And with Mucius and the 300 king killers, doesn't he technically make 301? I'm intrigued to know what you are bringing this all together to make, as you certainly have found a lot of examples of the number 300, what's the relevance?

The idea of de Brienne being a Templar is a bit out of the blue, as it would be easy to prove he was if indeed he was. My understanding, I may be wrong, is that no source mentions him as one - which is unusual to be omitted. With the lack of evidence available you could just as easily claim him to be a Hospitaller.

I looked at your links to Crema and Anagni but didn't get what you were pointing toward, could you expand on those?”
This is a very involved subject, directed to point out the massive use of 300 warriors/knights in a variety of times and places whereby certain repetative points seem to merge!

Thus, at this site;

http://hispanismo.org/english/11502-almogavars-james-i-peter-iii-catalonia-aragon.html

You can read about the band of 300 Frankish knights under the leadership of Hugh deBrienne!;

"At the Battle of Gagliano (Sicily) against the three hundred handpicked French knights ironically calling themselves the Knights of Death, more than a hundred of them fell victim to these tactics. The Almogavars "went about amongst them as if they were walking in a garden" (Muntaner, 458)."

Other accounts say that the number of the Knights of Death were 300! The Almogavars (Alms givers?) also known as the Catalan Company, had a number of accounts of the loss of 300, first of all when they were mercs under the employ of the Greeks of Constantinople, 300 of their numbers were reportedly slain at a banquet by the other mercs of the Greeks which are known to us today as the Alans! Let's see we have the "alans" fighting the "Cat-alans!", this, in its self, is strange!

But in another element soon there after, these same Catalans were involved as mercs employed by Waltier/Walter/Gautier de Brienne in his attempt to take back his lands in Greece proper!

A "Duke of Athens" by the name of Jean/John/Jacques? de la Roche, is also said to have attacked a larger force with his 300 kinghts!

Also; http://books.google.com/books?id=lhDPAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA146&lpg=PA146&dq=brienne+gagliano&source=bl&ots=iN6ohpxawO&sig=OP54oLaTfVdqKnd7NAw344rWQUo&hl=en&ei=XtrDS4iWHcK78gb8883ICA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CBIQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

Regarding the Knights Templar, it seems this site states that in 1268 CE, the Knights were under the control of the Catalans!

http://www.fortunecity.com/tatooine/acegarp/898/6411789.htm

More material can be found amongst these sites!

http://www.ask.com/web?&o=101881&l=dis&q=hugh%20deBrienne%20and%20catalans

Note that preparations for the eighth Crusade, reportedly began in 1268 CE! See;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighth_Crusade
Perhaps you can fill in some of the blanks since I am now constrained by time?

Now unrestrained by time, I shall suggest that the so called name of de Brienne above, was merely a title, such as "sheriff!"

By the above I meant that the word we now consider as a name, I.e. Walter / Waltier / Gautier, etc., merely was another spelling of the word Sheriff!

Owen Rees, then questioned me with the following;

“I'm still unsure as to the relevance of the fact that the number 300 keeps emerging; do you have an idea as to why these must be connected, other than the number 300?

Your etymology is rather vague, it seems you are using it to justify your own conclusions, although I may be wrong and you are referencing someone else, in which case could you post the link? For instance Almogavars is of an Arabic derivative implying a propensity for violence, or conversely comes from the arabic for captain (this is debated). And Catalonia seems to derive from the latin term for the area Gathia Launia, literally the land of the Goths (and the Alans were not Goths); it is also speculated by some that the terms Catalan may be an evolution from the name of the original Iberian tribes of the area the Lacetani. Although it should be reiterated that etymology is a dangerous form of evidence and, when translated through so many languages, loses any form of solid credibility.

You mention the frequent accounts of 300 dying within the Catalan Company, is it not possible that the form of combat/tactics they were involved in produced a similar amount of losses, and chronicles found it easier to round to a particular number rather than gather accurate figures? Also the idea that the Templars were controlled by a state or region seems to ignore the sources and the intrepid fear states had for the ever increasing growth and power of the Templars as an autonomous group that spanned the whole of Christendom.

I am still intrigued as to what your hypothesis is, so far you've shown chroniclers like to round numbers to 300 a lot, in particular circumstances. But these 300 don't share similar fates, they don't have the same foundations, they don't have the same causes for combat and they don't appear linked in anyway - although that last point may be wrong depending on your uniting theory.”

Actually, it seems that the valiant death of 300 Catalans, only occurs once.

My dear Owen!

You quite correctly, in your own thinking wrote these words;
"Your etymology is rather vague, it seems you are using it to justify your own conclusions, although I may be wrong and you are referencing someone else, in which case could you post the link? For instance Almogavars is of an Arabic derivative implying a propensity for violence, or conversely comes from the arabic for captain (this is debated).

And Catalonia seems to derive from the latin term for the area Gathia Launia, literally the land of the Goths (and the Alans were not Goths); it is also speculated by some that the terms Catalan may be an evolution from the name of the original Iberian tribes of the area the Lacetani. Although it should be reiterated that etymology is a dangerous form of evidence and, when translated through so many languages, loses any form of solid credibility."

Although there exists a lot of historical accounts that derive Catalanian, from the word "Almogavars!"

Perhaps you should make your search more pervasive or invasive?
I remain in wonder, since I have mentioned the use of the number of men involved in numerous battles as having been considered as numbering as about 300, that none of you have ever considered this?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/cohort

"Into the Valley of Death rode the 600!"

And just to provoke some of you to heart attacks, I even propose that the word "Cohort", could actually mean, "Co-heart!"

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cohort

Certainly at least a few units of the Phocians that united pairs of lovers in units of 300 might well resemble a "co-heart?", E.g.-“One heart!”

Owen Rees, wrote;

“Ok? I assume you have purposefully referenced the 'Charge of the Light Brigade' poem rather than the battle where, although the exact number present is unknown, it is generally accepted to be over 600 in the brigade (not sure what the relevance with cohort is).

And as you so carefully dangled the bait I shall bite, from your own links it states that cohort does not even remotely translate as 'co-hearts', although the relevance if it did was not clear from your post. Once again, the etymology is just being invented to support a theory; at least I assume there is a theory.”

I responded;

Owen, I thought one of the sites mentioned that a "cohort" was 300, etc.! , and there was a different word for 600, which was, I believe "Brigade" or two "cohorts!"

And, yes I made a "play on words", because of the asserted homo-sexual nature of the 300 killed by Phillip and Alexander! Thus "Hort" became "Heart!" Just what "opinion" could overide it?

And yes, I know most of them have degrees, and expertise, etc.!

And Shirley, I mean surely some of your friends have a Word Perfect Programme? Certainly the local College Library should?

So, be of good cheer! The time is near!

