Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
meninwhite
Knight
Joined: 26-Jul-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 61
|
Quote Reply
Topic: What if Cleopatra won the Battle of Actium? Posted: 26-Jul-2005 at 16:46 |
If Anthony and Cleopatra defeated Octavian at Actiem and took control of Rome and the Empire became Egyptian and they conquerd Parthia.What if thye discoved China,Korea and Japan would they try to Conquer them?
|
|
Lannes
Baron
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 439
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 26-Jul-2005 at 17:21 |
Er...
Anyway, I'll move this to Historical Amusement...
|
τρέφεται δέ, ὤ Σώκρατης, ψυχὴ τίνι;
|
|
Belisarius
Chieftain
Suspended
Joined: 09-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1296
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 26-Jul-2005 at 20:59 |
Originally posted by meninwhite
If Anthony and Cleopatra defeated Octavian at Actiem
and took control of Rome and the Empire became Egyptian and they
conquerd Parthia.What if thye discoved China,Korea and Japan would they
try to Conquer them? |
By the time of the Battle of Actium, the Romans had yet really to
figure out how to defeat the Parthians, so conquest of them would have
been a fantasy. The west already knew about the east and traded with
them occasionally, so there would have been no "discovery". Even if
they had been meeting for the first time, why would you try to conquer
lands thousands of miles away from your capital? Administration of
these lands would have been impossible. Besides, eastern development
was at least equal of Rome's, perhaps even more advanced. The Chinese
would have defeated any Roman force.
The Roman Empire would not become Egyptian. The Ptolemies were a
Hellenistic dynasty, so if anything, the Empire would have taken Greek
characteristics.
|
|
meninwhite
Knight
Joined: 26-Jul-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 61
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 26-Jul-2005 at 22:35 |
If they had conquered all of India and Southeast Asia how would they reacte to seeing The Pacific Ocean?
|
|
Belisarius
Chieftain
Suspended
Joined: 09-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1296
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 26-Jul-2005 at 23:35 |
Originally posted by meninwhite
If they had conquered all of India and Southeast Asia how would they reacte to seeing The Pacific Ocean? |
I would imagine it would go something like this...
Marc Antony - Hark! Behold yon briny deep! 'Tis a such an ocean that is vast and harmonious!
Cleopatra - Indeed! Ocean! The Nile is made humble by thine exalted majesty!
Marc Antony - My heart plays a descant of wonder!
Cleopatra - Enough! My loins invite thee that I may manipulate thy political arbitration!
Seriously though, I would imagine that they would be awed. However,
seeing the Pacific is hardly a satisfactory reward for marching
thousands of miles and losing thousands of men.
|
|
meninwhite
Knight
Joined: 26-Jul-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 61
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jul-2005 at 00:14 |
What would they do if they reached Japan,Would they try to establish trade or present Egyptian and Greek ways to them?
|
|
Belisarius
Chieftain
Suspended
Joined: 09-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1296
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jul-2005 at 00:29 |
I doubt the Japanese would ever accept Greek culture when they already have Chinese culture just next door.
|
|
meninwhite
Knight
Joined: 26-Jul-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 61
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jul-2005 at 00:41 |
I mean would Cleoptra try to force it?
|
|
Belisarius
Chieftain
Suspended
Joined: 09-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1296
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jul-2005 at 03:10 |
She, or any of the Ptolemies after the wars of the diadochi for that
matter, did not really care much about the spreading of Greek culture.
They were content with Egypt. The immediate area around Egypt barely
felt the Hellenistic culture. Sooooo, no she would probably just take
advantage of the luxuries that China offered... if it was conquered.
|
|
Ahmed The Fighter
Chieftain
Lion of Babylon
Joined: 17-Apr-2005
Location: Iraq
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1106
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jul-2005 at 03:35 |
I think noone lucky in the batlles the best allwayays win octavian better than mark antony.
antony wasn't great warior he never had a chance against octavian.
|
"May the eyes of cowards never sleep"
Khalid Bin Walid
|
|
Belisarius
Chieftain
Suspended
Joined: 09-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1296
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jul-2005 at 23:47 |
Actually Marc Antony was an excellent general, but was known to cause
instability where ever he went. In other words, people found him annoying. Julius Ceasar was known to be
frequently annoyed by him. The civil war between Octavian and Antony
could have gone
either way.
