The Usher A project for an innovative director prepared to ignore cries of, "Hey, no one will go see a movie about Ventidius. No one's ever heard of him."
It was said that the true disaster at Carrhae wasn't even the death of Marcus Crassus, but of his beloved son Publius. He was a very well liked and talented young man who served in Gaul under Caesar with flying colors, Marcus personally asked Caesar to release his son to go with him on this campaign. The people were devasted when the charismatic young noble was killed. And many historians contemporary to modern have pondered what part Publius may have played in the upcoming civil wars.
I actually didn't know much about the son. I do know the son was the only one trying to make something happen, amongst his fathers indecision. I always love hearing about people who are born into nobility and privilege, but don't become stuck up or full of themselves, eventually winning over the common soldier. Nobles who actually act Noble.
Good, crassus deserved what he got, an unjustified war for glory and wealth, to an already wealthy man who didn't need any more, but glory? His victories against the Spartacus slave revolt were fading.
ayoeb khan Did you even bother to watch the fucking video? Oakley pretty much explains how an army without even Horse Archers were able to defeat one not once but three times! Hell they even killed a Parthian Prince which is supposedly a higher rank that a senator like Crassus.
If Labienus rings a bell to you, it’s because he is Quintus Labienus son of Titus Labienus (Caesar’s lieutenant in Gaul), when Caesar won the civil war Labienus was killed in the Battle of Munda, an evenly matched conflict between the armies of Caesar and the sons of Pompey. Later his son Quintus Labienus made an alliance with Parthia and invaded the Roman provinces in the eastern Mediterranean which were under the control of Mark Antony.
Labienus considered Gaius Julius a traitor to the Roman people, and had personally oversaw the killing of the men whom were captured from Gaius julius's army at the first confrontation of the pompey's and Gaius's armies in Greece, he saw nothing but a traitor in Gaius julius and he died fighting a man he followed for over 15 years ! that shows how corrupted and evil Gaius julius was, but also Pompey and Crassus the other two members of the Triumvirate of Rome, were exactly the same !
@@alanpennie8013 no, Labienus was a man, not an army. He probably managed to bring some soldiers but I doubt an army of Romans are just going to defect to the enemy just because some general does.
@@Cailus3542 He beat the a terrible roman general by using horse archers? What amazing unique tactics did he employ that won him the battle? None. He was an average general at best.
Usually when you hear about Rome and Parthia the story begins and ends with Crassus at Carrhae. I am very excited that in this episode we have been able to cover the dramatic and deadly events which followed. I have to thank Eric TenWolde for all his help in the research and script writing! As always, if you enjoyed this content please consider tossing a dollar or two to the Patreon as every little bit helps fund these documentaries. You can check out more from our artist for this episode here: JLazarusEB.deviantart.com
Invicta, can you imagine Caesar's planned campaign against Parthia would have been like? Imagine if it had happened and how even more entertaining history might have been.
Yes! Thank you so much for this. I have long been interested in Rome's stalemate in the east. A good part of the reason they were never able to stabilize on their German frontier is that they had so much invested in their conflict with Parthia. In my opinion, Parthia played a greatly understudied role in the ultimate fall of Rome.
The light cavalry tactic of feigned retreat was apparently used over, and over, and over again by Eastern tribes and kingdoms against European armies, but the Europeans never seemed to catch on. They were still falling for it with the Mongols a thousand years after this campaign.
People like to parade Carrhae and Teutoburg forest around. They like to point to Cannae. But people forget that Rome either avenged these battles or ultimately won. With Teutoburg forest and the Germans, it was a terrible loss but Rome went back in and drove Arminius to his downfall. Germanicus earned his name by twice defeating Arminius. Cannae? We all know where this ends. At Zama and the eventual destruction of Carthage. People like to point to the Roman Empire for different lessons. Its "decadence" and corruption and how it ultimately failed. People forget that Rome lasted quite a while, especially if we include the Roman Kingdom, the Republic, the Empire, and the Byzantine Empire or Eastern Roman Empire which outlasted and even for a time reconquered the Western Roman Empire. Rome proved resilient, flexible, and able to rebound from many of its worst setbacks.
Even during the third century crisis, in a period of weakness, Rome repeatedly beaten the Germans, and the same Goths that would mark its end in fiftht century had been easily beaten by the rather obscure Emperor Claudius II. It had not been the enemies...
Mahbu don't forget germans where under the " holy roman empirw " and mongolia under the russian empire wich is known as third rome :) rome spirit got revenge
Rome too, like all empires fell however, people like to point out these victories, because everyone likes an underdog. It's more inspiring to hear a tale of David defeating Goliath, than the opposite.
That's fair, but the thing is I don't think they were all necessarily underdogs. Carthage was, at the time, one of the most powerful nations at the time. It dominated the sea when Rome had no sea power. Rome basically had to build a navy over night, train in unorthodox ways, and come up with new strategies and they managed to win. Parthia, too, was a great power though perhaps not as fearsome as Rome. And the Germans? They won not by plucky underdog resolve but because all the German guides betrayed the romans in Teutoburg forest and led them into a brutal ambush. And Rome did eventually fall but it's important to note that it is probably one of the longest lasting powers in the world. From the founding of the Roman (753 BC) to the collapse of the Byzantine Empire (1453), it left an indelible mark despite many powerful rivals throughout the ages. And numerous civil wars.
You oversimplify. Carrhae, Teutoburg and Cannae were huge if we look from the point of Roman society. Teutoburg was such a big shock for Romans like Stalingrad to German society in WWII. Maybe Rome didn't collapse after those events, but this defeat lasted for centuries to come in minds of roman commanders and emperors. Germanicus campaign was clearly a PR move. Rome showed that they could avenge their losses even bring back few of the lost Eagles, but there was no intention to conquer these regions. There was not much to gain conquering sparsly populated forests, but a lot to lose if another Teutoburg happened. We should remember about Roman defeat at Atuatuca where Ambiorix massacred Romans using deception. Roman Legions weren't expert in forest fighting and ambushes like these were to be expected in dense forests of Germania. Arminius downfall was not because of Germanicus, but because of fame he gained. Some Germans were afraid that he became too powerful so they assassinated him. He ended similar as Julius Ceasar. Carrhae showed that Parthians are not a pushover and Romans would need a big military force to do this. At that point Empire was so stretched that expensive campaign so far East was not worth it. Cannae is a special example, because it was that moment in history were Rome faced a real threat. We don't know what would happen if Hannibal decided to march straight on the city. Rome won war of attrition, because of so many people it was able to recruit into Legions. Burning city to the ground might spread chaos and disorder and bring total collapse. Hannibal chose other strategy which proved to be ineffective in long run.
you wonder how big the empire could have been had Caesar lived, I mean I fail to see how Parthia deals with 16 legions led commanded by Caesar and maybe we would have further accounts written by Caesar, who knows what else we would learn.
Over 500 hundred years war with iranian empires including parthian or sassanids , and the romans often was defeated badly ... I don't think the romans even with ceasar could do anything different.
