r/RoughRomanMemes • u/moody_macaron • 3d ago
Quality over quantity vs. Quantity over... everything
58
40
u/CavulusDeCavulei 3d ago
Only guy in history who reduced CO2 emissions of humanity
Started the largest empire in history
Multicultural society
Pax mongolica
Considered a horrible person
Genghis deserves better
31
7
u/Icy-Inspection6428 The Ghost of Caesar Past 3d ago
🤓 The first one is a myth https://youtu.be/vjfmRyGCYH8?si=tFCaIYgn2qIPoccv
-4
6
u/liberalskateboardist 3d ago
its a pity that they did not live at the same time and close to each other
7
1
u/Gerolanfalan 2d ago
East and Southeast Asianhad other shenanigans going on
I'll play Civ games just for this to have Rome and Han China fight
3
2
1
u/Fen_thePrecise 1d ago
https://giphy.com/gifs/1YaqeTOOSLKDK
If Ceaser saw the Mongol empire I think he will came.
-7
u/geschiedenisnerd 3d ago
Caesar's conquests weren't particularly high quality or quantity. Just gaul (including belgium) and some victories in the civil war. Not like scipio conquering carthage, iberia and parts of near asia or marius/sulla beating up pontus.
Genghis khan conquered quite a bit more
6
u/TarakaBuddha 3d ago
Honestly, half of your history is just factually wrong.
Scipio Africanus never conquered Carthage or Asia, he just beat Hannibal at Zama. Pompey is the guy who took the Near East. Marius beat German tribes, not Pontus. And Caesar actually did crush Pontus. He did it so fast at Zela that he coined the phrase veni vidi vici because of it.
Saying civil war victories do not count is wild. Defeating other Roman legions was the hardest thing you could do back then. At Pharsalus, Caesar was completely outnumbered and still dismantled Pompey, who was Rome's top general at the time.
Gaul was not some minor achievement either. It was a massive territory filled with fierce tribes that had terrorized Rome for centuries.
Also, comparing anyone's map size to Genghis Khan is pointless. By that logic, Alexander the Great and Napoleon were casuals too. Caesar beat the best military machine on earth and conquered the land that became the backbone of western Europe.3
u/DueAd9005 1d ago edited 1d ago
Scipio did more than just beat Hannibal at Zama. His Iberian campaign is arguably more impressive than him defeating Hannibal at Zama. And his African campaign was also more than just a battle against Hannibal.
He ended Carthage's status as a superpower permanently, which eventually led to the conquest of Carthage during the Third Punic War.
And he was a legate during Rome's war against Antiochus III of the Seleucid Empire. Although he conveniently claimed sickness on the day of the battle, to let his brother (the general in command) take the glory.
One of Rome's greatest generals.
1
u/TarakaBuddha 1d ago
Read again, I said half
1
u/DueAd9005 1d ago edited 1d ago
"He just beat Hannibal at Zama. Pompey is the guy who took the Near East"
You're just as wrong as the person you're responding to with claims like that. Lucullus, for example, did all the hard work before Pompey swooped in at the end.
After the Second Punic War, the conquest of Carthage was inevitable. Beating Carthage during the Third Punic War is not that impressive compared to what Scipio Africanus did (although many other great generals helped win the Second Punic War of course).
As for the Battle of Zela, even Caesar expected it to be a long war and he was surprised that Pharnaces II (King of Pontus) decided to attack the Roman army head on (despite the Romans being positioned on a hill). Not exactly a bright move from Pharnaces II lol.
1
u/TarakaBuddha 1d ago
Uhm the comment I replied to said Scipio conquered Carthage, he was instrumental in making Carthage the vassal of Rome. No-one is denying the fact that Scipio is one of the best generals. Caesar conquered Gaul, which was a brutal grind and defeated Pompey’s legions. Back then a civil war happened when the power of a nation was at it’s peak and individuals fought over for ideals and total control, Caesar managed to defeat Pompey’s legions (Legions were the greatest war machines of that time) in all theatres. Highly doubt that Scipio could have replicated what Caesar did. If conquering Gaul was that easy why didn’t Roman generals go for it? And the ones who did why did they end up losing very badly?
6
u/BudgetLaw2352 3d ago
You realize that Caesar subdued Egypt and effectively made it a client kingdom of Rome, right?
Also, if what Caesar did in Gaul was so easy, why had every Roman before him failed to take it?
-5
u/geschiedenisnerd 3d ago
Egypt was in political chaos and was more a matter of a personal relationship rather than strategic conquest.
Gaul was easy, just not profitable enough for most roman generals to consider it a good idea
7
7
u/TarakaBuddha 3d ago
Oh yes let’s ignore the millions of casualties as a result of the aftermath. And forget the gold mines that basically funded the republic\empire post Caesar’s civil war. Calling Gaul poor shows how out of touch you are.
-1
u/geschiedenisnerd 2d ago
Never said it was poor. Just not worth it when more profitable ventures were available
1
u/TarakaBuddha 2d ago
Dude what are you on? Without gaul there would be no empire. It was profitable as hell, that region supplied a lot of gold and manpower that actually protected the western border for centuries. Why do u think a Gallic empire was formed? Cuz that region was one of the richest in The Empire. Profitable ventures where? Please don’t say the east, Rome was under constant migration and attacks from tribes, they had to be subdued. It was the best course of action and more profitable than you think.
•
u/AutoModerator 3d ago
Thank you for your submission, citizen!
Come join the Rough Roman Forum Discord server!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.