Actually our dictionaries seem to pin the number of people in a cohort as somewhere between 300-600!

See;

"co·hort   /ˈ'koʊ?hɔ?rt/ Show Spelled[koh-hawrt] Show IPA
–noun
1.a group or company: She has a cohort of admirers.
2.a companion or associate.
3.one of the ten divisions in an ancient Roman legion, numbering from 300 to 600 soldiers.
4.any group of soldiers or warriors.
5.an accomplice; abettor: He got off with probation, but his cohorts got ten years apiece.
6.a group of persons sharing a particular statistical or demographic characteristic: the cohort of all children born in 1980.
7.Biology. an individual in a population of the same species.
Use cohort in a Sentence
See images of cohort
Search cohort on the Web

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Origin:
1475–85; < MF cohorte < L cohort- (s. of cohors) farmyard, armed force (orig. from a particular place or camp), cohort, retinue, equiv. to co- co- + hort- (akin to hortus garden); r. late ME cohors < L nom. sing.

—Synonyms
2. friend, comrade, fellow, chum, pal, buddy."
Thus, perhaps these researchers found that the use of the word sometimes fell into a span begining with 300 and rising to 600? What is strange is that it also seems the first usage of the term seems to have only been dated to the 16th century CE!
Thus the appearance of the word in any translation of more ancient works must have been substituted for what ever the ancient work used to describe a unit of the same size, etc.? That is, just what was the Latin or Greek word, etc.?

The 16th century was the very period where many of these old documents were re-discovered and translated, etc.!

More answers;

What we really see is that history has no pat or correct answer for the real number, that is, it could have moved from the number 300 to the number 600 or so, numerous times!

And yes, Owen we are told that it is related to "garden!"

But, resorting again to the mention of a "Sacred Band"(of brothers?), I would well bet $10.00 to $1.00, that no one else here has seen or heard of this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Krimissus

http://www.c3iopscenter.com/documents/The%20Battle%20of%20Crimissos%20River%20341%20BC.pdf

Please note the spelling of the name of the river, and ask yourselves if this does not remind you of another famous river and the battle(s) fought there?

Such as; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Issus

Can any of you find any reason that Issus cannot also be spelled as Issos?

You must note that I project or believe that the words "Issos" or "Issus" merely means mostly the same as our modern word "Issue(s)", or mostly, "flow", "flu", "flum!", or "Flume'", or "river!"

Can any of you even consider this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pineios_River_(Thessaly)

Could you perceive that "enios", or "aios?" could equal "Issus" or "Issos", or "isos?", or even "ios?", or even "os?", or "us?", etc.?

Perhaps you might well consider seeing this list of rivers in Greece?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rivers_of_Greece
Then perhaps you might well consider my proposition?

Regarding the number of 300 warriors;

I also hope that you read this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_300_Champions

Oh! As well perhaps one should again consider this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge_of_the_Light_Brigade

Thus maybe only 607 men?

Regarding Greek rivers and famous battles, I'd again bet that none of you have ever regarded this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Achelous_(1359)

Sorry, I know that I sometimes ask too much from "scholars!"

But, can any of you name the two rivers or streams, etc., that actually run thru or around ancient Athens?

My answer to the last of my above post, might well be surprising to most of you!

http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/world/A0805192.html

The simple answer is:

"Athens (ăath'inz) [key], Gr. Athínai, city (1991 pop. 2,907,179; 1991 urban agglomeration pop. 3,072,922), capital of Greece, E central Greece, on the plain of Attica, between the Kifisós and Ilissus rivers, near the Saronic Gulf.

Read more: Athens, city, Greece — Infoplease.com

http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/world/A0805192.html#ixzz17SwzosKR

Thus the correct answer, which I know all of you found surprising was "the Kifisós and Ilissus rivers!"

Strange is it not?

Perhaps you might well, by now at least, have some challenges left?

Dear Owen, did you really read about the Sacred Band of Carthage? Did you read these words about the battle at the river?

"As long as the Sacred Band
held, reinforcements could stream
across the ford to turn the tide of
battle. Timoleon saw his victory
slipping away. At this moment, the
gods intervened. To the
Greeks (at least it seemed so to
them). A violent thunderstorm
erupted onto
storm benefited
important ways. First, the wind blew
the rain and hail
Carthaginians,
backs of the Greeks.
heavy rain greatly slowed
crossing of the Carthaginian
mercenary reinforcements. And,
finally, the very heavily armored
hoplites of the Sacred Band became
mired in the quickly developing mud.

The Greek hoplites were apparently
more lightly armed, but it was the
Greek peltasts especially that found
they could now work their way
around the flanks of the Sacred
Band. The peltasts commenced to cut
it to pieces. Nearly all the sacred
Band fought and
stood. The Greeks claim to have
counted
on the field.
Carthaginian
Significance of the Battle
Timoleon's victory at Crimissos
solidified the hold of Syracuse on
Eastern and Central Sicily. It also
cavalry charge. But
unprepared,
flight of the chariots. But
intervened on the side of the
the battlefield. The
the Greeks in three into the faces of the
but only onto the
Second, the
the
died where they
12,500 Carthaginian dead
The remainder of the
army scattered in flight."

The copy and paste did not do well but the gist of it came through, that is these words; "the very heavily armored hoplites of the Sacred Band became mired in the quickly developing mud."

Do the above words not erily remind you of the forces/kinghts of Walter de Brienne, whom were also heavily armoured and likewise mired in the muc, whilst facing the Catalans? Did not the desertion of some of the mercenaries also remind you of the desertion of the Catalans that were on the side of Duke Walter, to their brothers on the other side?

Is it not recorded that the rest of the army of Waltier deBrienne were destroyed or scattered?

Could the area across the river have been deliberately flooded, or were clay pots placed in the area?

These three or four similarities, at least, cast doubt as to just which account is the real one?

Or did the ancient accounts of historians only indicate that they were pure and simple plagerists?

Did not my explanation of the rivers that flow thru Athens surprise you? At least the names of them should have?

"Read more: Athens, city, Greece — Infoplease.com

http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/world/A0805192.html#ixzz17SwzosKR

Thus the correct answer, which I know all of you found surprising was 'the Kifisós and Ilissus rivers!'

Just how close is "Kifisos" to "Cephissus", etc.? Perhaps you can well visualize Alexander at the battle of the "Il-issus", in Greece? Rather than in Asia? Issus v. Is(s)os, etc.!

Could not the confusion of the names of rivers or places, that historians found in the so called "ancient accounts" / Greek?, have placed them in inserting information of a similar nature?

Strange is it not?"

And please rather than just ignore the propositions I have given you and post derisive remarks to impress your friends, etc., it would be much better if you actually did the research into the assertations I have mostly given unto you?

Read about this man (de Roc) here;

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&u=http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernat_de_Rocafort&ei=oVIBTd_wJISClAeb_NTsCA&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCUQ7gEwAQ&prev=/search%3Fq%3DBernat%2Bde%2BRocafort%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4ADBR_enUS315US315%26prmd%3Divo

You might well notice that the fist name, if it really is one, is the same as "Berenger/Berengar, etc.", and is just another way to spell "Bernard" or "Bernado", etc.!

You will notice again that the Almogavers/ Almsgivers?, are also referred to as the Catalans!

You might well take the time to see just why the above words are sometimes considered as one word?

One (word) really has a religious aspect to it!

Please also note;
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ca&u=http://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernat_de_Rocafort&ei=LktPTJz1B8OC8gbftuGgAQ&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CB0Q7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3DBernat%2Bde%2BRocafort%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4ADBR_enUS315US315%26prmd%3Dio

And notice the place to which they "repaired"?

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ca&u=http://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernat_de_Rocafort&ei=LktPTJz1B8OC8gbftuGgAQ&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CB0Q7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3DBernat%2Bde%2BRocafort%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4ADBR_enUS315US315%26prmd%3Dio

Also the reported birth place of Homer!/D'Omer?/ H'Omer?", or even "Omar/Omer?", and as such also "Otto" / "Otho", etc.! Was “Homer”, a part of the Trojan war?

And again, a different spelling;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Crimissus

Compare to Krimissus?
Perhaps some of you should again read;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Thermopylae

Where you can read these words;

"At dawn Xerxes made libations, pausing to allow the Immortals sufficient time to descend the mountain, and then began his advance.[65] The Greeks this time sallied forth from the wall to meet the Persians in the wider part of the pass in an attempt to slaughter as many Persians as they could.[65]
They fought with spears until every spear was shattered and then switched to xiphēe (short swords).[84] In this struggle, Herodotus states that two brothers of Xerxes fell: Abrocomes and Hyperanthes.[84] Leonidas also died in the assault, and the two sides fought over his body, the Greeks taking possession.[84]

As the Immortals approached, the Greeks withdrew and took a stand on a hill behind the wall.[85] The “Thebans "moved away from their companions, and with hands upraised, advanced toward the barbarians..." (Rawlinson translation), but a few were slain before their surrender was accepted.[85] The king later had the Theban prisoners branded with the royal mark.[86] Of the remaining defenders, Herodotus says:

"Here they defended themselves to the last, those who still had swords using them, and the others resisting with their hands and teeth."[85]

Tearing down part of the wall, Xerxes ordered the hill surrounded, and the Persians rained down arrows until every last Greek was dead.[85] In 1939, archaeologist Spyridon Marinatos, excavating at Thermopylae, found large numbers of Persian bronze arrowheads on Kolonos Hill, changing the identification of the hill on which the Greeks died from a smaller one nearer the wall.[87]"

Now just what "wall" does the above refer to? It almost has to be the famous Phocian Wall, that ran parallel to the stream or river!

Do you remember it? Just why would a wall be constructed running parallel to a river (or a sea front), with no way to defend it from above? Or, did the Greeks think that the 1,000 Phocians would be able to do so?

Please see; http://www.spartan-world.de/thermopylae2_text.html

Perhaps you can make out the distinction?

Oh! I almost forgot! The river that runs through the pass is reportedly called the "Asopus", which could easily be also spelled or translated into "Asop-isus / -isos?"
Or would you disagree?

Remember that "Aesop" was famous for his fables?

Thus, is this the "Fabled river?"

See; http://www.who2.com/ask/aesop.html Or;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesop

From the above site we see; "Aesop or Esop", so just why not, "Asop?"

Also, from the above site, are these words;

"Problems of chronological reconciliation dating the death of Aesop and the reign of Croesus led the great Aesop scholar Ben Edwin Perry in 1965 to conclude that "everything in the ancient testimony about Aesop that pertains to his associations with either Croesus or with any of the so-called Seven Wise Men of Greece must be reckoned as literary fiction," and Perry likewise dismissed Aesop's death in Delphi as legendary;[9] but subsequent research has established that a possible diplomatic mission for Croesus and a visit to Periander "are consistent with the year of Aesop's death."[6] Still problematic is the story by Phaedrus which has Aesop in Athens, telling the fable of the frogs who asked for a king, during the reign of Peisistratos, which occurred decades after the presumed date of Aesop's death around 564 BC.[10]" Does the “fable of the frogs” mean anything? Were not the French/Franks called or associated with “Frogs” for centuries? Perhaps one of you, who are really historians, could fill in the blanks?

And this, famous battle, was reportedly fought about 480 BCE!

Again, regarding the rivers near and in Athens, we come to the above mentioned river named the Kifisos!

It is funny that the site mentioned above should spell it so! Perhaps some clarification is needed?

So, see if the following sites clarify the situation?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cephissus_(Athenian_plain)

The key sentence found in the above site is; "Cephissus (Athenian plain) (Greek Κ?ή?φfι?σsσsο?ς?, Kifissós, Kephissós, Kêphissos) or Cephisus (Greek Κ?ή?φfι?σsο?ς? Kêphissos), a river flowing through the Athenian plain."

Please take close note of the possible spellings of this river?

You might well note that it appears, at least to one of my previous sources, that another accepted spelling could be "Kifisos?", you see, it appears that the doubled "s" might well not be required!
See the above spelling as "Kifissos!"

You will also notice that another spelling (as the spelling of this river seems to change with each historians account) is "Cephisus!", which I would contend, could just as easily have been spelled as "Cephissus", or even "Cephissos?" / "Cephisus", etc.!
I would also contend that it could have even been spelled as "Kefisos", or "Kefissos", or "Kefissus", etc., as well as "Kiphissos", etc.!

I will now ask you to name the river in Sicily where another famous loss of 300 warriors took place?

That river's name was "the Crimissos!", which I will also suggest could just as easily be written as "Krimissos", or "Krimisos", or "Krimissus", etc.! Can anyone reading this small report, tell me or us just what I am referring to above? Bet most of you cannot?

While the use of "issus", "issos", "Isos", "Isus", etc. might not mean "river", can anyone see any reason why it could not mean "Issue" or more correctly "the issue of the "River? / Potamos"? Issue, in this case is more like the “issue” of a man during the sex act! That is, it issues forth, etc.!

Actually, I do not have to accept that "Potamos", has always been the Greek word for "river!" In actuality, we can read this;

http://www.theoi.com/Potamos/Potamoi.html

From the above site, we read this;

"THE POTAMOI were the gods of the rivers and streams of the earth, sons of the great earth-encirling river Okeanos. Their sisters were the Okeanides, goddesses of streams, clouds and rain, and their daughters were the Naiades, nymphs of fresh-water springs.