Edited by Belisarius
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2005 at 02:17 |
I just did Actium 3 days ago at uni, so I can speak on this with quite
fresh knowledge. Basically Antony SHOULD have won at Actium and he
SHOULD have won the civil war. Antony had by far the
richer, more sophisticated, better populated, more adcanced and
stronger half of the Roman world. Also, he definitely was a very
capable commander (20 years older than Octavian, with 20 years more
experience in warfare), which is what makes it so mind boggling that he
would force a naval engagement rather than coax his enemies into
fighting one on land.
Historians are of two minds as to what Antony actually wanted. Sadly we
are left with an extremely biased account of him due to Octavian going
into over-kill with his anti-Antony propraganda (and we all know who
writes history ). But basically
historians say that either Antony wanted the whole Roman world as his
own, or that he was an individual heavily charmed by Hellenistic
culture who was only interested in the East and desired a joint
monarchy between himself and Kleopatra, with their capital being
Alexandria (a city which made the Rome of the time look rather quiant).
Also Belisarius is quite right, Cleo was an Hellenic Queen and the
Empire would more likely become more heavily influenced by Hellenism.
As to marching into Asia, a few punitive expeditions against Parthia
are pretty likely, but any major conquests are unlikely. Going further
east than Parthia was an impossibility IMO.
|
|
meninwhite
Knight
Joined: 26-Jul-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 61
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2005 at 02:30 |
It turrns out Anthony wanted the Roman empire under his rule and to influnce in with Hellenism and then campaingn agaisnt Parthia I mean they might go father.
|
|
meninwhite
Knight
Joined: 26-Jul-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 61
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2005 at 02:48 |
Originally posted by Belisarius
Originally posted by meninwhite
If Anthony and Cleopatra defeated Octavian at Actiem and took control of Rome and the Empire became Egyptian and they conquerd Parthia.What if thye discoved China,Korea and Japan would they try to Conquer them? |
By the time of the Battle of Actium, the Romans had yet really to figure out how to defeat the Parthians, so conquest of them would have been a fantasy. The west already knew about the east and traded with them occasionally, so there would have been no "discovery". Even if they had been meeting for the first time, why would you try to conquer lands thousands of miles away from your capital? Administration of these lands would have been impossible. Besides, eastern development was at least equal of Rome's, perhaps even more advanced. The Chinese would have defeated any Roman force.
The Roman Empire would not become Egyptian. The Ptolemies were a Hellenistic dynasty, so if anything, the Empire would have taken Greek characteristics.
|
Hey The Brtish Empire did!
|
|
Ahmed The Fighter
Chieftain
Lion of Babylon
Joined: 17-Apr-2005
Location: Iraq
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1106
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2005 at 03:34 |
where is his victorious he defeated in the persian campaign
He was a great lover not a leader
if he military genius why he was defeat in actium
|
"May the eyes of cowards never sleep"
Khalid Bin Walid
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2005 at 03:45 |
Originally posted by Ahmed The Fighter
where is his victorious he defeated in the persian campaign
He was a great lover not a leader
if he military genius why he was defeat in actium |
Well that is according to what has come down to us from Octavian, who
took every opportunity he could to slander Antony as being under the
insidious influence of this Hellenic Queen.
In actual fact Antony proved to be a fairly good administrator, he in
particular anited the various Kingdoms in Asia Minor by setting up a
client-patron system between himself and them. In this way he ensured
their loyalty, that they kept peace with eachother, that they provide
troops and that the local territories remained loyal. He also did
manage to adapt himself to Eastern warfare, managing to capture greater
Armenia which he declared the property of one of his children by Cleo
(much to the consternation of the men in Rome).
He was an inexperienced and capable military commander, but why he
allowed disasters like Actium and the invasion of Parthia to befall him
leaves me a little stumped. The only thing our historical sources can
attribute to him is his ever increasing drinking, his increasing
infatuation with Cleo and the fact that as time went by he became more
Hellenized and more inclined to pretend to be a god rather than remain
a traditional pragmatic Roman commander.
|
|
Belisarius
Chieftain
Suspended
Joined: 09-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1296
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2005 at 12:53 |
Originally posted by meninwhite
Hey The Brtish Empire did! |
The British Empire was 1800 years later, with 1800 years of better
technology, faster ships, and vastly improved ways to communicate. I do
not think the British Empire would be a good example.
