ok lets talk about HISTORY

**thelastspartan** · May 01, 2006, 11:08 AM

is the barbarian units in this game can actually be true.
i mean did gauls actually organise there army by unit types, or did they just have a huge mass of people of all kinds of wepons (units)
were there screeching women, or head hulers
stuff like that

**The Thracian** · May 01, 2006, 11:09 AM

The gauls fought as a huge mass of people and as for screeching women and head hurlers they were used but rarely

**Flogger** · May 01, 2006, 01:35 PM

Nope. Gauls, Britons, Germans and any other barbarian you can think of didn't have units or officers, or anything organised really. They were just a huge gathering of people led under one warlord, and their only tactic was to charge head-on and hope that their numbers/bravery/gods win the day.

**Filippo the Great** · May 01, 2006, 03:11 PM

That is why the Romans were successful, because of their discipline.

**Stalins Ghost** · May 01, 2006, 03:17 PM

The barbarian forces of the ancient world were a complex thing really. No, one army was ever the same (I guess the same could be said for any army). To say they were nothing more than a mass of soldiers is to devalue their strengths. Leaders and figures of authority in the ranks did exist, and often this was down to martial ability, wealth or other means. Such people would take charge of varying amounts of troops, just as any officer in other armies. It would be too difficult to explain it all in one post, but barbarian peoples (alot of them anyway) did have structure to their armies. It just wasnt particuarly well documented and was not as well organised and structured as say the Romans, Persians or Hellenic peoples. I'm sure the good people on the Europa Barborum (sp) or RTR boards would be able to explain- particuarly EB, since that was their initial focus, and I'm sure they'd love to explain it (after all it is the original basis of their mod!)

**Flogger** · May 02, 2006, 01:54 AM

Originally Posted by Stalins Ghost

Such people would take charge of varying amounts of troops, just as any officer in other armies.

Do you mean the 'units' were divided into what area/tribe they came from, with the strongest warrior from that area/tribe leading them?

**Kraut** · May 02, 2006, 05:48 AM

Originally Posted by Flogger

Do you mean the 'units' were divided into what area/tribe they came from, with the strongest warrior from that area/tribe leading them?

Yes, units where defined by tribes/families, not by kind of weapon. I read some descriptions of Germans going into battle against the Romans. The units are described as rather small, matching more our modern-times platoons, not as big as Bataillons or stuff. Tribesmen with all kinds of weapons (spears, axes, javelins, clubs, sometimes swords for the rich ones) gathered around their chieftain or family head or some man of nobility to lead them. Often infantry and cavalry where mixed, with the nobles mounted and their men by foot, sometimes even grabbing the mane of the horse to go faster. Those small units, often from one village or from one family, where combined to larger units commanded by a tribal chieftain or something like this, with several of this units forming the "army" commanded by the king. this king was not from born heritage, but elected at the Thing, the gathering of the free men.

"Diszipline" was quite unknown, instead battle was seen as a competition of braveness. The leaders where expected to fight in the very first line, and be an example of bravery and boldness in combat. Also, for the "ordinary" men it was expected to follow their leader without hesitation and to be as brave as he was. Of course there was also competition between the units. The warriors of village A would not let their comrades of village B show more bravery than themselves by charging into a roman battleline alone :wink:

**yc_dc** · May 01, 2006, 11:02 PM

i want to know where the gauls remain...

at rome empire times...

and this nation's destroy

**Final Frontier** · May 02, 2006, 05:48 PM

Originally Posted by yc_dc

i want to know where the gauls remain...

at rome empire times...

and this nation's destroy

I'm a bit confused. I think the first question you are asking concerns the people/region of Gaul during Antiquity. Well, Gaul is where modern France would be located, along with some of the countries that surround it. If you mean the people, then they were conquered by Julius Caesar in the first century B.C., though southern Gaul had been subdued prior to that.

There you go.