RE: Constantine the god of the bible
October 28, 2010 at 5:45 pm
(This post was last modified: October 28, 2010 at 5:48 pm by Anomalocaris.)
He was no fool, but Roman standard of unpussiness calls for exhibition of personal martial virtues. This Octavian never had opportunity to show. So I imagine were it not for association with Caesar, he would have been seen as a unworthy pussy who weaseled his way into power through an unmannly style of cunning.
To say Antony was incompetent by this time was to give him far too much credit. The guy clearly was broken and had no more justification to be in an army tent after the drubbing he took from the Parthians. Antony defeated himself by not using his much stronger army which he actually brought to the field.
(October 28, 2010 at 5:16 pm)Cerrone Wrote:(October 28, 2010 at 4:47 pm)Chuck Wrote: [quote='Minimalist' pid='102174' dateline='1288298272']
Quote:How can you say that? Octavian was perhaps THE best Emperor Rome ever had.
But he didn't get there by being a pussy.
Quote:
Well, he sort of did, by Roman standards of pussiness. He was never worth a damn on the field.
Even though he defeated Mark Antony and the Egyptian fleet at Actium. Give the guy some credit.
To say Antony was incompetent by this time was to give him far too much credit. The guy clearly was broken and had no more justification to be in an army tent after the drubbing he took from the Parthians. Antony defeated himself by not using his much stronger army which he actually brought to the field.
