Talk:Battle of Save

References?

I found no references for this battle. According to my sources, Magnus Maximus was captured at Aquileia.--Panairjdde 18:13, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Sisica, a proper location of the battle

I agree. As the battle might happened in the surroundings of my home town, I have checked some available literature and none of them records the battle "of the Save". Although it records that Emona was involved in conflict with Maximus. That can be found in Schmid's "Emona". It says Maximus succeeded to plunger and occupy city of Emona for several months. Same author and modern history notice (triumphal) arriving of Emperor Theodosius in the liberated city, during the war.

I have also found some on-line sources regarding Maximus and year 388 that I have listed below.

Summarising all listed literature, we can find out that Theodosius found Maximus army that "after the siege of Æmona (Emona), ... fixed ... (their) camp in the neighborhood of Siscia ... strongly fortified by the broad and rapid stream of the Save". And that after few months Theodosius "squadrons of archers who fought on horseback" attacked Maximus army defeating them. Afterwards Theosodius marched through Emona "to receive the loyal acclamations of the citizens" towards Aquileia. We can easily conclude that battle "of the Save" could not happen near Emona, today Ljubljana, Slovenia, but few hundred kilometers southern in plains of the river Sava near Siscia, today Sisak, Croatia.

References:

• The History of the Decline and Fall of The Roman Empire - Vol 3, chapter 3, by Edward Gibbon
• The History of the Decline and Fall of The Roman Empire - Vol 3, chapter 4, by Edward Gibbon
  
• Theodoret, Jerome, Gennadius, & Rufinus: Historical Writings note quotation reffering Hodgkin's “Dynasty of Theodosius” p. 127.
• The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire by Edward Gibbon — In The West Chapter XXVII

Navportus 22:49, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Stirrups and Sources?

This article has only two sources. Gibbon is actually a fairly poor and antiquated secondary source on the Roman Empire. According to historian Peter Heather in his The Fall of the Roman Empire: a New History of Rome and the Barbarians, the Huns used a wood saddle but not stirrups. I know stirrups are a somewhat controversial topic but I recall the general consensus now is that stirrups did not exist in the 4th century AD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HeirOfSumer (talk • contribs) 13:23, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Theodosius's Choice

In the article, the phrase "Theodosius [was faced with a choice] which might, given the barbarian menace, bring the empire to final destruction." is unwarranted. According to Gibbon, the empire was exhausted following the Gothic War, and in the event of a civil war, "the feeble conqueror would remain an easy prey to the Barbarians of the North." Being prey to the barbarians cannot be construed to mean the empire might be destroyed.

References:

• The History of the Decline and Fall of The Roman Empire - Vol 3, chapter XXVII: Civil Wars, Reign Of Theodosius.—Part I, by Edward Gibbon
  

RMcPhillip (talk) 19:37, 23 December 2022 (UTC)