Greatest Roman generals

[Lurtz700]

RB,



Well wait, are we evaluating the statesmanship of these men, or their generalship?There's a big difference. Marcellus, for example, was a gifted general who was the very first to force Hannibal into stalemates, if not outright defeats -- multiple times. It's no accident that while Fabius was called the shield of Rome during the 2nd Punic War, he was called the sword of Rome. He's saved the Republic by constantly pressuring Hannibal, by his skilled manoevering, capture of cities, recapture of cities behind Hannibal's lines, and in general keeping Hannibal very much on his toes. He was no pushover. And consdering Hannibal's talent, it would take at least a Tier 2 general to be practically a match for him. So while he wasn't as good as Scipio (although we never know, he was killed before he could achieve more), he still deserves to be near the very top of Tier 2, and maybe bottom of Tier 1.

Literally, years before Scipio was even around, there was only Fabius and Marcellus to keep Hannibal on his toes and not let him steamroll over Italy. Let's not forget how late Sicio entered into the war, so who preserved the Republic until then, from Cannae until Scipio's campaigns in Spain, and even during them because while Scipio was fighting in Spain, somebody had to fight off Hannibal, Mago, Hanno, and Hasdrubal in Italy? By the time Scipio even returned to Italy to invade Africa, Hannibal was already corned off in the very southern tip of Italy. Somebody had to do that. And while Marcellus was killed by then, for most of the post-Cannae period he played a very major role in denying Hannibal any foothold, the latter being utterly incapable of stopping him. Clearly a top Tier 2 general there.

I solidly agree with you

[Lord Oda Nobunaga]

If Germanicus, Trajan, Pompey and Sertorius deserve to be in Tier 1 then certainly so do Mark Antony, Constantine, Sulla and Aurelian.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

Aetius, in terms of the number of Victories achieved, tops almost all of them with almost 20 recorded victories and only 1 defeat.

425 - Stalemate at Ravenna
426 - Breaks the Siege of Arles
428 - Defeats Chlodio and his Salian Franks
430 - 3 Victories against Anaolsus of the Aquitanian Goths, the Iuthungic Alemanni in Raetia, and the Bacaudae of Augusta Vindelicorum
431 - Defeats Chlodio and the Salii outside Colonia Agrippina.
432 - Defeated by Bonifacius at Ariminum
433 - Aetius breaks the siege of Narbona
435 - Aetius campaigns against the Bacaudae in the Alps
436 - Aetius surpresses a rebellion of the Burgundii
437 - Aetius and his Hunnic federates almost annihalate the Burgundii
438 - Aetius slays 8000 Goths at the Battle of Mons Colubrarius
439 - After Litorius is killed at Tolosa, Aetius soundly defeats the Visigoths in an ambush on their camp
442 - Aetius again defeats the Armorican Bacaudae
445 - Aetius defeats the Franks at the Battle of Vicus Helena
448 - Aetius again defeats the Armorican Bacaudae
451 - Battle of the Catalaunian Plains. This speaks for itself.
452 - Invasion of Italy. No direct engagement but we can assume Aetius at least harassed Attila's forces.
453 - The Siege of Arelate by Thorismund - No engagement but the siege was broken through Diplomacy
453 - Joint Romano-Gothic campaign against the Suebes resulting in Roman reconquest of Carthaginiensis

You place no Late Roman generals in the Tier 1, and of any Late Roman Commanders Aetius far surpasses them in terms of ability, especially with the limited resources of the 420's-450's. The only comparable ones are Julian and Belisarius.

[Lord Oda Nobunaga]

Yes that too, Aetius as far as late Roman generals go is a must.

[Erebus Pasha]

Aetius, in terms of the number of Victories achieved, tops almost all of them with almost 20 recorded victories and only 1 defeat.

425 - Stalemate at Ravenna
426 - Breaks the Siege of Arles
428 - Defeats Chlodio and his Salian Franks
430 - 3 Victories against Anaolsus of the Aquitanian Goths, the Iuthungic Alemanni in Raetia, and the Bacaudae of Augusta Vindelicorum
431 - Defeats Chlodio and the Salii outside Colonia Agrippina.
432 - Defeated by Bonifacius at Ariminum
433 - Aetius breaks the siege of Narbona
435 - Aetius campaigns against the Bacaudae in the Alps
436 - Aetius surpresses a rebellion of the Burgundii
437 - Aetius and his Hunnic federates almost annihalate the Burgundii
438 - Aetius slays 8000 Goths at the Battle of Mons Colubrarius
439 - After Litorius is killed at Tolosa, Aetius soundly defeats the Visigoths in an ambush on their camp
442 - Aetius again defeats the Armorican Bacaudae
445 - Aetius defeats the Franks at the Battle of Vicus Helena
448 - Aetius again defeats the Armorican Bacaudae
451 - Battle of the Catalaunian Plains. This speaks for itself.
452 - Invasion of Italy. No direct engagement but we can assume Aetius at least harassed Attila's forces.
453 - The Siege of Arelate by Thorismund - No engagement but the siege was broken through Diplomacy
453 - Joint Romano-Gothic campaign against the Suebes resulting in Roman reconquest of Carthaginiensis

You place no Late Roman generals in the Tier 1, and of any Late Roman Commanders Aetius far surpasses them in terms of ability, especially with the limited resources of the 420's-450's. The only comparable ones are Julian and Belisarius.

I think he did put Belisarius in tier one, however a slight personal grievance of mine whenever these lists come up is that they are normally(and quite understandably) stocked full of generals from the late republic to the early principate, whilst there is always only a smattering of generals from the Late Empire and they're normally the usual suspects such as Constantine, Julian and Belisarius. I think more late generals deserve to be there to be honest.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

Considering the circumstances he was placed in, I think Camillus might be worthy of a Tier 1 as well.

[Lord Oda Nobunaga]

In my opinion Julian isn't even a tier 1; he did some stuff on the Rhine and then ended up dying in Persia, quite pointlessly.

[Benny Profane]

AVE Marcus Scaurus, et al-

Your very commendable list inspired me to begin thinking critically about the greatest Roman generals, how to rank them, and what should qualify one for greatness. A difficult task, and everyone's list will be different in significant ways, but that is part of the fun of the excercise, yes?

Limiting my TIER ONE as you did to eight members....I believe they should be the following.

1. Gaius Julius Caesar-I came, I saw, I conquered basically says it all. The giant of Roman generalship, his wars in Gaul and his outnumbered victories at Pharsalus, Thapsus, and Munda confirm him as a legend.

2. Scipio Africanus-Dubbed "The Roman Hannibal" for his innovative battle tactics, Scipio Africanus helped save the Republic and set the stage for Mediterranean hegemony. The mastery of his victory at Ilipa match anything in the ancient world.

3. Gaius Marius-A seven time consul and defeater of the Numidians and Germans, Marius changed the format of the legions and saved Rome from repeated German invasions with the victories at Vercallae and Aquae Sextiae.

4. Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus-His accomplishments include a triumph at 24, defeating Mithridates VI, adding multiple new provinces to Rome, sweeping the Mediterranean of pirates, and helping Sulla end the first Civil War. Best known now as the man outmaneuvered by Caesar.

5. Trajan-The army demanded that the ineffectual Emperor Nerva adopt Trajan, who was already known as the greatest general in the army. After becoming emperor, he personally conquered Dacia and part of Parthia, becoming the first Roman general to step foot in the Persian Gulf.

6. Lucius Cornelius Sulla-From capturing Jugurtha and fighting the Germans as a legate, to winning the Grass Crown in the Social War, to fighting Mithridates' generals in Greece and beseiging Athens, to defeating Carbo and his allies in the Civil War, to defeating the Samnites on the doorstep of Rome, few generals did more with less in as many varied battles than Sulla. His cunning, ruthlessness, ingenuity, and - by his own omission - luck make him a serious contender.

7. Aurelian-An Illyrian general raised to the purple by his own military feats in 270 AD, Aurelian inherited a fractured empire beset by barbarian invasions. With no delay, Aurelian quickly defeated the invading barbarians before bringing the eastern provinces and Gaul back into the fold, and earning his title: Restitutor Orbis. Very few people fought as many major battles in so short a time as Aurelian.

8. Septimius Severus - After rising through the cursus honorum, Septimus Severus started the Third Century trend of imperial usurpation after the assassination of Pertinax in 193. He thrashed his imperial competitors in Syria and Gaul in separate battles that demonstrated his drive, strategic and tactical vision, and brutality. Once Emperor he successfully campaigned in Africa, Parthia (sacking the capital at Ctesiphon), before dying on campaign in Scotland. The variety and dominance of his endeavors confirm his tactical genius.

TIER 2 I will separate into 12 commanders (1.5 times the size of TIER ONE). Because many of the generals here have been listed by some as TIER ONE commanders, I have included in arguments why I have listed them at TIER TWO.

1. Agrippa-The Robin to Augustus' Batman, Agrippa helped win the battles against the assassins of Caesar before leading the fight against Mark Antony. Agrippa gets special mention for being the only person on this list to win battles on land and at sea.

2. Constantine-Though he defeated all of his barbarian enemies and turned the tetrarchy back to a monarchy, the lack of quality of his opponents doesn't match up with the TIER ONE generals. Who knows though? May have been the only general on this list that was supported by a higher power.

3. Aemilius Paullus--A giant in his day, Aemillius Paullus defeated a few barbarians in Spain before marching east and adding all of Greece to Rome's orbit. His destruction of Perseus' army at the Battle of Bydna proved to be the death knell for the phalanx

4. Flavius Aetius-The next two candidates will be two heavy candidates for TIER ONE because of the breadth of their accomplishments; few Roman generals were active in such high command roles for as long as Flavius Aetius and Stilicho. Flavius Aetius has perhaps the best case, because of his role in turning back Attila and the Huns in the 450's, and also his continuous campaigning on Rome's frontiers for several decades. However, I rate the generals in TIER ONE has having greater overall victories, of a more distinguished variety than just the victories over the tribes on Rome's peripherary. Unfortunately for Aetius, I am rating him because of the competition he faced and because his faltering in the last decade of his life.

5. Stilicho-Another "barbarian" general that was Romanized and eventually raised to the highest generalship in the empire. After becoming a general in Theodosian's eastern army, Stilicho was named the guardian of the new Western emperor, the young Honororius. After becoming the guardian of the west, Stilicho campaigned against the barbarians on the Roman' periphery, most notably Alaric, who he kept at bay in the Balkan wilderness. However, near the end of his life he failed to decisively defeat the Goths, Alaric, and an imperial imposter that had taken control of Britain. The outward pressure of these forces helped diminish his standing with the emperor, who eventually decapitated Stilicho for potentially aligning with Alaric. However, with Stilicho gone, Rome was besieged several times by Alaric before being sacked in 410.

6. Marcus Claudius Marcellus-Another great general from the Second Punic War, Marcellus is one of the only generals to gain the spoila opima, from killing the leader of the enemies' army. In the Second Punic War Marcellus led the campaign to take back Sicily, and afterwards helped protect Rome from Hannibal during his long stay in Italy, taking back strategic cities and outmaneuvering Hannibal before being killed in an ambush.

7. Fabius Maximus-Though he might not have as many major battles fought as the other people on this list, his strategic vision to box Hannibal in without offering him battle helped save Rome at their darkest hour. Sometimes the smart move is knowing when you aren't the smartest guy in the room.

8. Probus-Of anyone on the TIER 2 list, I think Probus would be the guy that you wouldn't want to face across the battlefield. His victories were so numerous and widespread the Gibbons actually doubted that one man could accomplish all of it. He defeated the Goths, the Longiones, and the Burgundians as well as several imperial usurpers.

9. Scipio Aemilianus Africanus-Though the histories of Polybius are certainly biased, it does appear that Scipio Aemilianus' genius helped win the Third Punic War. After distinguishing himself as a subordinate commander, he was elected consul though not yet of legal consul age. Afterwards, he led the campaign against the Carthiginians and was the one that presided over the destruction of the city.

10. Germanicus: Though I as much as anyone wish that Germanicus has succeeded Tiberius rather than his deranged son Caligula, I don't think he has the body of work to demand a top spot. He did not bring a major force to battle and though he did much to restore the honor of Rome after one of their greatest defeats, he does not have the resume of battles that generals on tier two like Septimius Severus, Sulla, or others have. Those generals warred over a decade, in multiple pitched battles on multiple environments. Germanicus I believe gets credit for doing so much while being so young, and for quite rightly being the foil to the bitter and evil Tiberius. Still I don't believe he belongs in the TOP TIER for the sheer lack of experience when compared to these other generals. Germanicus did battle with a German alliance that had massacred a poor Roman commander at the Teutoborg Forest. Given more time, I think he could have entrenched himself in Tier one and made an excellent emperor. But the list of qualified Romans to die young is a long one, and the talented Julio-Claudians in the first century AD had the life expectancy of James Bond villians.

11. Quintus Sertorius-A historian's favorite because of his early use of guerrilla warfare and his early victories against Metellus Pius and Pompey the Great, Sertorius was eventually figured out and his territory was slowly whittled away through the combined tactics of Pius and Pompey. After descending into a depression and alcoholism, he was assassinated by his own men.

12. Diocletian-A Dalmatian born to what could have been the lowest status of any of the Roman emperors, Diocletian was a major part of setting the empire back on its feet at the second of the third century. He won major battles against the Sarmatians and the Alamanni and under his direction Galerius defeated the Sassanids and sacked their capital at Ctephison.



Some other generals that warrant consideration but that I'm leaving off the list:

Mark Antony-Mark Antony seems to me to be the general that you would most want commanding your right wing, but you wouldn't want leading the army. Plutarch makes it clear that he was a man born and bred for warfare, but history tells us that he was not necessarily bred with strategic vision. No other general in TIER TWO has as many defeats as Mark Antony. He lost at the Battle of Mutina before combining forces with Octavian and defeating the Liberators. He did a great job as administrator of the East, and one has to imagine that very few people have lived as pleasurably as Mark Antony did as the hegemon of the Eastern part of the empire for those 10 years (roughly 42 - 32 BC). However, his utter failure in invading Parthia cost tens of thousands of Roman lives and his strategic miscues leading up to the Battle of Actium ended up costing his life. Immortalized for an unbelievable life, but I don't think you would want Mark Antony commanding your legions if you were a centurion.


Vespasian-And now Vespasian makes his appearance. He distinguished himself as a legate in England before subjugating a rebellion of the Jews, but Vespasian lacks the major battle experience of most of the other generals. I think he gets bonus points for settling the empire down after Nero's malevolence and the anarchy of 69 AD.

Okay so that's my take on things! I look forward for thoughts and opinions!

[Revan The Great]

I think Caesar is almost in a tier of his own. No one did more with less, or inspired such loyalty in his men. Moreover, many great generals (Pompey, or even Alexander the Great) made their names facing opponents that had poor quality soldiers, or poor quality leaders, or both. With Caesar this unquestionably is not the case, because he fought practically every contemporary enemy possible, including other Romans and multiple times. Caesar could defeat overwhelming numbers of Gauls and Germans just as readily as he could crush Eastern Kings or overcome Romans who themselves were capable and proven commanders.

I'd just add that Quintus Sertorius and Trajan are both exceptional candidates as well, and probably close seconds to Caesar. I won't go into details except to comment on Trajan and say that, after him, the Senators would salute a new Emperor with the words 'May he be luckier than Augustus, and better than Trajan', which strikes me as a truly meaningful accolade.

And finally, I rate both Aetius and Stilicho very highly as well. Both men served in an era where they were called upon to be more than just battlefield commanders, and Stilicho in particular was only an average tactician, but that's part of what made them great. Both men had to be a politician and a diplomat as much as a general to achieve their successes on the battlefield, and both men can claim to have been real checks on the decline of the Western Empire before being discarded and murdered by the jealous Emperors that they protected.

[Lord Oda Nobunaga]

As subjective as this is my tier 1 would include all of these and any I did not include from the original post (Pompey and Germanicus) would be demoted to tier 2
-Gaius Julius Caesar
-Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus
-Flavius Aetius
-Flavius Belisarius
-Gaius Marius
-Lucius Cornelius Sulla
-Lucius Lucullus
-Marcus Ulpius Traianus
-Quintus Sertorius
-Gaius Flavius Valerius Aurelius Constantinus

[Erebus Pasha]

I am of the opinion that we should separate those of the Republic and the early Principate with those of the Late Empire - different times, different requirements.

Constantius III - now there is a guy who doesn't get that much exposure, but he did a great deal in helping to preserve Honorius' position in the face of the Gothic threat and that posed by Constantine III. He drove the former out of Italy and eventually into Spain and defeated the latter.

Any thoughts on Flavius Theodosius - how would the guys here rate him as a commander others of the Later Empire?

[Lord Oda Nobunaga]

Did I not include Flavius Heraclius up there? I'm wondering if anyone would say Heraclius is tier 1 material, I think what puts most people off about Heraclius are the many defeats in his reign.

I would say that Heraclius inherited a very complex strategic situation which was not at all easy to control. His handling of the situation was quite masterful when he was fighting the Sassanians despite the fact that he lost Syria. The thing with the Persians and Parthians is that as soon as you let them overcome the fortresses along the Tigris and Euphrates and allow them to enter Syria, at least strategically speaking they become hard to stop and can only do so if they overstretch themselves in say Egypt or the mountains of Anatolia where getting them in one of those choke points gives you pretty much all the strategic and tactical advantages you could want. Would their army be successfully defeat an counter attack into Syria all the way to the Euphrates is quite easy unless you allow them to play on their strengths on that type of terrain. I think that when Heraclius led his first campaign against the Sassanids they had entered Syria and they could and did exploit the operational and tactical advantages that the area provided them.

[Sudden Death]

Looking at the context of the late republic only, I would list:

Caesar
Pompey
Lucullus
Metellus Pius
Sertorius
Cn. Pompeius Strabo
Sulla
Marius
Labienus
Antony
Ventidius Bassus
Bruttius (maybe)

*this is late republic only, and not in any particular order. I probably forgot some, so I'll add them in as I remember them.*