Rome\'s most able general?

[Paullus Scipio]

Steven wrote:-

Can you supply the exact reference?

I think it is Suda/Suidas frag 96 - where he describes the Celt-Iberian sword-making methods, and states that the Romans adopted the form but not the method, and adopted it during the war with Hannibal....the whole question is somewhat vexed and controversial...some believing the Polybius references I mentioned imply the Gladius Hispaniesis was adopted earlier, since it is impliedly in use during the wars with the Gauls , Telamon etc before the second Punic War. Livy, in describing the duel between Manlius Torquatus (Livy 7.10) and a giant Gaul around 362 BC, has Manlius strap on a Gladius Hispaniensis, but this is almost certainly an anachronism.

Unlike some academics, I do not find Polybius’ first time use of the term cohort as proof of when it was introduced.

But then how do you explain Dionysius and Livy’ use of cohort for the early republic, not to forget the middle republic period? If memory serves me correct, Livy uses the term cohort fifteen times in books I to V. Dionysius somewhere around 11 times, and on four occasions gives the number of men in a cohort.

...but it is here that Polybius describes the use of a cohort manouevring as a tactical unit for the first time, and the cohort eventually supercedes the maniple as tactical unit...previous references to cohort seem to refer to an administrative unit only....the various maniples generally do not manouevre together as a cohort...

Note that previously, the army can only effect outflanking manouevres by detaching 'ad hoc' units, not by the whole army manouevring.
Here is not the place to debate earlier Roman practice but at Sentinum for example, Livy only talks of reseves being moved up and used, not flanking manouevres.....

[Marcus Julius]

Very interesting discussion. At least as good as the one a while back about the greatest Emperor. Indeed way too many to choose from.

Can I be allowed to throw a monkey wrench into the argument. Would anyone consider Spartacus to be either Roman or a General? One of Julius Caesar's greatnesses was his charisma, his ability to get both the common people and the men who died for him to at least respect him, if not absolutely love him. Spartacus was able to raise tens of thousands of troops from slaves, and get them capable enough to defeat how many legions?

Again, the issues of situation and timing are at hand, as he was obviously underestimated time and again. However, no one can discredit his ability to incite, inspire, and draw a following.

[Ygraine]

Wow! That's a very innovative nomination. What was the ethnic origin of Spartacus, by the way?

[Sardaukar]

Ancient sources seem to agree that he was Thracian.

Appian says he was "a Thracian by birth, who had once served as a soldier with the Romans, but had since been a prisoner and sold for a gladiator." Appian, Civil Wars 1.116

Florus says he was "a mercenary Thracian [who] had become a Roman soldier, of a soldier a deserter and robber, and afterwards, from consideration of his strength, a gladiator". Florus, Epitome of Roman History 2.8

I shamelessly copied thsese from Wiki-article, that fortunately seems to have good sources :twisted: .

But it seems that he was quite accustomed to war...aptly demonstrated by his ability in leading army. Must have been quite a character. And since sources say he had been a Roman soldier, it should make him eligible to contest the title of Greatest Roman General. I don't think he was quite *that* good, but very good anyway.

[Marcus Julius]

Wow! That's a very innovative nomination. What was the ethnic origin of Spartacus, by the way?

Thracian, however, Thrace was part of the empire by then, wasn't it? Didn't it come under Roman governance in the mid 2nd century BC?
Certainly, if he had been a citizen, he was stripped of it when he became enslaved. Then again, wasn't Julius Caesar labeled an enemy of the Republic, too?

[Sardaukar]

If I recall correctly, Roman citizen could not be sent to slavery without first revoking his citizenship, nor could he be punished by flogging or crucifixion. However, he could be beaten by the rods carried by lictors.

[Marcus Julius]

If I recall correctly, Roman citizen could not be sent to slavery without first revoking his citizenship, nor could he be punished by flogging or crucifixion. However, he could be beaten by the rods carried by lictors.

Well, I did start off by saying "if he had been a citizen". Had he been, he was a deserter, and desertion from the military was certainly grounds for expatriating someone.
Anyway, I brought up that point about Caesar being labeled an enemy of the Republic, basically to show a point: The histories are typically written by the victors. Both of these men started out on the side of good and were then considered to be enemies of Rome. Why shouldn't we consider Spartacus as one of the great leaders of his time? Is it because he was a slave, or is it because he lost? Maybe a combination of both.

The difference between a rebellion and a revolution is merely a question of who wins.

The Nazi's lost WW2, but Rommel is still considered one of the best military leaders of the time (Certainly out of period, but others have brought up Patton in the thread).

[Ygraine]

I would have to agree - a great leader he was. Perhaps winning the title of "most inspirational"? What odds he was fighting!

For centuries, western man has a soft spot in his heart for "slaves" who win freedom. They've been admired, even if subdued.... and there is the eternal debate as to perception. Rebel or patriot? etc.

[Quintus Brutii]

I thought Scipio was really acomplished as well as Ceasar.

[Quintus Sertorius]

I believe Sertorius must be up there. He was a great strategist and could adapt to the circumstances and the terrain. Generalship is not all about huge pitched battles. He certainly gave Pompey a run for his money.

Strange no one went for Marius.
Quintus Sertorius
aka Guido Aston

[S SEVERUS]

Wow! That's a very innovative nomination. What was the ethnic origin of Spartacus, by the way?

Thracian, however, Thrace was part of the empire by then, wasn't it? Didn't it come under Roman governance in the mid 2nd century BC?
Certainly, if he had been a citizen, he was stripped of it when he became enslaved. Then again, wasn't Julius Caesar labeled an enemy of the Republic, too?

I think that Thrace was a client state till 46 AD.

[taira1180]

Scipius is probably the best. He fought in several situations and against different types of armies, also against good generals, and transformed the roman army.

[S SEVERUS]

Aurelian - Restitutor Orbis.
That says it all :wink:

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

Without any shade of a doubt it would have to be, in order of outstanding achievement in the field of EXCELLENCE!:

1 - Maximus Decimus Meridius

2 - Scipio Africanus

3 - Caesar and Pompey

4 - Germanicus

5 - Stilicho/Aetius

6 - Belisarius

7 - Machiavelli

[Octavianvs]

Hmm Caesar definitly especially for the tactics, strategies psychologie, he used everything to fight and win including on calculating in luck. I saw a Tiberius and not to forget his adoptive son Germanicus who knows had he not been murdered. But what about Vespasian?