I. Introduction
The Battle of Teutoburg Forest was a critical battle in the history of the Roman Empire and in the formation of the German state. This battle took place during the reign of Augustus in 9 AD during the time of the Roman Empire expansion. The fall of the Romans in the Battle of Teutoburg Forest was the consequence of several mistakes and strategic blunders by the Roman general Varus and his superiors in Rome. This paper will outline these mistakes as well as the strategic advantages that Arminius exploited on behalf of the Germanic tribes that successfully pushed back the Romans from the forest. The defeat at Teutoburg devastated the Roman emperor Augustus, who, as a result, lost his willpower to pursue the continued expansion of the Roman empire. The strategic mistakes and Roman miscues at Teutoburg had far-reaching ramifications beyond the battle itself.
II. Body Section One
The Battle of Teutoburg Forest was between two very distinct and separate cultures. The Romans, led by Varus under the reign of Augustus, were fighting on behalf of the Roman Empire, aiming to conquer all Barbarian lands and folding them into their empire. The German warriors represented a culturally less developed region that was not interested in becoming a part of the Roman empire. These disparate tribes also possessed local knowledge about the landscape and were motivated by a desire to keep the invading armies out of their land.
The Romans made strategic blunders in the lead up to this battle the first of which included the appointment of Publius Quinctilius Varus to serve as the general of the Roman army, and equipping him with an army that was not suited to the terrain of the forest.
When Augustus was determining who would serve...
... middle of paper ...
... sense of the nature of the Germanic Tribes and also illustrates what the success at the battle of Teutoburg Forest meant for the Germans.
Tucker, Spencer. "Battle of Teutoburg Forest." In Battles That Changed History: An Encyclopedia of World Conflict. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2011.
This source provides the reader with many helpful facts on the Battle of Teutoburg Forest. This source provides a chart on the first page with the date of the battle, the location of it, the opponents, the commanders, the approx. # troops, and the overall importance of the battle.
Wells, Peter S. The Battle That Stopped Rome: Emperor Augustus, Arminius, and the Slaughter of the Legions in the Teutoburg Forest. New York: W.W. Norton, 2003.
This book provides great information on the iron weapons used in the battle and how the use of specific weapons impacted the result of the battle.
Tacitus's superiority is further perceived when he describes the German settlements and shelters and portrays them as uncivilized as they do not have great cities and a hierarchical structure of authority that would ensure a level of political stability. The tone used when describing the lack of agricultural development, and the way that the Germans constantly raid other communities for their sustenance also points to the view that German society is inferior to that of the Roman Empire. Therefore, Tacitus’ analysis of Germania is one that is conducted in a way that seeks to compare it to the Roman Empire; resulting in a situation where he looks at Germania, not within its own context, but within the context of the Roman Empire. Tacitus's bias and maintenance of unfavorable views of Germania maybe a result of the massive military achievements of the Roman Empire and its pacification and establishment of its dominion over disparate societies that were considered
Tacitus's Germania is a thoroughly itemized ethnographic text detailing the geography, climate and social structure of Germany and its people. Unlike his Histories and Annales Tacitus doesn't offer a story line to be followed, but instead, he nudges forth an unspoken comparison to be made between two cultures.
Tacitus does a wonderful job of describing the culture and life of Germany and its people in Germania. His personal feelings about them seem to be two-sided. Tacitus describes the people of Germany as barbaric and dumb but he also wants us to know that they had many qualities of a great country. The Germans have a strong army of soldiers that find their nobility through war and that makes them a possible threat. Although Tacitus finds many similarities between his home country of Rome and Germany, we find out that the two places are very different.
3)Gwynn, David M. The Roman Republic: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2012. Print.
Military History: The Definitive Visual Guide to the Objects of Warfare. New York: DK Publishing, Inc., 2012. Print.
Over the span of five-hundred years, the Roman Republic grew to be the most dominant force in the early Western world. As the Republic continued to grow around the year 47 B.C it began to go through some changes with the rise of Julius Caesar and the degeneration of the first triumvirate. Caesar sought to bring Rome to an even greater glory but many in the Senate believed that he had abused his power, viewing his rule more as a dictatorship. The Senate desired that Rome continued to run as a republic. Though Rome continued to be glorified, the rule of Caesar Octavian Augustus finally converted Rome to an Empire after many years of civil war. Examining a few selections from a few ancient authors, insight is provided as to how the republic fell and what the result was because of this.
Rome, even at its beginnings, proved to be a force to be reckoned with. It’s rapid growth and accumulation of power and repeated victories over powerful neighbors set Rome in a position of great authority and influence. As the leader of early Rome, Romulus’ effective command of his men and governance of his people provided the foundation for the building of a great city. Livy emphasizes Romulus’ possible divine origins and strong ties to deities as a validation and reinforcement of his ability to rule. A nation’s sole defense cannot be just bricks and mortar, it requires an army and a will and Romulus was able to successfully take action against the aggressors when action was needed.
Shuckburgh, Evelyn Shirley. A history of Rome to the battle of Actium. London: Macmillan and Co., 1917.
The ancient Roman Empire began when Romulus founded the city of Rome in approximately 753 B.C. and lasted until about 1453 A.D. when the German invasion occurred. Throughout this era, specifically 250 BC until 200 AD, historians including Theodor Mommsen and Sara Phang have debated and interpreted several aspects of how and why the Roman military evolved and the military system itself. These authors used several ancient Roman historians, including Livy and Publius, public records, war accounts and many other sources to investigate and theorize different conclusions about why the Roman military was so powerful and how they were able to conquer the vast majority of the European Continent and the known world.
