Roman Defeats during the Third Century Crisis, and their Historiographical Treatment

Joined Aug 2021
1,093 Posts | 227+
Italy
What's the question :p
What syvanne thoughts about caracalla and gallienus?and,more important in my thoughts,there Is evidence about a large cavalry army focused Commanded by the emperor?and how much cavalry Roman army had in theirs ranks as fighting forces?for a comparison, if a had a time machine and i became emperor,if the coffins are full and the borders secure,i Will start to Copy the army of parthians from scratch, maybe trying to making a Copy of suren army at charrae.. how much cavalry had the Roman army in the third century,for example?i had read something that in all the East ,at the time of costantius the second, all cavalrymen were around 6000 or something like that..and do you think that could had raised more cavalry units,divided between horse archers and heavy cavalry?
 
Joined Aug 2021
1,093 Posts | 227+
Italy
From later centuries we know Romans sometimes campaigned at winter because Persians were unable to fight at that condition. such matter seems to have been so famous that there was a saying for it, something in lines of "no Mede will show his face in winter". mainly because Persian bows would break in such condition and were ineffective and bow was the main weapon of Persians/Parthians. It would not be surprising that Romans were already aware of this in Parthian area and therefore Alexander might even wanted to use this at his own advantage or perhaps it was simply because preparations took too long.

Considering the fact that southern army was destroyed while the northern army fought to stand off, it's quite possible that the main reason for this was not the cavalry based army of Persians but their bows and arrows. cavalry could still shoot at the far or dismount, besides Persians used a lot of foot archers. what actually might have stopped Persians to gain a decisive victory was the same bow and arrows. I believe there is also no report of Roman army getting harassed on it's way back. this is further proof of problem with bows. because either Herdoian simply forgot to mention this or there was no harassment at all which would be extremely weird considering we also don't read anything about destruction of Persian army at that region.
I also had read the campaigns of heraclius in autum and Winter with small army focused on cavalry,but from what i read, without the pony brought by the gozturk couldn't be possible.. usually the campaign season started in March and ended in october/november due the fact that horses couldn't be feed so easly in autumn and Winter..even if the autumn and Winter season could had lessen the burden on the soldiers caused by Extreme heat
 
Joined Oct 2018
15,357 Posts | 16,546+
Sydney
From later centuries we know Romans sometimes campaigned at winter because Persians were unable to fight at that condition. such matter seems to have been so famous that there was a saying for it, something in lines of "no Mede will show his face in winter". mainly because Persian bows would break in such condition and were ineffective and bow was the main weapon of Persians/Parthians. It would not be surprising that Romans were already aware of this in Parthian area and therefore Alexander might even wanted to use this at his own advantage or perhaps it was simply because preparations took too long.

Considering the fact that southern army was destroyed while the northern army fought to stand off, it's quite possible that the main reason for this was not the cavalry based army of Persians but their bows and arrows. cavalry could still shoot at the far or dismount, besides Persians used a lot of foot archers. what actually might have stopped Persians to gain a decisive victory was the same bow and arrows. I believe there is also no report of Roman army getting harassed on it's way back. this is further proof of problem with bows. because either Herdoian simply forgot to mention this or there was no harassment at all which would be extremely weird considering we also don't read anything about destruction of Persian army at that region.
This is a fascinating point btw
 
Joined Oct 2018
15,357 Posts | 16,546+
Sydney
What syvanne thoughts about caracalla and gallienus?and,more important in my thoughts,there Is evidence about a large cavalry army focused Commanded by the emperor?and how much cavalry Roman army had in theirs ranks as fighting forces?for a comparison, if a had a time machine and i became emperor,if the coffins are full and the borders secure,i Will start to Copy the army of parthians from scratch, maybe trying to making a Copy of suren army at charrae.. how much cavalry had the Roman army in the third century,for example?i had read something that in all the East ,at the time of costantius the second, all cavalrymen were around 6000 or something like that..and do you think that could had raised more cavalry units,divided between horse archers and heavy cavalry?
I don't remember his thoughts on Caracalla and Gallienus. These questions are straying too far from the thread. Keep in mind that this thread isn't about how Rome could defeat Persia.
 
Joined Jan 2016
457 Posts | 463+
nowhere
Do you had read also something of MAKSYMIUK K,or of Touraj Daryaee?

But Herodian Say that the northern army was able to cross the Mountains only because was Summer
As I said I don't recall about MAKSYMIUK. as for Dayaee, I don't think I have read much of his works but yes I have read some. I tend to stay away from most modern scholars as I often don't find them interesting or informing.

As for passing of Mountains in summer, I have to reinvestigate.
 
Joined Oct 2018
15,357 Posts | 16,546+
Sydney
The northern army first passed through the mountains in summer, but the campaign wasn't quick, as we know that Severus Alexander started delaying his advance, and then (afterwards) his army suffered from epidemic, and so that could well mean that the northern army returned during autumn or winter, recrossing the mountains at a nasty time.
 
