Valens

I'd actually like to move to a bigger city within the US. I would also be interetsed in moving to Paris(be nice to be able to visit my Great Aunt).

Oh, I understand, I'm just saying that Hannibal's opposition doesn't seem to be grounds to rank him lower than Alexander(in other words, I think Hannibal actually faced tougher opposition than Alexander, less numerical opposition, but tougher nonetheless). I would certainly rather put my army against a Persian Army of 4th Century BC than a Roman Army of the 3rd Century BC.

Napoleon wasn't a choice... But seriously, if we are going to judge Hannibal based on his opposition in Italy, then we certainly must make the same judgement for Alexander: The Persian Empire Alexander fought was most definately a Persian Empire on the decline in many areas, including militarily, and much like Hanibal in Italy, Alexander didn't face many extremely talented commanders in his main campaign, yet he still struggled in battles. Also, we have to realize that the armor and weaponry of Alexander's Hellenistic Army was far superior to Persian equipment, which was an advantage Hannibal didn't have, and an advantage that has proved to be very important in other Greco-Persian conflicts. When it comes down to it though, I'd put it as a toss-up. Too hard to compare for me.

I thought giving members a chance to give descriptions of some of their favorite battles from Roman History would be a good way for others to get a good general idea of what went on in the battle. It would also most likely give users a scope into how battles were fought throughout Roman History. So, if you have a battle you would like to describe, then please do so here. Be sure to put some effort into this, but at the same time, don't feel like you have to do a play-by-play of every units movements. I'll start us off: The Battle of Magnesia- This is my description of the Battle of Magnesia. It may contain errors, despite my best efforts in compiling my information, and is surely not any sort of published work, but it should give a good picture of this famous ancient battle. --- Background- We are in the year of 190 BC. Rome is at war with the Hellenistic World. The battle will take place between the Seleucids under Antiochus the Great and the Romans under Scipio Africanus. Drawing Up the Formations- The Romans used their manipular legion, against a Hellenistic formation focused on the phalanx. Unlike the earlier versions of the phalanx which used heavily armored hoplites, the the warriors(called phalangites) in the newer phalanx were lightly armored(many not armored at all) pikemen, that used the sarissa, which was a massive pike, at some times, measuring up to 6.4metres(or 21 feet). Alexander the Great had used his phalanx as something to pin down an enemy, letting his cavalry deliver the decisive charge, but due to a shortage of cavalry in Hellenistic Armies of the Second Century BC, they had come to rely on the phalanx to win battles. ---->Roman Troops and Line Up- To the far left of the Roman infantry formation, we have three rows of the Latin ala, going to the left of the ala, we have two Roman legions(of course drawn into three rows), continuing to the right, we have another three-rowed Latin ala unit. To the right of the last mentioned Latin ala, we have 3, 000 peltasts. The cavalry is positioned on the wings of the Roman infantry: the Turmae Cavalry being on the left wing, and around 3, 000 standard cavalry on the right wing. ---->Seleucid Troops and Line Up- (Since the Seleucids didn't line up in an easy to describe 'infantry in the middle, and cavalry on the wings' formation, I will simply desribe the line up from the Seleucid Right down to their Left.) Starting on the Seleucid right wing, we have 1, 200 Dahae Cavalry, next there are 10, 000 Argyraspides Infantry, following them we have 3, 000 Agema Cavalry, to their left is 3, 000 Cataphracts Cavalry, next in line are 1, 500 Galatians, next are 16, 000 phalangites(forming the main phalanx), to the left of the phalanx are another set of 1, 500 Galatians, following to the left are 4, 700 light infantrymen, then there are more of the Cataphracts Cavalry(numbering at 3, 000 on this side as well), next is 1, 000 of the Regia ala Cavalry, followed by 2, 500 Galatian Cavalry, and to the far left are 500 Tarentines Cavalry. We also have some additional units placed to the front of the Seleucid formation: There are a row of Seleucid Chariots in front of the Cataphracts, Galatian, and Tarentines Cavalries(to the left of the phalanx). In front of the phalanx, we have 54 elephants. Brief Stage of Events in Battle- Antiochus attacks and breaks through the Roman Legion with his attacks with agema and catacphracts. He orders these cavalries to go to attack the Roman camp, but they are checked by the Roman guards left behind. Lepidus(a commanding tribune of the broken legions), gathers his broken legion together to drive the cavalry and Antiochus back. The Seleucid Chariots attack, but are driven back by missile fire, and in their retreat, they cause much confusion in their own forces. Next, the Roman cavalry moves forward, and drives the opposing cavalries to the rear. The Roman infantry advances on the phalanx, defeating the surrounding skirmishers, but the phalanx itself stands firm for the time. Some of the phalanx support elephants panic upon seeing the Roman cavalry coming from their flank, and run back into the phalanx, causing mass confusion within the phalanx, eventually Seleucid the center dissolves, and the battle is won for the Romans who are free to march to the Seleucid camp. If errors are found, please bring them to my attention. If you are confused, and/or have questions, I will most certainly attempt to clear them up for you.

