DOCSLIB.ORG

Siege Engine and Castle Models Engineering

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Siege Engine and Castle Models Engineering 1 Engineering Design 100 Project 2: The Warless Summer: Siege Engine and Castle Models Engineering Guild E Stephen Dule, Nicholas Moose, Braden Rosemas & Cameron Tolas Professor Cox Pennsylvania State University 2 Contents: 1. Abstract……………………………………………………………………...….. 3 2. Existing Conditions………………………………………………………...… 4-9 a. Introduction…………………………………………………………...... 5 b. Our Definition of Siege Engines and Castles……………………...... 4-5 c. History of Siege Engines and Castles up to the Middle Ages…….... 5-7 d. Economy of Fiefs…………………………………………………...… 7-8 e. People we are goin to use and their jobs………………………...….. 8-9 f. Stakeholders and their needs…………………………………...……... 9 g. Summary………………………………………………………………... 9 3. Methods……………………………………………………………………. 10- 16 a. Introduction…………………………………………………………… 10 b. Conceptualizing Approach………………………………………... 10-11 c. Assessment Criteria……………………………………………….. 12-15 d. Specifications………………………………………………………….. 15 e. Ranking Chart…………………………………………………….…... 16 f. Summary………………………………………………………………. 17 4. Data Analysis………………………………………………………………. 17-24 a. Introduction………………………………………………………....….17 b. Final Prototypes………………………………………………........ 17-21 c. Prediction of Performance………………………………………... 21-22 d. Comparison of Predicted Performance to Actual Performance.. 22-23 e. Summary…………………………………………………………... 23-24 5. Conclusion…………………………………………………………………. 24-27 6. Works Cited…………………………………………………………….…….. 28 List of Figures: 1. Sketches of Castle…………………………………………………………….. 12 2. Final Prototype of Ballista…………………………………………….….….. 18 3. Final Prototype of Catapult……………………………………………...…... 20 List of Tables: 1. Stakeholder Table……………………………………………………………... 9 2. Specifications Tables………………………………………………….……… 15 3. Ranking Tables………………………………………………………..……… 16 3 Abstract: An engineering team consisting of Stephen Dule, Nicholas Moose, Braden Rosemas & Cameron Tolas have been assigned to build a model siege engine and castle for our engineering design class. The task arose from the lead stakeholder, the Queen, who has commanded that the neighboring fiefs in her dominion cease the annual summer fighting. The Queen is planning on invading her neighboring countries because of an omen that suggested an invasion. So in order to make sure she will have enough men, and food, she called off the fighting. However the Fief bosses have quickly come up with an alternative to the actual fighting and decided on using the models of the siege engines and castles that their engineers make and put them up against one another. This alternative is mainly based on gambling and a point system. Points will be accumulated from how well our siege engine and a castle do when facing other models in the field. Our siege engine will be designed around middle age engines such as Ballistas, Catapults, Falaricas, Mangonels, Onagers, Springals, and Trebuchets. Our engineering team has sat down and decided on making a Ballista and a Catapult that has three crevices allowing us to throw multiple projectiles at once. These engines will be built around the main goals of destruction, reliability, and ease of use, as points will be accumulated through these factors. The Castle will be designed around the principle of angled walls, as they are less likely to be penetrated and destroyed by enemy fire. Its main purpose will be to survive multiple attacks from enemy siege engines, as we will receive more points if our structure receives minor damage. In this report we will be going over several things the first of which are the existing conditions. In this part of the report we are going to define several things as well as identify the stakeholders and all of their possible needs. Preceding this is the methods section, where we discuss our approach to each of our structures, outline what they need to do. In addition to this 4 we will make specification and ranking charts. After this we will have our data analysis section where we explain how our structures work, what they are made from and how our castle is laid out. We will also write about how we predict how our siege engine will perform in the field and finally compare that to how it actually did. After several days, we successfully completed construction on our engines and castle as well as test. them in the field. The results of the field test lead us to say that we have achieved success, as we were able to cause major damage to our