Rome II

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Didn't Carthage get their asses kicked and relegated to the dustbin of history or something?

like Rome didnt?  :P

Not for awile. The world could thank Carthage for setting them up for inevitable defeat. The 2nd Punic war taught Rome the importance of establishing a professional standing army and paved the way eventually for Marius and his reforms. Always expansion was made under the claim of defense... Reflecting back to Hannibal. Although besides the Persians in the 3rd century, Carthage gave Rome more trouble than anyone...which would explain why they not only destroyed the city but salted the earth. That's why I love the Romans. They made warfare a true profession and did not refrain from exercising their new found art whenever they could.

They also had no problem stealing ideas from others and utilizing them without embarrassment. Fully acknowledging stealing their swords from the Spanish, helmets from the Guals and much more from the Eutrusceans.

Maybe I have you confused with someone else. I thought you were a cop? So you see total destruction of other civilizations as reasonable in war? Sorry to derail to a R&P type discussion. Do you see that as OK for the times or still OK?

[undercovergeek]

You have to admire their sheer hardcore attitude.... not only did they beat you, they took apart your mark on this earth stone by stone and then made sure nothing grew there ever again..... In a phrase - 'don't fk with us'

[Jarhead0331]

Didn't Carthage get their asses kicked and relegated to the dustbin of history or something?

like Rome didnt?  :P

Rome eventually fell after a few thousand years of kicking ass.  Carthage not so much.  The only reason anyone remembers Carthage is something about elephants and the alps, but who can possibly remember any of the details?   I blame sun tanning beds for your memory lapses.

Bison, you're just joking I presume. Sure, your average American May not know much about Carthage, but then they also don't know much about Rome either. Hell, kids these days don't even know much about the United States.

That being said, the educated soldier certainly knows about Carthage. You know, the great Mediterranean power that produced one of the greatest generals in all history. The one who defeated Rome's armies, battle after battle, bleeding her white and eventually bringing her to her knees. Hannibal's accomplishments certainly left a mark on history and his strategies are studied to this day.

I dunno, I see a lot of stereotyping in this thread now that is really pretty ignorant from a historical perspective. "Hardcore Romans, effeminate Greeks"? Yeah, go tell that to the Spartans. The Romans may have turned war into a profession, but the Spartans turned war into a lifestyle. I assure you, there was nothing "effeminate" about a Spartan soldier. Homosexuality was just as acceptable in roman society as it was in Greek. The only difference is in Rome, the most acceptable male sexual partners were slaves and prostitutes.

[Gusington]

There are a ton of factions in Rome 2 that I know nothing about, like Baktria...the Boii...the Odrysian League?? But that's why I love TW games. They get me interested in new historical eras and civs. And help me keep Amazon in business.

[mikeck]

Didn't Carthage get their asses kicked and relegated to the dustbin of history or something?

like Rome didnt?  :P

Not for awile. The world could thank Carthage for setting them up for inevitable defeat. The 2nd Punic war taught Rome the importance of establishing a professional standing army and paved the way eventually for Marius and his reforms. Always expansion was made under the claim of defense... Reflecting back to Hannibal. Although besides the Persians in the 3rd century, Carthage gave Rome more trouble than anyone...which would explain why they not only destroyed the city but salted the earth. That's why I love the Romans. They made warfare a true profession and did not refrain from exercising their new found art whenever they could.

They also had no problem stealing ideas from others and utilizing them without embarrassment. Fully acknowledging stealing their swords from the Spanish, helmets from the Guals and much more from the Eutrusceans.

Maybe I have you confused with someone else. I thought you were a cop? So you see total destruction of other civilizations as reasonable in war? Sorry to derail to a R&P type discussion. Do you see that as OK for the times or still OK?

I am a cop. But two points: first, I admire the Romans for not only the professionalism of their army, but a ruthless efficiency that allowed them to maintain order inside a huge empire for hundreds of years...many of those areas had never seen order. My job as a cop is irrelevant really, I just admire their administrative abilities and ruthlessness. Admiring and supporting are different things. My job is to maintain peace and order...regardless of whether I agree with their techniques, I do admire their ability to maintain order over am empire that large.

The Romans were able to establish peace and trade in areas like Gaul which had never known peace before. Now they killed a lot of Gauls getting there, but after the dust settled, the Romans establishes an administrative and military system that kept peace there for 300 years.

Jarhead: I am not saying the Greeks were effeminate; however, it was certainly the view of the Romans that their Greek neighbors were effeminate due to their pursuit of philosophy and the arts. It was an insult for a Roman to refer to another Roman as a Greek. So I'm not stereotyping the
...the Romans stereotyped them...just as the Romans stereotyped all northern tribes as barbarians even though the Gauls had achieved scientific advancements that surpassed the Romans...particularly in the area of metallurgy.

Hope that clears it up.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Sparta was the first thing that came to my mind as well. Fortunately Rome did not weaken Sparta before Leonidas or Persia may have taken all Greece. I doubt our understanding of Greek culture would have survived that. The basis of western civilization including democracy may have been lost.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Cross posting. Yes, it does clear it up.

[mikeck]

And of course the Romans had a tremendous amount of respect for Greek culture; they stole a lot of their architecture from the Greeks they stole a lot of everything from the Greeks. however,  they still viewed them as an effeminate educational type culture philosophically based society that was better suited to studying philosophy and putting on plays than fighting in wars.  may not of been true but that was certainly their viewpoint. That is probably more of an indictment against Roman stereotyping just as they did with the barbarians and it is truthfulness is suspect...but it was Roman stereotyping nonetheless , not my stereotyping

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

True, Rome copied Democracy from Greece, maybe it would have survived.

[Jarhead0331]

Jarhead: I am not saying the Greeks were effeminate; however, it was certainly the view of the Romans that their Greek neighbors were effeminate due to their pursuit of philosophy and the arts. It was an insult for a Roman to refer to another Roman as a Greek. So I'm not stereotyping the
...the Romans stereotyped them...just as the Romans stereotyped all northern tribes as barbarians even though the Gauls had achieved scientific advancements that surpassed the Romans...particularly in the area of metallurgy.

Hope that clears it up.

Where did you read that? I'd be interested in getting some more information on this...I've never read that Rome, as a whole, viewed Greek culture as effeminate. I would say without the Greeks, Rome would not have been Rome and in many ways, the Romans openly tried to emulate the Greeks. Again, I've never seen anything at all suggesting that the Romans thought the Greeks weak, not masculine or otherwise. I'm not saying its not true, just that its not something I have ever come across. 

[mikeck]

I can't provide a citation...I have read dozens of books on it most of which I no longer have so take it for what it is worth. The Romans admired Greek culture and stole much of its architecture. However, they viewed Greek men an effeminate partly due to the Greek view on homosexual relationships and party due to Greek pursuits of the arts.

I can't provide you the book...just remember reading it on several occasions. So I can't argue it as fact if I can't cite it. But it certainly isn't my stereotype. Romans had a habit of classifying groups of no Romans in negative ways so it would be out of norm.

I will try to find the work

From an article " of greeks & Romans"

Nevertheless, these "sophisticated farmers"—though they ingested all things Greek—were prone to hearken back to their agrarian origins.  They never forgot "how the West was won" and they certainly knew that these erstwhile "effete sophisticates" (i.e., Greeks) couldn't hold a candle to IMPERIAL ROME!  And, let's get one thing clear (and this is precisely how the Romans felt about the Greeks)—these Greeks are effeminate, and—when it comes right down to it—couldn't govern an Empire if it were given to them!

Certainly not a primary source or something I would cite in an argument over the issue itself as fact. my only point is that it's not me stereotyping the Greek but that I had recalled the Romans had stereotype them as being effeminate just as they had stereotyped many barbarian tribes as being on to the non-civilized when in reality both have been false

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

As if being ruled by an emperor was a better way of life.

[mikeck]

As if being ruled by an emperor was a better way of life.

It's all relative. if you lived in a village which was invaded on a regular basis by neighboring village and your women were raped and your kids were kidnapped and you had to deal with that, you would probably prefer the safety of Roman occupation,  the opening of Roman trade, use of Roman roads, the improvements to your infrastructure like aqueducts, roads, sewage systems and the safety now provided against these roving tribes ( because they have also been defeated by Rome ) it's all relative

Great summary by Monty Python:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9foi342LXQE

[Gusington]

In the book I'm reading right now 'The Last Frontier - the Roman Invasions of Scotland' there are a few references to what the Roman stereotype of Greek culture was, and it typically did describe the Greeks as effeminate. I've read about this in other books on Roman history too...the Spartans were seen as the more manly Greek exception (despite the homosexual tendencies). In pop culture I've seen plenty references to the Greeks being effeminate too...Robin Williams used to do a whole bit on it.

[Jarhead0331]

References to homosexuality as a basis for a Roman perception of Greeks as effeminate make no sense from a historical perspective. Homosexuality was just as prevalent in Roman society. So long as the Roman was the dominant individual in the homosexual relationship, there was no adverse implication on one's masculinity. Really, I would question the accuracy and impartiality of any source where you are getting this information from.