Germanicus Nero

Heh some read

such an action carried out, especially with all the KNOWN harm he did do to the Imperial family. Tiberius was Augustus's one bad move.

If the worst you can say about Antony is that he was a drunkard and he was perhaps a fool for love than he doesn't even deserve mention. Caligula actually had a physical ailment that drove him mad as if having to play nice all those years with the man who destroyed his family wasn't reason enough. If would probably have to be Commodus or Nero. Maybe Livia if she really did whack all those Imp family members though very unlikely.

I'd suggest rethinking your list if Africanus isn't on it. Hannibal had tactics but ask Mago about the rest, and on top of that what seasoned veteran army did he beat? Alexander Scipio Caesar Pyrrhus Hannibal Philip of Macedon Seleucus Pompey

Again saying this book will change your mind but having yet to provide one excerpt from it that would set me on said course seems like folly and I doubt you'll walk away as you seem the last word, I have a superior intellect sort.

That's the thing I never said I did. I have a belief and mentioned it. But my belief comes from what I would call the best possible source of the time. Where does yours come from and forgive me but re-torting with read a book isn't exactly a difficult argument to make.

And your basing your opinion on word of mouth from around 2000 years later? Can you hear yourself? Again I've found 2 sources who are arguably the most respected, quoited and used for certainb its of information. If it's your opinion or Suetonius than it's no contest. I can't make this point any clearer. Your opinion will never hold more weight with me than his no matter how well read you think you are.

And none of it will be proved. It seems to me as if you're presenting yourself and your opinion as more valid than Suetonius. That it what's killign me about this deabte. Gossip monger or not I'd think it wise to believe his and Tacitus opinion over said events than yours and how could you not expect me to. These men lived during the age. Agenda or not they weren't the onyl ones who thought Tiberuis had ahand in it. And Jesus H Christ wtf would Tiberius be pleased a man he needed had been poisoned. Stop and think about that for a second. I have no idea why you would give this villain of a man any sort of benefit of the doubt. He nearly single handedly destroyed the Imperial family. Fascinating, simply fascinating. How you can be so positive he had nothing to do with it is beyond me man. We obvsiuly aren't going to change each others minds but again I can atleast point to a well known source who states he believes and many others that this is what happened. Neither of us can offer any proof but I think Suetonius and Tacitus are closer than anytyhig you;ve produced.

There was evidence in the letter that Piso received from Tiberius. The letter which was never allowed before the senate. Once more you can see where I formed my opinion. Yours is simply speculation. Mine came from written text.

That was before Germanicus went to Alexandria (which was forbidden) and started acting as if he was Emperor. Also if he did have plans to whack Germanicus wouldn't giving him that power be wonderful misdirection. Again after what he did to the Imperial family it's doesn't seem so outlandish that he became jealous of Germanicus. Obviously you can see how and where I formed my opinion from. Where and how did you form yours?

I think this was common practice. Even so common people named after countries would lobby to campaign there for their name sake. Cladius named his son Britannicus as he had pwned them and secured a portion of the island.

Best portrayed Rome in all it's splendor decadence and glory. BBC's I,Cladius was an incrdible surprise for me. Cleopatra (Burton,Taylor) while not so accurate was very entertaining. Rex Harri's Caesar was the best to this point imho.

Aye it could, my point was that I've read written text from someone around that period. I choose to believe that it was a widespread scandal at that Romans of the time probably did wonder if Tiberius did kill Germanicus. You can't provide anything even remotely close to gossip to suggest Tiberius needed Germanicus. I formed my opinion from something I read written by someone of the age. Where did you form your opinion from and links to text I don't yet have do me no good.

Cut and paste an exceprt for me that suggest Tiberius needed Germanicus? My views are based on written text, many encylopedia style entires, every movie ever made about Ancient Rome that dealt with Tiberius and a whole host of other sources I'm sure I can't even recall atm.

"Tacitus gives the fullest report of the trial, and his account has been proved essentially accurate by a recently discovered bronze tablet which gives the official version of the trial and its result. [[24]] The issue was indeed treason, not poison, and Tiberius was concerned to appear impartial. Tacitus departs from the official version with the addition of a rumor that Piso had in his possession a letter from Tiberius instructing him in regard to Germanicus and that he intended to show it to the senate and implicate Tiberius in what had taken place in Syria. He further implies that Piso's death might not have been a suicide but an execution to prevent the disclosure. In a sense the bronze tablet corroborates Tacitus' innuendo, for the careful and detailed report that was set up in every legionary camp in the Empire shows the unpopular Tiberius on the defensive and confirms that the trial was a crisis for him. Tiberius now faced a truly difficult rival. Dead, perhaps martyred, Germanicus remained a formidable force in Roman politics. " Tiberuis Varo! Give me back my Germanicus!!!

"Germanicus fulfilled his mandate to display a Roman presence in the area and to settle internal affairs. In the client kingdom of Armenia, he crowned Artaxias, who was a friendly ally, and installed the first Roman governor of the new province of Cappadoccia. [[16]] In AD 19, he left Asia Minor and visited Egypt. He went, it was said, in response to famine but the trip included a sightseeing tour, rather in the spirit of his initial journey to the East. He was warmly received when he moved unpretentiously among the populace and especially when he opened the doors of the grain storehouses. He was displaying civilitas (citizen-like behavior) and liberalitas (generosity), virtues associated with imperial largesse. He was upstaging Tiberius. He was either oblivious to the effect of his behavior or he was intentionally testing the waters. His action was aggravated by the fact that all men of senatorial rank were strictly forbidden to set foot in Egypt, which was under the emperor's personal control. [[17]] His visit and his grandstanding there, if arguably appropriate for the 'almost-emperor' that he was, understandably irked the actual emperor." How could you not love this guy =) http://www.roman-emperors.org/germanicus.htm

"http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/hutchinson/m0003912.html" "Roman general. He was the adopted son of the emperor Tiberius and married the emperor Augustus

Again provide a source that says he probably didn't kill Germanicus. The argument still seems to consist of one opinion vs another and it's hardly just Tactitus and Suetonius that villafies Tiberius.

Like I said, provide a source saying Tiberius probably didn't kill Germanicus and I'll read it. The link from above did not. Seems odd, the obvious damage Tiberius did to the Imperial family. Yet you think it's impossible he would kill his most worrisome rival.

"Whether Tiberius is remembered as a depraved pervert who reined using murder and mayhem and allowed the rise of Praetorian influence, or as an effective administrator with Republican leanings, the true result of Tiberius rule was the ironic total destruction of the Republican ideal. While Augustus allowed a facade of Senatorial governing to continue to exist, under Tiberius, that fa

"Tiberius granted him full imperium in the east practically giving him equal power." Sources? First I've ever heard of this. Again it's one opinion vs Suetonius'. Again if the choice is an author's opinion who lived around the time of said events or yours I'd think it wise to go with his. I need some sort of legitame literature that atleast suggest this was the case.

Well if you can provode a better source than Suetonius I'll read t, hell I probably have anyhow until then I'm going to have to go with his opinion on what happened. Not to mention what's on record that Tiberius did in fact do and it's hard to specualte from any other angles. Curious, are actually defending Tiberius of all people ?

He had Germancius whacked. He was young, handsome and able. He was also a patriot who would of restored the republic just like his pimp father would of. Suetonius was da man! lmao I love this forum by the way. Others as eerily fascinated with the Romans as myself!

The story of Cinncinatus is quite compelling as well.

Germanicus Caesar son of Drusus. Damn that Tiberius!