Let us know in the comments which Roman emperor you think was the most successful. For more content like this, click here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-L4VUctdK5vM.html Don't forget to play our Live Trivia (www.watchmojo.com/play) games at 3pm and 8pm EST for a chance to win cash! The faster you answer, the more points you get!
When Julies Caesar was the leader during the time of the Roman empire, he was the most powerful when almost conquered cities and kingdoms in Italy, until he was betrayed by his own son Brutus🏛️🏛️.
Roman military technology was heavily borrowed from Greece as well. Granted, they improved upon the designs, but they still took a lot of Greek technology from military equipment.
Right in military might and brute force or ingenuity accordingly in order to conquer and exploit. I don’t think of that as the higher intelligence, certainly not the higher mentality in terms of ethics and morals, in which both are exploited for material means. Which brings us to where we are today in our militant era of western imperialism.
Right, some of these soldiers in Medieval times where less armor and not enough protection to ward off heavily armored enemy soldiers, so their comrades won't die as much⚓⚓.
I would still go with Greece simply because the intellectuals are so severely amazing, while Rome took so much of Greece for their own. I also have an issue with the focus on so much military in Rome.
Rome may have won the military round, but Greece still had cool warriors and battle history of their very own. Like the 300 Spartans and Alexander the Great.
@@dreamguardian8320 Agreed. Having a heavy military may win you the empire, but you lose too much in the extreme focus. Having a good military is enough, especially once the empire is going. Pretty much why the US military is way too much. It leaves too much falling to ruin.
addressing some misconceptions: 1. Athenian democracy =/= modern democracy under Athenian democracy, citizens were basically Greek men born from Greek parents and raised in the Greek city-states and to participate in decision-making all eligible citizens would be gathered in one place and every single citizen would be given a set time to orate their opinion 2. dictator in the Republican context was basically someone chosen by the Senate and given emergency powers (with the Senate's consent) during either wartime or religious conflicts the problem with Julius Caesar was because he unilaterally declared himself "dictator perpetuo", meaning not only is he sidestepping the Senate (where his unlimited-but-not-really-unlimited powers come from) but he's also saying the Republic is in an eternal state of public emergency
Greek democracy was any male who owned land over 21 of aristocratic family could vote / practices democracy and no such thing of complete democracy cause nothing would get done bureaucracy and everyone would vote on everything the feel they need
Not sure it's the right niche but if anyone's interested in brutally hard-core political, military and social history analysis comparison of ancient Rome and ancient Greece I strongly recommend Schwerpunkt. He's a PhD in Medieval warfare but when he gets to antiquity he rocks hard too
More suggestions : The Babylonians versus the Ancient Egyptians or Ancient China versus Ancient Japan? Modern languages of Western Europe, use Greek and Latin ( Roman ) words.
Rome would never have gotten as advanced or as successful without having adopted the Greek method of decapolis (a central large city with at least nine other slightly smaller but very centralized and developed cities as satellites of it) themselves. By doing so, the Roman Empire reached their zenith earlier and kept it longer than if they hadn't.
pointless discussion, even the Greeks were heavily influenced by the Phoenicians, that's how it works with civilizations... the Romans were influenced more by the Etruscans than by the Greeks,
@@blessed7614, yes and no. Without the Greek decapolis method of power structure, the influence of multiple schools of thought, education, religion, technology, and mathematics would never have reached the level of being that wide spread. Of course, all of them copied those before them, like the latter Babylonian rulers and Cyrus, but still...
@@ΦυλακαςΔικαιοςΕλλην. not saying anything bad about Greece. In fact, as I said, had it not been for Greek language, culture, their concept of the decapolis, etc, many good things would never have come to the rest of the world.
You can't talk about Military without talking about the Macedonian War Machine thanks to which Philip and Alexander took the lead of the Hellenic world first and of the world in general next.
"Graecia capta ferum victorem cepit et artes intulit agresti Latio "--Quintus Horatius Flaccus , (commonly known as Horace). Greece, the captive, made her savage victor captive, and brought the arts into rustic Latium.
Well the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire) was basically Greek ethnically, linguistically and culturally, and not a continuity of the ancient Latin, Western Roman empire to be fair.
The Romans adopted the Greek culture and with it their gods. The cultural inheritance Rome owes to Greece is also the reason why the two civilizations are often seen inseparably as one i.e. Greco-Roman. Ancient Rome was basically just the continuation of ancient Greece. They took the Greek culture and spread it across Europe. Rome wouldn't exist without Greece and Greece wouldn't be remembered without Rome.
A lot of ancient cultures have stories of Gods that seem pretty much the same as other cultures. It's one of the main points of Ancient Astronaut theory, that it's more likely ancient cultures across the world actually physically encountered these beings, rather than all of them independently coming up with the same stories, despite never interacting with one another. Rome and Greece are a poor example, since they did interact with one another, but it's a little harder to explain western cultures having similar lore.
Rome conquered Europe, but when they reached the greek parts they adopted the religion of the time, instead of implementing their own religion to the greeks. That is pretty much what happened
For me it’s Augustus not actually in militarily sense but being astute politician and greatly military planner with Agrippa the great tactician. Augustus ruled for 40-41 years January 16th 27BCE(age 35) to August 19th 14Ce(age 75/76)and is seen by many as the first emperor and the best.
I do not think it is possible to choose which emperor was most successful and anyone familiar with Roman history will agree. Arguments can be made for many. Augustus - the first emperor of Rome who laid the template for all future emperors; Hadrian, who consolidated the conquests of his predecessor, Trajan, certain could be considered one of the greatest though his reputation is diminished by his visceral hatred of Jews. Thereafter, comes an increasing destablization of the Empire, with certain men of stature providing temporary respite. In this latter period, Constantine stands out, providing the Empire with perhaps its last great burst of glory. We forget, of course, that the Byzantine Empire was a continuation of Rome, so we might want to consider perhaps its greatest leader, Justinian. All this being my opinion, of course.
The thing about Soldiers in Rome and Greece they did wore similar armor and helmets during the age of Medieval times, but the Spartans in Rome seem to had far better training and ruthless aggression in battle despite not wearing much armor carrying a Shield and Spear🛡️🛡️.
@@figliodihades Yep, they were probably had Greek blood in them during the time of ancient Sparta, but something tells me that Spartans and Greek soldier is were alike in their terms of weapons and training with Spears and shields🛡️🛡️.
@@figliodihades His comment is all over the place. Medieval times? Spartans in Rome? Even the armour is debatable if you compensate for the fact that iron wasn't a common material in the Classical times outside the Iberia peninsula...
Aphrodite vs. Venus, Hermes vs. Mercury, Zeus vs. Jupiter (or Ivpiter, as the Romans spell it), Kronos vs. Saturn, Ouranos, for whom Uranus is named, vs. Caelus, and Posiden vs. Neptune, and most importantly, Gaia vs. Terra. Let’s give a shout-out to Hades vs. Pluto. Here are their respective representations from their respective religions: war, which is Ares vs. Mars, love and beauty, messages, the chief, agriculture, the sky, and the ocean.
@@avidfather1864 that's not the point. The point is that the Greek gods are way more mainstream than the Roman ones. I would ask you to name 5 Roman gods without googling, but ik you'll be cheating. Bottom line is that is one point for Ancient Greece
@@TheArtmann Yeah, because the Greek gods are the original ones. The Roman gods are just copies of them. But I can easily give you 5 Roman god because the planets in our solar system are named after them. Mercury(Hermes), Venus(Aphrodite), Mars(Ares), Jupiter(Zeus) and Neptune(Poseidon).
Greece had some interesting tech and ideas, but everything that came out of Rome, altogether is quite the achievement. Maybe Greece had the two or three strangest achievements for its time, but Rome had the most, by a lot. I also disagree with Rome having the best leaders. Certainly some greats, but also some of the worst. Alexander, Leonidas, Philip. What they, and others, accomplished with what little they had is staggering. Military…. Rome had the largest and most sophisticated, but what Greece did with much less is the stuff of legend. Thermopylae, Gaugamela…. Also the sheer size of the Alex’s empire… Spartans and Macedonians are still looked in reverence, in comparison with Vikings and Samurai. No one is throwing a legionnaire into that camp. Culture? Well, Greek has way more. One advantage of being separated into city states forever. Greece wins. Rome for economy and
When i first looked at 300 and 300 rise of an empire, those movies did real life stories about the great Leiondas that he once ruled Ancient rome along with his powerful 300 spartan armies in Sparta,they also had to stop the God king called Xerxes from taking over ancient Sparta⚓🏛️.
Read before you make a video, no need to rub it in with fake crap, The Hellenistic Period refers to the time between the death of Alexander the Great (323 BCE) and the rise of the Roman Empire (32 BCE) in which Greek culture spread throughout the Mediterranean and Near East. Beginning with a series of conflicts between Alexander's top generals known as the Wars of the Diadochi, the time period would see major innovations in art, mathematics, philosophy, and science. The final Hellenistic kingdom, Ptolemaic Egypt, would eventually fall to Rome when Octavian (Augustus) defeated Mark Antony and Cleopatra VII at the Battle of Actium.
@@blessed7614 Ever heard of the Byzantine empire, genius? They survived well throughout the middle ages far after the (western) Romans got cucked by the Germanic barbarian tribes in 476 AD.
rome became an empire about 700 years after its founding... furthermore, rome included the etruscan and latin civilizations, plus all the other italic ones. only much later did it become an empire
