Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Plague Helped Bring Down Roman Empire
LiveScience ^ | May 10, 2013 | Charles Choi

Posted on 05/12/2013 6:14:17 PM PDT by SunkenCiv

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 last
To: gleeaikin; SunkenCiv

The history of the the wars between Rome and Parthia is complex, and unfortunately the sources are less than ideal in most cases. Sometimes the Parthians got the best of the fighting, while other times the Romans came out better. Capable Roman commanders like Ventidius Bassus proved that the tables of Carrhae could be turned on the Parthians when he used terrain favorable to the Romans to rout the Parthians. Later imperial invasions led by Trajan and Lucius Verus (actually Cassius Avidius for the latter) showed that a well led Roman army could march almost at will through Parthia.

I think one of history’s great what-ifs is what would have happened had Caesar lived to carry out his planned invasion of Parthia. For one thing, what was Caesar’s ultimate goal; to conquer Parthia (a tall order) or to decisively defeat them in war and dictate favorable terms (easy to imagine).

I think Caesar’s chances of success would have been high. The reasons for Crassus’ defeat were well known, so Caesar would not have made the same mistakes. Indeed it’s known that he planned to take a different invasion route through more favorable terrain. Caesar’s army would have included a larger cavalry force and more archers and slingers than Crassus’. Considering the success later Roman generals had against the Parthians (and Persians), it’s not hard to imagine Caesar emerging victorious in a war against Parthia.


81 posted on 05/13/2013 10:06:45 PM PDT by Aetius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv; Sherman Logan

Another interesting what-if is what would have happened had Aurelian lived? Generally, and considering his remarkable feat of restoring the Roman Empire as it seemed ready to fall apart, it’s tempting to imagine what he could have done with a long reign.

Specifically, I wonder how his invasion of Persia would have turned out?

It’s a shame that the sources are so poor for that time period, and it’s a shame that someone as remarkable as Aurelian is known only to Roman history enthusiasts.


82 posted on 05/13/2013 10:20:08 PM PDT by Aetius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Aetius; SunkenCiv; All

I encountered the story of Crassus and Cassius reading an old history book by Rollins (translated from the French I think). I was so taken with this possible explanation of Cassius motivation, I am contemplating writing a play about it after I renovate my house. Can you recommend any good sources going into detail about this? So what do you consider were Crassus’ mistakes, aside from that catch-all Hubris? Speaking of Verus, didn’t he have a disaster in central Europe? As I said before, I think that Caesar’s motivation would have been to redeem the honor of Rome, besmirched by such a severe defeat.


83 posted on 05/14/2013 12:33:12 AM PDT by gleeaikin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Aetius
It’s a shame that the sources are so poor for that time period

Actually, our sources are poor for most of the Empire. Which is probably why most people, if they've heard of any emperors at all, are familiar with Augustus thru Nero.

I've had discussions with people on FR who seemed to think it was the decadence of Calugula and Nero that caused the "Fall of the Empire!"

As though it didn't last another 400 years in the west and 1000 in the east.

84 posted on 05/14/2013 5:24:56 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv
The months of anarchy that followed ended with the ascension (usurpation) of Vespasian, the first of a number of military leaders to seize power in Roman history, and the final establishment of the precedent of dynastic rule.

You can't really call, IMO, the ascension of Vespasian a usurpation. This implies he took the throne from a "legitimate" emperor. Which again implies there is some well-known or accepted premise by which legitimacy is determined. Vespasian was the last of the "Four Emperors," and none of the other three had any real legitimacy either.

The Empire's biggest structural problem, IMO, is that they never came up with any such principle. Emperors came to power by all kinds of methods: inheritance, real or puppet election by the Senate, coup, civil war, etc. None of these was generally recognized as more legitimate than the others.

This had (at least) two great structural defects.

No Emperor could ever be sure of his generals' loyalty. He had to always be concerned about any competent general using his popularity to overthrow him. After all, that's how he or perhaps his dad got the job.

So emperors were always (and very logically) concerned about competent generals. Who they often executed or did not fully support. See Justinian and Belisarius. Although it is likely Belisarius was always loyal.

Meanwhile, overly successful generals often had a choice only between revolt or execution by the paranoid emperor.

OTOH, the primogeniture inheritance of the later European crowns, while it led to its own absurdities, allowed competent generals to be trusted by their monarchs, since they couldn't ascend the throne in any case. With the pretty much unique exception of Cromwell, and even he didn't call himself King. Louis XIV never had to worry that Turenne would displace him as King.

So Rome had civil war, over and over, every decade or two, through most of its imperial history. Think of what they could have accomplished with that energy turned outward, rather than inward, by a coherent rule of succession.

85 posted on 05/14/2013 5:41:09 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
Galba was the first usurper--unless you want to say Octavian was. But Galba turned out to be incompetent, and had no living sons. By Jan. 1 of the year after Nero's death, the legions on the Rhine refused to swear the customary oath to Galba but instead backed the commander on the Rhine, Aulus Vitellius. Meanwhile Otho had hoped to be adopted by Galba (thus in line to be the next emperor) but when Galba picked someone else with a more distinguished lineage (Piso), Otho engineered a coup which resulted in both of them (Galba and Piso) being murdered. Then Otho and Vitellius faced off--when Otho lost a battle to Vitellius' forces (Vitellius wasn't there), Otho committed suicide to prevent additional bloodshed. Vitellius quickly showed himself unsuited for the position of emperor, which is when Vespasian decided to make a bid for the throne.

The Year of the Four Emperors showed that anyone could become emperor if his supporters could beat the supporters of a rival, but they were fortunate to have no successful rebellions between 69 and 193. Vespasian was succeeded by his two sons, Titus and Domitian. After Domitian was murdered, the Senate put up Nerva, who quickly adopted Trajan. Trajan adopted his relative Hadrian (at least that was the official version). Hadrian adopted Antoninus Pius. Antoninus adopted Marcus Aurelius, but Marcus Aurelius had a surviving son who couldn't easily be passed over, Commodus. Commodus was another incompetent megalomaniac like Caligula and Nero and things went downhill from there.

The question is which Roman emperor the current President is most like...

Tacitus said of Galba, "in the opinion of everyone, he was capable of empire, if he had not ruled." I think of that in connection with some of the people who get hyped as potentially great Presidents if they would just run, like Colin Powell. He would have been a Galba.

86 posted on 05/14/2013 9:32:20 AM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

Helluva way to kick off the Dark Ages. Lots of interesting history, but at times they really were just “Dark.”


87 posted on 05/14/2013 2:13:43 PM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: juma

http://www.amazon.com/Lost-West-Forgotten-Byzantine-Civilization/dp/0307407969

This should help you out - you will probably see it in your local library.


88 posted on 05/14/2013 6:47:15 PM PDT by mbj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

Note: this topic is from 5/12/2013.

89 posted on 05/24/2015 5:53:08 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (What do we want? REGIME CHANGE! When do we want it? NOW!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Yersinia Pestis keyword, processed a bit, sorted newest to oldest within each "forum" of FR:

90 posted on 08/17/2021 1:33:35 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (Imagine an imaginary menagerie manager imagining managing an imaginary menagerie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Covenantor

91 posted on 08/17/2021 1:34:35 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (Imagine an imaginary menagerie manager imagining managing an imaginary menagerie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson