Axel Wers

I joined few days ago to Nova Roma

Now I read book The Search Begins (1973), there is mentioned that Nero sent an expedition to discover the source of the Nile. The results of the expedition were uncertain, but it is assumed that expedition probably reached south-central Sudan.

I think it's not possible consider what enemy was the most dangerous for Roman for easy reason: history of Roman Empire (including kingdom and republic) is very long with different historical outcomes. 1. Roman Kingdom: Early Rome controlled part of Apennine peninsula and Romans had to fight with some other inhabitants like Umbrians, Etruscans etc. Rome was "only" common city state like other cities in neighbourhoods. 2. Roman Republic: Gauls looted Rome in 390 BC. and Rome was almost defeated. Romans fought for last buildings and fortunately they won. Yes Carthaginians were very dangerous. After Battle of Canae Hannibal could led war against Rome city directly, but he stopped his campaign and Romans could repair their defence. 3. Roman Empire: Wars with germanic tribes were infinite. Empire was exhausted after few centuries. We cannot forget the Persian empire, permanent enemy on eastern boundaries for 4 centuries. And finally Arabs and Turks who took vast territories and empire lost important areas (like Egypt, and later Anatolia). These points are reasons why Roman Empire was one of few greatest empires in Earth history. Romans fought on several fronts with various enemies with different weaponry and been able to maintain their empire for two millennia.

First: I think: NO Roman empire in 69AD was powerful empire without real strong enemies (maybe Parthian empire on the East, but Parthians were dangerous only for some eastern borders). Germans were still poor in that time. Second: Galba maybe would be good emperor, we don't know very well about Otho nor Vitellius, their reign was very short (Otho especially). Vespasianus was good and able emperor. I think he could be marked as "little" father of empire (like Augustus), because he brought stability for empire. He finished civil war and brought peace for empire. Only Domitianus was not good emperor but thanks to his cruel reign could Nerva catch throne and establish glory nervan-antonine dynasty.

Yes, but practically only first crusade served its purpose.

Not easy to tell, because Eastern Empire existed more than 1000 years and during this age was different political situation in different centuries. First: Persians (5-7 century). Byzantine inherited this nemesis after split of Roman Empire. Wars with Persians were bloody and finally noticeably weakened both empires in the worst possible time - during muslim rise. Second: Muslims / Arabs (7-12 century). Muslims were in relatively easy situation. Byzantine empire was seriously weakened, Persians near to total collapse. After muslim attacks Persia definitely collapsed, Byzantine lost Levant and Egypt - important breadbasket. When Byzantine lost vast teritories, world power decreased to local power. From this time Byzantine wasn't not superpower, but only (but important) fortification against muslim invasion to Balkan. Third: Ottomans (13-15 century). Although Ottomans destroyed Byzantine empire, they were mainly consequence of muslim wars (turkish people were islamized similar like Persians). In this time power of Byzantine was low, Empire was weak without possibility to reconquest lost teritories. In my opinion Muslims / Arabs were the worst enemies. Don't forget on orthodox - catholic relations. Bad relations were very important factor for stability East Roman Empire. "Good" old enemies (like Goth, Vandals etc.) were secondary enemies. They were focused on western part of former Empire.

Augustus, founder of empire what fundamentally influenced history of Europe has birthday today!

Have you any connection with Roman Empire? Mine: I live in town Trencin (in Roman age named Laugaricio), modern Slovakia. In 179AD Romans defeated german tribes in this area and left inscription on the rock below the today Trencin Castle. Thanks to this inscription we know about settlement in this area what makes Trencin one of the oldest towns in central Europe. Marcus Aurelius planned to create a new province here, but died and Commodus withdrew from this area.

In my opinion Battle of Adrianople was tactical failure for two reasons: Legionaries were tired after long march Romans underestimated Goths

I could agree. I read something about his descendants and they also weren't much better from point of this view. I have to find sources about this. Here is a little example. I have little change my opinion. I confused overrated with underrated. I am jerk. I tell one thing: Only Scipio was able to defeat Hannibal for sure. That same Hannibal who destroyed almost whole Roman army.

Great! (and thanks for link) Yes, this is main reason why I don't want to buy goods from the USA, shipping is expensive. Yes I have some suggestions, for example t-shirt (and maybe flag too) of Legion II Adiutrix, this legion stayed in my town 1835 years ago. I can send you some images via PM.

I could agree. I read something about his descendants and they also weren't much better from point of this view. I have to find sources about this. Here is a little example.

Hi all, I would like to buy some t-shirts with Roman empire emblems, like this I found two e-shops but both are from the USA and shipping is about 30$ what is almost more than t-shirt price Do you know similar eshops in Europe? I found nothing. Thanks.

I think yes. Celtic gene pool is contained in almost whole western population. I read few years ago article about origin of europen population. All Europeans have about 10 (ten) common ancestors.

My work is selling of gemstones, obsidian including. Obsidian in natural form has an interesting smooth surface and sharp edges.