@@lewistaylor2858 are you sure ? The sassanids kill or captive 3 emperor of byzantyne and they knelt down against shahpur I and sassanids reach meditranian coast and take all over egypt and anatolia and reach the constantinople gates . I dont say iranian was the winner of 500 years of war but i say it was imposible for romans to conquest all over the persia and reach the india . Actually both of empire were the loser of war , because those wars weekend two empire and create an opportunity for arabs and muslims to raid and destroy both empire and great civilizations
Caesar would've never charged like a fool through the shortest route to begin with, as for the horearchers remember the briton's charriots? they used a very similar tactic yet caesar came out triumphant(barely). he could have applied what he learned in britain to his campaign in Parthia. Caesar was 10 times the military commander Crasus was and i truly believe he would've come out somewhat victorious
Chariots are not the same as horse archers. The chariot is far less flexible in manoeuvre. Another issue is scale. There would be far more horse archers than ever chariots. Caesar may have been a competent commander but that alone is not enough. Army composition and logistics would be the deciding factor. Putting it down to individual leadership is far too reductionist.
It's not as though Romans had no answer at all to horse archer tactics, it's just that Crassus put himself into a situation where the Parthians could maximize their advantages and Crassus could use none of his. Caesar was also planning to invade with a much stronger force than Crassus had, including way more cavalry. But mainly I don't think Caesar would ever have marched his army into the desert with no intelligence on Parthian forces.
@kurgan highlander you talk like America's enemies are just too good to use air support and artillery. When honestly you just cant afford to keep a real army, at least by modern standards. If it were Russia and China they'd also bomb your asses to oblivion before mopping you up. Because they can also afford it lol.
@kurgan highlander Forget all these Eurocentric racists. Parthians avenged the setbacks that they faced as well and they always want to gloss over these facts. In fact, the Romans only sound successful because the details in this video are strictly from their own sources And it ignores the less glorious parts.
Antony, though rash as he was, was no doubt a great military general. Without his famous maneuver against cassius at Phillipi, Octavian looked like he had almost lost the battle under Brutus's overwhelming pressure. The fact that he managed to beat the Partians back at every turn as he brought most of his army back intact over such a long distance away from friendly territory speaks volumes about his talents. His only downfall was Cleopatra tbh
The way you're phrasing it makes it sound stupid but this is pretty similar to European knighthood and feudalism. This system obviously has flaws but it existed for so long in so many places for a reason.
It's not unusual. Most military powers throughout history have largely drawn their cavalry forces from the upper classes, right up to and including WW1
@@SMEGMA42069 Feudalism is indeed incredibly stable (city state of Sparta could be even considered such example of proto-feudalism). However, in case of catastrophic setback, single battle will wipe out entire leadership and the country simply collapses. This happened to Gothic Spain (single battle against raiding Moor party), to Serbia (Kosovo field) it almost happened even the most powerful european country, France, at Crecy. Arguably, it happened to Achameneids too, in Granicus, Issus and Gaugemala, entire imperial leadership was either killed, enslaved or turned fugitive. All in the span of less than three years.
Amazing video! Very complete in-depth look at the start of Roman-Parthian rivalry. Among all of Roman history the Eastern Front has always been the last part I've wanted to learn about, and your video presents an incredibly refreshing start. Thank you for making it!
Loved this one, and it was nice to see something featuring Ventidius, who has always been one of my favorites... a very interesting figure from this fascinating period.
One explanation for why Crassus would go on a campaign with untrained soldiers and his exposing them to unnecessary dangers was that he didn't want to pay many of them. He was after all paying for them out of his own pocket, so the fewer the survivors the better.
Then that general would become a dangerous political opponent and overthrow the king? Is that what you were hinting at? Just like Caesar overthrew the senate?
@@PersimmonHurmo based on our historical records he died trying to save the king life from roman assassins and in parthian age Megisthanes parliament had the real power not king.
@Alex F I'm not saying it is impossible that such thing had happened among the Parthians or something! I'm simply saying stop getting all your info from Roman fetishists etc and Surena was not executed under the order of the king! This info is Roman propaganda! What you called "facts" are biased and inaccurate!
I am so glad to watch this video and learn a new chapter of which I was completely unaware. All the Roman history courses, ancient history courses, etc have never mentioned this revenge by the Romans. Usually a one liner reporting that Augustus Caesar managed the return of the Legion Eagles in a peace settlement.
Great job! Excellent work! This was quite interesting. I never knew about this because all I ever heard about was Crassus and the Battle of Carrhae. Then it was trajan moving into Mesopotamia. This is a fascinating but little-known History of Rome and its problems with the Parthians.
What’s worse is that he turned down help from Armenia. The Armenian King hated the Parthian Empire. So he tried to strike a deal with Crassus by offering him 20,000 troops to join in the Roman invasion and even give them a free route straight into the heartland of Mesopotamia through Armenia itself. Of course, the price for this deal was likely a fair amount of the spoils from any victories, of which Rome was known to have made such deals before, but Crassus refused.
I wouldn't just dismiss Crassus as a "stupid rich man" with no military talent. He did defeat Spartacus's slave revolt, which many other Romans had attempted to defeat and failed. It's just that he didn't get much credit for this because to Roman aristocracy, a victory over slaves wasn't considered impressive (despite the fact that these slaves came close to sacking Rome). He just pales in comparison to Caesar and Pompey, but saying he had no military skill because of that is like saying someone sucks at basketball because Steve Nash and Michael Jordan are better. But you're right, it's not surprising that a guy who spent his whole life in the legions and rose up the ranks from the bottom was more competent than Crassus. But he also had the benefit of learning from the defeat of Crassus. Before Carrhae it seems like there wasn't much direct military confrontation between the two powers, so their tactics were probably pretty new to the Romans.
Perhaps Crassus was blind, like Goliath. He dismissed his weaker opponent and didn't account for cunning tactics because he thought he could force a win through brute strength alone.
Ahh, my favorite period of Roman history. Just wish they'd gone back further to talk more about Marius. Anyway, fun to hear accurate information about this stuff! Presented in a fun way!
ayoeb khan No, Caesar knew how to use allies and play enemies against each other. Gauls were far more dangerous than any Parthian. He's one of the greatest generals in history for a reason. Horse archers are over rated and can't stop heavy infantry attacks.
ayoeb khan Did you know that the Kola Superdeep Borehole is the second deepest hole in the world? Followed by how deep your head is up your ass. Read some history before making stupid comments, thank you.
Hey Oakley! I'm a big fan of the channel and really appreciate this awesome documentary. For your next/upcoming documentaries, can you do one on the Teutoberg Forest and on avenging the Teutoberg Forest defeat by Germanicus??
Seriously? Why bother with a battle that everyone knows about, that every history channel has covered? At least the events of this video are obscure and actually informative.
Just like Teutoberg, Carrhae was also very much known, but much like the formers retributary campaigns, The Campaigns by Germanicus is also not know and obscured by history.
He was not a military counterpart of either of them, rather a "third wheel with a ginormous amount of fund" so that the whole Sulla - Marius situation wouldn't happen again, the same could somewhat be said about Lepidus. His death meant that Pompey and Caesar had no mediator between them and duked it out one on one.
Thanks so much for uploading this! I earned a degree in Ancient History (useless) and never heard of anything beyond Crassus’ debacle. I have continued to study history as if I am still in college (since graduating in 1974) and yet this is still the first mention of this Roman revenge. Thanks Again!!!
