Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 130

Thread: Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

  1. #1
    Bellus88's Avatar Ducenarius
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Amazing
    Posts
    919

    Icon5 Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

    I read a lot about this, from what I read some people seem to suggest that as an individual fighter the barbarian was much more capable being taller and stronger, but I think this is wrong. The Marian reforms required legions to be 5'10, and even without height requirements, from what I read the average barbarian was only 2-3 inches taller then a Roman soldier. As for strength, the Romans had a much better training regiment, it would ultimately depend on the individual for who's stronger, Roman or Barbarian. I think Romans were stronger due to their training and discipline, training with wooden swords and shield twice the weight of their standard weapons.

    I know some barbarian units were just as armored as Roman Legion, in 1 on 1 combat a Legionnaire vs a Barbarian armored with chain mail and a Long sword, who would win? Would be logical to conclude that the Barbarian has an advantage with his Longer sword but does that make him stronger and a better fighter? No.

    Also remember reading before the average Roman soldier was 5'6 while the average barbarian was 5'9.

    If you look at the fall of the Western Roman Empire, when Barbarian units started to have a lot of Armour, it seems to me they won not because they were better or stronger but because they over-whelmed the Romans completely with numbers and the Western Roman Empire had a lot of internal struggles. Then later Belisarius comes along destroying the short lived OstroGoth kingdom, Romans in Africa continued to resist the Vandals. Then when the Eastern Roman control ended with a number of tribes moving into Italy, they were over-wealmed with numbers, I remember reading over 500,000 armed Barbarians moving in.
    Last edited by Bellus88; December 09, 2010 at 03:07 PM.

  2. #2
    Azog 150's Avatar Civitate
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    10,112

    Default Re: Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

    The average Legionnaire was certainly tough. They had a very difficult and often brutal training regime. Three times a month there went on 18 mile long off-road route-marches in full gear with a forced pace of 4 or sometimes even 5 mile per hour. And full gear was heavy- each soldier had to carry armour, sword, shield (Which were big), two javelins, backpack, dagger, 14 days worth of food, a water bladder, cooking equipment, two stakes for constructing a camp and a spade. At the end of these marches they would have to set up camp (Using these spades and stakes) which included stakes, ditches, mounds and tents that day and take it down again the next day before going back on the march. During a campaign they would have had to do all this, plus fight battles.

    So they were certainly tough.

    As for barbarians- well more often then not their very lifestyle meant they had to be tough. Many barbarians came from cold northern climates, and would have been trained from birth to hunt and farm and (I think?) to use a weapon. Their general existence required them to be tough. Plus, as you said, they were naturally taller.
    Under the Patronage of Jom!

  3. #3
    Entropy Judge's Avatar Vicarius
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,660

    Default Re: Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bellus88 View Post
    I read a lot about this, from what I read some people seem to suggest that as an individual fighter the barbarian was much more capable being taller and stronger, but I think this is wrong.
    In general, the Romans' greatest advantage was that they were disciplined soldiers, not individual warriors. While it would vary due to individual differences (such as Marcus Valerius Corvus), if you took a random warrior from a barbarian tribe and a random Roman soldier, the barbarian would probably have an edge.

    If you look at the fall of the Western Roman Empire, when Barbarian units started to have a lot of Armour, it seems to me they won not because they were better or stronger but because they over-whelmed the Romans completely with numbers and the Western Roman Empire had a lot of internal struggles.
    IIRC, the WRE collapsed from economic problems as much (if not more than) as external threats.

    Then later Belisarius comes along destroying the short lived OstroGoth kingdom, Romans in Africa continued to resist the Vandals.
    Don't know so much about Africa, but Belisarius was probably the best strategist and tactician the Byzantines had, and the fact that he normally fought on the defensive certainly helped.
    I beat back their first attack with ease. Properly employed, E's can be very deadly, deadlier even than P's and Z's, though they're not as lethal as Paula Abdul or Right Said Fred.
    ~ Miaowara Tomokato, Samurai Cat Goes to the Movies

  4. #4
    MAXlMUS's Avatar Decanus
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    roman empire
    Posts
    507

    Default Re: Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bellus88 View Post
    Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?
    take any two guys off the street. they will naturally have different levels of strength, height, weight etc. training and equipment make up for the rest

    As for barbarians- well more often then not their very lifestyle meant they had to be tough. Many barbarians came from cold northern climates, and would have been trained from birth to hunt and farm and (I think?) to use a weapon. Their general existence required them to be tough. Plus, as you said, they were naturally taller.
    this is just an urban legend

  5. #5
    Azog 150's Avatar Civitate
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    10,112

    Default Re: Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

    What is?
    Under the Patronage of Jom!

  6. #6
    MAXlMUS's Avatar Decanus
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    roman empire
    Posts
    507

    Default Re: Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

    big tough barbarian vs midget romans

  7. #7
    Bellus88's Avatar Ducenarius
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Amazing
    Posts
    919

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MAXlMUS View Post
    big tough barbarian vs midget romans
    No I think that would be big tough barbarian or Roman vs Some shogun or Chinese warrior, they must have been 5'1-5'3 on average.

    [QUOTE=Entropy Judge;8578558]In general, the Romans' greatest advantage was that they were disciplined soldiers, not individual warriors. While it would vary due to individual differences (such as Marcus Valerius Corvus), if you took a random warrior from a barbarian tribe and a random Roman soldier, the barbarian would probably have an edge.


    Don't know for sure, the Barbarian would could be 2-3 inches taller but it also depends on the individual skill and just because your shorter doesn't mean your stronger. The Barbarian would have the advantage of a longer sword and shield and would have the edge but it would be more evenly matched giving the Roman longer sword.
    Last edited by Nikos; December 10, 2010 at 08:02 AM.

  8. #8
    Entropy Judge's Avatar Vicarius
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,660

    Default Re: Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

    Hm? I don't quite follow what you're saying .... First you say the Barb would likely be taller (I have no stance on this), then you say that it would vary by individual (which I agree with), then you say "just because your [sic] shorter doesn't mean your [sic] stronger," which confuses the hell out of me. Is the topic about pure physical strength? In that case, I have no idea. Regarding the barb's shield (second sentence), the Roman shield was larger than typical barbarian shields would be, AFAIK.
    I beat back their first attack with ease. Properly employed, E's can be very deadly, deadlier even than P's and Z's, though they're not as lethal as Paula Abdul or Right Said Fred.
    ~ Miaowara Tomokato, Samurai Cat Goes to the Movies

  9. #9

    Default Re: Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

    I'm not an expert on Classical warfare. However if you take a fella and just about ALL his training and equipment is designed for one on one combat and you take a fella who is just as well trained overall but whose training focuses in large part on combat as part of a unit, and has equipment that reflects that, and put them in a straight up one on one brawl I'd put money on the fella who specialises in single combat.

    Single combat, on average, I'd bet the barbarian.

    Army against army, on average, I'd bet on Rome(hindsight's a wonderful thing ).

    Arm-wrestling or picking up heavy I'd bet on a individual vs individual basis as there is no other way to do it.

  10. #10

    Default Re: Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

    Pre-AD Germanic societies were bordeline sustenance societies and despite the slighty higher protein content of the Germanic diet, Romans would have been better fed (as in more calories). They had a whole empire and its apparatus, working to feed them.

    Hellenic Air Force - Death, Destruction and Mayhem!

  11. #11

    Default Re: Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mythos View Post
    Pre-AD
    Otherwise known as BC.

  12. #12

    Default Re: Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

    Quote Originally Posted by ivan_the_terrible View Post
    Otherwise known as BC.
    Also B.C.E

  13. #13
    Pious Agnost's Avatar Praefectus
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Whangarei, New Zealand
    Posts
    6,355

    Default Re: Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

    Quote Originally Posted by Azog 150 View Post
    As for barbarians- well more often then not their very lifestyle meant they had to be tough. Many barbarians came from cold northern climates, and would have been trained from birth to hunt and farm and (I think?) to use a weapon. Their general existence required them to be tough. Plus, as you said, they were naturally taller.
    Well the Romans hunted and farmed too, you wouldn't be finding the bankers and the lawyers in the military

  14. #14

    Default Re: Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

    but its the same thing with nomadic people. german barbarians by the nature of their existance lived in a eat or be eaten environment, these types of societies produced men who had to struggled to merely survive, merely to eat, whose meals were not guaranteed ,

    compare that to roman man who grew up in lets say rome, and who could just buy food or something...


    but having said that.. roman soldiers had discipline and training which makes them very very formidable too,

    knowing how to properly and efficiently kill a man is not as well understood as we think.. a roman soldier would strike where he needed to , when he needed to

    i mean .. i have a mrine base kinda close to my house, and at the local paintball place, the marines sometimes come and evne when outnumbered 10-1 by another team, they still win, they are professional soldiers.. it makes a world of difference

    and with rome, thats why i think their individual soldier would be superior to a barbarian

  15. #15
    shikaka's Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Miskolc/Budapest (HUN)
    Posts
    2,222

    Default Re: Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bellus88 View Post
    If you look at the fall of the Western Roman Empire, when Barbarian units started to have a lot of Armour, it seems to me they won not because they were better or stronger but because they over-whelmed the Romans completely with numbers and the Western Roman Empire had a lot of internal struggles.
    Not true. Romans lost battles against barbarians when odds were about equal. For example at Adrianopole both the romans and the goths had an about 40-50k strong army, and the romans still lost misarebly.


    Then later Belisarius comes along destroying the short lived OstroGoth kingdom, Romans in Africa continued to resist the Vandals. Then when the Eastern Roman control ended with a number of tribes moving into Italy, they were over-wealmed with numbers, I remember reading over 500,000 armed Barbarians moving in.
    These numbers are often exaggarated.

    Also it doesn't always show the real value of the units.
    For example Belisarius and Narses was able to win against greater numbers, as long as they had their own, disciplined, well-equipped and mobile cavalry force.
    If you see it written that Persians: 100k vs. ERE: 30k it is really a feat that ERE won. But if you also know that the vast majority of Persians were conscripted peasants with a spear, and ERE had a strong force of mobile armored horse archers, and a good amount of hun mercenaries it is already different!

  16. #16
    Pious Agnost's Avatar Praefectus
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Whangarei, New Zealand
    Posts
    6,355

    Default Re: Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Hidetora View Post
    but its the same thing with nomadic people. german barbarians by the nature of their existance lived in a eat or be eaten environment, these types of societies produced men who had to struggled to merely survive, merely to eat, whose meals were not guaranteed ,
    Some of them but more so the British 'barbarians', plenty of Celts and Germans lived in villages with merchants, artists e.t.c. in a predicament not all that dissimilair to how the majority of Romans would live.

  17. #17

    Default Re: Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

    Well gibbon says that the average barbarian warrior would drink and eat all day until it was time for war... If i were to imagine a fight between a legionnaire and a barbarian, legionaire hands down...
    http://e-sim.org/lan.126366/

    Je t'aime ma petite chou!

  18. #18
    Odovacar's Avatar I am with Europe!
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arrabona (Gyõr, Hungary)
    Posts
    6,120

    Default Re: Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

    Pretty good days those barbarians had then....
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB HORSEARCHER
    quis enim dubitat quin multis iam saeculis, ex quo vires illius ad Romanorum nomen accesserint, Italia quidem sit gentium domina gloriae vetustate sed Pannonia virtute

    Sorry Armenia, for the rascals who lead us.


  19. #19

    Default Re: Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

    We should also out into account that these barbarians are not hairy mindless brutes...
    http://e-sim.org/lan.126366/

    Je t'aime ma petite chou!

  20. #20

    Default Re: Roman vs Barbarian How strong was the individual soldier?

    Quote Originally Posted by asianboy View Post
    Also B.C.E
    Not with AD.

    'Anno Domini/Before Christ', and 'Before Common Era/Common Era'. Not much point mixing them up.

Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •