Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Great men who challenged ancient Rome Posted: 20-Mar-2006 at 22:53 |
Why aren't the Gaulish and Germanic plunderers of Rome in that list? They surely caused more fear than most of the mentioned ones.
I voted for Hannibal anyhow. I'm a fan of that general and the phrase "Hannibal ad portas" and not "Vae victis!" was the one used to scare little children for centuries.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Reginmund
Arch Duke
Joined: 08-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1943
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Mar-2006 at 08:06 |
Originally posted by Maju
Why aren't the Gaulish and Germanic plunderers of Rome in that list? They surely caused more fear than most of the mentioned ones. |
Indeed, after Rome was sacked by the Gauls in 395 BC, none managed to breach it again until 410 AD, when the Goths lead by Alaric entered the Eternal City.
Some time prior to this sack, Alaric had been threatened by the Senate. They warned him of how the desperate masses of the city might react to a Gothic offence, yet Alaric merely laughed and replied; "the thicker the hay, the easier it is mowed!"
The sack itself was conducted in quite an exemplary manner. Churches were spared, as were they who cowered inside them. Material belonging to the Church was also let alone. Apart from the Basilica Aemilia and Sallust's palace, no buildings were razed or damaged by fire as far as our sources tell. Indeed, contemporary men of the Church sound quite pleasantly surprised with the clemency of most Goths.
This task accomplished, Alaric headed south to Calabria. His plan was sailing across to Africa, conquering the rich agricultural lands there for his people to settle. Alas, a storm forced the Goths back to Italy, and Alaric caught a fever in the process. He died soon after, only 34 years old.
Alaric's grave, no doubt filled with riches as was the custom with Germanic burial rites, was quite ingeniously concealed to prevent it from being plundered. His men turned aside the course of the river Busento, preparing the grave on the riverbed. After Alaric's body was interred, they released the river, and to this day no one has been able to find it.
|
|
Ponce de Leon
Caliph
Lonce De Peon
Joined: 11-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2967
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Mar-2006 at 09:24 |
Gold that was taken from ROME, gold that was taken from so many others that kept it for their own.
|
|
Lord Styphon
Immortal Guard
Joined: 21-Mar-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Mar-2006 at 21:59 |
Originally posted by RomiosArktos
For the republican era I would say Hannibal.Mithridates posed a big
threat only until Rome finally decided to deal with him.His armies were
no match for the republican Roman army.
For the imperial period I agree that Zenobia was the greatest
threat.The fact that Aurelian ,who defeated her , took the title
''restituor orbis'' shows that she counted as a really big threat
to the Roman world.
|
The thing about Aurelian being proclaimed Restitutor Orbis wasn't just that he defeated Zenobia, despite being the grave threat she was. At this period in Roman history, imperial authority was effectively non-existant, with Valerian's defeat and capture by the Persians. In addition to Zenobia and the Palmyrenes taking over much of the eastern Empire, Gaul, Spain and Britain formed their own government (the Gallic Empire) to replace the authority that Rome wasn't able to exercise. There were also barbarians running about, doing what barbarians do. Emperor Gallienus began the process of bringing the Empire back under control, notably by introducing cavalry as a major arm of the army and barring senators from holding army command. However, he was assassinated before his reforms could come full circle, but his successors, beginning with Claudius II, who had been Gallieunus's cavalry commander, were able to use them to begin the restoration. The restoration culminated under Aurelian, with the reconquest of the east from Zenobia and the restoration of Roman control in the Gallic Empire. Aurelian restored imperial authority, hence "Restorer of the World". I'll have to agree that Hannibal was the greatest opponent of Rome during the republican era. For the imperial era, I'll have to say Arminius, the victor at Teutoburg Forest. By annihilating the Romans there, Arminius was able to halt Roman expansion into Germany. He was helped by a later revolt in Illyria that diverted troops from a massive planned retaliatory attack, and ultimately helped cancel it. Nevertheless, Arminius kept the Romans from pushing their borders into Germany. This in turn created the long border that Rome had to defend during the imperial era, which would have been shortened by Roman control of Germania (compare the Rhine-Danube line with a potential Elbe-Danube line). Also, I'll have to say Pyrrhus deserves mention here. He was a great general in his own right (Hannibal is supposed to have ranked him second only to Alexander the Great in that regard), and the threat he posed forced Rome and Carthage to cooperate to defeat him.
|
|
ulrich von hutten
Tsar
Court Jester
Joined: 01-Nov-2005
Location: Germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3638
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Mar-2006 at 01:59 |
the brave and foxy collective of the free and independant germanic tribes under the leadership of the famous commandante arminius who defeated the roman supressors with the usupator varus in a heroic fight ,which showed the ancient world the predominance of the germanic worker and countrymen state.
after this challenge the bloody romans didn't even trust to come back as tourists for hundred of years.
|
|
|
Imperator Invictus
Caliph
Retired AE Administrator
Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3151
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Mar-2006 at 02:06 |
The thing about Aurelian being proclaimed Restitutor Orbis wasn't just
that he defeated Zenobia, despite being the grave threat she was. At
this period in Roman history, imperial authority was effectively
non-existant, with Valerian's defeat and capture by the Persians. In
addition to Zenobia and the Palmyrenes taking over much of the eastern
Empire, Gaul, Spain and Britain formed their own government (the Gallic
Empire) to replace the authority that Rome wasn't able to exercise.
There were also barbarians running about, doing what barbarians do. |
If you bring in Roman Rebels, it makes it complex. In that case, I
think Constantine deserves to be the named the greatest who challenged
Rome. Not only did Constantine defeat Rome, he also removed its power
and prestige.
Zenobia was the greatest woman to challenge Rome. No doubt. While boudicca conquered a few Legions, Zenobia conquered cities and built her Empire.
|
|
QueenCleopatra
Earl
Joined: 03-Apr-2006
Location: Ireland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 292
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Apr-2006 at 05:48 |
You left out the great Barbarian Chief Vercingeterix who challanged the Garrison at hadrians Wall
|
Her Royal Highness , lady of the Two Lands, High Priestess of Thebes, Beloved of Isis , Cleopatra , Oueen of the Nile
|
|
Heraclius
Chieftain
Joined: 28-Jun-2005
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1231
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Apr-2006 at 07:52 |
All of those on the list and many who aren't, challenged Rome or its rule over a particular area, but many are little more than a flash in the pan, hardly ever a real challenge to the empire as a whole.
The likes of Boudicca, Sertorius, Sparticus were all in the long run doomed to fail, Boudicca posed a real threat to Romes control of Britain, but Rome had come up against alot worse theres no reason to think that sooner or later Rome wouldnt have crushed Boudicca had they been expelled.
Sertorius was an incredible Roman, but never really stood a chance against Sulla and his Republic, he fought extremely hard and won many victories but again it was inevitably only going to end in one way eventually.
Sparticus is the same, he defeated on the whole, poor sub-standard Roman armies who had no place on a battlefield, his destruction was also inevitable, it took time but it was never in doubt for anybody but the most pessimistic.
Theres a big difference between, merely fighting the Romans and actually challenging their very existance or dominance on an empire wide scale. Countless numbers of individuals resisted and fought Rome, but only a handful ever challenged it on such a scale that Romes existance was in doubt.
On that list and on that basis only Hannibal and Attila stand out, Shapur was never going to conquer all of the Roman empire anyway, never more than a threat to Romes most Eastern possessions.
I think Pyrrhus deserved a place, he could have potentially destroyed Rome whilst it was still relatively isolated, nothing more than an aggressive land power.
|
A tomb now suffices him for whom the world was not enough.
|
|
Flipper
Arch Duke
Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1813
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Apr-2006 at 10:36 |
Originally posted by barish
Attila the Hun, because at the time he lived Rome was weaker than ever. |
I agree with that. Attila was the Romes biggest headache. Imagine that both the west and the east empire cooperated to fight him. When did that happen again after their division?
|
Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
|
|
vulkan02
Arch Duke
Termythinator
Joined: 27-Apr-2005
Location: U$A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1835
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Apr-2006 at 11:04 |
Where is Phyrrus of Epirus?? He is surely one of the top five who threatened Rome the most.
|
The beginning of a revolution is in reality the end of a belief - Le Bon
Destroy first and construction will look after itself - Mao
|
|
Flipper
Arch Duke
Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1813
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Apr-2006 at 04:28 |
Originally posted by vulkan02
Where is Phyrrus of Epirus?? He is surely one of the top five who threatened Rome the most. |
Damn you got me!!! It's so true. Pyrrus was the only one to defeat that great Roman army. Maybe he's forgotten cause he did the same mistake like all the hellinic city-states. When they won over an intruder they never hunt them down (there were exceptions). That was what happened to Pyrrus. He won, the Romans retreated and some years later they returned in full streingth to conquer his kindom as well.
|
Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-May-2006 at 14:35 |
Mine is other... What about Viriathus?
|
|
Ponce de Leon
Caliph
Lonce De Peon
Joined: 11-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2967
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-May-2006 at 15:33 |
Ok ok ok!!! So I do not know "a lot" of great men who challenged Ancient Rome! So sue me i put up the ones i am more familiar with. Geez give me a break and dont whine!
|
|
xi_tujue
Arch Duke
Atabeg
Joined: 19-May-2006
Location: Belgium
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1919
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-May-2006 at 13:34 |
I chuse atilla because cartigge i think its written like that fel under roman Rule and atilla didn't
|
I rather be a nomadic barbarian than a sedentary savage
|
|
Lunwlf
Immortal Guard
Joined: 21-May-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-May-2006 at 00:40 |
I choose Hannibal because he was able to defeat many Roman forces even
when they outnumbered him. He had limited men and no reinforcements and
yet he made it to the walls of Rome itself.
I agree that Attila the Hun was also very frightening for Rome, but he
had many warriors and he attacked Rome after Rome had been split in two
and ravaged by corruption and war. Also the Roman legions were not as
disiplined as the were against Hannibal.
|
I know that I am intelligent, because I know that I know nothing.- Socrates
|
|
malizai_
Sultan
Alcinous
Joined: 05-Feb-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2252
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-May-2006 at 14:54 |
Originally posted by Flipper
Originally posted by barish
Attila the Hun, because at the time he lived Rome was weaker than ever. |
I agree with that. Attila was the Romes biggest headache. Imagine that both the west and the east empire cooperated to fight him. When did that happen again after their division?
|
voted attila for the same reason
|
|
Ponce de Leon
Caliph
Lonce De Peon
Joined: 11-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2967
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Oct-2006 at 11:40 |
I still vote for Mithridates on this one
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Oct-2006 at 11:56 |
If I had to chose one, I would say Shapur, he challenged and bested Rome at her peak.
|
|
Leonardo
General
Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Location: Italy
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 778
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Oct-2006 at 10:54 |
Originally posted by Sparten
If I had to chose one, I would say Shapur, he challenged and bested Rome at her peak.
|
Really it was during the anarchy and the crisis of the third century ...
|
|
Reginmund
Arch Duke
Joined: 08-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1943
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Oct-2006 at 18:35 |
You could say that, but then again, Rome never conquered as much land as during the crisis of the late Republic period. On the other hand, circumstances are quite different when we reach the mid-third century.
|
|