Joined Aug 2021
1,093 Posts | 227+
Italy
The northern army first passed through the mountains in summer, but the campaign wasn't quick, as we know that Severus Alexander started delaying his advance, and then (afterwards) his army suffered from epidemic, and so that could well mean that the northern army returned during autumn or winter, recrossing the mountains at a nasty time.
And al
As I said I don't recall about MAKSYMIUK. as for Dayaee, I don't think I have read much of his works but yes I have read some. I tend to stay away from most modern scholars as I often don't find them interesting or informing.

As for passing of Mountains in summer, I have to reinvestigate.
Sorry,i didn't read that post
 
Joined Jan 2016
457 Posts | 463+
nowhere
Last edited:
his is a fascinating point btw
I do have something interesting to share with you actually. I was reading a collection of military manuals from Islamic time and there was one with a very interesting verse.

It goes like this:
"It was with bow(archery) that Ardashir spread his reputation in world ----------It was with bow that he took revenge upon the army of Kinanah "

Why this is interesting? because Banu Kinanah was located at Tihama and we know that Ardashir fought king of Tihama and his forces. considering that most of Arabic troops were infantry and Persians were cavalry, we can easily see how such battle worked out. this is important because it gives credit to destruction of southern army which was also probably majority infantry. I don't think the event as often described was taken from Battle of Carrhae. it was standard military tactic and it was used against Arabs as well in the same time period.
 
Joined Aug 2021
1,093 Posts | 227+
Italy
Thank you... according on the polish researcher , Alexander /Alexander severus army reached palmyra and from then kabhur Valley..and then stopped .. On the movements of the army commanded without
indirectly through Severus, Alexander can also be attested by the papyrus from Dura Europos (con-
marriage treaty of a soldier of the auxiliary unit dated October 1, 232), which
mentions the name of the winter quarters of one of the troops taking part in the expedition: it was
Qatna (Κάτνη), a town most likely located on the Khabur River, approx. 100 km from
the mouth of this river into the Euphrates. The document was published in: Welles, Fink, Gilliam 1959, no. 30,
pp. 153–159; Grubbs 2002: 134–135; on the location of Qatna, see Luther 2002:
5–6; Edwell 2008: 79.
Michael A. Speidel believe that among those killed in
In war with the Persians there was, among others, a legate of the IV Scythica legion, unknown to us today
(ἔπαρχος λεγεῶνος τετάρτης Σκυθικῆς), and this fact was commemorated by a heavily damaged inscription
tombstone (?), found in Dura Europos on the Euphrates. See AE 1956, 222; Speidel M.P.
1984: 287; Speidel M.A. 1998: 181, no. 18; Speidel M.A. 2000: 336. Dated: Winter 1988: 53
 
Joined Aug 2021
1,093 Posts | 227+
Italy
For Who want know where i found that : Expeditio Persica i triumf cesarza Sewera Aleksandra nad Persami (231-233 r.) / Expeditio Persica and the Triumph of Emperor Severus Alexander ... I used also Google translate with cut and copy
 
Joined Jan 2014
6,816 Posts | 1,340+
Connecticut
Considering the fact that southern army was destroyed while the northern army fought to stand off, it's quite possible that the main reason for this was not the cavalry based army of Persians but their bows and arrows. cavalry could still shoot at the far or dismount, besides Persians used a lot of foot archers. what actually might have stopped Persians to gain a decisive victory was the same bow and arrows.
A key advantage of cavalry was mobility but it couldn't operate effectively in rough terrain. The southern army was surrounded by the swiftly moving enemy, hence vulnerable to projectile bombardment from all sides. Under those circumstances, shields were less effective; each man's shield could face only one way while arrows rained in from all directions. In the northern area, cavalry was hindered hence less dangerous for the Romans.

I believe there is also no report of Roman army getting harassed on it's way back. this is further proof of problem with bows. because either Herdoian simply forgot to mention this or there was no harassment at all which would be extremely weird considering we also don't read anything about destruction of Persian army at that region.
The Persian army may not have been destroyed but it could've been mauled, hence unwilling to fight further. Pursuit was also difficult in the mountains, especially if the surviving sassanids were mounted. Or maybe they felt the bitter cold would do all the necessary harrassing which it did...
 
Joined Aug 2021
1,093 Posts | 227+
Italy
Last edited:
A key advantage of cavalry was mobility but it couldn't operate effectively in rough terrain. The southern army was surrounded by the swiftly moving enemy, hence vulnerable to projectile bombardment from all sides. Under those circumstances, shields were less effective; each man's shield could face only one way while arrows rained in from all directions. In the northern area, cavalry was hindered hence less dangerous for the Romans.


The Persian army may not have been destroyed but it could've been mauled, hence unwilling to fight further. Pursuit was also difficult in the mountains, especially if the surviving sassanids were mounted. Or maybe they felt the bitter cold would do all the necessary harrassing which it did...
I wonder if a Roman emperor could Simply chosen to go to Attack from Armenia and from then go to iranian plateau,and left others army in defensive in northern Mesopotamia,left the burden to Advance of the enemy .. However,the palmyrene state could be regarded as foreign enemy or instead a secessionist? And why looks like that the Germans had and infinite numbers of Warriors while their Lands should not be worth to conquest?and in the third century crisis,quadi,suebians, Marcomanni,alans and sarmatians ,where they go? What we know about the gothic war machine in this period?
 

Trending History Discussions

Top