The River-God was depicted in one of three forms:--as a man-headed bull; or a bull-horned man with the body of serpentine-fish from the waist down; or as a man reclining with an arm resting upon an amphora jug pouring water."

Wait just a moment while I regard the mention of "an arm resting upon an amphora (a clay jug) pouring water." Were not some "clay jugs" planted in the earth to stop a charging army?

But, most of all we see that the "potamoi" were merely the Gods of rivers, lakes and Oceans, etc.!

But, look!, later on we see the name of one of those gods;

"ILISSOS A River-God of Attika in southern Greece." As well as these;
"KEPHISSOS (1) A River-God of Phokis in central Greece.
KEPHISSOS (2) A River-God of Attika in southern Greece.
KEPHISSOS (3) A River-God of Argos in the Peloponnesos, southern Greece.
KRIMISOS A River-God of the island of Sikelia (Sicily) in Italy. He seduced a Trojan princess disguised as a dog."

Just how did the Greeks keep all of these gods seperate? It seems that it could be very confusing when translating or transcribing a document, etc.? Mistakes could, it seems, be easily expected, and perhaps common? Perhaps one should look at all of the gods listed at the site above?

And even this little site is informative;
http://www.hotelallegro.gr/potamos_en.php

Now examine the next site;

http://www.answers.com/topic/chaeronea

Where amongst other good points you will read these words;

"Chaeronea (kĕerə?nēe'ə?), ancient town of Boeotia, Greece, in the Cephissus (now Kifisós) River valley and NW of Thebes. There the Athenians and Thebans were defeated (338 B.C.) by the Macedonians under Philip II, and in 86 B.C. Sulla defeated the army of Mithradates VI of Pontus under Archelaus. Chaeronea was the birthplace of Plutarch."

I will leave it to your own devices to read about "Plutarch" here;

http://www.ask.com/web?&o=101881&l=dis&q=Plutarch

For those of you who just love to see me again mention a fighting force of 300, who do strange things, how about you reading at this site, concerning a famous battle?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plataea

These are the exact words, but the entire site is interesting;

"Thucydides tells that in April 431 BC, a an armed force of 300 Thebans commanded by two leading Theban generals/politicians were admitted after dark on a stormy moonless night into Plataea by two private citizens who expected the Theban force to immediately capture and kill the democratic leaders and bring Plataea into alliance with Thebes. Instead the Theban commanders harmed no one but attempted to persuade the citizens of Plataea to join with Thebes' allies."

Sorry the "300" just seem to keep popping out! Especially amongst the Greeks, and their neighbors!

I would suggest that some of you are certain that where ever I am going with these postings, that nothing can come of them! Thus I leave you with this quotation;

"Certainty is the mother of fools". -Patrick Jane on The Mentalist (a TV show)

Here is another version of some of my thoughts:

More about; Thermopylae, 300 dead knights, secret passages, famous sayings, cavalry traps, white chalk or ashes, and possibly the solution to a problem from the Middle Ages, and beyond!

You must notice that anything in this essay that is made "bold", or shows up in "bold" print, are points that I consider important!

http://www.livius.org/th/thermopylae/thermopylae4.html Ca. 470 BCE

The early fifth century history of Central Greece is poorly understood, but it is certain that the Thessalians and Phocians were at war "a few years before the Persian invasion" (Herodotus, Histories, 8.27). During this war, the "Phocian Wall" was built at Thermopylae: about 150 meters long, parallel along the road, and offering the Phocians a safe place from which to throw missiles at the invaders."

I hope you noticed that the "Phocian Wall", was not (it seems) built to serve as a block to the road, but as a protected place whereby they could assail the enemy from behind protection, and was, it seems, only located on one side of the road!

The road itself remained free of obstructions! It seems to me that a defensive work of this type which was (it seems) only 150 metres long could only contain about 300 defenders, or in this case offensive personnel, since it was designed to only "throw missiles at the invaders!" This would mean two missile throwers per metre! I would also ask, just what were the "missiles" that were thrown?

Did the 300 throw rocks?, or did they sling stones?, or did they throw darts (if darts, just what were darts?), etc. It seems that it would be fairly easy to defeat such a defense if they only had rocks, darts, stones, spears, etc. to throw at the attackers who would be in a very narrow defile! The invaders would only have to place protection upon one side of their column and would thus be able to repel attacks of this kind! Mere wooden panels, held alongside of wagons and men and animals would thus receive a lot of protection from such an attack!

Is my logic flawed at this point? And just how many missiles were available to be thrown? It seems a determined attacker with enough troops could quickly deplete the missile stores what ever they were if they were only stones, darts, rocks, and spears, etc.!

Just what kind of "missile" could have been used to prevent entry via the road?
The article continues;

"However, the Malians (allies of the Thessalians), discovered the Anopaea path and Thermopylae fell for the first time (Herodotus, Histories, 7.215). The invaders, however, were defeated at Hyampolis and the Phocians were able to free themselves."

The above account is informative in that it mentions that the Phocians reportedly defeated the Malian invaders in a later battle at Hyampolis and recovered their independence. This seems strangely similar to the events after the Spartan/ Greek stand at Thermopylae?

More about the above can be found here;

http://www.lightfigures.com/numismat/larissa/show.php?page=13

The first section of the above site is entitled;

"Thessalian Geography and Institutions"

You need to read it, and compare the organization of this area with the organization of the Feudal System in the Middle Ages? It seems awfully similar to me!

In section two, you probably need to know the meaning of "medizers?"

See;

http://www.apaclassics.org/AnnualMeeting/08mtg/abstracts/watson.pdf And from this site you can read;

"Medism – that is, willing collaboration with the Persians by a Greek city –.."

Thus medizers willingly co-operated with the Persians / Medes! You see they were still referred to as Medes! Could these words also describe the "Frankish" dukes, earls, knights who invaded Greece after the fall of Constantinople? It may be strange but it seems that there were two competing groups of knights or warriors that had connections within what we now refer to as Spain competing in Greece against one another, in the "Middle Ages" / "Medial Ages?"! See next!

You really need to compare the attitudes of Sparta and Athens at this early date (6th Century BCE) with that of the Catalan Company rule of Athens and the Navarresse Company rule of Sparta, and later Athens, in the Middle Ages?

Then you might well want to read part two of;

http://www.lightfigures.com/numismat/larissa/show.php?page=13
Remember you must look for some correlations from B.C.E. times to Medieval (C.E.) times!

You might well note that even the word "Medieval" seems to make some connection to the word "Media" or the "Medes?"

I will leave it to you, the reader to see what you can make of this claim! No matter what you find, I will be able to meet you in the "middle!" Chuckle!

But some really strange information, if it is true?, can be found here;

http://www.fanaticus.org/DBA/armies/I52h.html

"Ancient Phokis, the land of the Phokians (a.k.a. Phokaeans, Phocians), lay north of Boeotia and Thebes and was bounded by Locris and Aetolia to the west and Thessalia to the north. According to Greek legend, Phokia derived its name from Phocus of Corinth, who settled near Tithorea and Delphi in mythical times and became a great leader in the region.

In his Description of Greece, Pausanias notes that "opposite the Peloponnesus, and in the direction of Boeotia, Phocis stretches to the sea, and touches it on one side at Cirrha, the port of Delphi, and on the other at the city of Anticyra. In the direction of the Lamian Gulf there are between Phocis and the sea only the Hypocnemidian Locrians. By these is Phocis bounded in this direction, by Scarpheia on the other side of Elateia, and by Opus and its port Cynus beyond Hyampolis and Abae."

According to Homer, ‘the Phokians ‘held Kyparissos, and rocky Pytho, and Krisa the sancrosanct together with Daulis and Panopeus; they who lived about Hyampolis and Anamoreia, they who dwelt about Kephisos, the river immortal, they who held Lilaia beside the well springs of Kephisos." Essentially, Phokia was a federation of 20 townships centered in the upper valley of the Cephisus river with Krisa as its capital."

In the last paragraph above you will see the mention of "Kypar-issos", and "Pytho" and "Krisa" and Kepj-isos, and finally "the Cephisus river with Krisa/Chrisa?, as its capital!""

Note also in the above quotation the use of "..Kephisos, the river immortal" and "..the well springs of Kephisos,..", etc. and the use of "Cephisus river" also!

Are not all of these words, essentially the same?

The following site is also of some interest;
http://www.theoi.com/Potamos/PotamosKephisos1.html

"The Kephisos River had its headwaters on the northern slopes of Mount Parnassos, and the southern foothills of the Mount Othrys. It flowed east through Phokis and Boiotia before emptying into Lake Kopais near the town of Orkhomenos. The most important neighbouring rivers of the Boiotian Kephisos were the Sperkheios of Malis to the north, the Pleistos of Phokis to the south, and the Ismenos of central Boiotia to the south-east.

It is possible that the same river-god presided over the two Kephisos rivers of Attika. The river may have been thought to travel underground from Lake Kopais, to rise in the mountains of Kithairon and Parnes, there to form the two Athenian rivers of the same name. A fourth Kephisos located in Argos, vanished into a cleft in the earth. It may have been thought of as the source of the Phokian river, after travelling north through underground passages."

So, it seems that we are left with a bunch of possibilities whenever we see either the words "Kephisos" / "Kephissos?", or "Cephissus" / "Cephisus", mentioned!

And I would especially like you to consider these words from the above quote; " It is possible that the same river-god presided over the two Kephisos rivers of Attika.", as well as these words; " The river may have been thought to travel underground from Lake Kopais, to rise in the mountains of Kithairon and Parnes, there to form the two Athenian rivers of the same name."

Can any one identify the "two Athenian rivers of the same name?"

Perhaps you might want to read the following site;

http://books.google.com/books?id=V6YoAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA119&lpg=PA119&dq=krisa+greece&source=bl&ots=oBF5nG_-5d&sig=etFKjjvtohJEfi6lWork05knjL4&hl=en&ei=JiJySvGXKcaMtgef55iNBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3

http://www.fanaticus.org/DBA/armies/I52h.html continues with;

Because of its location in central Greece, Phokia was a cross-roads" (I must interrupt here to make a possible point? Does not the word "Phokis" look and sound similar to "phocus?" as well as "fokis?", and thus,"focus?" If so, then a "cross-roads" would well be a place to "focus" upon?)

The web site continues; "to much of Greek history, being proximate to the strategic pass at Thermopylae, the ancient oracle at Delphi (originally a Phokian dependancy), Mount Parnassos, and Doria (the first city of the Dorians in Greece)."

Note please, the use of the word "proximate!", which means "very near!" This is a much better description of a place than the use of the word "approximate" which is much less clear since it is only approximate! Laugh.

And the mention of the "Dorians"!, is a word that has mystified numerous historians for many years! It seems few historians can really get their hands upon this almost mysterious force of people who, it seems, overran Greece!

But, I am always amazed that no one, it seems, has ever connected "Dorian" with "Doria!", and the great exploits of an Admiral or two known by that name!

The quotation continues;

"According to Homer, during the Trojan War, the Phokians, under Skhedios and Epistrophos, provided 40 black ships to the Achaean host and fought as the left wing of the army. And in approximately 600 BC, Phokia founded a colony at Massalia (modern Marseille, France)."

I must now mention that the area around Marseille was at one time basically a part of Catalonia, and the language "du Oc" (Occitan) is but considered as a version of Catalonian, or the other way!

The quotation continues;

"During the First Sacred War (595-586 BC), Phokis fell under the control of Thessaly, their traditional rival. During this period, Delphi was liberated from Phokian control by Kleistehenes of Sikyon (585 BC) and the famous Oracle and surroundings were established as an independent city."

A few additional bits of information related to the above paragraph;

http://knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/Cleisthenes/ and;

http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/people/A0812505.html

From the last site you can read; "Cleisthenes, fl. 510 B.C., Athenian statesman. He was the head of his family, the Alcmaeonidae, after the exile of Hippias, and with Spartan help had made himself undisputed ruler of Athens by 506 B.C. He established a more democratic constitution by weakening the clan system and the local parties and by organizing the districts into political rather than social divisions. The Alcmaeonidae thus became leaders of a democratic party, a reorientation making them anti-Spartan instead of pro-Spartan as earlier. An attempt of his rival, Isagoras, to overturn the reforms of Cleisthenes after Cleisthenes had been sent into exile failed, and Cleisthenes was recalled."

Now there is a lot going on at the above, but particular attention might be shown to the word "Hippias?" Just what or whom were or was, or could the word "Hippias?" have meant?

First look here;

http://search.aol.com/aol/search?invocationType=webmail-hawaii1-standardaol&query=the%20exile%20of%20Hippias

We see that there was a tyrant named Hippias!
But, it seems he is of no real importance here, is he? This is a trick question, by the way!

Then read the following where "Hippias" is merely spelled "Hippas!";

http://books.google.com/books?id=eJwSAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA73&lpg=PA73&dq=%2Bhippas+meaning&source=bl&ots=ApYz0X4kAO&sig=PZOufTQKPqkQOxA4c-3XTLdNP3Y&hl=en&ei=2ilySsjeC4KGtgen1rCNBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10

From the above you will see what one learned "expert" had to say about it! He calls it (the word Hippas) "a form of wrestling!"

You see, it happened a long time ago, back in BCE times!