opponents castles. During the field testing we were able to breach several walls and make a lot of shots enter our opponents courtyard. In addition to this our castle withstood several harsh rounds of bombardment, and came out with minimal damage and breaches. Keywords: Siege Engine, Castle, Middle Ages, Ballistas, Catapults, Falaricas, Mangonels, Onagers, Springals, Trebuchets, Motte-and-Bailey, Keep Existing Conditions Introduction: In this section of the report we will focus on our definitions of siege engines, and castles. In addition to this we will discuss the history of these objects, the economy of fiefs, identify certain people we will need and determine all the needs for each stakeholder. Our Definition of Siege Engines and Castles Siege Engine- Our team defines a siege engine as a giant mobile weapon or structure that is capable of doing major damage to people, and buildings. Siege engines can achieve this goal by throwing or shooting projectiles that can be sharp, or heavy over a long distance. Or they can 5 achieve this by being able to carry a large amount of people at once over a wall so they can enter the enemy's fortress. Castle- Our team has defined a castle as a large structure usually made of rocks and cement, which is surrounded by an outer wall. In addition to this they have strong fortifications making it very hard for invading forces to enter, or attack it. This is done by digging a moat around the castle or building it on a mountain so that the ground is uneven preventing siege engines and enemy forces from being very effective. They also symbolize wealth and power as noblemen mainly lived in them. Siege Engines and Castles in the Middle Ages- Siege Engines- During the middle ages siege engines were more suffocated, reliable, and effective than their earlier counterparts (Campbell, 2003). The types of engines built in the middle ages were Ballistas, Catapults, Falaricas, Trebuchets/Mangonels, and Onagers. Ballistas are giant crossbows that shoot arrow like projectiles by using string torsion, however they were mainly used as a defense engine. Catapults are wooden structures that can hurl projectiles over long distances as a arm in the middle has a bowl at the end which houses projectiles. The arm is bent and then thrusted forward using a weight system, the arm then hits something when it is almost perpendicular to the base causing the projectiles to hurl towards the enemy. Falaricas are heavy javelins that have a sharp narrow tip, which can pierce armor. This weapon could also be applied with flammable materials allowing it to set enemy siege engines on fire. Trebuchets, know as mangonels in the middle ages, are beam-sling weapons that can hurl rocks, and containers filled with flammable material. They were mainly used to damage castle walls as the fire would deteriorate the cement holding the wall together. Finally Onagers are a type of 6 catapult that uses torsional pressure, by twisting a rope which created the energy to throw projectiles (Ramsey, 2016). Castles- During the middle ages castles mainly came in the form of giant structures surrounded by a wall, and denoted that someone of wealth, political or religious importance lived there. They were built all over Europe, and the Middle East during the middle ages as demand for them rose due to the fall of the Roman Empire. The first european castles were built by the Anglo-Saxons between the first and third century. They were basic structures, mostly made of wood and stone. Next the Normans began constructing castles as well, after conquering the Anglo-Saxons in the tenth century. They observed the early designs of these structures and decided to add to them, which resulted in the motte-and-bailey design. The motte is either a natural or man made mound that was raised about a hundred feet from the ground. On top of the hill was a keep, which was the stone or wooden wall covering the top structure and other living areas, meant to defend against incoming invaders. The bailey is the enclosed courtyard where the regular inhabitants lived (“A Brief History…”, 2017) The motte-and-bailey design was popular for the next few centuries. However in the 12th century the making of a shell keep formed, which was a keep that was on a lower level of the motte. This concept was mainly used in the 11th and 12th centuries as they built curtain walls, which were very tall stone keeps that surrounded the perimeter of the castle. Near the end of the 12th century, castles became a necessity for royal families. To accommodate this, castles became larger and stronger to block out large scale enemy attacks. This new design caused the keep to be replaced by a stronger defence, known as the barbican. This design included high walls and the placement of towers between a certain length of the wall. Overall it allowed for a better view of 7 the surrounding area allowing guards to see and warn if any attackers approached the castle. The curtain walls were designed as concentric figures and squares, which allowed the guards to have the best view (“A Brief History…”, 2017). By the 14th century many design changes were made, which improved the overall structure and safety of new castles. They were made into smaller structures called fortified manor houses. These houses had multiple layers of walls and towers, as well as a tower house that stood alone. They were not meant to withstand a battle as they were built more for show. This occurred because conflicts and battles had been decreasing and politics and society had advanced to the point where defensive castles were no longer a necessity (A Brief History…”, 2017).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Weapon Group Feats for Pathfinder: Class: Weapon Group Proficiencies
    Weapon Group Feats for Pathfinder: Class: Weapon Group Proficiencies at 1st Level: Alchemist Basic weapons, Natural, Crossbows, any other 1 Barbarian Basic weapons, Natural, any other 4 Bard Basic weapons, Natural, any other 3 Cavalier Basic weapons, Natural, Spears, any other 3 Cleric Basic weapons, Natural, deity’s weapon group, any other 2(3 groups if not following a deity) Druid Basic weapons, Natural, druid weapons, any other 1 Fighter Basic weapons, Natural, any other 5 Gunslinger Basic weapons, Natural, firearms, any other 3 Monk Basic weapons, and all monk weapons Inquisitor Basic weapons, Natural, deity’s weapon group, Bows or Crossbows, any other 3 (4 groups if not following a deity) Magus Basic weapons, Natural, any other 4 Oracle Basic weapons, Natural, any other 1 (+3 if taking Skill at Arms) Paladin/Anti­Paladin Basic weapons, Natural, any other 4 Ranger Basic weapons, Natural, any other 4 Rogue Basic weapons, Natural, any other 3 Sorcerer Basic weapons, Natural, spears, crossbows , any other 1 Summoner Basic weapons, Natural, spears, crossbows , any other 1 Witch Basic weapons, Natural, spears, crossbows , any other 1 Wizard Basic weapons, Natural, spears, crossbows This system doesn’t change Racial Weapon Familiarity. Weapon Group Name: Weapons In Group: Axes bardiche, battleaxe, dwarven waraxe, greataxe, handaxe, heavy pick, hooked axe, knuckle axe, light pick, mattock, orc double axe, pata, and throwing axe Basic club, dagger, quarterstaff, and sling Blades, Heavy bastard sword, chakram, double chicken saber, double
    [Show full text]
  • The Roman Army in the Third Century Ad Lukas De Blois My Issue In
    INTEGRATION OR DISINTEGRATION? THE ROMAN ARMY IN THE THIRD CENTURY A.D. Lukas de Blois My issue in this paper is: what was the main trend within the Roman military forces in the third century ad? Integration, or disintegration into regional entities? This paper is not about cultural integration of ethnic groups in multicultural parts of the Roman Empire, such as the city of Rome, thriving commercial centres, and border regions to which the armies had brought people from various parts of the Empire, and where multicultural military personnel lived together with indigenous groups, craftsmen from different origins, and immigrants from commercially active regions, either in canabae adjacent to castra stativa, or in garrison towns, as in the Eastern parts of the Empire. In variatio upon an issue raised by Frederick Naerebout in another paper published in this volume, I might ask myself in what sense an army, which in the third century ad was progressively composed of ethnically and culturally different units, kept functioning as an integrated entity, or in actual practice disintegrated into rivalling, particularistic regional forces whose actual or potential competition for money and supplies con- stantly threatened peace and stability in the Empire, particularly in times of dangerous external wars, when the need for supplies increased. The discussion should start with Septimius Severus. After his victories over Pescennius Niger, some tribes in northern Mesopotamia, and Albinus in Gaul, Severus had to replenish the ranks of his armies, for example at the Danube frontiers, which had yielded many men to Severus’ field armies and his new praetorian guard.
