[Beren] became the friend of birds and beasts, and they aided him, and did not betray him, and from that time forth he ate no flesh nor slew any living thing that was not in the service of Morgoth.

‘Caesar, having got the upper hand of his rivals, possessed himself of the sovereignty, which he strengthened, systematised, and secured, and, while preserving the form and name of the republic, made himself the absolute ruler of all. In this way the government, from that time to this, has been a monarchy; but they do not call their rulers kings, out of respect, as I think, for the ancient oath. They call them imperators, that being the title also of those who formerly held the chief command of the armies. Yet they are very kings in fact.’ - Appian

This is Livy’s full argument on whether Alexander would have defeated the Romans after discussing the greatness of Papirius Cursor: ‘No age has been more prolific in great and noble characters than the one in which he lived, and even in that age there was no one whose single arm did more to sustain the commonwealth. Had Alexander the Great, after subjugating Asia, turned his attention to Europe, there are many who maintain that he would have met his match in Papirius. Nothing can be thought to be further from my aim since I commenced this task than to digress more than is necessary from the order of the narrative or by embellishing my work with a variety of topics to afford pleasant resting-places, as it were, for my readers and mental relaxation for myself. The mention, however, of so great a king and commander induces me to lay before my readers some reflections which I have often made when I have proposed to myself the question, "What would have been the results for Rome if she had been engaged in war with Alexander? "The things which tell most in war are the numbers and courage of the troops, the ability of the commanders, and Fortune, who has such a potent influence over human affairs, especially those of war. Any one who considers these factors either separately or in combination will easily see that as the Roman empire proved invincible against other kings and nations, so it would have proved invincible against Alexander. Let us, first of all, compare the commanders on each side. I do not dispute that Alexander was an exceptional general, but his reputation is enhanced by the fact that he died while still young and before he had time to experience any change of fortune. Not to mention other kings and illustrious captains, who afford striking examples of the mutability of human affairs, I will only instance Cyrus, whom the Greeks celebrate as one of the greatest of men. What was it that exposed him to reverses and misfortunes but the length of his life, as recently in the case of Pompey the Great? Let me enumerate the Roman generals - not all out of all ages but only those with whom as consuls and Dictators Alexander would have had to fight - M. Valerius Corvus, C. Marcius Rutilus, C. Sulpicius, T. Manlius Torquatus, Q. Publilius Philo, L. Papirius Cursor, Q. Fabius Maximus, the two Decii, L. Volumnius, and Manlius Curius. Following these come those men of colossal mould who would have confronted him if he had first turned his arms against Carthage and then crossed over into Italy later in life. Every one of these men was Alexander's equal in courage and ability, and the art of war, which from the beginning of the City had been an unbroken tradition, had now grown into a science based on definite and permanent rules. It was thus that the kings conducted their wars, and after them the Junii and the Valerii, who expelled the kings, and in later succession the Fabii, the Quinctii, and the Cornelii. It was these rules that Camillus followed, and the men who would have had to fight with Alexander had seen Camillus as an old man when they were little more than boys. Alexander no doubt did all that a soldier ought to do in battle, and that is not his least title to fame. But if Manlius Torquatus had been opposed to him in the field, would he have been inferior to him in this respect, or Valerius Corvus, both of them distinguished as soldiers before they assumed command? Would the Decii, who, after devoting themselves, rushed upon the enemy, or Papirius Cursor with his vast physical courage and strength? Would the clever generalship of one young man have succeeded in baffling the whole senate, not to mention individuals, that senate of which he, who declared that it was composed of kings, alone formed a true idea?’ (Continued below)

Who was the greatest Roman emperor?

