The battle, though lost by Romans, showed the following: - It lasted for three days, which means that Roman military machine was working - Attack on the Rhine was expected, but never came after the battle, obviously because the Germans suffered heavy losses
Absolutely! You are bringing up important historical points that often get lost when viewing these events from the perspective of "the losers who lost". I talk about this concept a bit in my Greco-Persian war video, in how the historic world looks at those wars as a debacle for the Persians, while it was quite possibly just an inconvenience for them. While the battle was a disaster for Rome, they were certainly at or near the height of their military dominance, which is actually what made this defeat so grueling. As noted in the video, Varus was a political, and not specifically military personality, which very likely may have aided in the poor strategy and defeat. Also, much of the information we have on this comes from either third-hand accounts largely from Tacitus, and archeological findings of Roman armor and weaponry at the site. While the Roman remains in the area were much more significant than the Germanic, it's important to realize that the Germanic tribes lived there and were much much more likely to remove their casualties and give them proper send offs. To address you second bullet, there was a potential thought of creating a Germanic league to attack the Roman frontiers but history indicates that the tribes couldn't reach a consensus which may have thwarted those attacks History is complicated and these stories often go much deeper than what we see on the surface, but you bring up an important perspective!
@@ImpactfulMoments We do know about Cassius Cherea, who later killed Caligula, he actually made it to Praetorian guard, probably because due to his outstanding performance during the battle . Him and his unit, we do not know how many, but probably several hundred men, broke through the Germans and managed to retreat. Romans most likely put up quite a fight, before they fell and Arminius ended up with very weakened force, nobody looks at it like a Pyrrhic victory, but it seems like it. Also, the legions were not at full strength, when attacked, had numerous sick, and numbered total probably around 12 thousand fighting men, but that was common, we know from Caesar's works that they were very often not up to the full strength. Varus was definitely not a brilliant tactician, had it been somebody else in his place, like Caecina or Antoninus Priscus, such a disaster would not happen.
Thank you! Glad you liked it! And yeah... 💯 I'm a big believer that we can't really know any outcomes with any real degrees of certainty. When it comes to analysis I try to keep away from "certain" terms, and more toward suggestions and possibilities as much as possible.
Thank you! I'm thrilled you liked it. I didn't know too much about the details before I did the research, but I find these fork-in-the-road historical events (where a different outcome could have lead to wildly different futures) to be my favorite types of topics.
I wonder this all the time (ok maybe not all the time). I'd doubt it would be Italian though lol. It would likely have been a Germanic Latin dialect, a 6th Latin offshoot. Same with Britain, it would have been its own version of Latin and not English
And to address calcaleb, it's true that the culture was wildly different, but I think the comment was noting how this pushed society down a completely different path. Not to say there would have been a Hitler, but that he would have likely been a very different iteration. There's another comment about how Hitler might have existed but he would have spoken a different language. I do agree that there is a fascinating intrigue with the tribal, pagan people's. So raw.
The battle, though lost by Romans, showed the following:
- It lasted for three days, which means that Roman military machine was working
- Attack on the Rhine was expected, but never came after the battle, obviously because the Germans suffered heavy losses
Absolutely! You are bringing up important historical points that often get lost when viewing these events from the perspective of "the losers who lost". I talk about this concept a bit in my Greco-Persian war video, in how the historic world looks at those wars as a debacle for the Persians, while it was quite possibly just an inconvenience for them.
While the battle was a disaster for Rome, they were certainly at or near the height of their military dominance, which is actually what made this defeat so grueling. As noted in the video, Varus was a political, and not specifically military personality, which very likely may have aided in the poor strategy and defeat.
Also, much of the information we have on this comes from either third-hand accounts largely from Tacitus, and archeological findings of Roman armor and weaponry at the site. While the Roman remains in the area were much more significant than the Germanic, it's important to realize that the Germanic tribes lived there and were much much more likely to remove their casualties and give them proper send offs.
To address you second bullet, there was a potential thought of creating a Germanic league to attack the Roman frontiers but history indicates that the tribes couldn't reach a consensus which may have thwarted those attacks
History is complicated and these stories often go much deeper than what we see on the surface, but you bring up an important perspective!
@@ImpactfulMoments We do know about Cassius Cherea, who later killed Caligula, he actually made it to Praetorian guard, probably because due to his outstanding performance during the battle . Him and his unit, we do not know how many, but probably several hundred men, broke through the Germans and managed to retreat. Romans most likely put up quite a fight, before they fell and Arminius ended up with very weakened force, nobody looks at it like a Pyrrhic victory, but it seems like it. Also, the legions were not at full strength, when attacked, had numerous sick, and numbered total probably around 12 thousand fighting men, but that was common, we know from Caesar's works that they were very often not up to the full strength. Varus was definitely not a brilliant tactician, had it been somebody else in his place, like Caecina or Antoninus Priscus, such a disaster would not happen.
There is no way 2 predict what would hv happened if the Romans won this battle.
This is an excellent vid, IMO.😊
Thank you! Glad you liked it!
And yeah... 💯
I'm a big believer that we can't really know any outcomes with any real degrees of certainty. When it comes to analysis I try to keep away from "certain" terms, and more toward suggestions and possibilities as much as possible.
9 ad i think😮
You think correctly. I know there were many dates and years noted in the video regarding the leadup, but the actual battle was, as you noted, in 9 :)
Excellent Episode 👍
Last 5 minutes was interesting...
Thank you! I'm thrilled you liked it.
I didn't know too much about the details before I did the research, but I find these fork-in-the-road historical events (where a different outcome could have lead to wildly different futures) to be my favorite types of topics.
Great video 💯 Ty dude
Thank you!! I'm glad you enjoyed. Hopefully many more :)
Hitler could have been but he would have spoken Italian
I wonder this all the time (ok maybe not all the time). I'd doubt it would be Italian though lol. It would likely have been a Germanic Latin dialect, a 6th Latin offshoot.
Same with Britain, it would have been its own version of Latin and not English
Had Varus been successful, the argument can be put forward that Hitler might never had risen.
What ?! This was pagan Europe where real men lived. Not Christian Europe😂
It's wild to wonder where history could have gone had the wind blown in a different direction on a certain day in certain situations.
And to address calcaleb, it's true that the culture was wildly different, but I think the comment was noting how this pushed society down a completely different path. Not to say there would have been a Hitler, but that he would have likely been a very different iteration. There's another comment about how Hitler might have existed but he would have spoken a different language.
I do agree that there is a fascinating intrigue with the tribal, pagan people's. So raw.