Well, a list of both would be nice, but if you are only up to one, let's go with a list compiled by their whole career.

So, let's try to narrow it down to one: Both Primus and Viggen mentioned Trajan and Severus...and others listed were: Constantine, Vespasian, Aurelius, Titus, and Tiberius. So, anyone think they could narrow it down, or possibly rank these men in order of ability as a general?

Is there anything in particular that makes Vespasian stand out more as a general than Trajan to you, Primus?

Most Roman Emperors have very little military credit to their name, which is understandable, as their job was to rule the land, not to be a general. However, many emperors did double as generals in times of war, and many were very good generals, but which emperor would you consider to have been the best general?

Man, I won't get a chance to play this, as my comp wouldn't be able to handle it. I was pretty impressed with the show on Cannae, and will most certainly be anxiously awaiting the next show(I pretty sure I missed one while I was in Florida last week though).

I'm curious(I know so little about modern militaries), how does everyone think Italy's military would rank in a list of the best militaries? I know their military was sub par in the Second World War, but I assume they've had some sort of military reforsince then?

That's odd, the two High School's in my county(these all being in Tnnessee) surrounding counties all offer Latin(two of these schools being only 3A). In fact, we have Latin translation competitions. However, I chose to take Spanish instead of Latin.

That seems very true. Also, Polybius put the number of Romans and allies liable to military service at , the outbreak of the Second Punic War at 700, 000(which although seems to be exaggerated, would hint that the Romans easily had enough soldiers to create many armies).

I'm curious, how big would the resource(by resources I mean things like money, troops, etc.) gap have been between Rome and Carthage in the Second Punic War? It seems to me it would be a fairly large one, judging by Carthage's struggles in the mercenary war and also do to the destruction of their fleet. Cpurse, Im not sure how well Carthage rebuilt herself after the mercenary struggle, so any help would be greatly appreciated.

I'm a bit confused, was there no military rank higher than the Legatus Legionis(no different types of generals)?

This only happened every so often. For instance, when the Athenian messenger arrived to ask the Spartans for assistance against the Persians at Marathon, the Spartans were in the middle of a religious holiday. However, they have proven themselves many times over as the masters of the battlefield in Greece.

I'd choose Bacchus, the God of Wine. He must have one heck of a wine cellar .

That is indeed interesting to think of. I would venture to say that Athens might start a war to end Macedonia, and Sparta, not wanting to break friendly terms, would likely assist. With the two 'city-state leaders' in war, the other Greeks would be sure to follow their lead and join in. Wonder how the Athenians and Spartans would react when the Romans acted against their now quite large(after the taking of Macedonia) country?

Of the 5 Ancient Greek City-States(Athens, Sparta, Thebes, Argos, and Corinth), which is your favorite? Why are they your favorite? I'd have to choose Sparta. I admire their dedication to excellence, the males spending the majority of their lives in the military, and the female dedication to making themselves top specimens for breeding the perfect soldier child. Another impressive aspect of Sparta would be the stability of its government. In the hundreds of years that Sparta existed, they faced no internal rebellion save for that of their slave people, the Helots. Something interesting to note is that before Sparta went into its cultural isolation view of things, they were at the head of Greek cultural influence and advances(interesting as they were later known for being so primitive).

Ah, thanks. One last question: Was there a Sparta General in Africa, or did Sparta just send troops to serve under a commander from Carthage?

Right, but was Bagradas the only First Punic War Battle they fought in?

Thanks for the info, but I'm still a bit confused on events prior to those which you mentioned. Did Sparta intervene in any other First Punic War battles?

While reading the section on the First Punic War, I was interested to see that Sparta had been hired on as a mercenary army by Carthage, with great success in the Battle of Bagradas. I'm curious to know if the Spartans fought in any of the other Punic War battles, and if so, with how much success?

Wow, that was quite helpful. Thanks. Though upon reading the organization and an additional few articles, I have come up with a few more questions: *Besides the finer cloak and muscled breast plate, how would one of the highest ranking officers'(let's say a Legatus Legionis) armor/uniform differ from a Centurion's? *Were there any inter-legion ranks( high ranking officers that could control more than one legion)? *Lastly, would you happen to have any drawings of some of the Middle and High ranking legionary officers?

I have a couple of questions: What were the Roman military ranks? I would be inclined to think they changed over the years, so if possible, please let me know of changes. How would one move up the ranks? (was this a matter of leadership, bravery, or a capable mind?)