Another reason why the Spanish peoples are important is because, according to Livy, they are the reason Hannibal lost the war. He writes that Hannibal’s inability to keep a grasp on the Spanish people is what cost him the war. There were many alliances within the Spanish people, and some of them did change during the war, and even more than once. Livy thinks that this wavering of loyalty lost Hannibal the war. Scipio may be a great general, kind, noble etc., but the Carthaginian
Julius Caesar, a Roman general and statesman, served on the First Triumvirate that ruled the Roman Republic during 60 B.C. Although he was popular among the common people and also a great and outstanding military commander, he wasn’t a good leader to govern Rome due to his ambition and inner-weakness. One of the main reasons that Julius Caesar was not a good leader was his ambition. He was a corrupted tyrant, lusting for power. Becoming a governor in his region of Rome wasn’t good enough, he wanted to be crowned king and serve as a dictator for life, something that Rome didn’t have for five hundred years.
One group in Messana decided to rid the city of the Carthaginians, as they now saw Carthage as a greater threat than Syracuse. This group made an approach to Rome and this was a turning point of Rome and Carthage’s allegiance. At first, Rome was very doubtful as to whether to send a force to Sicily or not. They did not desire Carthage to stay in the Country and increase their influence, however sending men there would most likely provoke a war. The Romans were very cautious, however, influence from the upper and middle classes heavily swayed Rome’s decision.
But the Romans did not heed their allies. At least for a long time. When he finally did, and won a great victory against the Sequani, Caesar gave back the Aedui's independance. But the Aedui still felt hate toward the Romans and joined the Gallic coalition against Caesar. They fought a great battle against the Romans but lost with heavy causalities at the surrender of Vercingetorix at Alesia.
On the other hand, Maecenas took the role of making Augustus the sole figure as a leader to Rome with his inhibited propaganda as patron for some of the prominent writers of the time based on creating a perception of Augustus as a way ‘for the people’, rather than self ambition. The importance of Agrippa rose indistinguishably as being responsible for most of Octavian’s military triumphs. His role emerged during the ‘Sicilian conflict’ against Sextus Lepidus in 36 BC where after Octavian’s naval failure Agrippa engaged and destroyed the rebels fleet where Suetonius notes he “forced the enemy ships to sheer off “. Octavian’s opposition however, was marked most strongly by Mark Antony where coincidently it was again Agrippa whose military experience and instinct towered above Augustus, whom blockaded the ships of Antony and Cleopatra with a fleet under Octavian’s title. After the inauguration of Augustus of the first settlement, Agrippa’s militaristic conquests became
The romans won the battle against the Carthaginians and weren’t happy with the greeks for siding against them . The Romans started to take over Greece. Eventually the Romans defeated Corinth and made Greece a province of the roman empire. Therefore, physically the Roman military conquered Greece. The other side of my opinion is that the Greeks conquered the Romans in every which way, apart of militarily.
The author believes that Napoleon won many battles because of his enemies’ mistakes and not because of what he actually was…the greatest military mind that ever lived. I did some research of my own and found out that he is also remembered for his Napoleonic Code and his military campaigns are still taught in some military academies. Owen Connelly wrote in his book that Napoleon insisted that he would be remembered for the Napoleonic Code. And, in fact, he is. Owen Connelly’s perspective on the way Napoleon won battles is his opinion and he tries to prove it in this book.
Later in 59 B.C. Caesar married Calpurnia. Caesar was more of a politician than a soldier, however he knew to gain more fame he needed military victories. In 58 B.C., Caesar held a campaign about conquering Gaul, and it soon became clear that he was a military genius. During this war in Gaul Caesar only lost two battles in that nine years, and he conquered the area he wanted.
Caesar's own personality was a key role to his own death making him as guilty as everyone else. If Caesar was a caring ruler he might have survived his assassination but unfortunately he was the stereotypical leader and only cared for the good of himself. Even though the empire was stopped before Caesar could rule it, the republic did not last much longer anyway. Caesar's death was not much of an effect on Rome but nonetheless it was Caesars fault. Caesar was arrogant, hubris and full of pride.
Unnecessary military spending because of overexpansion and inability to expand further because of lack of new land to conquer is another theory. Yet another theory is that the immigration of Gothic Tribes and then mistreatment of the Gothics may have caused the immigrants to revolt. But the one thing that truly brought down Rome, and encompasses many of the other theories in its web of destruction, is the