In the darkest hour of the Roman Republic, an army was led against all odds to reign supreme on the Italian peninsula. Led through sheer military genius, the Carthaginian Army laid waste to everything the might of Rome could muster. For years on end, Italy was the stage for the greatest military orchestra the world had yet seen, conducted by a master of strategy and warfare. Hannibal, son of Hamilcar Barca, laid siege to the very idea of Rome’s military prowess. Despite absolute dominance of the Italian peninsula for several years, his success can not be credited to his brilliance and mastery of strategy. Hannibal’s success can be primarily attributed to Rome’s failure to respond at key points of his advance into Italy.
They seized control of all ends of the hill and even had a small group guard their booty on another hill to help protect it. At first the Celts seemed to be successful and fearless towards the Romans. “The Boii formed the main battle line facing north, with the Tauricsi behind and in support. The southern facing line was composed of the vicious Gaesatae, who elected to fight the battle in the nude, which apparently helped reduce the risk of wounds becoming infected.” (“Fournie, DAN”). Aemilius Papus sent out his cavalry to join the battle towards the hill that their opponent was on. “Tatilius Regulus attacked the Celtic horsemen with a 2,500 Roman cavalry and 3,500 velites. Aemilius Papus’s army joined in with an additional 4,000 horse and 3,500 velites. “(“Fournie,
Even before the war started, Hannibal knew what he was going to do. Since Carthage had no navy, there was no hope of going directly from Carthage to Italy over the Mediterranean Sea. Hannibal thought up a dangerous but ingenious plan. In order to get to Italy over land, Hannibal and his army would have to travel from Carthage-controlled Spain across the Alps and into the heart of the enemy. Hannibal left in the cold winter of 218 B.C. with 50,000 infantry, 9,000 cavalry, and 37 war elephants. While crossing the Alps, “Hannibal’s force suffered greatly from the elements and the hostility of the local tribesmen” (Beshara, 3). By the time they reached Italy, after only fourteen days, over 9,000 men had perished along with most of the elephants, but this number was soon replenished after 14,000 northern Gaul rebels joined Hannibal’s army. This group of 60,000 men proved superior to the Roman forces, and after at least three recorded major victories, the Roman senate was exasperated. An army of 80,000 Roman soldiers was sent to stop Hannibal’s army of now 50,000 once and for all. In July of 216 B.C., the Romans engaged the Carthaginians in “the neighborhood of Cannae on the Italian east coast” (Lendering, 2). Greatly outnumbered, Hannibal realized that he would have to win by strategy, and that is exactly what he did. As the two lines met, Hannibal’s cavalry gained the flanks and, moving up the sides, attacked the rear of the Roman line.
As all of us, Romans stared at the Britains in the distance, I almost felt a huge stone lift off our shoulders as though we were outnumbered we had better weapons and armour, the chance of victory suddenly became more fair. As we both prepared for the battle, Suetonius gave us a speech to inspire us, "Disregard the clamours and empty threats of the natives! In their ranks there are more women than fighting men! Unwarlike, unarmed, when they see the arms and the courage of the conquerors who have driven them to flight so often, they will break immediately. Even when a force contains many legions, few among them win battles - what special glory for your few numbers to win the renown of a whole army! Just keep in close order. Throw your javelin, and then carry on. Fell them with shield-bosses, kill them with swords. Do not think of plunder. When you have won, you will have everything."
Hannibal’s attempt to conquer Rome will forever and always remain an epic failure. Though he was a brilliant tactician, who was able to lead his army of men and elephants through the Alps and Apennines with minimal losses, he still failed to subdue the relatively new power of Rome. Rome was, to Hannibal’s dismay, terribly underestimated; he failed to see what he was dealing with. The Romans were able to defeat Hannibal for a number of reasons, which include Hannibal’s over-reliance on war elephants, and his choice to cross the Alps and the Apennines with them and his army. He was also overcome by Rome’s superior numbers on both land and sea, could not lay siege to Rome’s fortifications, and most importantly, failed to plan for Rome’s attitude towards war. In this
The Romans thought of an innovative idea following a loss at a recent battle versus Hannibal. The Romans decided to burn the anticipated path of the advancing army in an attempt to deprive them of any food. This way Hannibal not only struggled to find food, but the rate of his advance was decreased. Eventually his men would grow weary of consistently trying to find food. Hannibal’s inability to adapt to this left the resolve of his men weakened and the army’s willpower decreased. Furthermore, Hannibal was unable to respond to the battle tactics of the Romans. First, the Romans swiftly handled the Carthaginian cavalry which left Hannibal at a major advantage. After this, the war elephants were disoriented by the sounds of trumpets and the Romans flanked Hannibal from behind, one of Hannibal’s tactics. Hannibal was unable to adjust to these tactics and ended up losing in a crucial encounter, the Battle of Zama. Hannibal’s inability to respond to Rome’s adjusted tactics contributed to his downfall. Finally, Hannibal was too reliant on others. In other endeavours to weaken the Roman, he relied too much on his brother in Spain and his friend in Africa to stabilize the situation. He failed to adjust the situation in his inactions (i.e. appointing different military leaders). This proved to be fatal as forces originally intended for Hannibal were diverted to Spain because of the instability there. The outcome of the war could have been different if these forces could have reinforced Hannibal and given him the extra power to overcome the Romans. Essentially, Hannibal was continuously handcuffed because of the incompetence of his military comrades who were not on the same tactical level as he