There was no such a thing as a roman revenge, this narrative is roman fanboy fantasy, Parthians under pacorus went to ravage asia minor but they got pushed back, Pacorus got killed, end of story, status quo antebellum was restored, no revenge. The extent of damage to parthia here is over stated, in fact The parhian emperor came off the throne because of the death of his son and grief, but obviously parthia had much more where that came from, hence anthonys utter failure against parthia. 2nd more important point, parthian empire had a lot of internal quarrelling and fighting on its eastern borders with nomads, romes few successful incursions into parthia happened only when parthia was going through civil war
@@bongoseropersa5240 Sounds like you have an axe to grind. Reclaiming territory previously lost, and doing so in a number of successive battles resulting in decisive victories, is avenging a defeat in anyone's language. Only a biased partisan would claim otherwise.
don't get excited there was nothing like revenge in the campaigns mark Anthony defeated hard in iran and his retreat was a complete disaster nothing like revenge while they're flags where in hands of parthians and the king was Dead no a commander of an army and after that more kings got killd an defeated in Roman persian wars
One of the reasons, in my opinion, the Roman comeback was so devastating is because the Parthian King had executed the General who had won against Crassus because he was getting too successful. Really The Parthian King wanted to take on the Romans himself so he sent his political enemy as a General first with a smaller army to ware down the Romans so that he may defeat them and earn all the Glory
The outcome wouldn't have been different regardless. The army was same tactics was same except this time the Roman army wasn't solely infantry based but composed of different skirmishers and light troops and the army was well trained
Of interest is that Rome in time signed a treaty of alliance with Parthia technically incorporating it into the Empire. Part of the stability of the alliance was that Rome wisely left Parthia to it's own devices as a buffer state and trade launchpad to India and beyond.
What's interesting is that Bassus has a familiar style with all of his victories, feigning vulnerability then rapidly counter-attacking at the point where his enemy has fully committed and backed up by ranged support. This would only be possible in the ancient world where information traveled slowly and defeated generals were more concerned about saving face than being objective.
Ironic how a man with everything lost, and was only avenged by someone who came from nothing. It's also very sad how almost, if not every Persian (I'm including Parthia as well) defeat is due to cockiness, or underestimating their opponent.
The Cool Persian That's the problem of an army based on feudal cavalry. It tends to be undisciplined because every warrior wants to perform some notable feat of arms.
I love how in the Roman society you could climb up from slave to emperor, it was a military based meritocracy. It didn't matter were you came from, you could always be a true Roman if you embodied the Roman belief and values.
anyway you can talk about Goguryeo, the kingdom in ancient Northeast Asia a dynasty that lasted around 600 years that brought down the sung dynasty n also fought the tong dynasty that came after. I belive they fought many many times even army over million troop, just cuz I don't see anything in English here. thank you
I always disliked how Battle of Carrhae is always brought up as a sign of Roman weakness and vulnerability to horse archers. After Crassus's death, Cassius rounded up the broken troops, less than 1/5 of the legions, and defeated the Parthian pursuers, who maintained most of their numbers after Carrhae. Everyone remembers Battle of Carrhae, but no one has heard of Battle of Cilician Gate.
Lol E, in a video where people were mocking Rome for Cahhrae, and it being pointed out they ultimately got their revenge, and showed to usually get the upper hand on the Parthians - you again post another victory of the Bulgarians over the Romans... Let's not forget the Battle of Kleidion later, you know, when the Byzantines/Eastern Romans ultimately defeated that same first Bulgarian empire at it's end, shortly before conquering it completely (finallizing it with the battle of Dyrrhachium). So yeah, even if it is a hundred or so years later - the Romans still got the final word and revenge on the that Bulgarian faction for the battle of Pliska. The thing with the Romans, they usually just outlasted any single major battle loss in their history. It was the other bullshit that cost them far more dearly in the long run.
@@adrianbundy3249 oh really well Bulgarians prove your theories wrong check Second Bulgarian empire 😍 tell me who outlast who Again lol The Bulgarians came back and got their revenge. They rose to the top once more , winning all fights with the Eastern Roman empire !! (except 1 battle at adrianople)
@@adrianbundy3249 yes Battle of Kleidon was a catastrophic defeat and battle of Spercheios but these are only 2 major wins here are 6 more crushings ^^ Battle of Ongal Battle of Achelous Battle of Trajan Gates siege of Pernik - krakra defeats basil II bulgarslayer twice Battle of Klokotnitsa ! Battle of Boulgarophygon Battle of Pliska = Battle of Marathon
Crassus didn't lose the battle of Carrhae because he was a bad general, in fact he had a great deal of military experience, including the defeat of Spartacus and his slave army. He lost because the Parthian general Surenas showed his military genius by refusing to play by Crassus' rules. He avoided Crassus' strength by deploying only cavalry. But the true mark of his genius was the foresight he showed in having a train of 1,000 camels carrying quivers of arrows, so his mounted archers could rearm quickly thereby giving the romans no respite.
Lol nope crassus was a fool he had plenty of opportunities to win but he decided not to use them and paid the price also Spartacus revilt isn't the same with the parthians
Well said rex 👍.Anthony was a great general..he's often ridic.uled and undermined...caeser called him romes greatest warrior and fought with caeser in many campaigns. He was a soldier's general ,and like caeser was loved by his men...
hey julien please make a video on showing the military of the sengoku jidai period of japan and alsoa documentary on the evolution of war elephants by the way i can t wait to see the next moments video and you're the best youtuber in the whole galaxy .
Parthian is a rather broad term! Arsacid is what they called their dynasty! because alongside the Parthians, other Iranic groups such as the Persians, Early Kurds, Medes etc were all in their ruling system!
+Lion King What did they call themselves? We don't normally switch a country's name with a dynasty change. Did new dynasties differentiate and disassociate themselves from past ones?
PlzShoo 1893 - Wrong. Persians and Medes were NOT part of the Parthian ruling system. In fact, Persians and Medes considered themselves subjugated under Parthian rule. They were waiting for the weakening of the Parthian ruling class to revolt against them and recovery control over their homeland, which eventually happened in 208 AD. Once the Parthians were overrun by the Persian/Median uprising, they restored the Persian Empire in 224 AD under the Sassanid dinasty.
thought about it but the parthian empire turning in to the sassanid empire was more of an internal conquest rather than an external one which were were discussing as a parrallel to Rome's efforts
Surena was killed after his victory due to the king's fear of his competence. I wonder if things would have been different if he continued leading the army against next roman armies.
Nah he still would've got rekt, he only won one battle, which was against Romes' worst general. Lucky for surena, if he had met Ventidius then it would of been Surenas head getting paraded down the street instead of that other parthian general
Thank you so much! I had seen a video from Historia Civillus that showed how Crassus failed, but I was really wanting to find out what Rome's eventual military response would be. Thank you!
In addition to Mark Anthony's losses during his retreat, he arrived back at Antioch with another 14,000 men who were so badly affected by frost bite, losing fingers and toes, that they were discharged from the army.
You forgot to mention is 18 victories against parthia and no roman conquered parthia until trajan did it 141 years after antonius invasion,ancient historians praised him for his successful retreat
In my language there is a popular expression; "Erro crasso" meanning "gross error". By the way 2070 years later this battle still inhabits the popular unconscious
I highly doubt that this is due to Crassus and that they rather have the same root because crasso just translates to rough, gross or fat (more positive would be thick or solid). So "erro crasso" would mean "gross error" even if Crassus would not have existed. Is it possible that this is the reason why you still say it? Sure. Is it likely? Doubtful.
One thing precipitated another. Crassus was defeated. Fearful of the new hero, Orodes II kills his general Surena. The family of Surena, held a grudge that lasted 200+ years, culminating in the overthrow of the Parthian empire , by the descendants or Surena and the rise of the Sassanids.
