Reading Group--Caesar's Legion

[mmadsen]

Chapter XI -- The Battle of Pharsalus (continued)

The tale of the tape:

Pompey, conqueror of the East, fifty-seven, a former young achiever who had made history in his twenties, a multimillionaire, an excellent military organizer, a master strategist, coming off a victory, with the larger army. Caesar, conqueror of the West, who had celebrated his fifty-second birthday only three weeks before in the month that would eventually bear his name, who had been nearly forty before he made his first military mark, an original tactician and engineering genius with a mastery of detail, a commander with dash, the common touch, luck, and the smaller but more experienced army.

It's sad for Rome that these two meet on the battlefield:

Plutarch was to lament that, combined, two such famous, talented Roman generals and their seventy thousand men could have conquered the old enemy Parthia for Rome, could have marched unassailed all the way to India. Instead, here they were, bent on destroying each other.

 

[ExtremeSIMS]

Re: Chapter II -- Impatient for Glory

Caesar took a personal interest in the appointment of the legion's six tribunes, all young colonels in their late teens and twenties..."

Young colonels in their late teens? And here I thought a lieutenant in his early twenties was in over his head...

It's a good thing we still have centurions to keep the men in check. We just call 'em "sergeants" now.

Originally, colonels were "column leaders," more prized for their physical attributes than their leadership. Maybe that explains their relative youth.

 

[SHARK]

Greetings!

Chapter XI: The Battle of Pharsalus
____________________________________________________
Quote:

"Plutarch was to lament that, combined, two such famous, talented Roman generals and their seventy thousand men could have conquered the old enemy Parthia for Rome, could have marched unassailed all the way to India. Instead, here they were, bent on destroying each other."
____________________________________________________
End Quote.

Indeed, I have to agree with Plutarch. Pompey, like Caesar, was a great hero, and a brilliant commander. Rome loses much all around by having these two great commanders fight, regardless of who the victor is, really.

As an added thought, in my view, despite Rome's justified position as the greatest empire in history, Rome often wasted far too much blood, talent, and gold on frequent civil wars and in-fighting between various generals and would-be emperors. Should Rome have been thoroughly united, and embraced a smooth system of imperial election, the mind is boggled by what Rome could have accomplished! As it was, it is a fine testimony to the efficiency and skill of the Imperial beuracracy and the skill of the Legions that Rome was able to endure within the pale of greatness despite what the generals did, and the suffering of various civil wars.

One can only imagine what Rome might have been able to do!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

 

[Maldur]

It seems that the camp's commander, General Afranius, had already escaped by this time, spiriting away Pompey's son Gnaeus, probably as prearranged with Pompey.

It seems Pompey prepared even for defeat.
I wonder how much he believed his interpretation of his dream?

 

[mmadsen]

Should Rome have been thoroughly united, and embraced a smooth system of imperial election, the mind is boggled by what Rome could have accomplished!

If Caesar had lost and Rome had remained a Republic, you mean?

 

[Maldur]

Our keyboards might have look VERY different, and shark might have served time in the 42nd naval legion

 

[Rashak Mani]

>>>>>>>>>
One can only imagine what Rome might have been able to do!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Not much I think. You must remember that in counterbalance to their amazing technical and military skills was a society and political system that was becoming ever more corrupt and rotten. The slave system was a major "delaying" factor too.

If they somehow transitioned out of the senatorial/cesar power center arrangement and the slave based economy then they might have gone further. Rome first boosted in power when they deposed a Monarch and became a Republic... in later ages they were slowly going back to old ways.

Their strongest points were actually their Law system and Urban development. Corruption tended to weaken evermore the Law benefit and too much reliance on slaves made the urban population largely unemployed or under employed. Politics too spoiled the "system".

 

[mmadsen]

Our keyboards might have look VERY different...

Why would our keyboards look different if Rome had remained a republic? We use the Latin alphabet.

 

[Maldur]

ok, number are abuot the only difference ( maybe the $)

but I think SHARK meant a bit more than : just rome staying a republic.

What if rome echanged their internal structure in such a way , that the energy used in internal strife could have been used in other things. What if Pompey and Ceasar worked together! Might India or persia be roman as well? Would the roman empire have existed in the 15th century or the 20th?

 

[mmadsen]

but I think SHARK meant a bit more than : just rome staying a republic.

I was teasing SHARK a bit, because he seemed to want a benevolent dictator (like Caesar) leading Rome without opposition. I suggested a Republic under the Senate, like they had before Caesar seized power.

I don't know that much Roman history, but that is when things really started to go downhill, right? Once it became an empire?