Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)
Who was the greatest Roman Defier? |
Post Reply 
|
Page 123> |
| Author |
 Share Topic Printable Version Google Delicious Digg StumbleUpon Windows Live Yahoo Bookmarks reddit Facebook MySpace Newsvine Furl Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Reginmund 
Arch Duke 
Joined: 08-May-2005 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1943 |
 Quote Reply
 Topic: Who was the greatest Roman Defier?Posted: 17-May-2005 at 05:52 |
|
Bah, none of mye favourites are listed.
I like the barbarians, guys like Vercingetorix, Brennus, Alaric, Arminius and Theodoric. Neither must we forget the Goth Fritigern's crushing defeat of the Roman army at Adrianople 378 AD, where Emperor Valens was killed (328-378 AD). |
|
 |
|
|
Mosquito
Caliph 
Suspended Joined: 05-Aug-2004 Location: Sarmatia Online Status: Offline Posts: 2537 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 15-May-2005 at 19:03 |
|
Ahh yes, queen of Palmyra. I think that war with the allies was far more destructive than Spartacus Rebellion. |
|
|
|
|
Imperator Invictus
Caliph
Retired AE Administrator Joined: 07-Aug-2004 Online Status: Offline Posts: 3151 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 15-May-2005 at 16:54 |
|
Spartacus' was far from the most destructive rebellion. His was not
even the first major slave rebellion of the Republic. (The Roman Empire
did not exist during spartacus's time)
One who deserves nomination is Zenobia, who conquered over half of the Empire's eastern territories. |
|
|
|
|
Noir
Immortal Guard 
Joined: 15-May-2005 Location: Greece Online Status: Offline Posts: 0 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 15-May-2005 at 12:06 |
|
Difficult choice... My personal choice (using my heart, not my mind) would be Mithridates Eupator (Greek : ). This half Greek - half Persian King of Pontus (very greek at ideology and culture ) was Rome's terror (something like the Soviet so called super-power for Americans) for 2 generations of Romans. They constantly defeated him and he tenaciously regrouped and stroke back. When he died, Rome was celebrating for months. Mithridates of Pontus was a thorn in Rome's side for forty years before Pompey earned his title "the Great" by defeating him. He was the last of the ancient "Greeks" (ideologically).(Cleopatra excluded). (see also : http://www.pontos.dk/round_table_mithridates/TBNmithridates_ personality.pdf)
From the given answers :Hannibal was the greatest general and (using my mind now) the greatest danger for Rome. But he was very early and Rome at that time wasn't the super-power empire that we now refer to. (see map :red=roman territory)
Spartacus was the greatest threat because slave revolt was the economic - social - military -political nightmare for the Empire. He emerged from nothing, he had not a state to support him, and he (also) nearly made it. The others mentioned were insignificant by comparison. I think (given all that...) I will vote for Spartacus. Edited by Noir |
|
|
|
|
ArmenianSurvival
Chieftain 
Joined: 11-Aug-2004 Location: United States Online Status: Offline Posts: 1460 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 15-May-2005 at 05:11 |
|
I voted for Hannibal, but just as an honorable mention:
Tigranes II of Armenia. He was married to the daughter of Mithradates of Pontus. When Mithradates crumbled against the Romans, he fled east to Armenia. Tigranes refused to surrender Mithradates to the Romans, and in 69 B.C. Lucullus besieged the capital of Tigranocerta. When the city's inhabitants, most of whom were non-Armenian, opened the gates to the Roman army, Tigranocerta was looted, and Tigran lost control of Syria and Mesopotamia. Lucullus then tried to take the Armenian city of Artashat, but he was defeated. After Lucullus failed to ally with Parthia, he left Armenia. Tigran and Mithradates then reconquered Pontus, northern Syria and Commagene under Armenia. Rome then sent Pompey, who defeated Mithradates, and he was forced to flee toward Armenia once again. At this time, two of Tigran's sons betrayed him. One of them joined Pompey, the other one joined the Parthians. Parthia didnt want its lands to be in danger, so they took advantage of Armenia's war with Rome and attacked Artashat. Tigran held the Persians at bay, but when Pompey arrived, it was simply too much for him to go on. In 66 B.C. Tigranes signed the Peace of Artashat, in which the region of Greater Armenia remained intact as a buffer state against the Parthians, and Tigranes retained the Persian title "King of Kings". He ruled Armenia for another 10 years and died in 55 B.C. Before he fought Rome, Tigranes built an empire which stretched from the Caspian to the Mediterranean, from Georgia in the north to modern-day Lebanon in the south.  Edited by ArmenianSurvival |
|
|
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։ |
|
|
|
|
Mosquito
Caliph
Suspended Joined: 05-Aug-2004 Location: Sarmatia Online Status: Offline Posts: 2537 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-May-2005 at 19:01 |
I have to agree with your statement but lets not forget that Schulmeister played the most important role in the Ulm victory. Mack wanted to retreat and join Russians and it was Schulmeister who convinced him to stay. |
|
|
|
|
Temujin
King 
Sirdar Bahadur Joined: 02-Aug-2004 Location: Eurasia Online Status: Offline Posts: 5221 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-May-2005 at 13:21 |
|
of course i would agree that spies can be worth a lot, but wars are not won by spies but people that know how to use spies, spies are tools like armies. |
|
|
|
|
Mosquito
Caliph
Suspended Joined: 05-Aug-2004 Location: Sarmatia Online Status: Offline Posts: 2537 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-May-2005 at 17:50 |
|
Well, so far i know it was Schulmeister who did the job and fooled Mack. And it was after Ulm when Napoleon said to Schulmeister "Charles, you are worth as much as an army" or somthing like that.
Edited by Mosquito |
|
|
|
|
Temujin
King
Sirdar Bahadur Joined: 02-Aug-2004 Location: Eurasia Online Status: Offline Posts: 5221 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-May-2005 at 14:42 |
|
Schulmeister? personally i think it was only possible due to Berthiers excellent staff work. |
|
|
|
|
TheodoreFelix
Colonel 
Joined: 01-May-2005 Online Status: Offline Posts: 694 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-May-2005 at 20:39 |
|
Quintus Sertorius.
The Iberians called him the new Hannibal. lol |
|
|
|
|
giani_82
Shogun 
Joined: 28-Apr-2005 Location: Bulgaria Online Status: Offline Posts: 231 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-May-2005 at 17:49 |
|
Hannibal he spent the longest time on Roman territory, causing havoc which nobody else could.
|
|
|
"Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising everytime we fall."
Confucius |
|
|
|
|
Mosquito
Caliph
Suspended Joined: 05-Aug-2004 Location: Sarmatia Online Status: Offline Posts: 2537 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-May-2005 at 15:24 |
For me Ulm was Schulmeisters victory, not Napoleons! And my vote goes to roman leader of the spaniards - Quintus Sertorius. |
|
|
|
|
Temujin
King
Sirdar Bahadur Joined: 02-Aug-2004 Location: Eurasia Online Status: Offline Posts: 5221 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-May-2005 at 14:27 |
|
not at all, Teutoburg forest was politically completely insignificant, it can be compared to the defeat of british soldiers against the Zulus, it had no political consequences and shortly after germanicus led a sucessfull expedition the Romans killed Arminius and annihilated the Cheruskian tribe. Varus and his legions were just realyl unlucky because they got ambushed, somewhat similar how napoleon surrounded teh Austrian army in Ulm 1805. Arminius never was a thread to Rome, just some adventurer on the frontier of the Roman empire. |
|
|
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended 
Suspended Joined: 01-May-2005 Online Status: Offline Posts: 5711 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-May-2005 at 23:41 |
|
Definitely Hannibal. Excellant point raised there about how Hannibal affected Roman psychology, not until the cosy and comfortable days of the Empire and many years of peace did the do or die attitude of the Romans really weaken. Hannibal was important for making Rome was it was. He came critically close to destroying them entirely but was just that little bit short and had he faced any enemy with a typical amount of willpower I would think he could have done the job. I would say that Rome adopted a new aggressiveness after finally defeating Hannibal: they were determined to build themselves up so that never again could any enemy be such a threat to their very survival.
|
|
|
|
|
TheodoreFelix
Colonel
Joined: 01-May-2005 Online Status: Offline Posts: 694 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-May-2005 at 21:30 |
|
Eh, he died right afterwards. He also wasnt the first barbarian to sack Rome.
Anyway, Hannibal has to take the cake. The fear he put on Rome would last for centuries. He left Southern italy in ruins, stood in Italy undefeated for 16 years, slaughtered enough Romans to fill up Rome then. His legacy would never be forgotten to the Romans. They were so afraid of Carthage after that that even after it was destroyed they were not the same. They would never again let a nation have any chance to ignite a war. The second anything happened, Rome would rush to the attack. Which would lead to the destruction and slaughter of many. All of this was from Hannibal's legacy. Every defeat they had after that would be compared to Cannae and very very few actually came close. Edited by Iskender Bey ALBO |
|
|
|
|
vulkan02
Arch Duke
Termythinator Joined: 27-Apr-2005 Location: U$A Online Status: Offline Posts: 1835 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-May-2005 at 21:25 |
|
how bout the man who sacked Rome... Alaric king of the Visigoths??
|
|
|
The beginning of a revolution is in reality the end of a belief - Le Bon
Destroy first and construction will look after itself - Mao |
|
|
|
|
Ahmed The Fighter
Chieftain
Lion of Babylon Joined: 17-Apr-2005 Location: Iraq Online Status: Offline Posts: 1106 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-May-2005 at 17:45 |
|
arminius first he defeated roman in germany when they in greatest age after this defeat roman wil never think to conquer germany and the totoon becaome great nation after him i elect hannibal he was a great genral he became so closed to sake rome but a letter was found by roman from his brother hesdrobal about the next batlle so the roman know chartagian moves then they prepeard to the last batlle and defeat hesdrobal |
|
|
"May the eyes of cowards never sleep"
Khalid Bin Walid 
|
|
|
|
|
Qnzkid711
Knight 
Joined: 10-Jan-2005 Location: Albania Online Status: Offline Posts: 60 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 15-Mar-2005 at 18:05 |
|
It definately has to be Spartacus in my opinion. I dunno whether
or not I said Hannibal before but that was off IMO. Spartacus came from
nothing. he was a mere slave gladiator and got an army that crushed
multiple legions. he terrorized Rome when it was the undisputed number
1 power in Europe and Asia Minor.
|
|
|
"Europe and Asia are finally mine. Woe to Chritendom. She has lost her sword and shield."
Ottoman Sultan after hearing of the death of Skenderbeg. |
|
|
|
|
Komnenos
Tsar 
Retired AE Administrator Joined: 20-Dec-2004 Location: Neutral Zone Online Status: Offline Posts: 4361 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Mar-2005 at 15:31 |
Well, I'm glad somebody else recognises the significance of Arminius' victory over the Romans. It's strange that his achievements don't seem to be universally acknowlegded. The battle in the Teutoburg forest may not have been the earth-shattering event at the time, in comparison with Hannibal,s os Attila's campaigns, but the consquences for the further course of Roman history can't be overestimated. Edited by Komnenos |
|
|
[IMG]http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i137/komnenos/crosses1.jpg">
|
|
|
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Mar-2005 at 14:58 |
|
I say Hannibal for the havoc he caused to the Romans.
|
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Page 123> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz
This page was generated in 0.203 seconds.
