Talk:Macrinus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ]
(If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

What an outrageous assumption about Parthia: "historically inferior enemy such as the Parthians". Parthia was no "historically inferior enemy", as was illustrated by Carrhae and the failed expedition of Antony. A better way to phrase something of that intention should instead relate the constant internecine fighting among the Parthians. A blanket statement such as the former is far from correct, however. Alan 20:28, 04 May 2005 (EST)


I moved this to just "Macrinus" because that is how he usually appears in the big list of emperors. Stan 17:57, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I agree with Alan. The Parthians were until the very end a super-power and her equestrian armies were far from "inferior". Why should it be accorded to Roman incompetence rather than Parthian brilliance? Not only an outrageous assumption, but an enormously ignorant article which fails to mention the two times Marc Anthony lost at Phraaspa (As Julius Caesar too wanted to invade Parthia before his death), Crassus at Carrhae, the initially enormously successful campaign of Pacorus and Labienus, and the fact that Parthia made significant advances into India and Dravidia through the Indo-Parthians under Gondophares and the Pallava? I suggest an imminent change to this. Usually the loss at Carrhae is accorded to Roman incompetence, completely dismissing Surena's brilliance and the fact that this general had a successful record against the Greeks of Mesopotamia (And the accounts of his valour at the city of Seleucia) and such behaviour is something I find to be completely down-playing at Parthian achievements who even brought down the Seleucids, conquering the Iranian possessions.

The Parthians built the second largest defensive wall in the world in Hyrcania and the Parthian legacy of architecture has remained in the form of impressive citadels and castles, the forming of many large cities, their enormous trading by both land and later also by sea. I on the other hand find it rather idiotic to wage a war against a nation that far away, wasting money and resources when previous campaigns were more or less foiled. This is the mere exploit of the lack of Parthian sources. The Parthians were not inferior to the Romans. Graeco-Romans and Iranians alike have their moments of embarassment and triumph, or are Romanophiles going to dismiss the triumph of Shapur I as a mere "Roman miscalculation"? How typical.--The Persian Cataphract 19:22, 18 January 2007 (UTC)