Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 83

Thread: Greeks VS Romans

  1. #1

    Default Greeks VS Romans

    I've been looking into Greek and Roman history for some time now, due a paper I plan to write for school. What do you guys think; at the height of each one's might who was the better one.

    I believe that the Spartans of 300 and that era were much more stronger and mightier than the Roman empire ever was, pound for pound. Romans made good use of technology in addition to man power and tactics during warfare. But Greeks, especially Spartans were simply mightier, I mean Sparta didn't even have walls because Spartans believed they "didn't need them."

    What do you guys think? Greeks or Romans?

  2. #2
    Comes Domesticorum
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Athenai
    Posts
    33,211

    Default Re: Greeks VS Romans

    Romans:

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    Spartans:

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 








    I'll go with the Romans.
    Last edited by Stavroforos; April 15, 2010 at 01:33 PM.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Greeks VS Romans

    Quote Originally Posted by Cicero2 View Post
    I've been looking into Greek and Roman history for some time now, due a paper I plan to write for school. What do you guys think; at the height of each one's might who was the better one.

    I believe that the Spartans of 300 and that era were much more stronger and mightier than the Roman empire ever was, pound for pound. Romans made good use of technology in addition to man power and tactics during warfare. But Greeks, especially Spartans were simply mightier, I mean Sparta didn't even have walls because Spartans believed they "didn't need them."

    What do you guys think? Greeks or Romans?
    Ugh, Spartans. There's a reason we don't all speak Greek languages.

  4. #4
    Comes Domesticorum
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Athenai
    Posts
    33,211

    Default Re: Greeks VS Romans

    The term is racism, Φερρετς.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Greeks VS Romans

    Quote Originally Posted by Stavroforos View Post
    The term is racism, Φερρετς.
    Huh?

  6. #6
    Lonck's Avatar Centenarius
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    mah couch
    Posts
    851

    Default Re: Greeks VS Romans

    ferrets in greek letters. And stavros, crop much or spoilers? "the romans did what the greeks could not, unify" or something like that. Basically romans were succeful because they were united while Greeks lived in city states fighting each other.
    Last edited by Lonck; April 15, 2010 at 05:22 AM.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Greeks VS Romans

    No I mean what do you mean by racism?

  8. #8
    Lonck's Avatar Centenarius
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    mah couch
    Posts
    851

    Default Re: Greeks VS Romans

    prolly "spartans". He may be athenian or w/e.

  9. #9
    Lysimachus's Avatar Spirit Cleric
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    8,085

    Default Re: Greeks VS Romans

    Oh dear not another one of these threads. To end it short, let's just say the Romans conquered the entire of the Mediterranean and turned it in to the pool of their backyard, and the Greeks were too up eachother's throats to really expand any further than the Aegean for any extended period of time.

  10. #10
    NikeBG's Avatar Sampsis
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Sofia, Bulgaria
    Posts
    3,193

    Default Re: Greeks VS Romans

    Unless we count Alexander and the successor states...

  11. #11
    Lysimachus's Avatar Spirit Cleric
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    8,085

    Default Re: Greeks VS Romans

    ...the Greeks were too up eachother's throats to really expand any further than the Aegean for any extended period of time.
    Covered that.

  12. #12
    DAVIDE's Avatar QVID MELIVS ROMA?
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    ITALIA
    Posts
    15,811

    Default Re: Greeks VS Romans

    1) Stavroforos: please spoiler the pics
    2) i think this should go to alternate history

  13. #13
    Romanos IV's Avatar The 120th Article, § 4
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    the hell outta here (Athens, European Client State of Greece)
    Posts
    3,882

    Default Re: Greeks VS Romans

    For me, it is the Greeks; There were many Greek states which were diverse (and ofc, fighthing each other very often). The Successors' Era (Diadochi or Διάδοχοι in Greek) was the best time for the Greeks outside Greek mainland (the State of Massilia, the Seleucid Empire, the Greco-Bactrian Kingdom and the Greco-Indian state among others). For the Greeks of mainland Greece, it has to be the time between the democratization of Athens (600-550bc) and the Corcyra Civil War (435-431bc), the Golden Era of the Eastern Mediterranean.

    For me, the main reason I choosed the Greeks is because they transferred their culture and knowledge to the Romans, without which we would have no reason to praise them for expanding to form the Empire they actually created.
    Graecia capta ferum victorem cepit et artis intulit agresti Latio
    Under the noble patronage of Jimkatalanos

  14. #14
    Manuel I Komnenos's Avatar Rex Regum
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Athenian Empire
    Posts
    11,553

    Default Re: Greeks VS Romans

    @Stavroforos

    Look at the Empire Alexander the Great created in a 10 years time.
    It took 300 years for the Romans to create the Empire you showed us in the picture.
    Anyway I don't think there can be a comparison because the Romans and the Greeks were both great.
    As the scholars say the Romans conquered Greece with their arms and the Greeks conquered Rome with their civilization and culture.

    Romanos IV you are right about the Successors Era. For me, the most important and mysterious part of these Kingdoms' history is the conquest of India by the Indo-Greek Kingdom.. In fact I intend to write the history of this conquest in the forum when I have time.

    As for the Spartans, if Cicero2 was talking about their bravery compared to the Romans, then he is right. The Spartans were definitely the bravest and the greatest warriors of the Ancient Age.
    The Romans could field armies that contained tens of thousands of soldiers, yet how many times were the Romans slaughtered? By the Carthaginians, by the Germans, by the Parthians.
    The Spartans numbered 10.000 at most and still, their battles are considered some of the most romantic and most heroic stands in the world military history.
    Last edited by Manuel I Komnenos; April 15, 2010 at 06:35 AM.
    Under the patronage of Emperor Maximinus Thrax
    "Steps to be taken in case Russia should be forced out of war considered. Various movements [of ] troops to and from different fronts necessary to meeting possible contingencies discussed. Conference also weighed political, economic, and moral effect both upon Central and Allied powers under most unfavorable aspect from Allied point of view. General conclusions reached were necessity for adoption of purely defensive attitude on all secondary fronts and withdrawing surplus troops for duty on western front. By thus strengthening western front [those attending] believed Allies could hold until American forces arrive in numbers sufficient to gain ascendancy."
    ~General Pershing, report to Washington, 26 July 1917

  15. #15

    Default Re: Greeks VS Romans

    I don't know why people are bringing up Alexander - Sparta was pretty much the only Greek city not to contribute to that little project.

    Alexander built an Empire in ten years. It collapsed immediately upon his death, his successors were absorbed by other powers, and their culture mostly became a historical legacy. The Romans built an Empire over centuries, maintained it in some form for almost 1,500 years, and left romance languages, legal conventions, etc. etc. all across the European continent. I don't really want to get involved in another thread where the more passionate Greeks on the forum scream at me but I'll say this: the Romans were one of the most significant states to ever exist on the planet and the Spartans just have good PR.

  16. #16
    Lysimachus's Avatar Spirit Cleric
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    8,085

    Default Re: Greeks VS Romans

    I did have a post written up, but I messed it up. Suppose i'll have to write it up again...

    Look at the Empire Alexander the Great created in a 10 years time.
    It took 300 years for the Romans to create the Empire you showed us in the picture.
    Alexander's empire collapsed instantly. When the Romans created their empire, it was able to remain completely stable for over one hundred years during the Pax Romana. It took a few more hundred years for the western half to fall in 476AD, and it took nearly one thousand years for the eastern half to fall, in 1453AD.

    For me, it is the Greeks; There were many Greek states which were diverse (and ofc, fighthing each other very often). The Successors' Era (Diadochi or Διάδοχοι in Greek) was the best time for the Greeks outside Greek mainland (the State of Massilia, the Seleucid Empire, the Greco-Bactrian Kingdom and the Greco-Indian state among others). For the Greeks of mainland Greece, it has to be the time between the democratization of Athens (600-550bc) and the Corcyra Civil War (435-431bc), the Golden Era of the Eastern Mediterranean.
    Infighting among the Diadochi states constitutes as "the best time for the Greeks outside Greek mainland"? Yes, the Hellenistic influence was able to be spread quite far (all the way to Bactria), but I doubt constant conflict would make it a good time to be a Greek. They were long past their prime, the Macedonian states were unable to maintain Alexander's combined arms approach resulting in higher proportions of phalangites in the army, resembling the Greek hoplite warfare of old (which as we know, was simply a strategy based on attrition) and the glory days of the hoplite were long gone. Greece was having to contend with newer foes, the bronze breastplate had to be replaced by the linthorax cuirass to keep up with the rest of the army since the Hellenistic armies of the time were now being complemented by light peltasts, and the hoplites were no longer as well trained as they once were.

    For me, the main reason I choosed the Greeks is because they transferred their culture and knowledge to the Romans, without which we would have no reason to praise them for expanding to form the Empire they actually created.
    So I guess we might as well attribute Germany's Blitzkrieg campaigns all to Liddell Hart then? He came up with the combined arms approach, I guess he transferred his knowledge to the German tacticians and therefore he deserves all the credit, no?

  17. #17
    Manuel I Komnenos's Avatar Rex Regum
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Athenian Empire
    Posts
    11,553

    Default Re: Greeks VS Romans

    Ferrets54, I think this thread is called Greeks VS Romans, not Spartans VS Romans.. Anyway I'll remind you that the Greeks have given their name to one of the historical periods. Hellenistic Period 323 BC-31/30 BC. I'll also remind you that Greek was the most important language in the East Mediterranean for at least 600 years.. So why not stop talking about the Greeks with so much ignorance? As you saw I said that I'm not gonna say if the Romans or the Greeks were better because I consider them of equal importance. You call us 'passionate Greeks'. Maybe you have the problem, so if you don't like Greeks and Greece why come on Romano-Greek threads?


    Lysimachus the Ptolemaic Kingdom lasted for almost 300 years. The Seleucid Kingdom for almost 250.. The Empire of Alexander didn't collapse. It was just divided between his successors.
    Last edited by Manuel I Komnenos; April 15, 2010 at 06:50 AM.
    Under the patronage of Emperor Maximinus Thrax
    "Steps to be taken in case Russia should be forced out of war considered. Various movements [of ] troops to and from different fronts necessary to meeting possible contingencies discussed. Conference also weighed political, economic, and moral effect both upon Central and Allied powers under most unfavorable aspect from Allied point of view. General conclusions reached were necessity for adoption of purely defensive attitude on all secondary fronts and withdrawing surplus troops for duty on western front. By thus strengthening western front [those attending] believed Allies could hold until American forces arrive in numbers sufficient to gain ascendancy."
    ~General Pershing, report to Washington, 26 July 1917

  18. #18
    Lysimachus's Avatar Spirit Cleric
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    8,085

    Default Re: Greeks VS Romans

    Lysimachus the Ptolemaic Kingdom lasted for almost 300 years. The Seleucid Kingdom for almost 250.. The Empire of Alexander didn't collapse. It was just divided between his successors.
    Of course it did. His death resulted in a power vacuum, which caused it to collapse, upon which his Companions carved up his empire. It wasn't divided at all, Alexander wasn't exactly intending to die so early in his life now was he? Also there's no point raising the longevity argument either, since the Roman Empire (in all of its incarnations) lasted for over a millenia.

  19. #19

    Default Re: Greeks VS Romans

    Quote Originally Posted by Manuel I Komnenos View Post
    Ferrets54, I think this thread is called Greeks VS Romans, not Spartans VS Romans.. Anyway I'll remind you that the Greeks have given their name to one of the historical periods. Hellenistic Period 323 BC-31/30 BC. I'll also remind you that Greek was the most important language in the East Mediterranean for at least 600 years.. So why not stop talking about the Greeks with so much ignorance? As you saw I said that I'm not gonna say if the Romans or the Greeks were better because I consider them of equal importance. You call us 'passionate Greeks'. Maybe you have the problem, so if you don't like Greeks and Greece why come on Romano-Greek threads?

    But the OP did specify he was talking about Spartans.

    If you want to talk about Greeks, fine. But I don't like these pissing contests by nationalists who immediately, tediously and may I point out ing stupidly try to slur me by "not liking Greeks".

  20. #20
    Manuel I Komnenos's Avatar Rex Regum
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Athenian Empire
    Posts
    11,553

    Default Re: Greeks VS Romans

    The remaining companions divided the Empire between them after defeating Antigonos the One-Eyed with the treaty of Triparadeisos.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ferrets54 View Post
    Ugh, Spartans. There's a reason we don't all speak Greek languages.
    You stared being racist about Greeks. There were no Greeks in this thread when you said that.
    Under the patronage of Emperor Maximinus Thrax
    "Steps to be taken in case Russia should be forced out of war considered. Various movements [of ] troops to and from different fronts necessary to meeting possible contingencies discussed. Conference also weighed political, economic, and moral effect both upon Central and Allied powers under most unfavorable aspect from Allied point of view. General conclusions reached were necessity for adoption of purely defensive attitude on all secondary fronts and withdrawing surplus troops for duty on western front. By thus strengthening western front [those attending] believed Allies could hold until American forces arrive in numbers sufficient to gain ascendancy."
    ~General Pershing, report to Washington, 26 July 1917

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •