What do you reckon was the greatest Ancient Historical victory

spartans vs persians round 1
meme'd itself into history

Siege

of

Syracuse

What do you mean by greatest? Most deadly? Most decisive? For decisive I'd say Watling street. Deadly i wouldnt know lmao

Granicus or Issus

Why is this board filled with normies that only watch documentaries?

>>1630028
Grace us with your knowledge fuccboi

>>1630036
My dick is bigger than yours.

>>1629805
Cannae was too brutal. Carthaginians fucked up by cucking the Romans so hard.

Why do you think Rome worked their asses off to find a reason to go to war a third time? Beating Hannibal wasn't enough, they wanted to avenge the memory of Cannae by utterly wiping Carthage out forever.

>>1630042
Or just because the senators wanted loot. And thats what they got. They also got a Tiberius Gracchus restoring the rights of the people.

File: pepe.png (660KB, 1106x1012px) Image search: [Google]

660KB, 1106x1012px

>Win
>Lose

Was Hannibal retarded?

>>1630059
It was a lot deeper than just loot, though obviously that played a part as it does in every war.

If you'd like to know more I'd recommend "Carthage Must Be Destroyed" by Richard Miles. It really goes into the relationship between Carthage and Rome in a way that makes you rethink the wars, and better understand their uniqueness in Rome's history.

>>1630078
No, he just misunderstand the Roman psyche and waged war in the same fashion as it was waged in most of the Mediterranean, and as he had been raised waging it in Iberia.

>>1630080
Im speaking purely of the Third of course

>>1630084
So am I, but it wasn't an isolated incident and its occurrence was guaranteed as a result of the Second Punic War. There really was much more than simply loot below the surface for motivations.

>>1630094
True. I think loot probably played a big part in the thinking of it though

>>1630099
In a sense. Rome made more by forcing Carthage to pay reparations. The fact Carthage recovered economically decades before Rome expected them to was part of what motivated the Senate to being antagonizing the Carthaginians. There were very real fears of an economically viable Carthage reascending and once more threatening the stability of the republic.

Plus culturally the Romans hated everything about Carthaginians, and felt uneasy dealing with them at all. They didn't know how to place them, how to label them compared to many of the other cultures they dealt with.

>>1630039
citation needed

>>1629822
But that wasn't a Spartan victory.

You answered your own question with Cannae.

Guagamela and Salamis are also pretty big.

>>1630078
>have like 50k units maybe
>can't siege a city of a million people

>wuz hannibal retarded
>why dont he atack da romes?

>>1630113
>was part of what motivated the Senate to being antagonizing the Carthaginians
Makes sense if the stories of their reliance on mercenaries were true. A state that fields mercenaries has one advantage over a state that uses levies and volunteers, it doesn't need a big population or a lot of territory to field a large army, just deep pockets.

File: checkem.jpg (22KB, 472x472px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 472x472px

>>1629999
JESUS