- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 2/23/23 at 12:26 pm to Tiger1242
Belisarius reunited the east and west roman empires with basically no support, he's up there in my all time greatest generals list.
Posted on 2/23/23 at 12:28 pm to Tiger1242
Hannibal studied Alexander and told Plutarch that Alexander was better than he was.
Posted on 2/23/23 at 12:36 pm to Tiger1242
Cannae was was an unmitigated slaughter for the Romans and a mistake in that they abandoned the Flavian plan that was designed to bleed the Carthaginians. No doubt Hannibal wrecked Italians the Western Med but ultimately Hannibal got outflanked by Scipio when Scipio lands an army in N.Africa and works a deal with the Numidians and puts direct pressure on Carthage itself.
Alexander was a savant....and lucky in his opponents. Darius was no great general and once Alexander beats him at Issa, Persia is all but finished.Also his soldiers and army were maybe the best in all of antiquity with Hannibal a close second.
But, there was a reason the Romans were successful for 600 years in the Med world. The were organized as a society better than their opponents....and ruthless operators.
Alexander was a savant....and lucky in his opponents. Darius was no great general and once Alexander beats him at Issa, Persia is all but finished.Also his soldiers and army were maybe the best in all of antiquity with Hannibal a close second.
But, there was a reason the Romans were successful for 600 years in the Med world. The were organized as a society better than their opponents....and ruthless operators.
Posted on 2/23/23 at 12:36 pm to fr33manator
No I’ll have to look it up
Posted on 2/23/23 at 12:38 pm to USMCguy121
Yeah, people forget him. I'm not sure he ever lost a battle either.
Posted on 2/23/23 at 12:40 pm to Tiger1242
Posted on 2/23/23 at 12:42 pm to Mr Happy
Caesar was so much more ruthless than the other two.
Posted on 2/23/23 at 12:47 pm to Tiger1242
quote:
Alexander died 11 years into his and his empire immediately collapsed.
An early death was the greatest thing to ever happen to his legacy.
Perhaps it helped his legacy, but that seems to contradict this...
quote:
there is a decent argument that Alexander’s army could’ve done all of that without him
Your OP states how fiercely loyal they were. The immediate division of Alexander's empire and the ensuing 40 years of war among his successors suggests they would not have been able to accomplish what they did without him as their leader and unifier.
Posted on 2/23/23 at 12:50 pm to Tiger1242
Hannibal took elephants across the alps. Checkmate, Alexander.
Posted on 2/23/23 at 12:58 pm to Tiger1242
Age old question of championships, dominance, or longevity.
I'd vote for Alexander. He marched a long, long way.
Hannibal's whole campaign can fit in the upper left corner of Alexander's map.
Vs
I'd vote for Alexander. He marched a long, long way.
Hannibal's whole campaign can fit in the upper left corner of Alexander's map.
Vs
Posted on 2/23/23 at 1:05 pm to Tiger1242
I love the end of Dan Carlin's Punic Nightmares. IRRC he says the Punic Wars are what started Rome's conquering of a lot of the known world in self defense. The changes that Rome made to their army/government to stop Hannibal were what later let people like Marius/Sulla/Caesar to take the Roman Military and use it to dominate Rome. Kind of the beginning of the end of their Republican system of government.
IDK if that's historically accurate or not but it sounds pretty cool.
IDK if that's historically accurate or not but it sounds pretty cool.
Posted on 2/23/23 at 1:09 pm to Tiger1242
quote:shitty movie
Alexander the Great
Posted on 2/23/23 at 1:10 pm to Loup
I think that’s a good way to think of it.
IMO it’s that because of the Punic Wars Rome grew so big so fast, their political, social, and economic systems were not set up to support their size or their multi-cultural population and led them towards civil war.
IMO it’s that because of the Punic Wars Rome grew so big so fast, their political, social, and economic systems were not set up to support their size or their multi-cultural population and led them towards civil war.
Posted on 2/23/23 at 6:38 pm to Tiger1242
quote:
While I agree with this, there is a decent argument that Alexander’s army could’ve done all of that without him
Yeah. The army did an excellent job of staying United after he died.
Posted on 2/23/23 at 6:46 pm to Tiger1242
I doubt Phillip would have met the same end as his son, but I wholeheartedly believe that had it been Phillip instead of Alexander, the resulting success would have been much the same.
Then you would have had Alexander there to inherit and pick up the banner of the Macedonian Empire instead of it falling to pieces within a generation.
I'll take Hannibal. He did far more with far less.
Then you would have had Alexander there to inherit and pick up the banner of the Macedonian Empire instead of it falling to pieces within a generation.
I'll take Hannibal. He did far more with far less.
Posted on 2/23/23 at 6:46 pm to TigerintheNO
quote:
Alexander the Great never lost and captured the known civilized world by the age of 33.
Not exactly true. There were several large and vibrant civilizations in Asia that Alexander never saw.
Posted on 2/23/23 at 6:58 pm to TigerintheNO
quote:
Historians feel that a lot of Hannibal accomplishments are embellished by the Romans.
I'm no expert on Hannibal, by any means, but it does seem like the theatrics in "the games" provided by taking advantage of a dumbass that marched (some) elephants across the alps (not all of them, mind you) outweigh the "surprise factor."
Hannibal was called out, although briefly, in "The Psychology of Military Incompetence." Fantastic book.
This post was edited on 2/23/23 at 7:09 pm
Posted on 2/23/23 at 10:37 pm to LemmyLives
Now Hannibal definitely has one of the best battles...bu AtG did more overall.
This post was edited on 2/23/23 at 10:39 pm
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News