Ancient history specialist here , my area of research is Ancient history from the Bronze age to the classical period . If you have a question or remarks regarding this period then I am happy to discuss .
Better general: Hannibal Barca or Pyrhus of Epirus?
Why ask you when I can just look it up online?
This is a really cool thread!
In a few words, I would like to know to which extent the Greeks have been influenced by Egypt and Mesopotamia. I believe that Occident starts with the Greeks, but I guess they did not start from scratch.
Also, you define the time of your research, but not the place nor the civilizations, which area/cultures do you specialize in?
Thank you in advance!
In a few words, I would like to know to which extent the Greeks have been influenced by Egypt and Mesopotamia. I believe that Occident starts with the Greeks, but I guess they did not start from scratch.
Also, you define the time of your research, but not the place nor the civilizations, which area/cultures do you specialize in?
Thank you in advance!
Messinathon or Ronaldulus?
@Off-Steel
Do you think the Aeneid has historical validity or is it just a poem by Virgil?
Do you think the Aeneid has historical validity or is it just a poem by Virgil?
@clousems said in #2:
> Better general: Hannibal Barca or Pyrhus of Epirus?
In my opinion I would place them around the same level ,We know that Hannibal ranked Pyrrhus as the greatest general second only to Alexander the great, though when considering the time period between the two , it's obviously easy to see that Pyrrhus was popular by the time of Hannibal and hence had more eco , Both however have had interestingly the same weaknesses, both have relied heavily on mercenaries and have struggled to maintain focus among their troops which eventually led to their demise.
> Better general: Hannibal Barca or Pyrhus of Epirus?
In my opinion I would place them around the same level ,We know that Hannibal ranked Pyrrhus as the greatest general second only to Alexander the great, though when considering the time period between the two , it's obviously easy to see that Pyrrhus was popular by the time of Hannibal and hence had more eco , Both however have had interestingly the same weaknesses, both have relied heavily on mercenaries and have struggled to maintain focus among their troops which eventually led to their demise.
@Off-Steel who broke off from who during the great schism?
@MrPushwood said in #3:
> Why ask you when I can just look it up online?
You're absolutely free to look up online and I would encourage you to do so ( good research),
It's now however unfortunately that I see a notable increase in misleading and pseudo history online , So if if one would do a research its better be from a credible sources.
> Why ask you when I can just look it up online?
You're absolutely free to look up online and I would encourage you to do so ( good research),
It's now however unfortunately that I see a notable increase in misleading and pseudo history online , So if if one would do a research its better be from a credible sources.
@Off-Steel said in #7:
> In my opinion I would place them around the same level ,We know that Hannibal ranked Pyrrhus as the greatest general second only to Alexander the great, though when considering the time period between the two , it's obviously easy to see that Pyrrhus was popular by the time of Hannibal and hence had more eco , Both however have had interestingly the same weaknesses, both have relied heavily on mercenaries and have struggled to maintain focus among their troops which eventually led to their demise.
Which sources mention these? Phyrrhus failed because of the sicilian campaign, while Hannibal had problems with Carthage's elites, not the same for me...
> In my opinion I would place them around the same level ,We know that Hannibal ranked Pyrrhus as the greatest general second only to Alexander the great, though when considering the time period between the two , it's obviously easy to see that Pyrrhus was popular by the time of Hannibal and hence had more eco , Both however have had interestingly the same weaknesses, both have relied heavily on mercenaries and have struggled to maintain focus among their troops which eventually led to their demise.
Which sources mention these? Phyrrhus failed because of the sicilian campaign, while Hannibal had problems with Carthage's elites, not the same for me...
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.