It could have nothing to do with later (Medieval) times! Could it?

But, it is certainly very close!

Heck, as a child we / I even played such a game! The point was to "dismount" the rider! What other "game" involved this? If you perform any kind of search concerning "hippas" you will automatically notice that the word "hippo", which almost any fool would know is the ancient Greek word for "horse!", is a prime substitute! I. E. "Augustine of Hippas / Hippo!"

Thus the game (played in "ancient Greece") was a child’s version of "jousting!", I.E. "Unseat your opponent!" If you see the word "hippas" you might well want to consider "horse mounted knights?" I would suggest that the "wrestling matches" as our esteemed author above said, were merely Jousting Matches, which were a symbol of the Middle Ages!

So, from the above sites words concerning the "exile of (the) hippias", one might well consider that it was the exile of the "horse mounted knights!" or "the cavalry?" You decide!

But, perhaps we really need to read about the "tyrant" called "Hippias?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippias_(tyrant)

As well as this Hippias?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippias

And, as well you can read this;

http://messagenetcommresearch.com/myths/ppt/Hippias_1.html
"his brother, Hipparkhus might be thought of as co-tyrant and was thus a powerful man in Athens; Hipparkhus was in love with a young man named Harmodius but his affection was not returned; Hipparkhus sought to humiliate Harmodius by publicly slandering Harmodius’ sister."
Perhaps the above could not have made it in the a "Band of Brothers?", or "Lovers?

You can decide just how important the above named, really are to my story/ presentation!

And now you will read (from the original quoted site) about two "obscure battles" which might seem familiar?

"Two obscure battles fought prior to 480 BC helped Phokis throw off the Thessalian yoke.

In a battle in the pass at Hyampolis, they defeated the Thessalian cavalry by strategem, which involved digging a ditch, filling it with empty water jars, and then leveling it over with dirt. The jars broke beneath the weight of the charging Thessalian horse, dismounting riders and crippling the legs of their steads."

How utterly incredible!

Just how many hundreds of ceramic water jars would have been needed to make a difference?
How deep would the "ditch" have to be?, and how long was it? And just how big were the water jars? The above begs for some explanation! Does it not?

We need to stop at this point so I can make mention of another battle that is somewhat similar to the above "empty water jars" entry. Please see;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Halmyros

Where you will see; "The Company" (the Catalan Company) "assumed a defensive position on the plain of Orchomenus, near the River Cephissus.

Their Turkish auxiliaries took up a separate position nearby, thinking the quarrel was a pretext arranged by the Company and the Duke of Athens” (Duke de Brienne) to exterminate them.

To protect their position, the Catalans broke dikes and dug trenches, diverting water from the Cephissus to flood the fields lying in front of them."

(We must consider that the fields mentioned must have been recently tilled and made soft.)

"On the eve of battle, the Catalans in the Duke's service, stricken by conscience, took leave of him and rejoined the Company. (You must know that the number of Catalan soldiers who left the service of Gauthier de Brienne, is said, to have numbered 300!) "
This circumstance little disturbed the Duke, who still outnumbered the company, and had at his command the chivalry of the Frankish states in Greece, considered the flower” (Fleur) “of the French-speaking world." (In the above paragraph we are not told just how many Catalans were in the service of the "Duke", who is supposed to be Duc/ Dux Gauthier / Walter de Brienne!)

"The Duke, with his banner in the vanguard, opened the battle with a cavalry charge against the Catalans, followed by the infantry. In the morass covering the Catalan front, the cavalry soon became hopelessly mired, the Duke and his banner falling in a rain of assegais from the almogavars. As the lightly-equipped Catalans advanced to cut down the wallowing knights, the Turkish auxiliaries descended from their camp upon the Athenian army, panicking and routing what remained of it."

According to “Muntaner”, only two of the seven hundred knights survived the battle, Roger Deslaur and Boniface of Verona. However, Nicholas Sanudo, later Duke of the Archipelago, also escaped, and a few others, like Antoine le Flamenc, were probably ransomed. Muntaner claims that 20,000 of the infantry were killed, and all of the native horse." (here as one of you has already sumised it seems that "native horse" in this instance means "native cavalry / horse=soldiers', in the plural, and not just a horse.

Might one assume that "Antoine le Flamenc", could well have described some one who was from a "Flemish" / "Flamenc?" background? And, notice well, that the above account mentions not a word about the use of bows and arrows!

Were the Franks immune to them?

Were the Catalans adverse to them?

Now back to the account of the;

"First Sacred War (595-586 BC)";

The Thessalians retaliated with a massive invasion of Phokia.

A reconnaissance force of 300 Phokians under Gelon was destroyed to the man, prompting a panic among the Phokians. All their women, children and goods were collected and placed under the charge of 30 men with orders to kill them and burn the goods if the Thessalians should prevail in the coming battle (a.k.a. "The Phocian Despair")."

(Above the 300 Phokians / Phocians were reportedly only a "reconnaisance force" and thus were expected to avoid a trap or one sided battle! But, one only has to know the result of the defeat of Waltier de Brienne, where all of the Frankish women were taken by the Catalan victors as wives, etc.)

"The Phokians then mustered their forces with Daiphantes of Hyampolis commanding the horse and Rhoeus of Ambrossus leading the foot under the overall direction of Tellias, a seer of Elias" (please think of the Eli or Elias of the Bible?) ", who brought a favorable oracle from Delphi. In the subsequent battle, the Phokians fought desperately and wrenched victory against long odds against the Thessalians who were compelled to retire.

Subsequently, Tellias the Eleian hand-picked six hundred Phokians and had them and their armor and shields covered in white chalk. They attacked the Thessalians at night in their encampment, causing a panic and slaying over 4000. Defeated and demoralized, the Thessalians withdrew.

Wow, who knew?

Above we see a "reconnaissance" force of 300 men under their leader "Gelon" were killed "to the man" by the Thessalians! I thought only the 300 Spartans were famous for fighting to the last man, but in a subsequent battle they were avenged, just like the "300 Spartans!".

Does any other information concerning this "Gelon" exist?

There is this;

http://www.fjkluth.com/writing.html , (which is just a repeat of the above) but other than this it seems the only other Gelon mentioned, existed in Syracuse!

It seems that the Gelon of Phocis has no other fame!

But the covering of the Phokian’s armor and shields with white chalk is interesting. Ashes can also be "chalk" looking! (Some where, some time in the past, certain warriors were also said to have covered themselves in the ashes of a famous opponent!)

Fortunately for us, we have the following article concerning the "Gelon of Syracuse" in Sicily / Greater / Great? Greece!;

http://www.mainlesson.com/display.php?author=church&book=persian&story=greeks

In the above article are these words which may surprise you?

"Then said Gelon, ‘Man of Athens, ye seem to have commanders more than enough, but of them that should be commanded a few only. Go ye back then to Greece with all haste, and say that she has lost the spring out of the year.’ For he likened himself and his power to the spring, which is the best season of the year."

The key statement you might recognize is, "Man of Athens, ye seem to have commanders more than enough, but of them that should be commanded a few only."

Note this statement, or one very close to it, was also made about 480 BCE!

Does the above line seem somewhat familiar? It was supposedly spoken in about 480 BCE!

Can any of you remember the famous words supposedly said by "Xerxes?", or possibly by, John / Jean I (ier) (Jacques?) de la Roche?

According to Wikipedia;

"In 1275, John," (Jean I (Ier), de la Roche) "with 300 knights, relieved Neopatras, blockaded by land and by sea. It was at Thermopylae, confronting the Greek enemy" (Greek meaning Byzantine) ", that he said "'Great are their numbers but few among them are true men." And, quoting Herodotus, who reportedly wrote, of the Battle of Thermopylae, ‘The Persians are great in their numbers but true men are far and few.’"

Compare with the words of Gelon above; "...ye seem to have commanders more than enough, but of them that should be commanded a few only."

"F. Gregorovius, when reporting the "de la Roche event" in his "History of the City of Athens in the Middle Ages--", was quick to notice the obvious plagiarism in the above words attributed to ‘John / Jean / Jacques? I / ier", since they were basically the same words reportedly quoted as being said by Xerxes (per Herodotus) when faced with a similar force (one that was reportedly made up of 300 Spartans under Leonidas, many hundreds of years earlier, as Herodotus is understood, as well as the words of Gelon of Syracuse, in our ‘consensual’ histories"

So, as historians, of a sort, are we to believe the above quotations are merely co-incidences?

Of course Gregorovius considered that de la Roche, was educated enough to remember the words of Herodotus, but what of Gelon of Syracuse, and what of Gelon of Phocis who also led and lost 300 men?

Could not, all of the above quotations be translated with the same meaning? It seems that it totally relies upon the translator him/her self?

Wow, a real examination of the past, seems to reveal a lot of strange things! But, of course, I would bet that the defenders of our consensual history would dismiss the above as "merely a co-incidence!"

Co-incidentally, I do not!

While not quite the end of my points, the next site actually shows a cross section of all of the battles fought at Thermopylae!
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?104560-The-Five-Battles-of-Thermopylae&p=2292247&viewfull=1

But, it may indeed show the most strange semi-relationship?

It seems that 335 men died there in 1941, facing the Nazi's!

Greek history continues it seems?

Just for a few quality points, have any of you ever seen the drawings showing the "poor" Knights of Solomon", E.g. the "Knights of the Temple" / Knights Templar, riding two to a horse? That is one armoured kinght sitting right behind his saddle mate?

Could such a scene be considered as somewhat "homosexual?"

If you have seen it, then please show it?

If not, then I shall have to do so!

If, indeed such a representation is known to any of you, or if any of you actually remember seeing such, then you might well consider the words "Band of Brothers", which is really any of the so called Medieval Groups of "Brother" or "religious" knights, who were members of certain "Orders" of the "Cross", which were ordained by the Pope to fight wars for God! I.e. they were "brother-hoods!"

And so were, we are told, the "Kinghts of the Temple!"

But, just what religious "Order" were the knights of the Thebeans? That is just what group did the "order" of knights that defended "Holy Thebes" originate?

Were they "Brothers", like our modern priests? Or were they sexually related? That is, just what was a "Sacred Band?"

Just a few things for one to consider!

And, again we are merely told that "poverty" was the reason for the depiction of the Templars riding two to a horse! Other implications (such as mine) are never considered!

Here is another case of a famous unit of 300 Knights (mounted!)

http://l-clausewitz.livejournal.com/442530.html

These winners are mentione thus;
"Deep columns and wedges also saw some use. The best evidence we have for them is the description of the Swiss-Nuremberger formation at the Battle of Pillenreuth (1450), where their cavalry was arranged so that the first rank was made up of the five bravest men, the second of seven, the third of nine, the fourth of eleven, and the last of fourteen. We don't know the exact details about the gradation in the breadth of the ranks between the fourth and the last, but in any case the formation as a whole would have been more than twenty ranks deep since it was supposed to include at least three hundred men. Hans Delbrück, finding that this formation stood at odds with 19th-century cavalry doctrines that required a charging formation of horsemen to operate in line for maximum impact, argued that the deep wedge was used only during the approach march and that it would naturally have evolved into a broad (if still rather deep) line as it drew closer to the enemy. However, other historians have pointed to examples like the French cavalry column at the Napoleonic battle of Eylau or 10th-century Byzantine cataphract wedges as evidence that the Nuremberger wedge was really meant to operate as described, smashing through the enemy's ranks by virtue of its sheer mass and the tightness of its formation. Interestingly, Albrecht "Achilles"--the leader of the opposing faction at Pillenreuth--also seems to have deployed his men in a similar wedge-tipped column formation, and he advocated it again when he gave some tactical advice to his son Johann "Cicero" in 1477."

If you want to have a little fun, just avail our self with 300 small coins or other items and arrange them as mentioned above!

http://hispanismo.org/english/11502-almogavars-james-i-peter-iii-catalonia-aragon.html

Since I used the above site for my information concerning the death of the 300 Knights of Death in Sicily, I just wanted to know if any of you can find anymore information concerning this event?

From the above site, you will notice that it does not seem to mention that the leader of the "Knights of Death" was one Huges/Hugh/Hughes de Brienne!
I wonder why since there was a previous mention of Walther deBrienne, who was also killed by the almogavars, that there was not a connection made?!

But notice please these words from above!

"At the Battle of Gagliano (Sicily) against the three hundred handpicked French knights ironically calling themselves the Knights of Death, more than a hundred of them fell victim to these tactics. The Almogavars "went about amongst them as if they were walking in a garden" (Muntaner, 458)."

Please note the word "garden!" Does it strike a bell?

Certainly, it seems, I have tried to obtain more information, but any remarks concerning it seem to be well hidden, or non-excitant! Except for a few very hidden ones! And just why should that be?

The name DeBrienne(s), is one of the most famous of this era! And, at least three of them, it seems, have some connection to the use of 300 knights!

Could this information be deliberately hidden?

After all most all of you here have devoted a lot of your lives into researching the past, but just how many of you had ever heard of most of the information I have passed on, in the last number of posting here, before?

How many of you ever considered the multiple mentions of 300 or its multiple 600 in so many ancient accounts?

I don't even remember if I have exhausted my supply of them yet?

After all of the above, it seems I am left with nothing else to say?

But you might well be wrong?

Notice in my above postings the mention of the words "issus" or Issos", etc.! You might well have to resort to re-reading the above to make sure?

Thus, if you have now become familar I will propose a similar relationship, that can be found here;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Naissus

In part, the following words are somewhat important;

"The battle of Naissus came about as a result of two massive invasions of "Scythian" tribes (as our sources anachronistically call them) into Roman territory between 267 and 269. The first wave came during Gallienus' reign (267) and started when the Heruli, raiding on 500 ships,[10] ravaged the southern Black Sea coast and unsuccessfully attacked Byzantium and Cyzicus. They were defeated by the Roman navy but managed to escape into Aegean Sea, where they ravaged the islands of Lemnos and Scyros and sacked several cities of the southern Greece (province of Achaea) including Athens, Corinth, Argos and Sparta. Then an Athenian militia, led by the historian Dexippus, pushed the invaders to the north where they were intercepted by the Roman army under Gallienus.[11] He won an important victory near the Nessos (Nestos) river, on the boundary between Macedonia and Thrace, with the aid of the Dalmatian cavalry. Reported barbarian casualties were 3,000 men.[1] Subsequently, the Heruli leader Naulobatus came to terms with the Romans.[10]

In the past, the battle on the Nessos was identified as the Battle of Naissus, but modern scholarship has rejected this view. On the contrary, there is a theory that the victory at Nessos was so decisive that Claudius' efforts against the Goths (including the battle of Naissus) were no more than a mopping-up operation.[12] After his victory, Gallienus left Marcianus in place and hastily left for Italy, intending to suppress the revolt of his cavalry officer Aureolus.[13] After Gallienus was assassinated outside Milan in the summer of 268 in a plot led by high officers in his army, Claudius was proclaimed emperor and headed to Rome to establish his rule. Claudius' immediate concerns were with the Alamanni, who had invaded Raetia and Italy. After he defeated them in the Battle of Lake Benacus, he was finally able to take care of the invasions in the Balkan provinces.[14]"

I would also ask you to consider the connection (if any) between the descriptions of the Scythians (sp) and the (Mongolian) Horde, and the relationship of the “mounted knight to his horse”?

I then would suggest that you look to mythology and the "centaurs!"?

Perhaps, some of you, might well look up the exploits of the Heruli?

Earlier on this series of postings, I wrote;

"(I hope you noticed that the "Phocian Wall", was not (it seems) built to serve as a block to the road, but as a protected place whereby they could assail the enemy from behind protection, and was, it seems only located only upon one side of the road! The road itself remained free of obstructions!
It seems to me that a defensive work of this type which was (it seems) only 150 metres long could only contain about 300 defenders, or in this case offensive personnel, since it was designed to only "throw missiles at the invaders!" This would mean two missile throwers per metre!

I would also ask, just what were the "missiles" that were thrown?

Did the 300 throw rocks?, or did they sling stones?, or did they throw darts (if darts, just what were darts?), etc. It seems that it would be fairly easy to defeat such a defense if they only had rocks, darts (as we today consider them), stones, spears, etc., to throw at the attackers, who would be in a very narrow defile!
The invaders would only have to place protection upon one side of their column and would thus be able to repel attacks of this kind! Mere wooden panels, held alongside of wagons and men and animals would thus receive a lot of protection from such an attack!

Is my logic flawed at this point? And just how many missiles were available to be thrown?
It seems a determined attacker with enough troops could quickly deplete the missile stores what ever they were if they were only stones, darts, rocks, and spears, etc.!

Just what kind of "missile" or “dart”, could have been used to prevent entry, via the road?"
Now, while I might not have posted the sites necessary for one to really pursue this line of thought, I would now like to mention that I have found, and lost, one site that proposed that the Phocian Wall, ran parallel to the hot spring river/creek of Thermoplyae! You must note that modern historians show the Phocian Wall as running parallel to the coast line running basically from North to South!

But, if the ancient fortifications ran with the river/hot creek at its Northern side, then it presents a better line of defense! I.e. river to one side with steep walls, and a road to the Southern side, with steep walls to its back, then it makes more sense!

Perhaps one of you can find the site showing the "wall" existing along side of the river/stream bound side?

http://www.allaboutturkey.com/conquest.htm

From the above, which concerns the conquest of Istambul by the Ottomans, we can read about another battle where a group of 300 warriors / knights were sacrificed and died!;

“29 May, 1453---Platoons positioned for the assault. Sultan Mehmed gave the order to attack at midnight. Inside Constantinople, while the soldiers positioned for war, people filled the churches.

The Ottoman army launched its final assault accompanied by commemoration of God and beats of drums. The first assault was performed by infantry and it was followed by Anatolian soldiers.
When 300 Anatolian soldiers were martyred, the Janissaries started their attack.

With the presence of Sultan Mehmed” (Mohammed?) “, the Ottoman army was motivated and chest to chest fights started. Meanwhile the young soldier called Ulubatli Hasan who first erected the Ottoman flag on Byzantine land fortresses was martyred. Upon the entrance of the Janissaries from Belgradkapi and the surrender of the last defenders in Edimekapi front, the Byzantine defense collapsed.
Abandoned by his soldiers, the Emperor was killed during street skirmishes.”

Thus from the above we see that 300 Anatolian soldiers were martyred in the attack upon Byzantium! The brave and the dead 300! The dead “witnesses!”/ martyrs!

The below was posted by me at another section of this site, but I felt that it also belonged here. It concerns the loss of 300 Spartans, but in an entirely different manner!

Sources can be found here; http://www.ask.com/web?&o=101881&l=dis&q=Othryades

"In 547 BC the famous battle of the 600 Logades (Λ?ο?γ?ά?ς? = chosen soldiers) took place. Each side (Sparta - Argos) had to choose 300 men who would fight each other. The winner should take under his control the valley of Thyrea (Strabo, VII). From this battle 3 people survived: The argeads Alkinor and Chromius and the spartan Othriades. While the argeads headed to Argos to announce happily their victory, Othriades removed the armour of the dead Argeads and with spartan blood he wrote on their bodies "AGAINST THE ARGEADS" and committed a suicide.

When the Argeads returned to receive the territory, the Spartans did not agree that there was a clear victory. Then a massive battle occurred where the Spartans defeated the Argeads and got the possession of Thyrea once again.”

Note can we recognize the word "Argeads" as being, I think, merely another way of spelling "Argives?" If I am correct, just why did the author of the above use the word “Argeads?”

What do you guys think?

It is an interesting death of 300 Spartans in any event!

Just a part of a larger missive of mine.

Ronald L. Hughes (copyright, @ 2010) Permission is granted for reproduction to non-profit sites, or educational history sites, etc.!. Just assuring the correct attribution.

Ronald L. Hughes
Long Beach, MS

Edited by opuslola - 24-May-2011 at 18:25