User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 4:43:54 PM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Legions faced and beat Macedonian phalanxes. Pikes would be nothing new. 1500 men would be brushed aside by the skirmishers. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: are we talking even strength or being outnumbered now? No matter here are a few famous fights: Morgarten – 1315 The first major use of pole-arm infantry by the Swiss came at the Battle of Morgarten. An estimated 1,500 strong force of Swiss routed a 15,000 strong Austrian force. The Swiss’ weapon of choice was the halberd. Laupen – 1339 Much like the Battle of the Golden Spurs, the Battle of Laupen is regarded as one in the chain of battles that proved the superiority of well-trained infantry over knights. An outnumbered Swiss force was able to rout a larger force of knights and infantry. Laupen was also the first time the Swiss used the pike in combination with the halberd. there are a lot of others-battles of Morat, Nancy and sempach....they were always outnumbered 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 4:44:21 PM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Pikes, Halberds, and crossbows would be fine till the Romans looked them over, viewed the tactics of their deployment, and figured out how to defeat them. I don't suspect it would take them long, even in the field. Till then they would counter maneuver those pointy stick cumbersome formations into wooded or hilly areas where they would have more of a advantage instead of fighting on more level ground that would favor medieval weapons. I figure once they saw a halberd they would figure out in a hurry that it's main advantage was hooking and unhorsing cavalrymen. Long pointy poles cut from the countryside with a simple iron hook attached would accomplish the same thing in the short term. Hell a hook of fire hardened wood fitted to a pointy pole would suffice. As someone else mentioned.....The Romans killing everyone would be a huge confidence shaker for the knight/king class. "Enlightenment" comes with a price when your opponent just wants you and everyone you brought with you dead.  The Romans were the best of their age, but aren’t the flawless war machine some think. They had their struggles with the Gauls. Medieval heavy cavalry would have wrecked them, combined with infantry and crossbows. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 4:45:06 PM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But heavy horse is expensive and there never is very much. The light cav with missile weapons are a bigger threat IMO as the are numerous, fast and dispersed. Slingers to the front! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cr%C3%A9cy |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 4:46:01 PM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You come sit next to me! Currently reading Cicero's Murder Trials. Rome is my hobby. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
And after that defeat you see a back and forth between Parthia and Rome for 400 years. Horse DID NOT overwhelm the Roman. Well, that explains the hand job you're giving Caesar. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 4:48:57 PM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Pikes, Halberds, and crossbows would be fine till the Romans looked them over, viewed the tactics of their deployment, and figured out how to defeat them. I don't suspect it would take them long, even in the field. Till then they would counter maneuver those pointy stick cumbersome formations into wooded or hilly areas where they would have more of a advantage instead of fighting on more level ground that would favor medieval weapons. I figure once they saw a halberd they would figure out in a hurry that it's main advantage was hooking and unhorsing cavalrymen. Long pointy poles cut from the countryside with a simple iron hook attached would accomplish the same thing in the short term. Hell a hook of fire hardened wood fitted to a pointy pole would suffice. As someone else mentioned.....The Romans killing everyone would be a huge confidence shaker for the knight/king class. "Enlightenment" comes with a price when your opponent just wants you and everyone you brought with you dead. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 4:49:55 PM EST
[#6]
12-15th century Europeans donkey punch the romans
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 4:50:33 PM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Rome is my hobby Well, that explains the hand job you're giving Caesar. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
And after that defeat you see a back and forth between Parthia and Rome for 400 years. Horse DID NOT overwhelm the Roman. Well, that explains the hand job you're giving Caesar. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 4:51:28 PM EST
[#8]
Medieval English long bowmen would kill a lot of Romans.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 4:55:02 PM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Medieval English long bowmen would kill a lot of Romans. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:02:39 PM EST
[#10]
One advantage I will give to Rome is size. Roman armies could approach 100k in a single battle. European armies were typically in the lower tens of thousands. Quantity has a quality all its own.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:05:25 PM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's amusing as I was armor and despised and mocked the infantry (combat arms play) and here I am defending an infantry army over a more mobile and powerful but smaller force. Defend it I will and not because of 'rumor' or 'myth.' Do you know why we know so much about the Romans? Because they wrote it all down. Do you know why we don't know details of the middle ages? They couldn't read. I put my money on the ancients who were not only more organized AND civilized...they were tougher. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
And after that defeat you see a back and forth between Parthia and Rome for 400 years. Horse DID NOT overwhelm the Roman. Well, that explains the hand job you're giving Caesar. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:07:27 PM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You do realize the "Middle Ages" covers 1000 years right? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
And after that defeat you see a back and forth between Parthia and Rome for 400 years. Horse DID NOT overwhelm the Roman. Well, that explains the hand job you're giving Caesar. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:08:49 PM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You do realize the "Middle Ages" covers 1000 years right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:09:33 PM EST
[#14]
For those who enjoy reading of the Roman civil wars of Marius and Sulla and Caesar's Gaul campaign, the scale of violence the Roman's were willing to inflict and receive is mind boggling. Armies of this size were not seen again until Napoleon and then only briefly. World War I type logistics and planning and relentlessness.
Quantity has a quality all its own. It would not have even been close. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:10:36 PM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Shhh - he thinks Romans don’t bleed like everyone else. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:10:55 PM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For those who enjoy reading of the Roman civil wars of Marius and Sulla and Caesar's Gaul campaign, the scale of violence the Roman's were willing to inflict and receive is mind boggling. Armies of this size were not seen again until Napoleon and then only briefly. World War I type logistics and planning and relentlessness. Quantity has a quality all its own. It would not have even been close. Also I don't think you barbarians comprehend the maneuverability of small units of Roman infantry during the heat of battle. You don't see it again until the German storm troops of 1917. Absolute control of their units. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:11:22 PM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You literally just described what the Swiss did. Lol Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Pikes, Halberds, and crossbows would be fine till the Romans looked them over, viewed the tactics of their deployment, and figured out how to defeat them. I don't suspect it would take them long, even in the field. Till then they would counter maneuver those pointy stick cumbersome formations into wooded or hilly areas where they would have more of a advantage instead of fighting on more level ground that would favor medieval weapons. I figure once they saw a halberd they would figure out in a hurry that it's main advantage was hooking and unhorsing cavalrymen. Long pointy poles cut from the countryside with a simple iron hook attached would accomplish the same thing in the short term. Hell a hook of fire hardened wood fitted to a pointy pole would suffice. As someone else mentioned.....The Romans killing everyone would be a huge confidence shaker for the knight/king class. "Enlightenment" comes with a price when your opponent just wants you and everyone you brought with you dead.
Except for obtaining better quality steel the Romans would be a very quick study and catch-up quickly. Things had not advanced really all that much as far as weaponry went between the two eras. I suspect the Romans would fight at a disadvantage till winter and when the next fighting season started they would quickly gain the upper hand with improved weapons and tactics. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:13:41 PM EST
[#18]
With Julius Caesar with the 10th and other Gallic veterans? I think he’d shit in everyone’s Wheaties, including ghenghis khan, Alexander, and Hannibal.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:14:54 PM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Punic Armies of Carthage did rather well until Fabian refused them battle. So did the Germanic tribes under Arminius (Herman the Germa) The Goths at Adrianople crushed the Legions and the Visigoths sacked Rome. Now, throw in those Asiatic horse archers (Scythian, Parthians) and the Romans were really disadvantaged. Don't even think of what the Mongols would do. Sic transit gloria mundi!  |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:16:43 PM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
One advantage I will give to Rome is size. Roman armies could approach 100k in a single battle. European armies were typically in the lower tens of thousands. Quantity has a quality all its own. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:18:51 PM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oh they died like dogs...and kept coming. Rarely broke in that era either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:21:12 PM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That is a myth perpetuated by the same people who think medieval swords were essentially 20 pound dull edged sword shaped clubs that caused blunt trauma injuries. There were plenty of well organized and deadly medieval armies that would trounce Roman legions. Genoese crossbowmen, English longbowmen, Swiss pikemen, some of the crusading armies were absolutely huge and very well equipped, Medieval Europe had siege engines that made Roman technology look like tinker toys, let alone getting into the full steel plate armored cavalry of the 1400s. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:22:02 PM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Pompey and Vercingeterix both outnumbered caesars army 3 to 1. Caesar was the world most brilliant tactician this world ever laid eyes on.  Attached FileCaesar is definitely in the Top 10, perhaps even Top 5 though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:25:34 PM EST
[#24]
Single battle?
The medieval forces. Over a war? Romans. Numbers, organization, and logistics. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:27:54 PM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For those who enjoy reading of the Roman civil wars of Marius and Sulla and Caesar's Gaul campaign, the scale of violence the Roman's were willing to inflict and receive is mind boggling. Armies of this size were not seen again until Napoleon and then only briefly. World War I type logistics and planning and relentlessness. Quantity has a quality all its own. It would not have even been close. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:31:36 PM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/61337/THESS_ALEXANDER_01_jpg-714804.JPG Caesar is definitely in the Top 10, perhaps even Top 5 though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:31:39 PM EST
[#27]
Many of you are ignoring the impact of technology.
The longbow, crossbow, etc. on top of higher-grade metals used in armor and weapons would be a significant advantage for the Europeans. The Romans were still in the bronze age. The impact of the longbow alone against a Roman army would be devastating, assuming the European army was lead properly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:31:42 PM EST
[#28]
The people voting Rome > Medieval Europe are probably the same ones who think Bruce Lee could beat Mike Tyson.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:32:24 PM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Can you reccomend a few good books about that particular period? Goldsworthy is probably the best Roman Author out there. It also comes with pictures of the battle formations along with famous battles to help you visualize what went on. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:33:13 PM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The people voting Rome > Medieval Europe are probably the same ones who think Bruce Lee could beat Mike Tyson. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:39:10 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Pompey and Vercingeterix both outnumbered caesars army 3 to 1. Caesar was the world most brilliant tactician this world ever laid eyes on. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
One advantage I will give to Rome is size. Roman armies could approach 100k in a single battle. European armies were typically in the lower tens of thousands. Quantity has a quality all its own. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:41:31 PM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oh they died like dogs...and kept coming. Rarely broke in that era either. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: Shhh - he thinks Romans don’t bleed like everyone else. (Not to mention that educated Medieval leaders had the benefit of reading Roman treatises... but oh yeah, non Romans are not capable of learning anything haha) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:43:16 PM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Gauls were fractured tribes. Medieval France was not. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:43:25 PM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Gauls were fractured tribes. Medieval France was not. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:46:09 PM EST
[#35]
Also don’t bring up Charlemagne. He was a holy Roman emperor.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:47:08 PM EST
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And the millennium and a half of nearly constant European warfare that followed bred weaker cowards? LOL (Not to mention that educated Medieval leaders had the benefit of reading Roman treatises... but oh yeah, non Romans are not capable of learning anything haha) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:48:32 PM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think Caesar would have shit on Alexander. I think Hannibal would have as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:48:48 PM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Under vercingetorix the Gauls we’re united and outmanned Caesar 3 to 1 medieval France barely took over outreamer and that was due to the suljeks being divided. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: The Gauls were fractured tribes. Medieval France was not. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:49:57 PM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Also don’t bring up Charlemagne. He was a holy Roman emperor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:52:00 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I like both of them, but Alexander's combination of tactical and strategic brilliance was unmatched IMHO. No one (other than Phillip) had even dreamed that you could conquer all of Persia with 40k men. That being said, Caesar's fortifications at Alesia were probably the most daring and brilliant tactical maneuver of all time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:52:22 PM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
English longbowmen attrit the Romans before legionnaires even get close enough to think about fighting. And I'm a Scot. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:52:42 PM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Charlemagne would have eaten a legion for breakfast. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:54:47 PM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No doubt that Alexander wasn’t a brilliant tactician but he had a very drilled and seasoned army by his father Phillip II and he felt he was invincible which helped him bulldog his way to victories. Caesar would’ve used that against him. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I like both of them, but Alexander's combination of tactical and strategic brilliance was unmatched IMHO. No one (other than Phillip) had even dreamed that you could conquer all of Persia with 40k men. That being said, Caesar's fortifications at Alesia were probably the most daring and brilliant tactical maneuver of all time. This could be the most relaxing thread in GD since 16. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:55:45 PM EST
[#44]
Henry V's army at Agincourt would slaughter the Romans.
Quoted:
Quoted:
English longbowmen attrit the Romans before legionnaires even get close enough to think about fighting. And I'm a Scot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 5:57:38 PM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No doubt that Alexander wasn't a brilliant tactician but he had a very drilled and seasoned army by his father Phillip II and he felt he was invincible which helped him bulldog his way to victories. Caesar would've used that against him. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 6:00:13 PM EST
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And he sure the hell wouldn’t have lined up in the open field against them. Get a little terrain to break up that close packed infantry and disrupt the cavalry. What do you know it works against medieval armies too! This could be the most relaxing thread in GD since 16. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 6:00:36 PM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is the real key. The full plate armor, quality steel, and calvary of the Europeans make a big difference but nothing changes the game like the English longbowmen. And I'm a Scot. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
English longbowmen attrit the Romans before legionnaires even get close enough to think about fighting. And I'm a Scot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 6:01:57 PM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Both had a very seasoned army. In fact I think it was this edge that gave Caesar victory over Pompey at Pharsalus. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 6:03:27 PM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This X10. Pyrrhus only did well against the legions due to his war elephants. Imo Pyrrhus was a good as of a commander as Alexander imo. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Hydaspes |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2018 6:05:07 PM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Henry V's army at Agincourt would slaughter the Romans. No question about it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Henry V's army at Agincourt would slaughter the Romans. Quoted:
Quoted:
English longbowmen attrit the Romans before legionnaires even get close enough to think about fighting. And I'm a Scot. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
