11-09-2012, 11:58 PM
First, the Goths was a heterogenous people in which Dacians was an important presence.
Then if we look at periods we see that during the wars with Carthage Rome didnt even controled the entire Italian peninsula. It was still a local power that tried to rise but wasnt anywhere near the behemot that was during Trajan rule, when arguably reached its peak.
And Huns, well, Roman empire was already split and very weakened from the inside, and having other enemies as well beside Huns. Even such, the weaker western empire Roman army under Flavius Aetius managed to defeat Attila Hunic army (both armies reinforced with Goths, Burgunds, Franks etc) when they fight a head on battle and Huns didnt used their hit and run tactics.
Supposedlt Aetius even let Attila escape or alive because of personal political and strategic reasons, as to keep himself in important position in the empire (as the only general able to defeat the Huns) and keep a control on other allies (Goths or Germanics) that might disobey without Hunic threat around.
Persians was not a direct threat to Roman empire (except very late under Sassanids for eastern Roman empire).
Except same Trajan i dont think was any Roman emperor who really want to conquer Persia. Sure, we can count Crassus (but that was more like a private adventure) or Marcus Antonius (not very successfull).
Caesar might had planed that, after he planed an full attack against Dacia (acording to Strabon). And Trajan didnt seem to have big problems in defeating Parthia (despite that failed sige of that town in the desert). He conquered even Susa i think (Ctesiphon and Babylon too) in today Iran, and if he wouldnt get sick (and be too old) i assume he would go on. Jewish rebellion was a problem too, but almost totally resolved already when he died
So Dacians was among the greatest Rome enemies as they fight against it with quite succes for a while, right at the peak of Roman power, even forcing it during Domitian to pay them a tribute.
Is hard to consider that they could've threat Rome directly, but their example might stir the Germans and Parthians, which Decebal actualy tried to do, unfortunately Pacorus II refused and Germans back then wasnt strong or united enough to do something against Roman empire.
However if Dacians continued to pose such a problem and defeat and humilate Rome, such alliance may come to reality and threat Roman empire with a war on 3 fronts which was way much hard to fight.
Thats why Trajan stoped imediatly the pay of the tribute and raised such big armies to resolve the Dacian problem.
And those was very hard wars, the distance from Roman Danube frontier (where Romans build that bridges) to Sarmizegetusa, the Dacian capital, is i think no more then 200 km. A distance that a legionar in a march can cover in one week (lets say is a bit harder as its in mountain area).
And Roman army (probably the biggest ever used against a foreign enemy) needed one year to get there, in both wars (maybe less in the second one, when they covered more of Dacian kingdom of Decebalus, which doesnt comprised however all the teritories inhabited by Dacians).
Paulus Orosius write about Dacians/Getae (the part i want to point out is the opinions of Alexander the Great, Pyrrhus and Caesar about them)
https://sites.google.com/site/demontorto...sius_book1
<<On the contrary, recently these Getae, who are at present also called Goths (Alexander publicly said that they must be shunned, Pyrrhus dreaded them, and even Caesar avoided them), after stripping their homes bare and abandoning them, united their forces in one body and invaded the Roman provinces. By proving themselves to be a menace over a long period of time, these barbarians hoped upon their request to obtain an alliance with Rome—an alliance which they could have won by force of arms.>>
Then if we look at periods we see that during the wars with Carthage Rome didnt even controled the entire Italian peninsula. It was still a local power that tried to rise but wasnt anywhere near the behemot that was during Trajan rule, when arguably reached its peak.
And Huns, well, Roman empire was already split and very weakened from the inside, and having other enemies as well beside Huns. Even such, the weaker western empire Roman army under Flavius Aetius managed to defeat Attila Hunic army (both armies reinforced with Goths, Burgunds, Franks etc) when they fight a head on battle and Huns didnt used their hit and run tactics.
Supposedlt Aetius even let Attila escape or alive because of personal political and strategic reasons, as to keep himself in important position in the empire (as the only general able to defeat the Huns) and keep a control on other allies (Goths or Germanics) that might disobey without Hunic threat around.
Persians was not a direct threat to Roman empire (except very late under Sassanids for eastern Roman empire).
Except same Trajan i dont think was any Roman emperor who really want to conquer Persia. Sure, we can count Crassus (but that was more like a private adventure) or Marcus Antonius (not very successfull).
Caesar might had planed that, after he planed an full attack against Dacia (acording to Strabon). And Trajan didnt seem to have big problems in defeating Parthia (despite that failed sige of that town in the desert). He conquered even Susa i think (Ctesiphon and Babylon too) in today Iran, and if he wouldnt get sick (and be too old) i assume he would go on. Jewish rebellion was a problem too, but almost totally resolved already when he died
So Dacians was among the greatest Rome enemies as they fight against it with quite succes for a while, right at the peak of Roman power, even forcing it during Domitian to pay them a tribute.
Is hard to consider that they could've threat Rome directly, but their example might stir the Germans and Parthians, which Decebal actualy tried to do, unfortunately Pacorus II refused and Germans back then wasnt strong or united enough to do something against Roman empire.
However if Dacians continued to pose such a problem and defeat and humilate Rome, such alliance may come to reality and threat Roman empire with a war on 3 fronts which was way much hard to fight.
Thats why Trajan stoped imediatly the pay of the tribute and raised such big armies to resolve the Dacian problem.
And those was very hard wars, the distance from Roman Danube frontier (where Romans build that bridges) to Sarmizegetusa, the Dacian capital, is i think no more then 200 km. A distance that a legionar in a march can cover in one week (lets say is a bit harder as its in mountain area).
And Roman army (probably the biggest ever used against a foreign enemy) needed one year to get there, in both wars (maybe less in the second one, when they covered more of Dacian kingdom of Decebalus, which doesnt comprised however all the teritories inhabited by Dacians).
Paulus Orosius write about Dacians/Getae (the part i want to point out is the opinions of Alexander the Great, Pyrrhus and Caesar about them)
https://sites.google.com/site/demontorto...sius_book1
<<On the contrary, recently these Getae, who are at present also called Goths (Alexander publicly said that they must be shunned, Pyrrhus dreaded them, and even Caesar avoided them), after stripping their homes bare and abandoning them, united their forces in one body and invaded the Roman provinces. By proving themselves to be a menace over a long period of time, these barbarians hoped upon their request to obtain an alliance with Rome—an alliance which they could have won by force of arms.>>
Razvan A.