Damon Lindelof explique la signification de la réplique de Hal “I hope I mattered” : « Ce que Hal veut dire, c’est : “J’espère avoir compté pour toi.” et ce message s’adresse directement à John. Ce n’est pas “J’espère avoir compté parce que j’ai sauvé le monde d’une putain d’étoile de mer extraterrestre géante”. Ce n’est pas “Je veux qu’on érige des statues à mon effigie. Je veux que mon nom figure sur un arc ou un monument”. C’est simplement : “J’espère qu’on se souviendra de moi et que j’ai joué un rôle important dans ta vie.” »

A Decision for Hannibal Hannibal’s crossing of the Alps with his army and the subsequent invasion of Italy are often viewed as acts driven by the Carthaginians’, and particularly the Barca family’s, desire for revenge following their defeat in the First Punic War. The march into Italy and the crossing of the Alps seem like the beginning of a Blitzkrieg-style campaign designed to capitalize on that desire for revenge, but the reality is quite different from the narrative handed down to us by Roman historiography. I am basing my account on the chronology proposed by Professor Dexter Hoyos (Hannibal’s Dynasty: Power and Politics in the Western Mediterranean, 247–183 BC, 2003) for these events. After destroying Saguntum, Hannibal traveled to Carthago Nova, where he learned that a Roman embassy had declared war on the Carthaginian Senate in early 218 BC. Hannibal is believed to have set out with his army toward Gaul between late May and early June, reaching the region by late August. The delay in reaching Gaul was due to the fact that Hannibal was keeping a close eye on what the Romans were doing with the two consular armies they had raised in Italy for the war. He knew that the Romans were torn between two options: sending two consular armies against him in Iberia, or sending a single consular army to keep him tied down in Iberia while the other consular army prepared to invade Africa. When he learned that the consul Sempronius Longus was preparing the fleet in Sicily to cross to Africa, Hannibal pressed on, leaving Gaul behind to enter Cisalpine Gaul and eventually crossing the Alps between late October and September of 218 BC. Thus, the invasion of Italy and the Roman territories was not the ultimate goal of Hannibal’s campaigns. The invasion of Italy was a response intended to prevent the Romans from invading Africa, just as they had done in the First Punic War. And Hannibal succeeded. The war would be fought on Italian soil for the next seventeen years, although, in the end, the Carthaginian Senate failed to capitalize on the opportunities Hannibal provided, preferring instead to focus its efforts on other war fronts. It was a decision that would cost Carthage dearly, but that is another story.

Cannae was one of the most important and defining battles in the history not only of Rome, but of the entire Western world. The genius of a man who changed the way war was waged was on full display in the valleys of Cannae on August 2, 216 BC, when he faced the Roman legions, more than eighty thousand men. I’ve always been fascinated by this historical event, not only because of its significance, but also because of Hannibal’s ability to get his men to follow him onto the battlefield against an enemy that vastly outnumbered them, and whom they had to face by adopting a counterintuitive formation. I believe it’s an event that’s always worth narrating. Many years ago, when I was still a naive history student, I decided that I wanted to devote myself to Carthaginian history and bring it to life for people through historical fiction. Cannae: Hannibal’s Masterpiece is just a small part of this project, but I approached it with great rigor, striving to recreate as accurately as possible what happened and what the key figures experienced on that historic day. That’s why I’m very pleased to announce that my narrative, Cannae: Hannibal’s Masterpiece, is now available in its new edition on Amazon and through its KDP program. For those who are already paid subscribers to SP Historian, you’ll be able to enjoy each of the parts published last year with a new edition, which includes corrections and a new map. I invite you to read Cannae: Hannibal’s Masterpiece and immerse yourself in the chaos of one of the most important battles in history: a.co/d/0bajZSc2

You can save one ancient work from being lost. You don't know what it contains. - Greek philosophy - Roman history - Greek drama - Carthaginian history - Library of Alexandria scroll Which category are you gambling on?

First Crusade: Adventures in Cilicia! For the moment, the way forward was clear as the Turks fled before the Crusaders. The prize the Crusaders sought was Antioch; between the Crusaders and the city was formidable mountainous terrain. Risks would need to be taken! 🧵