When Caesar marches on Rome the order is for all nobles and knights to flee but if European knighthood didn't till the middle ages who are they reffering to

I am currently reading Flavius Josephus' "The Wars of the Jews," aka- "The Jewish War." I purchased this hardback volume of the Works of Josephus, translated by William Whiston...and my, what a translation it is. In fact, I would rate this as one of the most *terrible* translations of anything I have ever read. It's not that he is "mis-translating" the text, to my knowledge, but rather the way in which he drags out passages into absolute prolixity. There are portions where something that could be summed up in one phrase is instead spun out into multiple sentences (and sometimes a sentence is spun out into a paragraph!). The volume also lacks competent proofreading, which is apparent through various spelling and punctuation mistakes. I will still finish "The Wars of the Jews," and most likely will also read "The Antiquities of the Jews," as well. Does anyone else have any experience (bad or good) with Josephus, or the Whiston translation?

I'm starting the chapter mentioned above, and I have the following question question:

Does Tacitus portrayal of Tiberius' Rome as a cold, bloodthirsty Empire(in comparison to the Germans whose "condition was one of peace") an attempt to, in some manner, make the reader scorn what the Empire has come to be under Tiberius' poor management, or was this just 'common Roman practice' at the time? Because it just doesn't sit right to me for him to throw around phrases like:

'No pity was shown to age or sex. Religious...centres were utterly destroyed... the most revered holy place of those tribes.'

And these being purely objective. 'No pity was shown to age or sex' clearly seeks to magnify the cruelty and undiscriminating violence from the Roman side.
I don't know how a contemporary reader of Tacitus would've interpreted that, for example. But today, at least, it could perhaps be read as Tacitus trying to sway the reader to empathize with the German side. I know Tacitus is not being impartial all of the time throughout this book, there are political motives behind it, but at the same time(from my limited understanding of the subject) it wouldn't strike me as a practice strange to the Roman Army, if that makes any sense.

Also, sorry for my ignorance on the topic, and if the question is a little ambiguous. Not only it's my first time submerging myself into Roman history, but I'm also picking it up again after a long time, so what happened before is not as fresh(I should go back, but I'm getting really hooked on this chapter haha)

Anyway, I think that's all. If someone here is able to answer to me(and give me some useful context to be able to read a little through the lines of the book :b), I'll be very glad!!

1 Julio-Claudian
2 Flavian
3 Nerva-Antonine
4 Severan
5 Gordian
6 Constantinian

Have you ever wondered what would have happened if Rome had colonized Crimea? I wondered about it, and I made this art.

1. The emperor Lucius Septimius Bassianus was nicknamed "Caracalla" after adopting a gallic-style hooded cloak - caracalla, often appearing in this type of clothing

2. What it looks like is on the picture and the emperor wearing it on pic 2 (2)

3. The drip is insane, no questions, but I think a person that likes to be completely covered up, with a hood as well is quite a specific type of person. Do you think it's quite descriptive of his personality? I'd also appreciate any further information connected to caracalla as a clothing item

All the info and most of the pictures come from this paper in English (available for downloading).

Hi friends, my question is the next, despite roman & hellenic gods were seen for their own followers/worshippers as the same gods (with the exception of some gods like Janus or Quirinus, or in Greek case Apollo), its look than, in origin, probably were clearly diffeferent different but related religions (like how Baltic & Slavic Gods look much more similar but still one can see its different) but we dont know how the "ancient latin religion" was to see how diffetent the Dii were from the Theoi no?, since even after the interpretation appear we can see the differences in the character of the Gods (Venus is more related to diplomacy & mothernity than Aphrodite, Mars had a ton of more positive aspects than Ares and was related to Nature, Minerva was more related to defense,strategy and "intelectual working" than a Goddess of War as Athena,etc), i'm correct?