Started By
Message

re: Octavius (Augustus) Caesar: Cruel sniveling coward or great Roman (or both)?

Posted on 1/12/16 at 10:15 am to
Posted by biglego
Ask your mom where I been
Member since Nov 2007
76692 posts
Posted on 1/12/16 at 10:15 am to
The stakes were higher for Scipio. Julius never went up against Hannibal.
Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
56605 posts
Posted on 1/12/16 at 10:29 am to
Well, that wouldn't have been possible, and Hannibal's troops were depleted and physically beaten after the long marches. His famous elephants were replaced at a moment's notice and didn't have the training that they normally would have, which made it easier for Scipio's troops to herd and confuse them.

And in addition to his crowning victory, Caesar basically went on a continental European tour of asswhipping, repeatedly routing the hated Celts and attaining almost godlike status among the people.

I will say, Scipio's strategy was funnier. I've always wondered what would have happened if Hannibal had continued his siege and conquest of Rome, allowing the two armies to basically just take over each other's home capital.
Posted by RandySavage
Member since May 2012
30934 posts
Posted on 1/12/16 at 11:08 am to
quote:

The stakes were higher for Scipio. Julius never went up against Hannibal.


Vercingetorex was no slouch.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram