08-09-2007, 09:48 AM
Quote:I really don't think there was a "greatest" defeat - and certainly not one which can be pointed to as the 'downfall' of Rome. No single Military defeat ever crippled or destroyed the Roman Empire. Indeed, arguably, it was never " destroyed" in any meaningful sense, but rather evolved.
The Western Empire evolved into the loose states of 'Western Europe' who continued to have a similar identity and languages, and the Eastern Empire evolved into the Islamic/Arab/Ottoman empire, with a broadly similar culture, identity and languages, even if politically splintered. ( A very broad generalisation, I know, but roughly speaking.... )
Quite often in its history, Rome had 50,000 man armies/navies 'destroyed'(not forgetting that rarely, if ever, did this actually mean that many killed, except maybe some of the naval disasters).......and overcame these blows and carried on militarily anyway - Cannae, Carrhae, Teutoburgerwald, Adrianople etc are but a few examples. After each of them, the Roman Military returned 'bigger and badder' than ever (excuse another generalisation, but a big topic demands a broad brush).There may have been "rot" in the sense of a decay in Roman military abilities ( and that's arguable too!) , but this was due mainly to non-military reasons.
Let us not forget that Rome never conquered for the sake of conquest, the reasons for a 'takeover' were always complex - greed, pursuit of glory,'lebensraum' etc...and rational. If Rome chose not to occupy Western Germany, or Scotland or Africa or Iraq, it was because those places were simply not worth it (to a Roman) - sorry if that offends proud Brits or Germans ! :wink:
To Roman tenacity, a military defeat, even a massive one or several massive ones, was just a 'hiccup' or 'speed-bump'.
Consider the borders of the Empire at its height - desert to the south in Africa/Egypt, desert to the East in Palestine/Syria/Anatolia, a cold desert to the North across the steppes, a desert of trees to the North in Germany and of Ocean to the west !!!
Rome's boundaries were decided by Geography, not military defeats !! 8)
I would submit that none of Rome's defeats were ever disatrous in the sense of leading to Rome's destruction.
I don't quite agree. The east empire evolved to the Byzantine empire, but the west was conquered. True, the barbarians were more interested to use the roman confort, but they were too diferent to be a mere continuation. Several kingdoms with a warrior and iliterate aristocracy isn't the same (or even close!) as a unified empire.
