Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Romans vs Germans
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 345
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Evrenosgazi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 379 		  Quote Evrenosgazi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Romans vs Germans
    Posted: 22-Mar-2006 at 15:55
Originally posted by J.Caesar

I think the Romans had an easy time with them. Look at the battle of Vercalae for example. over 200,000 Geramns vs. 50,000 Romans
losses: 140,000 German dead, over 60,000 prisoners.
Roman losses; less than 1000! *Wikpedia
Yes Romans were mislead and traped and had some losses but they were rare but highly publized for various reasons.
Yes the Romans were very organzed and rarely surrenderd. However I feel all people of that era were well trained to fight from an early age. The Romans relied on infantry the most. (so the best way to beat them is cavalry)
Studying their battles for a long time I have conclude they were amazing hand to hand fighters. Inafantry is hand to hand. The Romans were alwys severly outnumbered. They had only two hands. However I think these legionaires must have possessed an amazing strength and agilty. I think the Celts had better weaponary and metal making skills(so perhaps Germans too) in which the Roamns copied. Pilum,chain mail.
Just think you had a fighter that was hadrier and fiercer than all. Just that great leaders like Caesar,Drussus,Germanicus get much of the credit and the individual Roman is overlooked. The battles and the numbers and excerpt from roamn soldiers(not Tacitus or other propaganda writers) shows soldiers of superior confidence against any regardless of the numbers. Do not think any soldiers of this day would be so confident in hand to hand against superior numbers.

Again the same, the urbanised armies armies are small and brave, the nomad armies are big and crap, This brave armies are sometimes chineese, persians, romans, greeks . Crap armies are nomads, germanic tribes and ofcourse Ottomans. Wikipedia is a ridicolous source. Not worth to mention it
Back to Top
J.Caesar View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 23-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28 		  Quote J.Caesar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Apr-2006 at 22:52
Batlle of Vercallae says it all...8 Roman legions(Tuetonberg trap had 3) vs OVER 200,000 Germans. Results: 140,000 Geramsn dead and over 60,000 slaves. Roman losses: less than 1000!!* Wikpedia nd German historian Theodor Mommsen.
There were many Roamn victories over the Germans that rivaled this ,from Maruius,Germanicus,Caesar and Drussus to name a few. They even reacched far into the eatern end of Germany. The tribes were thourougly beaten and only attempted guerilla war. The Forest trap was the most over rated in history. 3 legion loss was not great by other Roamn losses. Plus American Army historian ,Dan Ptersen, who studies the site feels that the Romans actually drove them off. (albeit many roamn losses plus standards) His evidence: burial mounds from Varus`s forces.  Only the victors could have done this.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 345

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.