1700075610

1700075611 14.Vita, Chapter 58.

1700075612

1700075613 15.Premerstein, Klio 3：28.

1700075614

1700075615 16.Biedermann, in his Studies on Egyptian Governmental History（Studien zur ägyptischen Verwaltungsgeschichte），1913，establishes in detail（p.108）that the old Egyptian administrative organization disappeared toward the middle of the third century.

1700075616

1700075617 17.It is generally assumed that the auxiliaries had been increased as early as the second century because at that time they still had fewer demands than the legions. Under Augustus, for example.they received only a third of the pay of the legions and had no claim on the large donatives. At the same time, the demands of the legions were continuously increasing, while their military efficiency was declining. Domaszewski, Heidelberger Jahrbücher 10：226. This assumption is contrary to the possibility that I expressed on p.171 above that the auxiliaries had been organized into legions. Both theories are mere possibilities. And it is, of course, also imaginable that they existed side by side and that now one and now the other actually took place.

1700075618

1700075619 18.I do not believe it necessary to attribute any significance to Caracalla’s military frivolities, which are reported in Dio Cassius 77.7 and in Herodian 4.8.2.3.

1700075620

1700075621 19.Petersen, in The Marcus Aurelius Column, Text（Die Markus-Säule, Textband），p.44，says of the legionaries shown on the relief: “Their shield is seldom a normal scutum, their lance never shown as a pilum，” and on page 45 he continues: “… often they have trousers.”These are unusual phenomena which I do not know how to explain. It has also struck me in Tacitus’account of the German war how little reference is made to the unusual aspects of the Roman combat with the pilum.

1700075622

1700075623 20.Von Domaszewski, Die Religion des römischen Heeres, p.49. See also p.113.

1700075624

1700075625 第二篇　民族大迁徙

1700075626

1700075627 1　日耳曼人为主体的古罗马军队

1700075628

1700075629 1.Robert Grosse’s Roman Military History from Gallienus to the Beginning of the Byzantine Thematic Constitution（Römische Militärgeschichte von Gallienus bis zum Beginn der byzantinischen Themenverfassung），Berlin，1920，has unfortunately very little to offer, despite all the energy that went into it. I have not been able to draw anything from it for my account. See my review in the Historische Zeitschrift，1921.

1700075630

1700075631 2.Dio Cassius 78.17.

1700075632

1700075633 3.Zosimus 2.15.1.“He collected his forces, which included subjugated barbarians, Germans, and other Celtic nations, and some assembled from Britain.”*

1700075634

1700075635 4.Ammianus 20.4.17. A source of little value, Nicephorus Callistus, also reports this of Valentinian I. But the description in Symmachus, orationes 1.10，to the extent that this rhetorician is to be trusted, excludes that possibility.

1700075636

1700075637 5.Ammianus 31.7.11.

1700075638

1700075639 6.Schuchhardt，“Anastasius’Wall at Constantinople and the Dobrudscha Walls（“Die Anastasiusmauer bei Konstantinopel und die Dobrudschawalle”），Jahrbücher des Archäologischen Instituts 16：107.

1700075640

1700075641 7.Brunner, Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte 1：39；（2d edition, p.58）.

1700075642

1700075643 8.This point is correctly observed by Dahn in Procop von Cäsarea, p.391.

1700075644

1700075645 9.Ammianus 12.12.61.

1700075646

1700075647 10.Lavisse, Histoire de la France 1：2. Les Origines, la Gaule indépendant et la Gaule Romaine, by G. Bloch, Paris.1901，p.299 f. Ad. Blanchet, in The Roman Walls of Gaul（Les enceintes Romaines de la Gaule），1907，rejects, on the basis of the broadest research, the theories that would place the construction of these fortifications as late as Diocletian’s period, in the fourth century or even later.

1700075648

1700075649 11.According to the citation by Dahn, in Könige der Germanen 5：26.

1700075650

1700075651 12.Mommsen, Ostgotische Studien, Neues Archiv für ältere deutsche Geschichte 14：460. L. Schmidt, Geschichte der Vandalen，1901，pp.65，72，122.

1700075652

1700075653 13.The study on the battle at the Milvian Bridge by F. Trebelmann in the Abhandlung der Heidelberger Akademie，1915，is very valuable topographically, but from the military history viewpoint it misses the mark just as much as Seeck’s account does. Both authors are still entangled in the concept of massive armies. They even believe the sources to the effect that Maxentius had superior forces—and even several times as many—to those of Constantine. Since it is naturally impossible to construct any reasonable account with such preconceptions, Seeck grasps the expedient of having both commanders lead their armies by dreams and portents rather than strategic considerations. I do not see why both Constantine and Maxentius should not have been capable of interpreting their dreams and signs in the same way as had previously been done by Themistocles. Pausanias, and Mardonius. The account by Landmann in Dölgner’s Constantine the Great and His Times（Konstantin der Grosse und seine Zeit），1913，is reasonable, but in view of the lack of sources, it is without any conclusion of importance to military history.

1700075654

1700075655 2　斯特拉斯堡会战　无

1700075656

1700075657 3　阿德里安堡会战

1700075658

1700075659 1.It is curious that the West Roman troops were fighting in the Dobrudscha and when they were returning to Illyricum, they encountered the Taefalae. Is it possible that they had previously left the Taefalae behind them? These bands probably did not cross the Danube until the Roman troops had already moved farther eastward. Perhaps the East Goths under Alatheus and Safrax also did not come across the Danube until now, although Ammianus recounts this earlier. In any case, the reinforcements that moved to join the Germans must have been very significant.

[ 上一页 ]  [ :1.70007561e+09 ]  [ 下一页 ]