Flavius ​​Belisarius: the Nika Revolt and the War with the Vandals

7 492 49
Flavius ​​Belisarius: the Nika Revolt and the War with the Vandals
Lang Jeffries as Belisarius. Still from the film "Battle of Rome," 1968-1969.


В previous article We discussed the origins and early military career of the famous Byzantine commander Flavius ​​Belisarius, his acquaintance with the future Emperor Justinian the Great, and his marriage to Empress Theodora's elder friend, Antonina. We concluded this article with a discussion of the causes and beginnings of the Nika Revolt. Today, we'll discuss how this rebellion was suppressed and how Belisarius crushed the North African Vandal Empire.



The Nika Revolt: Theodora and Belisarius


Recounting what happened at the very height of the uprising in the imperial palace, Procopius of Caesarea, who was openly hostile to Theodora, reports her speech at the imperial council as follows:

He who was born cannot help but die, but for one who once reigned, being a fugitive is unbearable. May I never lose this purple robe, may I never live to see the day when those I meet no longer call me mistress! If you wish to save yourself by flight, my lord, it is not difficult. We have plenty of money, the sea is nearby, and there are ships. But be careful that, having escaped, you do not have to choose death over salvation. I like the ancient saying that royal power is the best shroud.


Justinian and Theodora, a still from the film "Primordial Rus"

And this is how Procopius of Caesarea, who hated Justinian and Theodora, is presented in the same film:


Theodora is probably alluding to the words of the Carian ruler Artemisia, who, according to Herodotus, said to Darius before the battle at Salamis:

Royal power is the best shroud.

But perhaps she had in mind the tyrant of Syracuse, Dionysius the Elder, who, being besieged by rebellious citizens, declared (in 403 BC):

Tyranny is a beautiful shroud.


Silva Koscina as Theodora. Still from the film "Battle of Rome" (1968-1969).

The experienced commander Narses agreed with the empress and then, at the risk of his life, managed to enter the Veneti box at the Hippodrome and bribe many senators.

And Justinian made up his mind – he ordered Belisarius, John the Armenian, and Mundus, the Illyrian strategos, to attack the rebels gathered in the hippodrome. Procopius of Caesarea writes of this:

The basileus placed all his hopes on Belisarius and Mundus. One of them, Belisarius, had just returned from the war with the Persians, bringing with him, in addition to a worthy retinue of strong men, a multitude of spearmen and shield-bearers, seasoned in battle and the perils of war. After some thought, he decided to attack the crowd standing in the hippodrome—a countless throng, crowded together in complete disarray. Drawing his sword and ordering others to do the same, he charged at them with a shout. The disorganized crowd, seeing armored warriors renowned for their bravery and battle experience, striking without mercy with their swords, fled.


Justinian in the center, Belisarius to his right, Narses to his left, mosaic in the church of San Vitale

It all ended in a terrible massacre in which about 30 thousand people died.

In this picture you see the victorious Justinian, Theodora, Belisarius and Mundus (with a spear):


To atone for the massacre, Justinian announced the start of construction on a new church 40 days later—to replace the basilica erected by Emperor Theodosius II, which had burned down during the uprising. The workforce reached 10, and a sum equivalent to three annual imperial budgets was spent, but on December 27, 537, Patriarch Menas of Constantinople consecrated the new cathedral, Hagia Sophia.


Constantine and Justinian before the Virgin Mary, mosaic on the southern façade of Hagia Sophia:


And the hero of our article in 533 led the army sent by Justinian against the Vandals, who had created their own state on the territory of North Africa and Sicily.

Vandals


The first mention of the Vandals appears in the works of Pliny (1st century AD). Later, Tacitus and Ptolemy wrote about them. Paulus Orosius believed the Vandals were related to the Goths and Suiones (Swedes). The Byzantine historian Procopius of Caesarea, quoted repeatedly in the first article, asserts that the Vandals themselves considered the coast of the Sea of ​​Azov their ancestral homeland and, on their journey north, annexed some of the Alans. Regarding the Vandals' appearance, he says:

They all have white bodies and light hair, they are tall and beautiful in appearance.


Vandals, reconstruction at the Krakow Museum


Vandal Horseman, Mosaic, Bordj Djedid City, circa 500

But Jordanes claimed in Getica that the homeland of the Vandals was Southern Scandinavia.

It is known for certain that from the 1st century AD the Vandals lived in the area between the Elbe and Oder rivers, but perhaps also near the Vistula; the name "Silesia" is derived from the Vandal tribe of the Silingi.

Incidentally, the mountain range separating Bohemia from Silesia was once called the "Vandalic Mountains".

Interestingly, beginning in the 8th century, some German authors began to equate the Vandals with the Wends. Around 990, Gerhard of Augsburg, in his Life of Saint Ulrich, called the Polish prince Mieszko I a Vandal. And the 11th-century chronicler Adam of Bremen claimed that the Slavs had previously been called Vandals. But in this case, we see only a similarity in the names.

The second half of the 2nd century saw the southward movement of another major Vandal tribe, the Silingi. They took part in the Marcomannic War of Germanic and Sarmatian tribes against Rome, and in 174 received permission from Marcus Aurelius to settle in Dacia. The peace treaty with Rome in 271 also recorded the presence of the Silingi. Between 331 and 337, the Vandals were driven out of Dacia by the Goths, and Emperor Constantine permitted them to move to Pannonia on the right bank of the Danube, where they remained for 60 years, supplying Rome with auxiliary troops. But in the 380s, under pressure from the Huns, the Vandals, having annexed some of the Suevi and Alans (who became allies rather than vassals), crossed into Gaul.

In the winter of 406–407, they attacked the Roman provinces, and their enemies blamed the famous general Flavius ​​Stilicho for their invasion, on the grounds that he, the husband of the niece of the Eastern Emperor Theodosius the Great and father-in-law of the Western Emperor Honorius, was of Vandal descent. In 409, the Vandals and their allies crossed the Pyrenees and, within three years, conquered the lands of modern-day Spain and northern Portugal. Orosius reports that here they:

They exchanged their swords for plows and treated the other Romans favorably as friends and allies... There were some Romans among them who preferred the poor freedom among the barbarians to the tax burdens among the Romans.

The Romans did not have the strength for war, but they “set” the Visigoths against the Vandals-Silings and the Alans, in 418 the Gothic king Wallia:

He carried out a massive slaughter of barbarians in the name of Rome. He routed the Silingian Vandals in battle in Baetica. He destroyed the Alans, who ruled the Vandals and Suevi, so thoroughly that when their king, Ataxus, was killed, the few who survived forgot the name of their kingdom and submitted to the Vandal king of Galicia, Gunderic.

Gunderic occupied Baetica, which eventually became Andalusia. In 422, he managed to defeat the Roman army, which included Gothic troops.

The new king, Geiseric, Gunderic's brother, came to power in 428. Procopius of Caesarea writes of him:

Geiseric had an excellent knowledge of military affairs and was an extraordinary person.

Jordanes in his "Acts of the Goths" calls him secretive, taciturn, far-sighted and disdainful of luxury.


Gunderich, portrait by an unknown artist, 1513

It was during the 49-year reign of Geiseric that the Vandals captured and plundered Rome, built a huge fleet, with the help of which they captured Sardinia, Corsica, the Balearic Islands and Sicily, and founded their state on the territory of modern Tunisia, northeastern Algeria and northwestern Libya.


Geiseric made Carthage his capital, entering the Vandals without a fight—while almost all of its inhabitants were at the hippodrome watching the races. As you can see, Carthage wasn't destroyed by the Romans at all: the city only became deserted after the Arab conquest.

Official documents in the Vandal state were written in Latin, and the dominant religion was Arianism. The Vandals came to Africa at the invitation of the Roman governor Boniface, who had rebelled against the central authorities. They never returned to Spain; that territory fell to the Goths.


According to legend, the Vandals were summoned to Rome by Licinia Eudoxia, widow of the Emperor Valentinian (the murderer of the general Aetius) and wife of the new emperor, Petronius Maximus. The Vandal fleet entered the mouth of the Tiber, and from June 2 to 16, 455, Rome was under the victors' control.


Vandals and Moors in Rome in a sketch by K. Bryullov. We see King Geiseric on horseback.

Empress Eudoxia and her two daughters were taken to Carthage, where one of them (her mother's namesake, Eudoxia) married Geiseric's son, Gunaric. After 455, the Vandals occupied the last remaining Roman territories in Africa. In 468, they routed the combined fleets of the Western and Eastern Empires. In 475, the Byzantine Emperor Zeno the Isaurian concluded an "eternal peace" with Geiseric.

Eudoxia and Gunaric's son, Hilderic, favored an alliance with Byzantium and favored Orthodox Christians rather than the Arians. This displeased many, and in 530, Hilderic was deposed by his nephew Gelimer. Emperor Justinian seized on this palace coup as a pretext for an invasion. By this time, the Vandals had already lost their former bellicosity; Procopius of Caesarea, who is familiar to us, called them "the most effeminate" of all the barbarians the Byzantines had fought.

Belisarius against the Vandals



Depiction of Belisarius in the Nuremberg Chronicle, 1493.

This war had been going on since 530, but it was Belisarius who finally and forever defeated the Vandal state, annexing North Africa to Byzantine possessions.

He commanded only 10,000 infantry, about 5,000 cavalry, and a 1,000-strong contingent of federates, consisting of Hunnic cavalry and Herulian infantry. There were only 92 warships, and civilian vessels, crewed by Egyptians, Ionians, and Cilicians, were used to transport troops and equipment. Overall command of the fleet was exercised by Kalonymus of Alexandria.

At that time, a five-thousand-strong detachment of the best Vandal warriors, led by the new king's brother, Tsazon, successfully attacked Sardinia, defeating the Goth Goda, who had betrayed them.

King Gelimer, who was in Africa, made the mistake of attacking Belisarius's forces from three sides: his brother Ammatus's forces advanced from Carthage toward Decimus, with Gelimer's nephew Gibamund on their left, and the king himself deciding to outflank Belisarius's army. In September 533, the Vandals were defeated in battle near Decium (approximately 12 km from Carthage). Ammatus led his force to the city ahead of schedule and was routed by the Byzantine cavalry vanguard of John the Armenian (three hundred of the finest horsemen). Gibamund, who attempted to come to the rescue, was also defeated—his force was routed by the Huns. Among the others, both Vandal commanders were killed.

Unaware of the defeat and death of his relatives, Gelimer and his main forces repelled part of the Byzantine army. However, upon discovering the body of his dead brother in Decimus, he abandoned the pursuit and, immersed in mourning, began preparing for the funeral. Meanwhile, the retreating Romans were stopped by Belisarius, who, in a swift counterattack, routed Gelimer's army as well, and then occupied Carthage.

In December of that year, the Vandals were finally defeated near the village of Tricamere. Pursuing them, Belisarius captured Gelimer, and the African coast from Carthage to the Nile Delta came under Roman control. From the two thousand Vandal prisoners, Belisarius formed five cavalry regiments, known in Byzantium as the Vandali or Justiniani, which were sent to the Persian border. Some Vandals fled to the Gothic kingdoms or northern Algeria, where they gradually interbred with the local population. Many young women were married to Byzantine soldiers, not Romans, but barbarians.

In the next article, we'll continue the story and discuss Belisarius's wars against the Goths in Italy, as well as other battles of this commander. We'll also discuss the final years of his life.
49 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    2 October 2026 04: 11
    Thanks for your efforts! Any plans for articles on Stilicho and Aetius?
    1. VLR
      +2
      2 October 2026 06: 58
      For now I'm working on other topics, and then we'll see.
  2. 0
    2 October 2026 04: 46
    I read "Primordial Rus" with rapture...several times.
    It was as if I myself was present at the events described then.
    Oh times, about morals!
  3. +4
    2 October 2026 05: 22
    It all ended in a terrible massacre in which about 30 thousand people died.

    Against this background, any massacre of the High and Late Middle Ages, except, of course, the Latin one, which took place in the same Constantinople (truly, “Byzantine cruelty” is not empty words!), seems like child’s play in a sandbox.
    Thank you, Valery!
    1. +2
      2 October 2026 06: 13
      Like in the TV series "Rome", I don't remember it word for word, but something like:
      When Sula came to Rome with his legions, there was such a massacre that the walls could have been painted with blood.
    2. VLR
      +1
      2 October 2026 07: 00
      Perhaps these are the overall casualty figures. And the rebels, after all, also "made a good mess." Moreover, the figures in all sources raise serious questions. Where, for example, did ancient Athens and Sparta get such large armies? How and with what could the Persians have fed the enormous armies of Xerxes and Darius? It has recently been acknowledged that the Battle of Kulikovo involved several thousand cavalry on both sides—not tens or hundreds of thousands.
      1. 0
        3 October 2026 20: 32
        but who knows...
        you can't say anything against it
      2. 0
        4 October 2026 15: 47
        Where, for example, did ancient Athens and Sparta get such large armies?
        Besides the written evidence, which raises skepticism, there are also some objective, material ones. There are reports of food rations distributed to soldiers, workers, and slaves. Entire workers' camps where they lived during construction remain. The remains of cities from which population estimates can be determined remain. Barracks and Roman camps remain. It's all just boring.
  4. 0
    2 October 2026 05: 54
    For example, the Swedish king's title in Swedish is "My Lord, My Father, and My Son." And in Latin, it's "My Lord, My Father, and My Son."

    That is, the Swedes officially believe that the Vandals are actually Wends...
    1. +6
      2 October 2026 08: 02
      For example, the Swedish king's title in Swedish is "My Lord, My Father, and My Son." And in Latin, it's "My Lord, My Father, and My Son."
      In the Swedish province of Uppland there is a village called Vendel, from where it is believed that the Big world Vandals. Some historians even proclaimed this region the Vandal capital and created a museum there. Vandalorum. So the royal title is quite appropriate for this village. Vandalorum RexAnd with Gothorum so everything is clear...)
      That is, the Swedes officially believe that the Vandals are actually Wends...
      From this South Baltic hodgepodge of Slavic, Germanic, and Celtic peoples, it's difficult to pinpoint the Vandals as belonging to any specific ethnic group. It's possible that the word vandal It didn't refer to an ethnicity, but to a union of tribes living in roughly the same territory. This is eloquently demonstrated by the emergence of the Przeworsk culture, a complex multiethnic community that can't be classified as either Slavic or Germanic. Although, in my opinion, most of those we call Vandals were still Germanic, as evidenced by the few surviving fragments of the Vandal language, which point to its similarity to the Gothic language. Thus, the Vandals were not so much representatives of what we now consider Germanic, as representatives of the region where the Slavs lived...

      And one more thing! Ancient authors, as a rule, grouped large tribal unions under common ethnic designations (for example, Franks or Goths), which made it difficult to reconstruct the exact origins of ethnic groups (in our case, the Vandals)...
      1. 0
        2 October 2026 08: 23
        And again, the official title of the Vandal king was "King of the Vandals and Alans," who apparently made up the cavalry. For some reason, this is often forgotten, as is the fact that the Alans were certainly not Germanic. Yet, they entered into a near-symbiotic relationship with the Vandals, which likely means they didn't consider the Vandals completely alien. What's unclear is whether the Vandals were Germanic, as the Alans certainly didn't behave that way toward other members of the Germanic group. With the exception of the Goths in the early period, but they weren't necessarily Germanic either. But if the Vandals were Slavs, they clearly had contact with them back in the Black Sea steppes. Almost like their own...

        However, this doesn't negate the presence of a Germanic element in the Vandal alliance, including the royal family. Ethnicity was treated much more simply in those days...
        1. +4
          2 October 2026 08: 34
          Quote: paul3390
          King of the Vandals and Alans... For some reason, this is usually forgotten, as is the fact that the Alans were certainly not Germans.
          The Vandals and Alans, driven by fear of the Huns and food shortages, began to seek refuge in the Empire. This united them. And what's surprising is that this alliance seems quite strange, given the vast ethnic and linguistic gap between these two peoples. Nevertheless, this alliance persisted in one form or another throughout the following generations. The Alans also had a similar alliance with the Goths. (let's remember Catalonia, also known as Goto-Alania)
          1. 0
            2 October 2026 08: 41
            Well, the Alans had been trying to grab the empire's udder for quite some time by that time... Just as they had hired themselves out to it...

            So it seems to me that the alliance would only be strange if the Vandals were Germans. And if they were Slavs, then the Alans had long-standing contacts with them, they probably got used to each other over all these years... The same goes for the Goths—if there really is a literary-historical forgery, and Jordanes' Goths were, in fact, Getae, an ancient people of the Thracian group, they were clearly not alien to the Alans either.

            And then, in order to glorify and retrace the history of the original Goths and Germans, the deeds of the Getae were tacked on to them by the similarity of their name. After all, even Jordanes's work is called Getica, and not Gothica!
          2. +1
            2 October 2026 17: 32
            There's nothing surprising about the alliance between the Alans and the Vandals. It's simply important to understand that the Alans fled west in the last quarter of the 4th century, unwilling to submit to the Huns. Until 406, they lived alongside the Quadi (Suevi) and Vandals in Central Europe. Since the 1st century, the Danubian Sarmatians, descendants of the Iazyges and Roxolani, had already lived in the Pannonian Plain, the last and westernmost enclave of the Great Steppe. They had long and closely interacted with the Germans. It's enough to recall the Marcomannic Wars, in which the Sarmatians actively participated alongside the Marcomanni and Quadi. In other words, there was no gulf between Germans like the Vandals or Suevi and the Sarmatian-Alans. On the contrary, the Germans actively adopted equestrian culture, since there was room for cavalry there, and the Alans, like the Sarmatians before them, interacted with the Germans just as easily, especially since the Alans had extensive experience of communicating with the Goths back in the Black Sea region.

            And so, under pressure from the Huns, or rather the Visigoths, who were being pressured by the Huns, at the beginning of the 5th century, these peoples decided to flee the Gothic/Hunnic threat further west and, crossing the frozen Rhine, found themselves in Gaul. Moreover, they did not travel as a single crowd, but most likely in different hordes, as the Vandals were attacked during their migration by Frankish federates, who were entrusted with guarding the Rhine borders by treaty with the empire. And the Vandals had a very hard time here, as, according to Gregory of Tours, the Franks killed many people, including their king, Godagisl. They were saved by the Alans, who intervened and defeated the Franks. This once again emphasizes that the Vandals and Alans, by and large, did not have any major disagreements, much less a "vast ethnic and linguistic gap." This is again confirmed by their subsequent joint actions in Gaul and Spain.
            And yes, the Alans and Goths in Spain had no alliance. On the contrary, the Goths of Wallia committed a localized genocide against the Alans there, after which the survivors were forced to flee to the Vandal-Asdingi under the rule of their rex, after which he received the title of rex Wandalorum et Alanorum.
            The Alans didn't live in Catalonia either. According to Idatius, they were allocated lands in Lusitania and the province of Cartagena by lot. Catalonia, in turn, was the province of Tarraconensis, which remained under imperial rule until it was captured by the Goths.
            So no Goto-Alania existed, and could not have existed.
            1. +1
              2 October 2026 20: 31
              Lusitania - Lusatian Sorbs (Lusatian Serbs)
            2. +5
              3 October 2026 09: 05
              Quote: MikMichel
              There was no gap between the Germans, such as the Vandals or Suevi, and the Sarmatians-Alans.
              Really??? What about the cultural divide? Do you even know what that is?
              Quote: MikMichel
              And yes, the Alans and the Goths in Spain had no alliance.
              Such alliances existed, but they were complex and variable, ranging from military clashes to assimilation, as is true of all barbarians. And the genocide you mentioned (you're probably referring to the death of the Alan chieftain) is just a small part of these relationships, somehow etched into history. And whatever the relationship, the portion of the Alans who remained in Spain and did not join the Vandals became part of the Visigoths...
              Quote: MikMichel
              So no Goto-Alania existed, and could not exist.
              As a real entity, no historical state known as Goth-Alania existed. However, some medieval chroniclers claimed that the region of Iberian Catalonia received its name from the interbreeding of Goths and Alans, which linguistically gave rise to the name. The name Goth-Alania suggested that after the Visigoths unified the peninsula, they interbred with the remaining Alan population, giving the region its name. Furthermore, due to the lack of any documentation, the entire topic is shrouded in considerable uncertainty.
              Quote: MikMichel
              If we believe Idatius
              The bishop who fought against the Arian heresy in Gothic and Suevic Spain should not be trusted under any circumstances...))
              Quote: MikMichel
              And Catalonia is the Tarraconenian province, which remained under imperial rule until it was captured by the Goths.
              Wouldn't it shock you if I told you that the Goths and Alans settled in this very territory, which would later be called Catalonia (part of Tarraco)? And perhaps even as Roman federates? And I repeat once again that due to the lack of any documentation, this entire topic is shrouded in considerable uncertainty...
              Quote: MikMichel
              And so, under pressure from the Huns, or rather the Visigoths, who were being pressured by the Huns, at the beginning of the 5th century, these peoples decided to move away from the Gothic/Hunnic threat further west and, having crossed the frozen Rhine, found themselves in Gaul.
              Why are you posting completely obvious things here that can be read in a fifth-grade school textbook?
      2. +1
        2 October 2026 08: 29
        Uhhh... It doesn't matter—they're the same title. Only in Swedish they're called Wends, and translated into Latin, they're called Vandals. How so?
        1. +4
          2 October 2026 08: 40
          Quote: paul3390
          It doesn't fight—it's the same title. Only in Swedish it's "Vendi," and in Latin it's "Vandals." How so?
          Translation peculiarities. One language may not have the same phonetics as another. Ask someone to pronounce the Russian word. soap or sorrel any English or French speaker. I'm talking about letters Ы и ЩOr try to pronounce the letter yourself. Н in the word Harald or sound th in the English article the...))
          1. +1
            2 October 2026 08: 45
            Really? So, let's say the Latin name for today's Vienna—Vindalicorum, the Vendians living along the Lycus River—doesn't convince you? What part of the name "Vendians" can't be accurately translated into Latin? Do you see the letters "Щ" or "Ы" in the word "vend"?
            1. +5
              2 October 2026 09: 26
              Vindalicorui is today's Augsburg. The Roman name for Vienna was Vindabonda.
            2. +4
              2 October 2026 10: 45
              Quote: paul3390
              Do you see the letters Щ or Ы in the word vend?
              Don't exaggerate! I used the pronunciation of these letters as an example only to show that phonetics in different languages ​​also differ. And to answer your question, I'll say that in the word sells There are no letters Щ or Ы. It's just that these letters, or rather their pronunciation, are completely beyond the ability of speakers of other languages. Likewise, the word sells Germans, Yakuts, Chinese, or Bantu-speaking blacks can pronounce it differently. And just like we all have a hard time pronouncing the word "tee,"th Without biting off your tongue, and writing it in Cyrillic characters is even more difficult, since such a letter hasn't been invented in Russian yet! I'm talking about writing the same phonetics in different languages. And comparing the Wends (Vends) and the Vandals is tantamount to attributing the Etruscans to the Russians, and the megalithic structures of Chechen Itza to the Chechens...

              As for the ancient name of Austrian Vienna, you've already been told above...
              1. +7
                2 October 2026 10: 58
                It's just that these letters, or rather their pronunciation, are completely beyond the capabilities of speakers of other languages.
                By the way, Polish is practically inaccessible to Norwegians due to the abundance of hissing sounds.
                1. +5
                  2 October 2026 11: 02
                  Quote: 3x3zsave
                  By the way, Polish is practically inaccessible to Norwegians due to the abundance of hissing sounds.
                  That's exactly it! Just like they are not available to native Russian speakers. clicking tongues The languages ​​of the peoples of South Africa are inaccessible both phonetically and in writing, as it is simply impossible to write them down using their own alphabet...
                  1. +6
                    2 October 2026 11: 17
                    Just as the clicking languages ​​of the peoples of South Africa are not accessible to a native Russian speaker.
                    I read somewhere that in Africa there is a group of languages ​​where sounds are pronounced on the inhale, not on the exhale.
                    1. +5
                      2 October 2026 12: 00
                      Quote: 3x3zsave
                      I read somewhere that in Africa there is a group of languages ​​where sounds are pronounced on the inhale, not on the exhale.


                      These are Khoisan languages. In South Africa: Bushmen, Hottentots. In East Africa: Hadza and Sandawe.
                      1. +3
                        2 October 2026 12: 03

                        These are Khoisan languages.

                        Thank! Did not know.
    2. +1
      3 October 2026 07: 25
      Quote: paul3390
      That is, the Swedes officially believe that the Vandals are actually Wends...


      Since the 12th century, Danish kings had also held the title of King of the Wends. Those same Slavic kings, because they controlled the Slavic lands of Pomerania. This title then passed to the Swedish kings. And by the 16th century, the title of the Wends had become Vandals.
  5. +3
    2 October 2026 06: 30
    Carthage was indeed destroyed by Rome, but then rebuilt as a purely Roman city, which, apart from its name and location, had no connection with the lost Punic one.
    1. VLR
      +1
      2 October 2026 06: 41
      A stone city isn't easy to destroy, especially at that time—without gunpowder, dynamite, or TNT. Already at the end of the 18th century, the Convention ordered the rebellious city of Lyon razed to the ground, but its commissioners were ultimately unable to accomplish this, only symbolically blowing up a few buildings in the center.
      1. +3
        2 October 2026 07: 07
        The stone city is not so easy to destroy,
        Baron Osman succeeded.
        1. VLR
          +1
          2 October 2026 07: 57
          Yes, he certainly had a good walk through Paris; only small islands here and there remained of the ancient medieval city. But his opportunities at the time were quite different.
      2. +5
        2 October 2026 12: 45
        Quote: VlR
        The Stone City is not so easy to destroy

        Nothing complicated. Just evict the residents, and nature will do the rest.
        In fact, Roman Carthage is a completely new city built on the site of the old one, after the harbor of the former capital of the province of Utica became shallow and unsuitable for shipping.
        P.S. I remember "The Battle of Rome." We used to rush to see it as schoolchildren, but not so much out of love for history as for the battle scenes and... the episode in the bathhouse.
        1. +2
          2 October 2026 13: 45
          It is enough to evict the residents, nature will do the rest itself
          Stone buildings can stand for millennia even without humans. Ancient Egypt is a good example, and I'm not even talking about the Great Pyramids. The Karnak and Luxor temples are still standing, and not only them.
          1. +5
            2 October 2026 15: 37
            Quote: Sergey Valov
            The Karnak and Luxor temples are still standing, and not only them.

            These temples are still standing, but all that remains of Amarna is that it was hastily forgotten. And this happened under the next pharaoh. As we can see, the ancient Egyptians managed just fine without dynamite.
            As far as I understand, the Romans quickly realized they had overdone it and, just thirty years later, attempted to repopulate the city, but the attempt failed precisely because little remained of the city. The next, more successful, attempt occurred a hundred years later under Caesar, and this city was completely new.
            1. +2
              2 October 2026 16: 01
              All that remains is what was forgotten in the rush
              Religious intolerance is a terrible thing. There's practically nothing above ground there. Akhetaten is now empty and flat, like a giant football field.
              1. +1
                4 October 2026 13: 17
                Quote: Sergey Valov
                Stone buildings can stand for thousands of years even without humans.

                There's also the question of construction technology. Many Roman buildings would likely still be standing today if local residents hadn't stolen the bronze clamps that held the walls together.
                I don’t know how the Punic houses were built (from adobe?), but the fact is that the buildings that have survived to this day date back to the Roman period.
                1. +1
                  4 October 2026 15: 34
                  There is also a question about construction technology.
                  There are a lot of nuances here. As you rightly noted, the Romans fastened stone blocks together with staples. But these staples could only be removed by removing the top row of blocks resting on them. I've seen similar rows of stone blocks in Egypt, but without staples. Another factor is the block's weight. The material plays an important role—stone, after all, comes in many different forms. Climate is also a crucial factor—Egypt is very dry and there are no temperature fluctuations. Where it's humid and there are fluctuations, everything can deteriorate quickly.
  6. -1
    2 October 2026 08: 07
    Carthage was not destroyed by the Romans, but they knew better than to go there.
  7. +1
    2 October 2026 08: 22
    To atone for the sin of mass bloodshed, Justinian announced the start of construction of a new temple 40 days later.

    The most important thing in religion is that any sin is forgiven, you just need to repent...that's why religion is not the enemy of violence, but allows one to go unpunished.
  8. +2
    2 October 2026 08: 22
    Quote: Valery Ryzhov
    The name "Silesia" is derived from the Vandal tribe of the Silings
    The Vandals were apparently divided into two large tribal groups, known as the Hasdings (a Norwegian branch) and the Silings (a Danish branch), associated with the island of Zealand (Sjalland in Danish). Later, through migration, the Silings, who took their name from the Danish Sjalland, bestowed Silesia upon the region they settled. But I will make it clear that all these etymologies are just assumptions based on the limited knowledge available...
  9. +3
    2 October 2026 09: 53
    It's an interesting read, almost like reading V. Yan's story "The Phoenician Ship" in my youth. hi
    As you can see, Carthage was not destroyed by the Romans at all: this city became empty only after the conquest of these lands by the Arabs.

    To be fair, it should be clarified that Carthage was captured, plundered, and completely destroyed by the Romans after the 3rd Punic War in 146 BC, so that no one lived there.
    But in 122 BC, according to the law of the tribune Rubrius, the colony of Junonia was founded; they tried to restore the city, but it was abolished by decision of the Senate.
    Julius Caesar proposed founding a colony on the site of Carthage. However, Colonia Julia Carthago (Carthaginian Colony of Julius) was founded after his death, more than 150 years after the destruction of Carthage. On the site of the ruined city, the Romans undertook large-scale construction of new public buildings and temples. The colony grew rapidly, and under Emperor Augustus, it became the capital of the province of Africa.
  10. +3
    2 October 2026 11: 28
    Carthage was not destroyed by the Romans at all: this city became deserted only after the conquest of these lands by the Arabs.

    No, it was destroyed by the Romans, but was rebuilt by them according to Roman taste... the location is very convenient and the harbors are closed, too.
    1. VLR
      +2
      2 October 2026 12: 31
      Carthage, of course, was captured by the Romans. The question is: did they have the technical ability to simply destroy its stone buildings—so that they could then sow the site of the former city with salt? Without gunpowder, dynamite, or TNT? It was more likely a symbolic act. Like the aforementioned Lyon, which the Jacobins failed to destroy despite the strictest orders from the Convention. And serious men attempted to destroy it—Collot d'Herbois and Fouché, who earned the nickname "the executioner of Lyon." Therefore, I think the Romans, when they wrote about the destruction of Carthage, were mistaking wishful thinking for reality.
      1. +2
        2 October 2026 14: 54
        did they simply have the technical ability to destroy his stone buildings?
        There was an opportunity. The lever was already known, and with its help, anything could be torn apart. Roman engineers proved themselves to be highly skilled professionals. The Arabs, for example, managed to extract blocks from the pyramids to construct their own buildings.
  11. +3
    2 October 2026 13: 54
    Quote: VlR
    Therefore, I think, when the Romans wrote about the destruction of Carthage, they were passing off wishful thinking as reality.


    No, unfortunately, it was badly damaged.
    For the construction of the Forum of Augustus, the Byrsa Hill was completely leveled, and the most interesting finds from the time of late Punic Carthage are now in the excavations of the backfill along the periphery of the Forum, into which construction waste was deposited after the demolition of the high-rise buildings and temples of Byrsa.

    Moreover, we must not forget that Punic Carthage was mainly not made of stone and brick, but of adobe on a wooden frame.
  12. +1
    2 October 2026 20: 25
    For the last time, the Great Empire brought the entire Mediterranean under its rule!
    As they say, the record is unbroken.
    All the laws of Rome for 1000 years of its existence were revised and codified (Code of Justinian).
    It would seem that there was every potential for prosperity, but... the Justinian plague, and subsequent rulers never portrayed a single Justinian again, that is, they were unable to earn the nickname "The Great."
    And what the vandals left us with was vandalism—the senseless destruction and vandalism of something great and beautiful, like Rome. Although Rome was vandalized many times later, it was only by "cultured nations."
    1. VLR
      +2
      2 October 2026 21: 22
      "General History, Edited by Satyricon":
      For two weeks the Vandals plundered and destroyed Rome; they could not have done otherwise: in doing so they undoubtedly showed taste and understanding, since they destroyed precisely those paintings that were most valuable.
    2. +2
      2 October 2026 21: 56
      And what we are left with from the vandals is vandalism - the senseless destruction and vandalism of something big and beautiful.
      The vandals were simply "lucky" to enter history in this way. Vandalism has been perpetrated by everyone throughout history: Alexander the Great burned Persepolis, the enlightened French tried to blow up the Kremlin, the Mongols razed Samarkand, the Spanish completely destroyed Native American civilization…
  13. +1
    3 October 2026 02: 06
    Quote: VlR
    Carthage, of course, was captured by the Romans. The question is: did they simply have the technical ability to destroy its stone buildings—so that they could then sow the site of the former city with salt? Without gunpowder, dynamite, or TNT?

    I watched a historical program a long time ago about Carthage, which was built by the Phoenicians. The buildings were built using stone blocks as foundations, and the walls themselves were constructed of mud brick. Limestone served as a finishing material and for the construction of defensive structures.
    Marble and granite for temples and public buildings were imported.
    The Romans had many ways to demolish buildings:
    ram
    levers and wedges
    heating large blocks and watering with water
    tunnel for collapsing walls
    arson

    Wood is the main material for ceilings and wall frames; if the wood burns, the wall masonry will collapse.

    As the ancient Romans said:
    Il tempo non appartiene agli occupati, literally translated as - to break, not to build. laughing hi