Originally posted by Ahmed The Fighter
where is his victorious he defeated in the persian campaign
He was a great lover not a leader
if he military genius why he was defeat in actium
|
You seem not to realize that Actium and the Persian campaign were not
Antony's only military ventures. He served under Julius Ceasar in Gaul
and was instrumental in his victory there.
He was not a military genius. We only say that he was an excellent general.
Antony lost the Battle of Actium because he was not naval commander, but a field general. At sea, he was competent at best.
As I have said before, by the time of the Second Triumvirate, the
Romans were still stumped on how to beat the Parthians who fought in a
way completely alien to them. I doubt even Ceasar could have beaten the
Parthians with the current knowledge they had.
Edited by Belisarius
|
|
Mosquito
Caliph
Suspended
Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Location: Sarmatia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2537
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2005 at 16:24 |
In my opinion if Antonius won at Actium the civil war would have been continued. Antonius was a better soldier than Octavian who wasnt a soldier at all but Romans wouldnt accept hellenic queen and her influence on the republic. Sooner of later in Italy, Gaul, Africa or Spain someone else would raise an army and lead it against Antonius. And Antonius definatelly didnt have the luck of Caesar nor had his skills. Actually I belive that most of the senators would leave Rome before Antonius arrived there, being scared of Antonius and new proscriptions. It was impossible to rule Rome without being accepted by Roman elites and they would never accept Antonius and his hellenic queen. Even if he subdued Rome it would be only matter of time when someone would assasinate him, just like Caesar was assasinated. Maybe Antonius was a better soldier than Octavian but Octavian was much better politician than Antonius. In political sence of this word Octavian was a heir of Caesar while Antonius wasnt. Altough the best people of Rome were already murdered during proscriptions of the second triumvirate, there still were some able politicians and generals who could overthrown Antonius.
Edited by Mosquito
|
|
Rome
Samurai
Joined: 29-Jun-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 129
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2005 at 17:13 |
The Chinese would have defeated any Roman force! (Belisarius wrote the first sentence) Belisarius how can you say something like this. Who do you think you are the master of military history or what! Do you even know the type of helmet the Roman army gave to the Legionaries in the Late Republic? Do you know the organization of the first cohort in a Legion in the Late Republic? Do you even know the types of spears the Auxiliaries used in the Late Republic? Do you know anything about the Roman army in the Late Republic with out researching it on the internet like a cheater?
Edited by Rome
|
|
Belisarius
Chieftain
Suspended
Joined: 09-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1296
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2005 at 19:53 |
Well that's rude. Is anyone else getting the impression that Rome is
just a little bit close-minded? Sir, I realize that you must be an avid
fan of Roman history, believe me I am too, but I really think you are
overreacting.
I say again, the Chinese would have defeated any Roman force sent
against them at this time. The Chinese were at a technological level
far ahead of Rome by the Late Republic. The Chinese were making wide use of the
crossbow when the Romans were still using slings and hand-proprelled projectiles as their main missile weapons. The Chinese
ruled an empire that stretched from the Korean peninsula to the
Himalayas when the Romans were still struggling to conquer the Italian
peninsula. The entire standing Roman army at the time of the Late
Republic was at about 350,000 men. The Chinese had about a million
defending their capital alone. The eastern Roman empire grew rich
because of trade with the east. China was where most of this trade
originated.
That said, Antony will not be sending the entire Roman army in this
eastern expedition. To do so would leave the empire undefended. He
would be sending a group of legions, a fraction of the Roman armed
forces. Would this army be sufficient to conquer an entire empire,
defended by an army of well-trained, well-equipped men numbering in the
millions, with the vast resources of China behind them?
The historical argument finished, you proceeded to insult my
intelligence and my integrity. I do not presume to be the master of
military history. I have always endeavored to make the most neutral and
logical comments possible. If there is anyone reading this believes
otherwise, plese make yourself known. It seems that you are suggesting
that you are the master of military history. You call me a cheater when
it comes to research. I have not spent hours of my life reading scores
of books with pages numbering in the hundreds for someone to tell me
that my history knowledge comes from the internet.
I would like an apology and we can forget this little scuffle ever
happened. Then we can return to discussing this topic without any more
outbursts.
Edited by Belisarius
|
|