Crassus also did not know his enemy and hadn't had military command since the defeat of Spartacus. He was old , soft ,arrogant and didn't do his homework on the strengths and weaknesses of the Parthians
![Avenging Varus - The Germanic Wars [FULL DOCUMENTARY]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZyzY4ayG8R4/mqdefault.jpg)
Check out our latest episode on the history of Roman Fast Food: ruclips.net/video/v5Qz00eUF5Q/видео.html
Albino I know why y'all really went down there 🤯
Bro hates parthians🗣
"Avenging Crassus" sounds like it should be the title of the most badass movie about Rome ever made.
The Usher
A project for an innovative director prepared to ignore cries of,
"Hey, no one will go see a movie about Ventidius. No one's ever heard of him."
it'd be a mini series ;)
@@alanpennie8013 He dropped out of history after his return to Rome. He was awarded a Triumph for his victories, then retired to Picenum.
@@MarsFKA Not been killed he is a threat
It was a great honour to be a part of this with the research and writing :) So nice to see it all come together like this!
Thanks a ton for all the help and the many revisions we went through, it came out awesome!
Follow this dude on Instagram, @roman.military.history
good job bud
nice job man! greetings from brasil
Do You Believe People you Don't Even Know.?? UGH*
I guess you could say he needed a Crassus Belli.
Yep Rome War 3!
Luke Dysart get out
oooooooohhhhh lol. You sir, are a killer AND a scholar.
lol
Ha
It was said that the true disaster at Carrhae wasn't even the death of Marcus Crassus, but of his beloved son Publius. He was a very well liked and talented young man who served in Gaul under Caesar with flying colors, Marcus personally asked Caesar to release his son to go with him on this campaign. The people were devasted when the charismatic young noble was killed. And many historians contemporary to modern have pondered what part Publius may have played in the upcoming civil wars.
the Parthians advancing with the head of Publius on display...bad news for Crassus...
I actually didn't know much about the son. I do know the son was the only one trying to make something happen, amongst his fathers indecision. I always love hearing about people who are born into nobility and privilege, but don't become stuck up or full of themselves, eventually winning over the common soldier. Nobles who actually act Noble.
Was he the rapist in Spartacus?
Good, crassus deserved what he got, an unjustified war for glory and wealth, to an already wealthy man who didn't need any more, but glory? His victories against the Spartacus slave revolt were fading.
Your map includes Lake Assad in Syria, which is a man made lake created in 1974. Otherwise, great video
Haha
Good old times, before it all had gone to shit...
Lake Ataturk in Turkey, too (1990).
Regardless is more fitting than otherwise, I think.
Assad ? Is.that lake name.for syrian president family?
54 BC:Crassus not his year
Blitzkrieg not near enough cubes for me
I understood that reference!
Historia Civilis
I get it
Caesar Parthia war would be so cool!
damn you Brutus!
et tu,brute
it could have also meant the world we live in today would be a diffirent world and probably you wouldn't exist in it
@@masterxmasterx7197 meh, you're probably wrong.
@@jjs8426 no, you're probably wrong
@@masterxmasterx7197 you are wrong here
How iconic, where the richest man of Rome fails a slave succeeds.
If any story from the ancient world would make a good movie, it is the story of these two men.
The Ting thats strange, because the romans annaxed everything they conquered. They reached mesopotamia so why didn't they stay there?
ayoeb khan Horse archers perform poorly when the enemy is prepared to fight them though.
ayoeb khan Did you even bother to watch the fucking video? Oakley pretty much explains how an army without even Horse Archers were able to defeat one not once but three times! Hell they even killed a Parthian Prince which is supposedly a higher rank that a senator like Crassus.
That's actually pretty interesting, especially considering Crassus was the guy who defeated Spartacus, the leader of Rome's greatest slave revolt.
If Labienus rings a bell to you, it’s because he is Quintus Labienus son of Titus Labienus (Caesar’s lieutenant in Gaul), when Caesar won the civil war Labienus was killed in the Battle of Munda, an evenly matched conflict between the armies of Caesar and the sons of Pompey. Later his son Quintus Labienus made an alliance with Parthia and invaded the Roman provinces in the eastern Mediterranean which were under the control of Mark Antony.
Labienus considered Gaius Julius a traitor to the Roman people, and had personally oversaw the killing of the men whom were captured from Gaius julius's army at the first confrontation of the pompey's and Gaius's armies in Greece, he saw nothing but a traitor in Gaius julius and he died fighting a man he followed for over 15 years !
that shows how corrupted and evil Gaius julius was, but also Pompey and Crassus the other two members of the Triumvirate of Rome, were exactly the same !
Jeffy The great
Hahahaha lmao Ceasar killed prisoners all the time lmao
He killed over 1 million Gauls in Total
Akira Moon
So the Parthians had an army of Roman heavy infantry but never made effective use of it.
@@alanpennie8013 no, Labienus was a man, not an army. He probably managed to bring some soldiers but I doubt an army of Romans are just going to defect to the enemy just because some general does.
@@settratheimperishable4093
They did defect though. They were mostly former members of The Liberators' Army (at Philippi) so it makes sense.
It is also worth noting that Carrhae wasn't only lost by Crassus, but it also won by Surena, quite decisively.
Moreso the former...cmon
@@PurelyGoliath No, it was the latter. Surena was a superb tactician. He had the potential to be another Hannibal.
@@Cailus3542 He beat the a terrible roman general by using horse archers? What amazing unique tactics did he employ that won him the battle? None. He was an average general at best.
@@pooroldman5089
Go away.
@@alanpennie8013 Based
"It's over Pharnapates! I have the high ground!"
Neutron Alchemist Pharnapates : "You underestimate my power" *gets wrecked*
whakabuti Pharnapates :"I hate you!"
Testicles: "You were the chosen one!"
Star wars Fans/geeks we are everywhere 😝
Θ TRHC Pharnapates my allegiance is to the Roman Republic to DEMOCRACY!!!
Usually when you hear about Rome and Parthia the story begins and ends with Crassus at Carrhae. I am very excited that in this episode we have been able to cover the dramatic and deadly events which followed. I have to thank Eric TenWolde for all his help in the research and script writing! As always, if you enjoyed this content please consider tossing a dollar or two to the Patreon as every little bit helps fund these documentaries. You can check out more from our artist for this episode here: JLazarusEB.deviantart.com
Invicta for me the name of Crassus automatically reminds about slave rebellion lead by Spartacus
Lord Alehandro after long humiliation of Rome, yeah. Though, if I am not mistaken, Pompey partly help Crassus to defeat Spartacus and his rebellion
Invicta Fuckin love this series please continue maybe in the medieval errors
Invicta, can you imagine Caesar's planned campaign against Parthia would have been like? Imagine if it had happened and how even more entertaining history might have been.
Yes! Thank you so much for this. I have long been interested in Rome's stalemate in the east. A good part of the reason they were never able to stabilize on their German frontier is that they had so much invested in their conflict with Parthia.
In my opinion, Parthia played a greatly understudied role in the ultimate fall of Rome.
Parthian logic
*Uses horse archers to kill enemy from afar
*Calls Romans cowards when they take the high ground
"It's over Pharnapates! I have the high ground!"
ayoeb khan Because Orodes saw him as a threat
They won dumbass.
The light cavalry tactic of feigned retreat was apparently used over, and over, and over again by Eastern tribes and kingdoms against European armies, but the Europeans never seemed to catch on. They were still falling for it with the Mongols a thousand years after this campaign.
ParthianShot53BC
Yes, he couldn’t get enough of it.
Man, Publius Vintidius Bassus is a guy I did not know about till this video and am really sad he's not more well known. What a life story.
For sure.
Crassus was the original noob-box player
lol
"When enemies are everywhere - just make a noobsquare" - Crassus 54b.c
He fought Spartacus and also with Ceasar in gaul
@@jaynishnakar3115 Crassus' son fought with Caesar in Gaul. Crassus and Pompey were in Rome at the time.
Crassus wasnt a noob. He was highly intelligent and competent. He made a mistake. Thats all.
People like to parade Carrhae and Teutoburg forest around. They like to point to Cannae. But people forget that Rome either avenged these battles or ultimately won. With Teutoburg forest and the Germans, it was a terrible loss but Rome went back in and drove Arminius to his downfall. Germanicus earned his name by twice defeating Arminius. Cannae? We all know where this ends. At Zama and the eventual destruction of Carthage.
People like to point to the Roman Empire for different lessons. Its "decadence" and corruption and how it ultimately failed. People forget that Rome lasted quite a while, especially if we include the Roman Kingdom, the Republic, the Empire, and the Byzantine Empire or Eastern Roman Empire which outlasted and even for a time reconquered the Western Roman Empire. Rome proved resilient, flexible, and able to rebound from many of its worst setbacks.
Even during the third century crisis, in a period of weakness, Rome repeatedly beaten the Germans, and the same Goths that would mark its end in fiftht century had been easily beaten by the rather obscure Emperor Claudius II. It had not been the enemies...
Mahbu don't forget germans where under the " holy roman empirw " and mongolia under the russian empire wich is known as third rome :) rome spirit got revenge
Rome too, like all empires fell however, people like to point out these victories, because everyone likes an underdog. It's more inspiring to hear a tale of David defeating Goliath, than the opposite.
That's fair, but the thing is I don't think they were all necessarily underdogs.
Carthage was, at the time, one of the most powerful nations at the time. It dominated the sea when Rome had no sea power. Rome basically had to build a navy over night, train in unorthodox ways, and come up with new strategies and they managed to win. Parthia, too, was a great power though perhaps not as fearsome as Rome. And the Germans? They won not by plucky underdog resolve but because all the German guides betrayed the romans in Teutoburg forest and led them into a brutal ambush.
And Rome did eventually fall but it's important to note that it is probably one of the longest lasting powers in the world. From the founding of the Roman (753 BC) to the collapse of the Byzantine Empire (1453), it left an indelible mark despite many powerful rivals throughout the ages. And numerous civil wars.
You oversimplify. Carrhae, Teutoburg and Cannae were huge if we look from the point of Roman society. Teutoburg was such a big shock for Romans like Stalingrad to German society in WWII. Maybe Rome didn't collapse after those events, but this defeat lasted for centuries to come in minds of roman commanders and emperors.
Germanicus campaign was clearly a PR move. Rome showed that they could avenge their losses even bring back few of the lost Eagles, but there was no intention to conquer these regions. There was not much to gain conquering sparsly populated forests, but a lot to lose if another Teutoburg happened. We should remember about Roman defeat at Atuatuca where Ambiorix massacred Romans using deception. Roman Legions weren't expert in forest fighting and ambushes like these were to be expected in dense forests of Germania.
Arminius downfall was not because of Germanicus, but because of fame he gained. Some Germans were afraid that he became too powerful so they assassinated him. He ended similar as Julius Ceasar.
Carrhae showed that Parthians are not a pushover and Romans would need a big military force to do this. At that point Empire was so stretched that expensive campaign so far East was not worth it.
Cannae is a special example, because it was that moment in history were Rome faced a real threat. We don't know what would happen if Hannibal decided to march straight on the city. Rome won war of attrition, because of so many people it was able to recruit into Legions. Burning city to the ground might spread chaos and disorder and bring total collapse. Hannibal chose other strategy which proved to be ineffective in long run.
you wonder how big the empire could have been had Caesar lived, I mean I fail to see how Parthia deals with 16 legions led commanded by Caesar and maybe we would have further accounts written by Caesar, who knows what else we would learn.
Over 500 hundred years war with iranian empires including parthian or sassanids , and the romans often was defeated badly ... I don't think the romans even with ceasar could do anything different.
@@alibakhshi8017 The Romans held the upper hand for most of it, sacked the capital numerous times and had client states in the area.
@@lewistaylor2858 are you sure ? The sassanids kill or captive 3 emperor of byzantyne and they knelt down against shahpur I and sassanids reach meditranian coast and take all over egypt and anatolia and reach the constantinople gates .
I dont say iranian was the winner of 500 years of war but i say it was imposible for romans to conquest all over the persia and reach the india . Actually both of empire were the loser of war , because those wars weekend two empire and create an opportunity for arabs and muslims to raid and destroy both empire and great civilizations
@@lewistaylor2858 The Parthian Capital was merely ornamental, sacking it was no big deal. It wasn't the all encompassing hub that Rome was.
@@rorykeegan1895 yeah but the city of Rome was almost untouchable too... Unless you're a Roman general...
They should have waited for Caesar to wreck the Parthians before offing him
Caesar would've never charged like a fool through the shortest route to begin with, as for the horearchers remember the briton's charriots? they used a very similar tactic yet caesar came out triumphant(barely). he could have applied what he learned in britain to his campaign in Parthia. Caesar was 10 times the military commander Crasus was and i truly believe he would've come out somewhat victorious
Chariots are not the same as horse archers. The chariot is far less flexible in manoeuvre. Another issue is scale. There would be far more horse archers than ever chariots. Caesar may have been a competent commander but that alone is not enough. Army composition and logistics would be the deciding factor. Putting it down to individual leadership is far too reductionist.
Gowan James Ditchburn Briton Chariots were different in their mobility. ruclips.net/video/LOCBWh5Iwm4/видео.html&
ayoeb khan Yo if you’re gonna argue about Caesar, you gotta spell his name correctly.
It's not as though Romans had no answer at all to horse archer tactics, it's just that Crassus put himself into a situation where the Parthians could maximize their advantages and Crassus could use none of his. Caesar was also planning to invade with a much stronger force than Crassus had, including way more cavalry.
But mainly I don't think Caesar would ever have marched his army into the desert with no intelligence on Parthian forces.
Lol 11:00 “the parthians saw this as extreme cowardice”
As they use hit and run horse archery.
Edit: Y’all need to chill out it’s a joke.
@kurgan highlander You are comparing modern warfare to ancient times. How dumb can you be?
@kurgan highlander you talk like America's enemies are just too good to use air support and artillery. When honestly you just cant afford to keep a real army, at least by modern standards. If it were Russia and China they'd also bomb your asses to oblivion before mopping you up. Because they can also afford it lol.
@kurgan highlander Forget all these Eurocentric racists. Parthians avenged the setbacks that they faced as well and they always want to gloss over these facts. In fact, the Romans only sound successful because the details in this video are strictly from their own sources And it ignores the less glorious parts.
@@phoneguy8588 So where are the parthian sources then?
It's called strategy burn ass. Ez roma
Fantastic Episode!
You are factually accurate while your vocal style is easy to listen to. Such an excellent channel!!
Antony, though rash as he was, was no doubt a great military general. Without his famous maneuver against cassius at Phillipi, Octavian looked like he had almost lost the battle under Brutus's overwhelming pressure.
The fact that he managed to beat the Partians back at every turn as he brought most of his army back intact over such a long distance away from friendly territory speaks volumes about his talents. His only downfall was Cleopatra tbh
He was :) Read my other comment on this, I think you may find it interesting.
This ignores much about Antony. I did a comment about this below if you want to check it out c:
Check out my other comments too thanks
Rex Galilae Cleopatra was a puppet.
김성산 dude go check out his profile, it goes from raising small birds, a couple of songs by Blondie to FUCK All BLACK PEOPLE!!!!!! 😂😂😂
Think you glossed over the Retreat of Crassus. It sounds absolutely brutal being pursued like that.
I think he did a video on the full battle a while back. MIght be why he glossed over it.
here you go, this video covers it very well. It was indeed brutal.
ruclips.net/video/bR7VDPUj5AE/видео.html
Probably didn't want the video to be too long.
not as brutal as the way he made his wealth. that man got exactly what he deserved.
Two wrongs doesn't make a right.
It is easy to see how much you have improved since you started. Thanks for the great job!
I always appreciate the feedback and support, thanks
"let's put every man needed to run the country on horses and repeatedly charge them at Roman heavy infantry"
"Okayyyyyyyyyyy sure"
The way you're phrasing it makes it sound stupid but this is pretty similar to European knighthood and feudalism. This system obviously has flaws but it existed for so long in so many places for a reason.
It's not unusual. Most military powers throughout history have largely drawn their cavalry forces from the upper classes, right up to and including WW1
@@cass7448 Not Romans though. And I am no fan of senate.
@@SMEGMA42069 Feudalism is indeed incredibly stable (city state of Sparta could be even considered such example of proto-feudalism).
However, in case of catastrophic setback, single battle will wipe out entire leadership and the country simply collapses. This happened to Gothic Spain (single battle against raiding Moor party), to Serbia (Kosovo field) it almost happened even the most powerful european country, France, at Crecy.
Arguably, it happened to Achameneids too, in Granicus, Issus and Gaugemala, entire imperial leadership was either killed, enslaved or turned fugitive. All in the span of less than three years.
Or put them in a trench and let them charge a machine gun
...
War.
Amazing video! Very complete in-depth look at the start of Roman-Parthian rivalry. Among all of Roman history the Eastern Front has always been the last part I've wanted to learn about, and your video presents an incredibly refreshing start. Thank you for making it!
LOVE your Deadly Moments in History series. Please keep doing more.
Loved this one, and it was nice to see something featuring Ventidius, who has always been one of my favorites... a very interesting figure from this fascinating period.
One explanation for why Crassus would go on a campaign with untrained soldiers and his exposing them to unnecessary dangers was that he didn't want to pay many of them. He was after all paying for them out of his own pocket, so the fewer the survivors the better.
If only the Parthian king didn't execute his general that defeated Crassus.
He may have been a great general but you really don't need a genius to beat Crassus lmao
Then that general would become a dangerous political opponent and overthrow the king? Is that what you were hinting at? Just like Caesar overthrew the senate?
@@PersimmonHurmo based on our historical records he died trying to save the king life from roman assassins and in parthian age Megisthanes parliament had the real power not king.
@@sina-alavi1962 Thank you for the legit info. What I mostly see here is just a bunch of ignorant and Roman fetishist comments not truth seeking.
@Alex F
I'm not saying it is impossible that such thing had happened among the Parthians or something! I'm simply saying stop getting all your info from Roman fetishists etc and Surena was not executed under the order of the king! This info is Roman propaganda!
What you called "facts" are biased and inaccurate!
Crassus was the Roman leader who brutally ended the slave revolt of Spartacus- so fate evened things out with his brutal finish...
I am so glad to watch this video and learn a new chapter of which I was completely unaware. All the Roman history courses, ancient history courses, etc have never mentioned this revenge by the Romans. Usually a one liner reporting that Augustus Caesar managed the return of the Legion Eagles in a peace settlement.
Desert area
Just watched a video about Herod the Great and he commanded the Southern front in what we might call the Ventidian War.
Thank you for this video. This is the first in-depth analysis of what happened in the aftermath of Crasuss and Antony that I have seen or read.
I can’t believe we were so close to watching Caesar invade Parthia for revenge....
Would have been glorious
Ass burn
Would have been merciless probably, being Crassus was a young Ceasar's patron. But then I wonder if that would have clouded his judgement any.
Parthians: *charge uphill*
Me: Aljubarrota sends its regards.
Great job! Excellent work! This was quite interesting. I never knew about this because all I ever heard about was Crassus and the Battle of Carrhae. Then it was trajan moving into Mesopotamia. This is a fascinating but little-known History of Rome and its problems with the Parthians.
Crassus was so ignorant. He attacked in the enemy territory without knowing their tactics and warfare.
What’s worse is that he turned down help from Armenia. The Armenian King hated the Parthian Empire. So he tried to strike a deal with Crassus by offering him 20,000 troops to join in the Roman invasion and even give them a free route straight into the heartland of Mesopotamia through Armenia itself. Of course, the price for this deal was likely a fair amount of the spoils from any victories, of which Rome was known to have made such deals before, but Crassus refused.
well he did have some military experience operating against Spartacus but that is definitely an entirely different type of campaign
meh not necessarily since in Rome, politics and military command went hand in hand and certainly produced many competent generals
I wouldn't just dismiss Crassus as a "stupid rich man" with no military talent. He did defeat Spartacus's slave revolt, which many other Romans had attempted to defeat and failed. It's just that he didn't get much credit for this because to Roman aristocracy, a victory over slaves wasn't considered impressive (despite the fact that these slaves came close to sacking Rome).
He just pales in comparison to Caesar and Pompey, but saying he had no military skill because of that is like saying someone sucks at basketball because Steve Nash and Michael Jordan are better.
But you're right, it's not surprising that a guy who spent his whole life in the legions and rose up the ranks from the bottom was more competent than Crassus. But he also had the benefit of learning from the defeat of Crassus. Before Carrhae it seems like there wasn't much direct military confrontation between the two powers, so their tactics were probably pretty new to the Romans.
Perhaps Crassus was blind, like Goliath. He dismissed his weaker opponent and didn't account for cunning tactics because he thought he could force a win through brute strength alone.
Ahh, my favorite period of Roman history. Just wish they'd gone back further to talk more about Marius. Anyway, fun to hear accurate information about this stuff! Presented in a fun way!
Finally someone covered Publius Bassus.
Superb stuff.
This is beautifully animated and you’re a great story teller.
your first comment i've seen where you don't have 50000000 likes
Romans: It’s over, I have the high ground... don’t try it
Parthians: You underestimate my power
I wish Ceasar was never murdered by the Senate. He would have had literally EPIC campaigns in Parthia.
ayoeb khan Surena was already dead by that point, executed by Orodes because he feared his popularity
ayoeb khan No, Caesar knew how to use allies and play enemies against each other. Gauls were far more dangerous than any Parthian. He's one of the greatest generals in history for a reason. Horse archers are over rated and can't stop heavy infantry attacks.
Marty Moose So you wich Ceasar wasnt dead so he could kill more people ?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Cilician_Gates
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Amanus_Pass
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Mount_Gindarus
ayoeb khan Did you know that the Kola Superdeep Borehole is the second deepest hole in the world? Followed by how deep your head is up your ass. Read some history before making stupid comments, thank you.
Hey Oakley! I'm a big fan of the channel and really appreciate this awesome documentary. For your next/upcoming documentaries, can you do one on the Teutoberg Forest and on avenging the Teutoberg Forest defeat by Germanicus??
we were discussing doing one on Avenging Varus and maybe Avenging Caesar
nice!!!!
Seriously? Why bother with a battle that everyone knows about, that every history channel has covered? At least the events of this video are obscure and actually informative.
most don't know about Germanicus Ceasar and his retaliatory campaign against the Germans
Just like Teutoberg, Carrhae was also very much known, but much like the formers retributary campaigns, The Campaigns by Germanicus is also not know and obscured by history.
Wow! Didn't know anything before about Bassus (the Boss!). Fascinating story worthy of a big budget movie!
same, I had actually never really known what happened after the immediate defeat of Crassus
Publius Ventidius "Bossus" Bassus
@@InvictaHistory
It's sad this brilliant Roman general is so little remembered.
An excellent treatment of an often neglected part of history; many thanks.
Crassus dying worked out quite well for Pompey and Caesar, 1 down 1 to go.
bebop 417
Or worked out badly. Perhaps Crassus' could have prevented the quarrel between Caesar and Pompey.
He was not a military counterpart of either of them, rather a "third wheel with a ginormous amount of fund" so that the whole Sulla - Marius situation wouldn't happen again, the same could somewhat be said about Lepidus. His death meant that Pompey and Caesar had no mediator between them and duked it out one on one.
Bassus, the king of perfectly timed counter-attacks
Really nice one, thank you Invicta and Eric it was very enlightening.
Invicta your vids are great man keep up the good work, looking forward to the next History Today!
Thanks so much for uploading this! I earned a degree in Ancient History (useless) and never heard of anything beyond Crassus’ debacle. I have continued to study history as if I am still in college (since graduating in 1974) and yet this is still the first mention of this Roman revenge. Thanks Again!!!
There was no such a thing as a roman revenge, this narrative is roman fanboy fantasy,
Parthians under pacorus went to ravage asia minor but they got pushed back,
Pacorus got killed, end of story, status quo antebellum was restored, no revenge. The extent of damage to parthia here is over stated, in fact The parhian emperor came off the throne because of the death of his son and grief, but obviously parthia had much more where that came from, hence anthonys utter failure against parthia.
2nd more important point, parthian empire had a lot of internal quarrelling and fighting on its eastern borders with nomads, romes few successful incursions into parthia happened only when parthia was going through civil war
@@bongoseropersa5240 Sounds like you have an axe to grind. Reclaiming territory previously lost, and doing so in a number of successive battles resulting in decisive victories, is avenging a defeat in anyone's language. Only a biased partisan would claim otherwise.
@@laudace1764 sure buddy...
@@bongoseropersa5240 Amen, genius.
A good motto that maches this perfectly: "The one who laughs last, laughs best."
Can't wait until Historia Civilis makes a video on this.
I think he already did do one on Carrhae
o shit you right
Agreed, everyone knows about Carrhae, but a video about some of the follow up successful Roman campaigns in the east would be unbelievably fantastic
I love your channel provides so much varied content for everyone. These videos however are probably my favorite though
Parthians: **kill a Roman**
Rome: "So, you have chosen death"
Parthians: *Bane Voice* "For You..."
@@timurthelamest5630 Rome: No, you.
@@BasedForever0 Parthians: Your dad lesbian
@@timurthelamest5630 Haha, subhuman.
Uh, waht? The Parthians won.
Can you imagine what it would be like to go from being a Slave in a Triumph to having your own Triumph... unreal
People are familiar more with Crassus defeat. But the follow up campaign you covered was really insightful for the aftermath. 👍
don't get excited there was nothing like revenge in the campaigns mark Anthony defeated hard in iran and his retreat was a complete disaster nothing like revenge while they're flags where in hands of parthians and the king was Dead no a commander of an army and after that more kings got killd an defeated in Roman persian wars
@@mohamda5155 blablabla
Not only does vintidius have no ego, he has a strong mind and a great technician!
Wow he is amazing!
Parthian horse archers :
"wtf ! These Roman cowards use shields !"
...
"And now they're on the higher ground as well ..."
Why is there no Rome 2 footage? It's a perfect opportunity!
The Moments series is done in a different style. I will still use total war footage for videos explicitly about battles, campaigns, or units
thanks for the feedback
me too. even though i love rome 2, this style of art looks really cool.
Rome 2 looks like crap even if you try to make it look good. Its built on an engine thats literally existed for 15 years
@@R3adybreck .....if it's that bad then tell us why is it the most defining and best-selling game of its genre?
You are the best ancient history channel
One of the reasons, in my opinion, the Roman comeback was so devastating is because the Parthian King had executed the General who had won against Crassus because he was getting too successful. Really The Parthian King wanted to take on the Romans himself so he sent his political enemy as a General first with a smaller army to ware down the Romans so that he may defeat them and earn all the Glory
The outcome wouldn't have been different regardless. The army was same tactics was same except this time the Roman army wasn't solely infantry based but composed of different skirmishers and light troops and the army was well trained
Check out our "Welcome to Roshar" video on the Stormlight Archive: ruclips.net/video/xL4M7Yx0SSE/видео.html
Bonjour a tous du Canada O.K. my turns too shoot in french Crassus close crasseux
crasseux =filthy
Of interest is that Rome in time signed a treaty of alliance with Parthia technically incorporating it into the Empire. Part of the stability of the alliance was that Rome wisely left Parthia to it's own devices as a buffer state and trade launchpad to India and beyond.
The port of Charax was a major entrepot for Roman trade with China and India
Got to give it to Ventidius, from slave to successful commander paraded after glorious victories. Truly a badass.
I saw the Roman history account talk about this and I instantly knew it would pop up in my feed. Great work!
These videos are so great. I’m not even studying history or anything but I can’t stop watching
What's interesting is that Bassus has a familiar style with all of his victories, feigning vulnerability then rapidly counter-attacking at the point where his enemy has fully committed and backed up by ranged support. This would only be possible in the ancient world where information traveled slowly and defeated generals were more concerned about saving face than being objective.
You explain ancient history very well and keep it interesting and easy to learn. Love this channel.
Ironic how a man with everything lost, and was only avenged by someone who came from nothing.
It's also very sad how almost, if not every Persian (I'm including Parthia as well) defeat is due to cockiness, or underestimating their opponent.
The Cool Persian
That's the problem of an army based on feudal cavalry. It tends to be undisciplined because every warrior wants to perform some notable feat of arms.
Awesome video.. Nice illustrations..... A great way to depict history.... Keep making such videos
An excellent precise synopsis of the Roman Military campaigns in Parthia up to Augustus.
I love how in the Roman society you could climb up from slave to emperor, it was a military based meritocracy. It didn't matter were you came from, you could always be a true Roman if you embodied the Roman belief and values.
No, you will be emperor when you are the commander of the Roman army
anyway you can talk about Goguryeo, the kingdom in ancient Northeast Asia a dynasty that lasted around 600 years that brought down the sung dynasty n also fought the tong dynasty that came after. I belive they fought many many times even army over million troop, just cuz I don't see anything in English here. thank you
What is this, for God's sake, it was one of the countries belonging to the Mongols
I always disliked how Battle of Carrhae is always brought up as a sign of Roman weakness and vulnerability to horse archers. After Crassus's death, Cassius rounded up the broken troops, less than 1/5 of the legions, and defeated the Parthian pursuers, who maintained most of their numbers after Carrhae. Everyone remembers Battle of Carrhae, but no one has heard of Battle of Cilician Gate.
That's how it is Sadly, they always to hurt the Great Roman Republic and or the Empire.
Battle of Pliska
Lol E, in a video where people were mocking Rome for Cahhrae, and it being pointed out they ultimately got their revenge, and showed to usually get the upper hand on the Parthians - you again post another victory of the Bulgarians over the Romans... Let's not forget the Battle of Kleidion later, you know, when the Byzantines/Eastern Romans ultimately defeated that same first Bulgarian empire at it's end, shortly before conquering it completely (finallizing it with the battle of Dyrrhachium). So yeah, even if it is a hundred or so years later - the Romans still got the final word and revenge on the that Bulgarian faction for the battle of Pliska.
The thing with the Romans, they usually just outlasted any single major battle loss in their history. It was the other bullshit that cost them far more dearly in the long run.
@@adrianbundy3249 oh really well Bulgarians prove your theories wrong
check Second Bulgarian empire 😍 tell me who outlast who Again lol
The Bulgarians came back and got their revenge. They rose to the top once more , winning all fights with the Eastern Roman empire !! (except 1 battle at adrianople)
@@adrianbundy3249 yes Battle of Kleidon was a catastrophic defeat and battle of Spercheios but these are only 2 major wins
here are 6 more crushings ^^
Battle of Ongal
Battle of Achelous
Battle of Trajan Gates
siege of Pernik - krakra defeats basil II bulgarslayer twice
Battle of Klokotnitsa !
Battle of Boulgarophygon
Battle of Pliska = Battle of Marathon
this channel and kings and generals are the only things to watch on youtube
very innacurate
Ventidius living the Roman dream of achieving greatness through hard work
If only Crassus had the foresight to augment his legions with archers and light cavalry...
@@alanpennie8013 How tf was Surena a military genius???
Crassus didn't lose the battle of Carrhae because he was a bad general, in fact he had a great deal of military experience, including the defeat of Spartacus and his slave army. He lost because the Parthian general Surenas showed his military genius by refusing to play by Crassus' rules. He avoided Crassus' strength by deploying only cavalry. But the true mark of his genius was the foresight he showed in having a train of 1,000 camels carrying quivers of arrows, so his mounted archers could rearm quickly thereby giving the romans no respite.
Lol nope crassus was a fool he had plenty of opportunities to win but he decided not to use them and paid the price also Spartacus revilt isn't the same with the parthians
You might as well do a Battle of The Weser River:Teutoberg Avenged
Man i hope he those Germanicus story. People i know tend too not talk about him after Teutoberg
Thank you for a brilliant and informative video. Keep up the good work!
Well said rex 👍.Anthony was a great general..he's often ridic.uled and undermined...caeser called him romes greatest warrior and fought with caeser in many campaigns. He was a soldier's general ,and like caeser was loved by his men...
hey julien please make a video on showing the military of the sengoku jidai period of japan and alsoa documentary on the evolution of war elephants by the way i can t wait to see the next moments video and you're the best youtuber in the whole galaxy .
M.R. Khan i rlly want a video about war elephants
Persians are very intelligent people. I've never seen any history and civilization like Persians. Great video. Thanks
Parthian is a rather broad term! Arsacid is what they called their dynasty! because alongside the Parthians, other Iranic groups such as the Persians, Early Kurds, Medes etc were all in their ruling system!
Lion King its what I see commonly used in my sources but I get what you are saying
+Lion King What did they call themselves? We don't normally switch a country's name with a dynasty change. Did new dynasties differentiate and disassociate themselves from past ones?
PlzShoo 1893 - Wrong. Persians and Medes were NOT part of the Parthian ruling system. In fact, Persians and Medes considered themselves subjugated under Parthian rule. They were waiting for the weakening of the Parthian ruling class to revolt against them and recovery control over their homeland, which eventually happened in 208 AD. Once the Parthians were overrun by the Persian/Median uprising, they restored the Persian Empire in 224 AD under the Sassanid dinasty.
+e77fan Thanks man. That's honestly really good info!
No, they were not. Parthians were the only ruling elite. Those you have mentioned were merely subjects.
Finally another video, I've been waiting. You're my favorite historical channel please keep digging into obscure history, I love it!
looking in to some aztec content soon : )
I don't want inspired you to create this series but you are amazing and please don't ever stop
Your Persian(Achaemenid) empire map didn't show the Afghan, Gedrosian, Scythian and Indian territory.
Nope, his map is quiet correct
Yes Tiggris, the famous river in the 100 acre wood
Compared to most non-professional historians, I deemed myself well-acquainted with roman history. This, however was an eye-opening saga!
I could watch this all day please keep making more videos about Rome or similar they are really awesome
plenty more to come
The Sassanids should been have mentioned at the end.
thought about it but the parthian empire turning in to the sassanid empire was more of an internal conquest rather than an external one which were were discussing as a parrallel to Rome's efforts
No. That is a separate topic involving internal politics.
Scipio Africanus Sassanids were 300 years later and parthians were still powerful at Sassanid empire only dynasty change country is iran as same.
@@aradsstates9584 dude, the video is 2 years old...
Scipio Africanus i love old things I still love my first love most lol.
Surena was killed after his victory due to the king's fear of his competence. I wonder if things would have been different if he continued leading the army against next roman armies.
Dshim
You'd think so. With Roman legions on their side the Parthians ought to have beaten Ventidius if they had had competent leaders.
Nah he still would've got rekt, he only won one battle, which was against Romes' worst general. Lucky for surena, if he had met Ventidius then it would of been Surenas head getting paraded down the street instead of that other parthian general
Surena was in good and very numerous company. Happened a lot in ancient times and not unknown up until quite recently in some dictatorships.
Why are there rectangular scutums in the image of the triumph where Bassus was shown up?
I would agree that the shield should be a bit more oval and rounded but its a fairly minor detail that this new artist overlooked
Yeah i totally agree, but still =)
Thank you so much! I had seen a video from Historia Civillus that showed how Crassus failed, but I was really wanting to find out what Rome's eventual military response would be. Thank you!
Dude that was awesome and genuinely educational. I learned a great deal. And it was fun. Thank you.
In addition to Mark Anthony's losses during his retreat, he arrived back at Antioch with another 14,000 men who were so badly affected by frost bite, losing fingers and toes, that they were discharged from the army.
Jesus damn the sons of Abraham lose
The Romans were the "Sons of Abraham"? Don't think so.
You forgot to mention is 18 victories against parthia and no roman conquered parthia until trajan did it 141 years after antonius invasion,ancient historians praised him for his successful retreat
In my language there is a popular expression; "Erro crasso" meanning "gross error". By the way 2070 years later this battle still inhabits the popular unconscious
I highly doubt that this is due to Crassus and that they rather have the same root because crasso just translates to rough, gross or fat (more positive would be thick or solid). So "erro crasso" would mean "gross error" even if Crassus would not have existed. Is it possible that this is the reason why you still say it? Sure. Is it likely? Doubtful.
One thing precipitated another. Crassus was defeated. Fearful of the new hero, Orodes II kills his general Surena.
The family of Surena, held a grudge that lasted 200+ years, culminating in the overthrow of the Parthian empire , by the descendants or Surena
and the rise of the Sassanids.
Crassus is a good example of never be too cocky and never get too greedy.
Crassus also did not know his enemy and hadn't had military command since the defeat of Spartacus.
He was old , soft ,arrogant and didn't do his homework on the strengths and weaknesses of the Parthians
Awesome documenary.
Death smiles at us all, all a man can do is smile back.~Marcus Aurelius