Talk:Trajan's Parthian campaign

Military history: Roman & Byzantine C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Roman and Byzantine military history task force

Iran High‑importance

	open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Classical Greece and Rome High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rationale regarding "Parthian victory"

Despite Initial success, The Campaign suffered from Revolts, Overextension and guerrilla warfare^[1]
The Romans ultimately withdrew from Mesopotamia, Making no long-term gains
The Romans had a saying: "If you don't give up, You don't lose". inversely, if you give up, You lose.

I am open to debate. If anyone is willing to show evidence towards a Roman victory, Please do so.

Until i am shown rationale, I will continue to revert edits like these that give no rationale, Source or addition.

References

^ Clifford Ando, 2008, Rome: The Rise and Fall of an Empire: The Dacian Wars: "Holding on to the territory across these inhospitable swaths of desert was very hard for Trajan. Trajan found himself especially fighting in the North, Middle and South and the same time; He had overextended his resources"

Roman Victroy?!

How it is a Roman victory? They ran away after Trajan's death.

talk) 02:27, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Because he whooped the Parthians ass, capturing their capital etc. --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:05, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Roman military victory

Greg has clearly mentioned that trajan achieved decisive military victories and aneexing their capital. Clifford also seems to agree with this part as well. The war is a clear of roman "Military" victory. Reason I added military. If Trajan has captured it and lost the annexed territories by parthians army then it might have been a stalemate.but that never happened. Trajan never lost the captured province. It was Hadrian his successor who pulled out of the annexed territory and he was not the part of the campaigns 103.81.215.150 (talk) 03:26, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We need the sources to support explicitly a Roman victory, that's not what i see, otherwise, it would be

WP:OR.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:51, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

[1] Clifford Ando, 2008, Rome: The Rise and Fall of an Empire: The Dacian Wars: "Holding on to the territory across these inhospitable swaths of desert was very hard for Trajan. Trajan found himself especially fighting in the North, Middle and South and the same time; He had overextended his resources"

[1]