The Greatest Roman General

[Germanicus]

I don't think M. Aurelius was that good of a general, his campaigns were too passives. Instead of the conquering the Germans once and for all, he made a campaign of really just trying to keep them out of German, subduing them only temporary.

 

Sorry - who were you responding to here ? He's not on the list and I don't think anyone suggested him for Best General status.

[M. Porcius Cato]

Based on the metrics of added-value and strength of the opponent, I'd go with Scipio Africanus any day--he took a military organization that blundered its way into getting slaughtered at Cannae and he turned it into the finely-tuned machine that could defeat Hannibal at Zama. (If there were a poll for Rome's greatest adversary, I'd probably vote for Hannibal too.)

 

Why not Caesar? While Caesar won decisive victories in Gaul, even under Vercingetorix the Gallic armies--while awesome in number--were inferior to Caesar's army in technology, in tactics, and in training. These competitive advantages were not developed by Caesar in Gaul but in Spain under Scipio et al. (Most obvious example: the Mainz gladius carried by Caesar's troops was but a slight modification of the gladius hispanicus.) Still, the decisive competitive advantage in the Gallic Wars came from military engineering, and I can't think of a Roman general before Caesar who completed anything as audacious and successful as the circumvallation of the Alesian plateau. For that (more than Pharsalus), Caesar squeaks by Pompey as my #2 pick.

 

I'd add that Pompey should have been added to the list. I'm reminded of Shakespeare's line: "You blocks, you stones, you worse than senseless things! Oh you hard hearts! You cruel men of Rome! Knew you not Pompey?"

[FLavius Valerius Constantinus]

Caesar is (obviously) the best Roman general with Trajan and Scipio battling for 2nd place. Than Marius and Aurelian.

 

If I'm wrong, correct me, but Traianus here mentioned Aurelius, so I was responding to him. Well he's not on the list :bag:

[Primus Pilus]

I'd add that Pompey should have been added to the list. I'm reminded of Shakespeare's line: "You blocks, you stones, you worse than senseless things! Oh you hard hearts! You cruel men of Rome! Knew you not Pompey?"

 

I too have always admired Pompey's abilities. It can really be seen in his earlier days under Sulla. Unfortunately his campaigns against the guerilla Sertorius in Hispania were not exceptional, the eastern expeditions are clouded by the 'softening' of resistance by Lucullus, and of course his indecisiveness against Caesar left a poor final legacy. However, as we must also understand that Pompey ended up on the losing side of the civil war, the propoganda machine certainly did him no favors.

 

Unfortunately, I'm unable to edit poll choices or I would add him

[Gaius Julius Trajan]

Caesar is (obviously) the best Roman general with Trajan and Scipio battling for 2nd place. Than Marius and Aurelian.

 

If I'm wrong, correct me, but Traianus here mentioned Aurelius, so I was responding to him. Well he's not on the list :bag:

 

Check my post, I mentioned Aurelian.

 

Caesar is (obviously) the best Roman general with Trajan and Scipio battling for 2nd place. Than Marius and Aurelian.

 

I agree Agrippa deserves some mention, where would Octavian have been without him?

 

Out of curiosity - Why do you put Marius so low ?

 

So you consider 4th place in over a 1000 years of Roman history low?

 

I'd put the other three above him because they made important conquests and/or brought much land under Roman control which would give them the edge IMO.It's not becaused I dont value Marius capability.

[Germanicus]

So you consider 4th place in over a 1000 years of Roman history low?

 

I'd put the other three above him because they made important conquests and/or brought much land under Roman control which would give them the edge IMO.It's not becaused I dont value Marius capability.

 

I just consider it low because in my opinion there may not have been a Rome for Caesar or Trajan to expand had Marius not stood in the way of 100,000 Cimbri and Tuetones.

 

But each to their own.

[M. Porcius Cato]

I just consider it low because in my opinion there may not have been a Rome for Caesar or Trajan to expand had Marius not stood in the way of 100,000 Cimbri and Tuetones.

By this reasoning, shouldn't Romulus be considered Rome's greatest general?

[FLavius Valerius Constantinus]

If there were any real evidence that he existed.

[Germanicus]

QUOTE(Germanicus @ Nov 30 2005, 04:43 PM)

 

I just consider it low because in my opinion there may not have been a Rome for Caesar or Trajan to expand had Marius not stood in the way of 100,000 Cimbri and Tuetones.

 

 

By this reasoning, shouldn't Romulus be considered Rome's greatest general?

 

That's just silly, you got my point.

[LEG X EQ]

Yes, Marius was a great general, but, the germanic union of cimbris and teutons, were not a thread to Romes Italy. but a threat to Transalpine gaul, which was just recently conquered by the Romans. Just for those who arent informed, Cimbrian War, 4 battles, around 152.000 dead Romans and 278.000 dead Germanics and 60.000 captured Germanics put into slavery.

 

The Greatest General, was Publius Cornelius Scipio Major, in the Second Punic War, when things went bad for Rome, a handful of Roman Officers wanted to flee, he was the one who assembled a group of soldiers, followed and found those cowards, and made them swear to uphold their loyalty to Rome, while holding a gladius at their throats. He was the mastermind who defeated hannibal, and won the Second Punic War for Rome.

 

"Scipio was welcomed back to Rome with the agnomen of "Africanus". He refused the many further honours which the people would have thrust upon him. For some years he lived quietly and took no part in politics."

from Wikipedia

 

Thats why i admire Scipio, he was a humble man not so power obsessed like Caesar and others, he did what had to be done, and saw it as his duty(no more, no less).

 

So Scipio gets my vote.

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp...80px-Scipio.jpg

 

 

 

and as for Romulus, thats just a myth, nothing i take seriously , cause he never existed.

Edited December 4, 2005 by LEG X EQ

[FLavius Valerius Constantinus]

Yeah, sadly the humble part about the Cornelii was no more during Caesar's time.

Edited December 5, 2005 by FLavius Valerius Constantinus

[Iuvius Maximus]

why do people underestimate Scipio Africanus's talent as a great general

here is some facts that convinced me to thinking that he is a better general.

1)He and Hannibal met on three occasions, one of those occasions, after the battle of Zama, Scipio asked Hannibal who he thought the greatest Military leader of all time was, Hannibal said Alexander the Great, then Scipio asked who he thought the second best was (clearly, Scipio was looking for a compliment) Hannibal replied... .... idk his name right now but will get the book again , finally Scipio asked who the third greatest was He said Scipio, because he could defeat himself. And also he would he would have put himself at the top if Scipio hadn't won at the battle of Zama, then Hannibal would have put himself at the top because he would be able to defeat the great Scipio.

 

:2guns:

[Primus Pilus]

Text of Livy Book 35 in Latin and English

 

Inter alia cum quaereret quem fuisse maximum imperatorem Hannibal crederet, respondit Alexandrum, Macedonum regem, quod parva manu innumerabiles exercitus fudisset quodque ultimas oras, quas visere supra spem humanam esset, peragrasset. Quaerenti deinde, quem secundum poneret, "Pyrrhum", inquit, "castra metari primum docuisse, ad hoc neminem loca elegantius cepisse, praesidia disposuisse"

 

Exsequenti, quem tertium diceret, semet ipsum dixit. Ridens Scipio: "quidnam tu diceres," inquit, "si me vicisses?"

 

"Tunc vero me," inquit, "et ante Alexandrum et ante Pyrrhum et ante alios posuissem."

 

When he (Scipio) asked him (Hannibal), among other things, who he considered to be the greatest general, he replied that this was king Alexander of Macedonia, because with a small army, he had routed innumerable armies, and had reached the furthest coasts, which are beyond human hope to see. Asking who he believed was the second, he replied "Pyrrhus, who taught us how to built a camp; until now, no one has ever chosen better positions or built better fortifications".

 

When Scipio continued and asked who was the third, Hannibal mentioned himself. With a smile, Scipio asked, "What would you have said if you had defeated me?"

 

"In that case," Hannibal replied, "I would have placed myself before Alexander and Pyrrhus."

[FLavius Valerius Constantinus]

Wow, that paragraph was truly an example of good Roman propaganda. Obviously, that was Livy's job anyways.