    [Show full text]
  • A Reconstruction of the Greek–Roman Repeating Catapult
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Archivio della ricerca - Università degli studi di Napoli Federico II Mechanism and Machine Theory 45 (2010) 36–45 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Mechanism and Machine Theory journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/mechmt A reconstruction of the Greek–Roman repeating catapult Cesare Rossi *, Flavio Russo Department of Mechanical Engineering for Energetics (DIME), University of Naples ‘‘Federico II”, Via Claudio, 21, 80125 Naples, Italy article info abstract Article history: An ‘‘automatic” repeating weapon used by the Roman army is presented. Firstly a short Received 21 February 2009 description is shown of the working principle of the torsion motor that powered the Received in revised form 17 July 2009 Greek–Roman catapults. This is followed by the description of the reconstructions of these Accepted 29 July 2009 ancient weapons made by those scientists who studied repeating catapults. The authors Available online 4 September 2009 then propose their own reconstruction. The latter differs from the previous ones because it proposes a different working cycle that is almost automatic and much safer for the oper- Keywords: ators. The authors based their reconstruction of the weapon starting from the work of pre- History of Engineering vious scientists and on their own translation of the original text (in ancient Greek) by Ancient automatic weapons Mechanism reconstruction Philon of Byzantium. Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Among the designers of automata and automatic devices in ancient times Heron of Alexandria (10 B.C.–70 A.D.) was probably the best known.
    [Show full text]
  • DIY Science Catapult
    DIY Science Catapult How can making a catapult help you prove something that it took mankind millennia to work out? Look at the science behind siege engines in the DIY Catapult! Historical Overview On War Machines and Mangonels One of the problems with warfare throughout history was that enemies had the annoying habit of hiding behind fortifications. The solution: to find a way of beating down, piercing or otherwise destroying part of the wall so as to gain entry. Alternatively, it was equally important to be able to keep others intent on destroying your walls at bay. Enter the one- armed throwing engine. What’s a Mangonel? The Greeks c200 BC referred to these one-armed machines as among numerous devices that could be used by the defence against a besieger’s machinery. People from the Mediterranean to the China Sea developed war machines that operated using the elasticity of various materials. The term catapult is used to describe all of the different types of throwing machines. What you and I know as a catapult is actually a mangonel, otherwise known as an onager. Onager was the slang term derived from the Greek name for ‘wild donkey’. This referred to the way the machine ‘kicks’ when it’s fired. The correct term for the machine is mangonel - derived from the ancient Greek term “manganon” meaning “engine of war”. Historical Evidence There is very little archaeological or historical evidence on the mangonel. However, the Roman, Ammianus, does describe one in his writings, but the proportions of the machine are unknown. There remain some medieval illustrations of the machines and some speculative drawings from the 18th and 19th centuries.
    [Show full text]
  • Army Guide Monthly • Issue #3 (102)
    Army G uide monthly # 3 (102) March 2013 Savings Served Up for Bradley Armor Plates Tachanka Hwacha Patria Delivered 1st Batch of NextGen Armoured Wheeled Vehicles to Sweden Micro-robotics Development Furthered with ARL Contract Extension Textron Marine & Land Systems to Build 135 Additional Mobile Strike Force Vehicles Saab Acquires Ballistic Protection Technology Scale Armour Textron Awarded Contract to Produce Turrets and Provide Support for Colombia's APCs US Army Developing New 120mm AMP Tank Round Siege Engine Heavy Tank Medium Tank Tanegashima Super-Heavy Tank www.army-guide.com Army Guide Monthly • #3 (102) • March 2013 Army to change the armor tile box material from titanium to Savings Served Up for Bradley Armor aluminum for more than 800 reactive armor tile sets. Plates "They wanted to change the material for several reasons," said Peter Snedeker, a contracting officer with ACC-New Jersey. "It was easier to manufacture with aluminum rather than titanium, so there would be shorter lead times. Aluminum was also more readily available and cheaper." However, changing a contract isn't a simple matter. The change can't have a material effect on the design, nor can performance be less than what the contract requires. The aluminum must perform just as well or better than titanium to support the demands of the Soldier. When a military contractor approached the Army ACC-New Jersey's technical team performed an with a proposal for significant savings on armor extensive analysis of the change proposal and continued tiles for the Bradley Fighting Vehicle, the impulse to to work with General Dynamics to determine if the quickly go for the savings had to be postponed: The Bradley played such an important role in saving material switch served the form, fit and function lives that keeping a steady flow of contracts was specified in the technical data package.
    [Show full text]
  • Hungarian Archaeology E-Journal • 2018 Spring
    HUNGARIAN ARCHAEOLOGY E-JOURNAL • 2018 SPRING www.hungarianarchaeology.hu PLUMBATA, THE ROMAN-STYLE DARTS. A Late Antique Weapon from Annamatia TAMÁS KESZI1 It is possible to view an unusual object in the display showing Roman military equipment at the permanent exhibit of the Intecisa Museum, a special weapon of the army in Late Antiquity, the plumbata.2 The meaning of the Latin word is ‘leaden’, but if the construction and use of the implement is taken into account it could be called a dart in English. With this ca. 50 cm long, hand-thrown weapon the heavy infantry could have begun to disrupt the diployment of the enemy from a distance. WRITTEN SOURCES The name and description of the projectile weapon called a plumbata in Latin is known from numerous sources from Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages. (VERMAAT 2015) (Fig. 1) Fig. 1: Depiction of a plumbata tribolata and mamillata. The lead weight is missing from the latter (Source: http:// rekostwargames.blogspot.hu/2016/11/roman-unit-menapii-seniores.html, date of download: 19 April 2018) According to Flavius Vegetius Renatus, who lived in the Late Imperial period, the expert soldiers of two legions in Illyricum used the plumbata, and so they were called Mattiobarbuli (I 17. II 15. 16. 23. III 14. IV 21. 44.). The emperors Diocletian (284–305) and Maximian (286–305) honored the two units with the title Jovian and Herculean for their prowess. From Vegetius’s description it seems that the two units used the plumbata prior to Diocletian coming to power, but it is perhaps only after this, in the last decades of the 3rd century, that its use spread to the other units of the empire as well.
    [Show full text]
  • Inventor Center the Catapult Forces Challenge EDUCATOR’S GUIDE
    Hands-On in the Inventor Center The Catapult Forces Challenge EDUCATOR’S GUIDE Complex Spring Catapult, Leonardo daVinci from Leonardo’s Catapults , http://members.iinet.net.au/~rmine/Leonardo.html WHATWHAT’’’’SSSS INSIDE? • Essential Questions • Glossary • Making thethethe Most ofofof Your Visit • Resources • CorrelationCorrelationssss tototo Standards • Activities (Coming Soon) • Facilitation ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS During your facilitated hands-on experience in the Inventor Center: Catapult Forces Challenge , the facilitator will be posing essential questions to your students in two categories: The In- ventive Process and the Science of Catapults and Trebuchets. These questions may also be use- ful for you as a teacher to gain background information as well as for facilitating higher order thinking during class discussions. The Inventive Process Inventor Center encourages students to explore the thrilling process of invention. The Inventor Center includes a series of participatory stations: build, experiment, learn and share. Students will define the problem, build a prototype, experiment with the prototype, learn how well the prototype works (solves the problem), and share their ideas or inventions with others. Who is an inventor? An inventor is someone who uses technology in a new way to solve a problem. An invention is a unique or novel device, method, or process. Inventions are different than discoveries because a discovery is detecting something that already ex- ists. In the Inventor Center everyone is an inventor. What is the inventive process? There are many ways to invent. Most inventive processes consist of four main parts: learning, building, testing (or exper- imenting), and sharing. These four parts of the inventive process can happen in any order.
    [Show full text]
  • Catapult to the Front of the Line
    Name: Date: Catapult to the Front of the Line GOAL Create a catapult that will hurl a penny through a target from the furthest distance away. MATERIALS TIME TO CREATE r!,rP!vlDu4! Acr,turY Read the following, hightighting important information, and answer the questions. lmagine that you are in the midst of a snowball fight. ln addition to preparing for battle, you also need to think about protection. Hiding behind something is helpfu[, but what if your enemy is able to break down your barrier? Throughout history, finding a way to destroy the enemy's protection while maintaining a safe distance was cha[[enging-untilthe invention of the catapult, the one-armed throwing machine. Ancient Greeks referred to the catapult as a mangone[, meaning "engine of war." The mangonel, weighing approximately z tons, functioned by ftinging heavy objects over and through walls. Because of its powerful kicking motion, mangonels were also referred to as onagers, a name derived from onagros, meaning "wild donkey." A ballista was another type of catapult. lt was designed similarty to the crossbow. Ballistas relied on the work of torsion to release ammunition that looked like giant arrows. Over time, gravity catapults, such as the trebuchet, were invented. Trebuchets were designed to hur[ a heavy object into a high arc, which was quite useful for breaking down castle walls, especially if the ammunition involved fire. Catapults have been one of the most effective weapons for warfare. A sling is attached to the end of the catapult's arm. ln lowering the arm, the user stores energy in the ropes, and when the arm is released, the arm is flung forward.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of the Roman Army (200 BC – AD 476)
    Impact of Empire 6 IMEM-6-deBlois_CS2.indd i 5-4-2007 8:35:52 Impact of Empire Editorial Board of the series Impact of Empire (= Management Team of the Network Impact of Empire) Lukas de Blois, Angelos Chaniotis Ségolène Demougin, Olivier Hekster, Gerda de Kleijn Luuk de Ligt, Elio Lo Cascio, Michael Peachin John Rich, and Christian Witschel Executive Secretariat of the Series and the Network Lukas de Blois, Olivier Hekster Gerda de Kleijn and John Rich Radboud University of Nijmegen, Erasmusplein 1, P.O. Box 9103, 6500 HD Nijmegen, The Netherlands E-mail addresses: [email protected] and [email protected] Academic Board of the International Network Impact of Empire geza alföldy – stéphane benoist – anthony birley christer bruun – john drinkwater – werner eck – peter funke andrea giardina – johannes hahn – fik meijer – onno van nijf marie-thérèse raepsaet-charlier – john richardson bert van der spek – richard talbert – willem zwalve VOLUME 6 IMEM-6-deBlois_CS2.indd ii 5-4-2007 8:35:52 The Impact of the Roman Army (200 BC – AD 476) Economic, Social, Political, Religious and Cultural Aspects Proceedings of the Sixth Workshop of the International Network Impact of Empire (Roman Empire, 200 B.C. – A.D. 476) Capri, March 29 – April 2, 2005 Edited by Lukas de Blois & Elio Lo Cascio With the Aid of Olivier Hekster & Gerda de Kleijn LEIDEN • BOSTON 2007 This is an open access title distributed under the terms of the CC-BY-NC 4.0 License, which permits any non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
    [Show full text]
  • Warfare Issuing an Order to Order a Unit to Attack, Select the Attacking Unit and a Legal Defender (See the Order of Battle Below)
    Warfare Issuing An Order To order a unit to attack, select the attacking unit and a legal defender (see The Order of Battle below). Attacking The attacking unit makes an Attack test against the target units Defense. Roll 1d20, add the acting unit’s Attack bonus. If the result equals or exceeds the defending units Defense, the attack is successful, move to the Power test. Attacking exhausts a unit. Exhausted units cannot attack. Once all units are exhausted, all units refresh. Power In order to inflict a casualty, you must make a Power test against the target’s Toughness. Roll 1d20, add the acting unit’s Power bonus. If the result equals or exceeds the defending units Toughness, you inflicted a casualty! Decrement the casualty die! Casualties Once a casualty die reaches 1, another casualty removes the unit from the battle. Each unit can be Rallied once at this point. Rally A unit about to be removed from battle can be Rallied. Their commander makes a Morale Test, DC15. If successful, the unit remains in the battle, but cannot be Rallied again. Diminished Once a unit is at half strength (for instance, 3 or less on a D6), if it takes a casualty, it must make a Morale test against DC 15 or suffer another casualty. The Order of Battle All units belong to a Rank specified on their unit card. A unit’s rank determines who they can attack, and who they can be attacked by. There are six ranks; Infantry (incl. Levies). Anyone can attack these units. Archers.
    [Show full text]
  • Antonine Plague 7, 195, 197, 201–217 Demographic Effect 195 in Egypt 204–206 Antoniniani 247, 251, 252, 256, 286–288
    INDEX Abolition of memory 85 n. 27, 268, Antonine Plague 7, 195, 197, 201–217 267 demographic effect 195 Abrittus 106 in Egypt 204–206 Abrochia 205–206 Antoniniani 247, 251, 252, 256, Accessibility 271 286–288, 300, 303–306 Acclamation 323 n. 29, 328 Antoninus Pius 26, 199, 298, 369 as Imperator 64, 329 Apamea (Syria) 99, 100, 101, 102, formulas 332 103, 106 Account money 250 Aphrodisias 35 Achaia 27, 113, 124 Appianus 157 Ad edictum praetoris 265 Apollodorus of Damascus 146 Adaeratio 227, 228 Apollonius of Tyana 397, 399 Adulis 242 Appointment policy 112 Aemilius Aemilianus 116 Aqueducts 186 Aemulatio, aristocratic 69, 70, 72 Arabia 264, 269 Aerarium 224 Area Palatina 329 Africa 5, 26–27, 48–49, 57–60, 106, Arenas 186 108, 114–116, 118, 120, 122–124, Argenteus 257 222–225, 231, 272 Arius 417 Ager Gallicus 166 Army pay 250 Ager per mensura extremitatem Arrien de Nicomédie 102, 103 comprehensus 230 Ascension to the throne 327–336 Ager publicus 157 Asia Minor 27, 113, 122–123, 133, Aggregate income 185 137, 148 n. 42, 203, 220–224, 227, Aggregate production 197 253 Agricola, life of 106 Assaria 253 Agricultural change 197 Assayers 246–247 Agricultural decline 197 Asses 253 Agrippina 89 n. 35 Assidui 158, 161, 162 Aila 235 Athens 371, 399, 402, 406 Ala Contariorum 101 inhabitants of 406, 408 Alamans 104 Atmospheric metal pollution 189 Alani 102 Attalus 156 Albano 103 Atticus, A. 106 Alexander of Aphrodisias 408, 409 Attius Suburanus, Sex. 68 Alexandria 236, 371, 408 Augustae 267, 302 Allectus 53, 54, 55 Augustus 23, 67, 70, 71, 162, 164, Ammianus Marcellinus 145–147, 149 262, 263, 298 Ampli cator 272 Res Gestae 78–80 Anatolia, inhabitants of 107 Aula 331 Animal bones assemblages 191 Aurei 248, 249, 250, 254 in Roman Italy 192 Aurelianianus 256 in the provinces 191 Aurelianus 17, 51, 73, 107, 108, Annales 184 118–119, 122, 295 n.
    [Show full text]
  • AVARICE COMBAT RULES VERSION 1.2.2 UPDATED 7/26/21 the Avarice Battle Game Is Designed to Have Easy to Learn Rules and to Feel Competitive
    AVARICE COMBAT RULES VERSION 1.2.2 UPDATED 7/26/21 The Avarice Battle Game is designed to have easy to learn rules and to feel competitive. Combat is usually player vs player (PVP) with objective-based scenarios. Points are assigned based on each side’s performance, rewards of in-game resources are awarded accordingly. Combat Marshals dressed in Yellow and Green will be present during all combat encounters to help insure a safe and fair combat. CONTENTS: Introduction........................................................... 1 General Safety Rules............................................. 2 Safety Calls............................................................. 2 Strike Safety........................................................... 3 Weapons................................................................. 3 Hit Points/Hit Zones............................................. 4 Armor..................................................................... 4 Death/Respawning................................................ 4 Healing................................................................... 5 Seige Engines......................................................... 5 Monsters................................................................. 5 Melee Weapon Standards..................................... 6 Bow/Crossbow Standards..................................... 7 Shield Standards.................................................... 7 Armor Standards.................................................... 7 Seige Engine Standards........................................
    [Show full text]