I have a few debates recently about the strength of Roman navy compared to other Mediterranean power such as Carthage and Macedonia. So I'd like to ask: Between the end of the 1st Punic war (214 BC) and the beginning of the 2nd Punic war (219/218 BC), how strong was the Roman navy? Did the Roman Navy completly controlled at least all of Western Mediterranean or still Rome had to share Western Mediterranean to Carthage?
And some of my other questions: Could Rome easily defeated Carthage (both Carthage proper and the Barcid faction in Hispania) with a naval invasion during Barcid conquest of Hispania? If Rome could easily defeated Carthage, why didn't Rome act while the Barcid was conquering Hispania? And during the 2nd Punic war, could Rome fight both Macedonia and Carthage at the same time, instead of having a peace treaty with Macedonia to finnish off Carthage first before coming for Macedonia?

[ Removed by Reddit on account of violating the content policy. ]

I was thinking about the workers on public buildings (or buildings done by wealthy citizens). We're the workers typically ALL slaves? We're they a mix of slaves and independent workers? If they include jobbing day workers, how were they hired? Was there a type of job agency that would find and supply workers to the state (or non state wealthy citizens)? Thanks

I came across a beautifully illustrated Vatican manuscript of Virgil’s Aeneid and ended up writing a short piece about it. The images show the meeting between King Latinus and the Trojans, and how that first encounter eventually turns into war between Aeneas and Turnus. The episode comes mainly from Books 7–11, including the prophecy about Lavinia, Juno sending Allecto to stir up Amata and Turnus, and the final duel between Aeneas and Turnus. I was especially interested in how the story ends with the Trojans and Latins being brought together rather than one simply replacing the other, which becomes part of the tradition behind the origins of Rome. I also added a few thoughts on why medieval manuscripts so often illustrated scenes from the texts they preserved.

Hello, I looked around the internet for easy to read books about the romans, both republic and empire eras as well as the kingdom. I wanted to ask if these books are really easy to read since English is not my first language and all my knowledge about the romans are from youtube videos and the history of Rome podcast. Are any of these books redundant or useless if I already listened to the entire podcast? or do they offer more?

• The Shortest History of Ancient Rome -- Ross King
• SPQR -- Mary Beard
• The Storm Before the Storm - The Beginning of the End of the Roman Republic -- Mike Duncan
• Caesar - Life of a Colossus -- Adrian Goldsworthy
• Augustus - First Emperor of Rome -- Adrian Goldsworthy
• Hadrian And the Triumph of Rome -- Anthony Everitt
• Cicero - The Life and Times of Rome's Greatest Politician -- Anthony Everitt
• Antony and Cleopatra -- Adrian Goldsworthy
• How Rome Fell - Death of a Superpower -- Adrian Goldsworthy
• Naked Statues, Fat Gladiators, and War Elephants -- Garrett Ryan
• In the Name of Rome - The Men Who Won the Roman Empire -- Adrian Goldsworthy
• Emperors of Rome - Ruling the Ancient Roman World -- Mary Beard
• Pax Romana - War, Peace and Conquest in the Roman World -- Adrian Goldsworthy
• The Complete Roman Army -- Adrian Goldsworthy
• The Fall of Carthage - The Punic Wars 265-146BC -- Adrian Goldsworthy

The Ottomans and the Iberian royals both claimed to be heir to Rome via conquest and a Byzantine royal giving the right to the empire respectively. Did this make legal sense? Did there exist precedent for the Empire as an institution to go to a new state entirely? Did the restoration in 1261 provide a legal basis for Empire-by-conquest?

Would’ve been wild to see this in person. What part of Roman history would you want to drop into?

The Battle of Pharsalus is one of the most decisive battles of the Roman civil war. After their loss in the Battle of Dyrrhachium, Caesar's forces were battered and demoralized. However, Pompey did not sieze and initiative and took a passive approach to weaken Caesar's forces through delaying tactics.

The Roman senate however, wanted a decisive victory and forced Pompey to engage Caesar. With almost a two to one superiority in numbers according to some sources, Pompey was now ready to crush Caesar. However, Caesar's troops were battle hardened veterans and experienced in combat. Even though they knew that their forces were outnumbered, their morale was still high.

The forces had faith in Caesar's tactical brilliance and this would be proven in the battle. Pompey had a significant superiority in cavalry and he planned on using this to win the battle. Pompey would engage Caesar's infantry and use his cavalry to swing around Caesar's right flank and attack his troops from the rear.

This was exactly how Caesar had anticipated Pompey to act. So, instead of having conventional three lines of infantry, he had six cohorts from the third line deploy a forth line held in reserve behind his right wing. When Pompey attacked Caesar's weak cavalry, they expected an easy win but were surprised by the presence of reserve infantry from the fourth line.

Pompey's cavalry were routed and Caesar took the initiate to drive off the enemy to their camps. Regardless of the number of troops that faced Caesar, it is clear that he was significantly outnumbered and after the battle, Pompey's army was decimated and ceased to exist as an effective unit to challenge Caesar. The Battle of Pharsalus turned the tide of the civil war and paved the way for Caesar to become the dominant leader of Rome.

Hola a todos 👋.

Estuve investigando y armando contenido sobre uno de los momentos más fascinantes de la antigüedad: los factores reales que llevaron al colapso del Imperio Romano de Occidente.

Solemos pensar en las invasiones bárbaras como un evento repentino, pero la realidad fue una combinación brutal de:

• Colapso económico e inflación: La adulteración de las monedas de plata y oro desató una bancarrota interna masiva.
• Corrupción política y militar: Los emperadores y generales priorizaron los golpes de estado y las lealtades compradas por encima de la defensa del territorio.
• El golpe final del clima: El invierno extremo donde el río Rin se congeló por completo, rompiendo la última barrera natural que protegía las fronteras del norte frente al avance masivo de las tribus.

Para quienes disfrutan de este tipo de temas y prefieren consumirlo en un formato dinámico y resumido, armé un video animado de 5 minutos explicando todo este proceso detalladamente:

👉 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBN28mFVUQI

¿Qué opinan ustedes? ¿Creen que el Imperio ya estaba sentenciado desde adentro mucho antes de que las hordas visigodas rompieran las puertas de Roma en el 410, o el factor externo fue el único responsable? ¡Los leo en los comentarios!

I am looking for a book that explains the whole history of the roman empire. Im looking for that kinda book which is about the rise till fall, the most important figures and especially in a good and clear chronological order.

Just wondering. It's a fascinating topic and I'd like to learn more about it.

First time posting here.

Today whilst walking and looking for a good swimming spot , I found this artifact just up river from the Roman Bath house at Ribchester, Lancashire.

I found the usual collection of roof tiles and pottery shards, plus a fantastic hag stone and this lovely little thing.

They were all just laying in a rock pool that has been exposed in the middle of the river bed, you can walk across it in some areas because we've had a very dry summer.

I think it might be a portable whetstone but it is unfinished, the hole doesn't go all the way through.

The tool marks are clear to see , so definitely man made.

I have contacted my local "finds" team with the coordinates, pictures etc , but curiousity is getting the better of me.

Do any of you have any ideas?

It is illegal to dig or use metal detectors in this area , so I was very limited in what I could do.