+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Allies & Enemies of Rome (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Rome\'s Public Enemy #1 (/showthread.php?tid=13154)
Rome\'s Public Enemy #1 - praetor0708 - 07-17-2008
I wanted to ask the members who they think was Rome's most feared adversary. The one that made Romans "tremble behind the walls". I think of Hannibal during the republic period and Attila the Hun during the late Roman period, but there were many others. Which one in your opinion was the greatest?.
Doug "Suetonius Attius Hispanicus"
Re: Rome\'s Public Enemy #1 - Wander - 07-17-2008
While Hannibal ("ad portas") was probably the greatest external fear of the Republican era, I think their greatest internal fear was Spartacus -- and the idea that he would inspire other slave revolts. Hence the many crucifixions along the Via Appia.
Re: Rome\'s Public Enemy #1 - zugislander - 07-17-2008
Hello all,
Nice topic. Personally I favor Hannibal, as he was an external threat being from Carthage, while also an Internal threat as he stomped about Latium for better than 15 years, destroying armies whither he went. However, I will add to the discussion the Celts/Gauls they certainly did put a scare into Rome after the first encounter. Furthermore they precipitated Marius' rise and poblems that followed in the late second century B.C..
Cordially,
Michael
Re: Rome\'s Public Enemy #1 - Jona Lendering - 07-17-2008
Enemies are often only enemies in the mind. The Romans believed Catilina and the Gracchi were dangerous - so I add them to the list.
Re: Rome\'s Public Enemy #1 - Tarbicus - 07-17-2008
Don't forget them pesky Parthians.
Aside from Hannibal and Spartacus, I'm not sure any others were seen as something to be afraid of; just an opportunity to get richer, grab some glory, and acquire some land and slaves. They were a tenacious bunch, and even when ad porta, they held an auction in full view of Ol' One Eye, selling the land he was occupying at cheap rates; essentially sticking two fingers up to him. They lost a battle, they just sent more men. Otherwise, we'd be re-enacting Carthaginians after Lake Tresimene.
I think the question should include; Who did they despise the most? In which case I'd say the Gauls after the sack of Rome (they did kill a messenger IIRC, so kind of brought it on themselves), Carthage and Hannibal, and Germans for a while after 9AD. Then Parthia.
Re: Rome\'s Public Enemy #1 - john m roberts - 07-18-2008
The Gauls, definitely. Alone of the non-Italian peoples they conquered, sacked and extorted ransom from the city. Then for the next couple of centuries they threw a fright into the Romans with incursions in force into Italy, sometimes forcing Rome to break off a foreign war to drive them out of the peninsula. Three and a half centuries after the sack, it was payback time.
Re: Rome\'s Public Enemy #1 - sonic - 07-18-2008
I'd put in the Samnites: the only enemy on Italian soil that they truly feared. Not surprising after the Caudine Forks!
The Samnites were the only ones who actually threatened the actual existence of Rome except for Hannibal.
Re: Rome\'s Public Enemy #1 - Sascha - 07-18-2008
I do not know if it could be the most feared foe, but the strongest, tallest and fittest enemies were the people of the German tribes…
A Reference is Flavius Josephus and the Jewish War, where these men were mentioned in this way.
:wink:
Re: Rome\'s Public Enemy #1 - Robert Vermaat - 07-18-2008
Romans had none to fear but themselves!
In fact the main reason for the demise of the Western Empire was civil war. :evil:
Re: Rome\'s Public Enemy #1 - Magnus - 07-19-2008
Crap...you took my answer Vorti. I bet nothing made a legionary more afraid than the thought of facing someone with the same weapons, same training, same discipline.
Ugh...no thanks!
Re: Rome\'s Public Enemy #1 - Gaius Julius Caesar - 07-19-2008
I imagine you could count GJC as one , from the perspective of certain Romans of the period.....obviously they were deluding themselves though!
Re: Rome\'s Public Enemy #1 - Simplex - 07-19-2008
Hello,
--Isn't there already a whole department of threads devoted to that question?! :wink:
--Somebody mentioned the Sassanids (Persians) already ?
--Personally, I'd subscribe to the thesis, that every single era of the Roman Empire had it's own specific "P.E. 1".
And the "Interns" seemed to have been as bad as the "Externs".
:roll:
Greez
Simplex
Re: Rome\'s Public Enemy #1 - Ironhand - 07-19-2008
No from what I've heard the Roman soldiers were quite eager to engage in battle against each other in the civil war. They were soldiers not pansy strategists on a chess board. War is more than the tools they use and in fighting somewhat familiar foes there is no fear of the unknown involved either. It becomes a contest of stategy, discipline, and skill which would very much have appealed to the hot blooded Roman soldier.
Re: Rome\'s Public Enemy #1 - texascavtrooper - 07-19-2008
I could see this. Due to the fact that many of the legions were formed by regions. So one legion might have a grudge with one of the other legions just by the fact that they came from a certain place.
Re: Rome\'s Public Enemy #1 - A_Volpe - 07-19-2008
Certainly feared by the Senate in the Late Republic: Julius Caesar! On his way back from Gaul :twisted: