Talk:Battle of Munda

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


What was the "unsuccessful ploy" that Caesar used to try to bring the Optimates off the hill? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AMWS (talkcontribs) 14:55, 8 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Do we know if the date is corrected for the Gregorian calendar?

The struggle in Spain was protracted for several months, but the decisive battle was fought at MUNDA, 17 March, 45, on the Guadalquivir, near Cordova. - Pennell, Robert Franklin, "Ancient Rome : from the earliest times down to 476 A. D"
Probably,. - Vedexent 15:07, 17 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Both De Bello Hispaniensi and Plutarch say that the battle was fought on the Liberalia, that is, March 17. --Cam (talk) 02:22, 17 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]


This is not a very well written article, is it?

That is not a very constructive comment, is it? If you don't like it, do something about it. Piet 13:10, 10 January 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

At least it is an article, but is it referring to legion X or legion XIII?

Gnaeus Pompeius[edit]

Did Gnaeus Pompeius die in the battle? The dagger next to his name seems to indicate so, but the article tells differently. Piet 13:10, 10 January 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Removed it. Piet 09:50, 26 January 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I was unable to find any evidence of Octavian precence in the battle in the Ancient sources or in mdoern accounts of the battle (includign Appian, Dio Cassius and De Bello Hispaniense). In particular Nicolaus "Vita Caesaris" specifically states that Octavian was unable to reach Caesar in Spain because of sickness and that he met Caesar only in May. I am going to change the article accordingly. --Calabrian 11:31, 5 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've heard both that he could not make it, and that it was his first military command. But I can't remember where. I may have to scan biographical material on Octavian to see. It may be that he wasn't at the battle, but his biographers "exaggerated" later. - Vedexent 17:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Caesar saw that he must make one more struggle. He set out for the province accompanied by his nephew OCTAVIUS (afterwards the Emperor AUGUSTUS), and by his trusted friend and officer, DECIMUS BRUTUS. The struggle in Spain was protracted for several months, but the decisive battle was fought at MUNDA, 17 March, 45, on the Guadalquivir, near Cordova. - Pennell, Robert Franklin, "Ancient Rome : from the earliest times down to 476 A. D".


The sentence in the introductory paragraph "His subsequent assassination began the process that eventually would lead to the end of the Roman Republic" is wholly inaccurate. While the assassination of Julius Caesar led to an immediate crisis (one of too many to count in those years), the the fall of the Roman Republic certainly began nearly 100 years earlier with the reforms of the Gracchi. (talk) 15:08, 16 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The living dead[edit]

"Many of the Republican soldiers had already surrendered to Caesar in previous campaigns and had then deserted his army to rejoin Pompeius: they would fight with desperation, fearing that they would not be pardoned a second time (indeed Caesar had hitherto executed prisoners)."

Caesar must have been very surprised to see all these previously executed persons rising from the dead to fight against him again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:27, 22 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Surrendering doesn't mean being executed (excluding Thapsus) AMWS (talk) 14:54, 8 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Caesar's Losses[edit]

"At the end of the battle there were about 30,000 Pompeians dead on the field; losses on Caesar’s side were much lighter, only about 1,000"

a little later however the page says

"What is clear is that the Munda conflict was no mop-up operation. Tens of thousands of Romans died at Munda, where Caesar fought for his life among the ranks"

Now i may be wrong but it doesnt seem as if caesar's losses could only have been a 1000 soldiers if tens of thousands of romans died and caesar himself was in danger of his life among the ranks. Either the tens of thousands of bit is exaggerated in which case we remove the small line or the bit about about caesar's losses be increased or changed. Any opinions?
Tca achintya (talk) 14:26, 22 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sentences in Prelude section all end in exclamation points[edit]

All of the sentences in that section end in exclamation points. Just wanted to bring it to someone's attention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:11, 3 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Octavian and Agrippa were NOT subordinate commanders[edit]

I note that the Info Box states that the subordinate commanders at Munda were Octavian and Agrippa. I would suggest this is wrong and misleading. Wrong, in that Octavian wasn't even at the battle, arriving once the battle had concluded as a shipwreck had delayed his arrival (see Holland, Richard (2004). Augustus: Godfather of Europe, pg. 42). Misleading, in that Agrippa, who may not have even participated in the battle (see Reinhold, Meyer (1933). Marcus Agrippa: A Biography, pgs. 13-14), would have been a junior officer at best.

The role of subordinate commanders would have been held by Caesar's legates. According to Broughton (Magistrates of the Roman Republic, Vol. 2) at Munda there were at least three: Quintus Fabius Maximus, Quintus Pedius, and Gaius Caninius Rebilus. There is a possibility that Publius Cornelius Dolabella was also present. Unless anyone objects, I will make the change in the next few days. Oatley2112 (talk) 05:38, 8 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]