History :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For the discussion of general and orthodox history from the advent of writing up to mid 20th Century, i.e. 3,200BC up to World War II. 
Welcome! Log InRegister
What a fascinating read this was. Thank you!!

I personally agree with Livy and your assessment. Rome would have won. Alexander was a brilliant commander and tactician, but Rome, as you said, pushed relentlessly until they were where they wanted to be.

Thanks again,


"Sic itur ad astra" Virgil

Dovahkiin, Dovahkiin,
Naal ok zin los vahriin
"Dragonish, Skyrim by Jeremy Soulle

Options: ReplyQuote

Subject Views Written By Posted
Alexander and Rome 939 Aneth 03-Sep-14 17:40
Re: Alexander and Rome 369 Nolondil 03-Sep-14 18:10
Re: Alexander and Rome 302 Aneth 03-Sep-14 18:44
Re: Alexander and Rome 259 Eddie Larry 04-Sep-14 02:26
Re: Alexander and Rome 336 s-d.adrain 04-Sep-14 08:36
Re: Alexander and Rome 292 Eddie Larry 05-Sep-14 03:15
Re: Alexander and Rome 284 Aneth 04-Sep-14 17:57
Re: Alexander and Rome 338 Eddie Larry 05-Sep-14 00:15
Re: Alexander and Rome 279 Aneth 05-Sep-14 16:03
Re: Alexander and Rome 292 s-d.adrain 08-Sep-14 06:38
Alexander was actually 32 when he died. 250 ananda 13-Sep-14 13:22
Re: Alexander was actually 32 when he died. 355 Spiros 16-Sep-14 01:45
Richard III was 32 when he died 314 Eddie Larry 17-Sep-14 02:58
Re: Richard III was 32 when he died 575 Brian Patterson 18-Sep-14 04:26
Re: Alexander and Rome 373 Skatha 08-Sep-14 17:37
Re: Alexander and Rome 331 Titus Livius 09-Sep-14 16:25

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.