Author Topic: Roman Empire(western) was defeated by twohanded throwers(franks/goths/germans)  (Read 5799 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DrKronic

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 67
  • Infamy: 39
  • cRPG Player
  • Arch Villain of cRPG
    • View Profile
  • Faction: I do what I want
Also the horse archer vandals and hun contributed to the end of one hand shield throwing western roman empire

Was it tactics, problems with their military system, corruption that was the primary cause of their failure? Or what?

The eastern empire embraced horse archery + compound bow(vardoratai and others) and two handed weapons (varangian guard) and survived until the age of gunpowder...

I know I spelled their elite horse archers name wrong but I am certain someone  will enlighten me
Greed is for amateurs...Chaos, Disorder, Anarchy now that's fun!

Offline Sharky

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 44
  • Infamy: 10
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Legione Italica
  • Game nicks: LEGIO_Sharkyborn_Sharkatron Legio_Lollia_Paolina Legio_Sharkatrower Legio_SharkaNukes
Actually the last battles of the roman empire hadn't many romans in it, in most of them after the 400 you would see 2 barbarian armies fighting each other. There are many reason for this decline of the (western) roman army, i will try to name some of them.

1) Trade bring a lot of wealth, but also a lot of nasty diseases. In imperial era sickness not know in europe begin the spread, like Measles, Smallpox and various plagues. Also some of the roman ways wasn't really healty, a lot of them had lead poisoning for example, in late roman empire there was an huge fertility decrease and probably a population decrease in the western half

2) Of course really bad emperors and civil wars didn't help

3)The roman society was largely demilitarized, protected by a small professional army. War  weapons were forbidden and built only on strictly controlled factories, while a roman soldier was considered (barely) able to fight after 2 years of expensive training.
All this when every guy from 14 years to 60 outside the empire was able to fight and had some kind of weapon at disposal.
So when the small professional armies was wiped, there was no defence.

4) Barbarians in the late empire era knew the roman army and their tactics. A lot of them served in the roman army, also the german and scandinavian technology, wealth and population greatly increased after the 200 AC.

5) In the republican era and early empire, romans and non romans really wanted to become soldiers.
A roman soldier had actually a much more  life expectancy and quality of life compared to a civilian, since he had a really good medical care, probably unmatched until 19 century, a really good diet, while casualities in battles were often low. Roman soldiers were really expensive to train, so they took care they didn't die too much.
For the rest of the plebeians there were absolutely no jobs (slaves did everything) the luckiest had some land where they could do some subsistence agricolture, while the others lived in total misery.
When the empire stopped to grow, there were less slaves, and also there was some laws that tried to make the freemans works.
Life conditions greatly increased with the increase of trade and greater avaiability of different kind of food, jobs, and all the roman infrastructure (baths,thermae, aqueducts, roads). Also since the legions fought defensively, no looting anymore = no chances of getting rich.
As a result, nobody wanted to do the soldier.
The soldier work became hereditary, but there are many stories of self inflicted mutilations and desertion, so they could avoid spending all their lives in some fort in the middle of nowhere under really harsh work and discipline (often soldiers were used as free labourers for building roads towns etc).
The problem was initially solved by hiring outsiders, there were always non romans in roman armies, but their presence steadily increased. When they were trained as romans, under roman officials and divided (tribe mates not togheter) they performed as well as roman citizens.
But after Hadrianople, the Legion's prestige was damaged and the outsiders didn't want to serve in a losers army. 
Need made the emperors hire entire tribes, under barbarian leaders and with barbarian equipment/tactics, so legions effectivness greatly decreased.

6) Splitting the empire sounded a cool idea, since it was really hard to control all that land. In pratice was a disaster. The western half of the empire was always pisspoor compared to the eastern half.
Eastern empire had more population, a lot more trade, more culture. While the empire was united a lot of the eastern revenues went to the western part of the empire, the western empire depended on the east even for the food, they got a lot of it from egypt and black sea shores.
When the empire splitted, no more subsidies from the east, and the west started to decline. In the last years of the western half, the east often bribed the barbarians to go to the west and leave them alone actually.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2011, 04:14:51 am by Sharky »

Offline Belatu

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 242
  • Infamy: 111
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • what
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Fallen Brigade
  • Game nicks: Fallen_Belatucadros
Stopping slavery was the end of Roman Empire
My fridge is my shield

Offline Sharky

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 44
  • Infamy: 10
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Legione Italica
  • Game nicks: LEGIO_Sharkyborn_Sharkatron Legio_Lollia_Paolina Legio_Sharkatrower Legio_SharkaNukes
Stopping slavery was the end of Roman Empire
Slavery didn't stop completely even after christianity but yeah was greatly reduced and that caused troubles.

Also in times of food shortages you could eat them

(click to show/hide)
« Last Edit: March 01, 2011, 10:19:53 pm by Sharky »

Offline Belatu

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 242
  • Infamy: 111
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • what
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Fallen Brigade
  • Game nicks: Fallen_Belatucadros
Slavery didn't stop completely even after christianity but yeah was greatly reduced and that caused troubles.

Also in times of food shortages you could eat them

(click to show/hide)

Too skinny for me... I prefeer landlords and merchants
My fridge is my shield

Offline Lennu

  • Marshall
  • ********
  • Renown: 774
  • Infamy: 94
  • cRPG Player Sir White Bishop
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Fallen Brigade
  • Game nicks: Fallen_Lennu
  • IRC nick: Lennu_
Also, soldiers and officers no longer swore loyalty to the emperor. More likely to the local landlord or centurion, so in the end everyone was fighting for their own good instead of the mighty empire of Rome. Which lead to corruption and disorganization. 

Offline Pdogg5954

  • Peasant
  • *
  • Renown: 1
  • Infamy: 0
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
Rome was one of the only nations economically strong enough to equip all of its troops with standard iron swords.  Germanic warbands, when standarized, were feared for their spears, esp. the Goths.

Swords were weapons for the elite Germans and were not two-handed (not 100% sure on this one).  2 Handed swords came about in high middle ages for countering the heavily armored sergeants and knights.

Were the Vandals horse archers?  That doesn't sound right, though I suppose after they have moved to Carthage.  But that migration happened during the dark ages.

Offline Sharky

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 44
  • Infamy: 10
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Legione Italica
  • Game nicks: LEGIO_Sharkyborn_Sharkatron Legio_Lollia_Paolina Legio_Sharkatrower Legio_SharkaNukes
Swords were weapons for the elite Germans and were not two-handed (not 100% sure on this one).  2 Handed swords came about in high middle ages for countering the heavily armored sergeants and knights.
Well gauls did use overhead strikes in 2h mode, but i don't think we can call their swords two handed, they were quite short compared to medieval swords and could be used without troubles with one hand.
Celts and germans did have some big 2h axes and maces, and many tribes of that time used weapons that resembles a 2h sword.

Rhompaia, trachian weapon used also by many other ppl (could be used as polearm but also used as an 2h sword if shortened as in this picture)

Also the romans feared the Dacian Falx, it was used as a bar mace in crpg, to crush blocks, but with cut damage instead of blunt damage.
(click to show/hide)



Quote
Were the Vandals horse archers?  That doesn't sound right, though I suppose after they have moved to Carthage.  But that migration happened during the dark ages.
No, most of vandals fought on foot, as all germans tribes did. They migrated to Carthage before the fall of rome and the dark ages, the romans tried many times to reconquer it.

Anyway roman's equipment was better then their enemies in early empire era, germans tribe barely had any armours or swords (they were used just by the elite).
Germans also didn't have any logistical or enginering skills, and no professional armies.
In the late empire, germans had much more wealth and started to adopt roman weapons and organization, while roman armies became much more germanized, both in troops (most were germans) and equipment. The result is that a roman army of 400 ac was almost the same as a german army of the same time.

One example is the late empire Spatha, a long 1h sword good at cutting and swings. A german weapon, that replaced the early empire Gladius, a really short 1h sword ideal for thrustings and use by troops in tight formation and with good discipline. Both german armies the roman armies exstensively used that weapon.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2011, 09:30:44 pm by Sharky »

Offline MadMac

  • Noble
  • **
  • Renown: 23
  • Infamy: 35
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Crusader State of Jerusalem
  • Game nicks: Arn Magnusson, Lord of Jerusalem
the falx was so feared the romans changed their helmets (to no real advantage against it) in an attempt to stop all the split heads they had :P

Offline Phalanx300

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 45
  • Infamy: 24
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
Germans and Celts charging in with two handed axes etc. is a myth. Yeah sure there might be some individuals but all ancient descriptions or images show them using shields.  :rolleyes:

That view is just Hollywood. And the falx was used by the Dacians not the Germans.

Franks, Goths etc. weren't two handed trowers. Franks were known to trow the Francisca which was an one handed axe. And probably other Germanic peoples also used this trowing axe though probably to an lesser extent.

Offline Formless

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Renown: 102
  • Infamy: 74
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
Germans and Celts charging in with two handed axes etc. is a myth. Yeah sure there might be some individuals but all ancient descriptions or images show them using shields.  :rolleyes:

That view is just Hollywood. And the falx was used by the Dacians not the Germans.

Franks, Goths etc. weren't two handed trowers. Franks were known to trow the Francisca which was an one handed axe. And probably other Germanic peoples also used this trowing axe though probably to an lesser extent.

Houscarls used 2 hand axes sans sheild, but that is later in the medieval age.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaG_OO1RYE8&feature=related
“Empty your mind, be formless, shapeless - like water. Now you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup, you put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle, you put it in a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.” - Bruce Lee

Offline DrKronic

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 67
  • Infamy: 39
  • cRPG Player
  • Arch Villain of cRPG
    • View Profile
  • Faction: I do what I want
Germans and Celts charging in with two handed axes etc. is a myth. Yeah sure there might be some individuals but all ancient descriptions or images show them using shields.  :rolleyes:

That view is just Hollywood. And the falx was used by the Dacians not the Germans.

Franks, Goths etc. weren't two handed trowers. Franks were known to trow the Francisca which was an one handed axe. And probably other Germanic peoples also used this trowing axe though probably to an lesser extent.

Untrue two hand weapons did exist and were used by celts greatly, stuff like the later irish kern axe and galloglass twohand sword had forebearers and nordic(german etc) people were feared for two hand axe , I don't remember any movie about the gauls but I read alot of books and historical weapons sites

Its actually more a myth that most troops had weapons that required only one hand to use, and the dacian rhompeia and Falx were terrifying twohand weapons(albeit not germanic)
Greed is for amateurs...Chaos, Disorder, Anarchy now that's fun!

Offline Phalanx300

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 45
  • Infamy: 24
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
You are speaking of later timeframe. I'm talking about B.C. with those Celts and those Germanics and A.D. Germanics.

Celts did have a two handed sword but it is a myth that they would use it as basic weapon. Same with the dacians, yes they had these brutal Falxes but I'm pretty sure most of the infantry used shields.

Germanics weren't feared for two handed axes. They are in Hollywood yes, but in history? Germanic warrior was actually given a spear and a shield upon becoming a man. Tools such as bows and axes which were used for everyday living were seen as dishonourable weapons because they weren't tools of war. (though one handed axes become more common later with Germanics)

Offline Sharky

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 44
  • Infamy: 10
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Legione Italica
  • Game nicks: LEGIO_Sharkyborn_Sharkatron Legio_Lollia_Paolina Legio_Sharkatrower Legio_SharkaNukes
Most Germans and Celtic peoples in b.c times (and even after) used 1h weapons like clubs maces spears and swords yes, but 2h weapons were also used by some tribes.
Other examples over the Rhompaia and Falxes that i cited earlier: Britons used a really big 2h sword, and Cimbri were well known for their 2h axes and clubs.

Barbarians usually had troubles in the ranged weapons too.  Pilum was really an important weapon for the romans, they said they used for making the enemy shields useless, but recent tests had proved that they were designed to kill or seriously injure the guy behind the shield too. Also the tip always break when throw so they couldn't be used by the enemy.
Roman artillery like scorpions repeating ballistae onagres etc were also widely used not only in sieges but on open field battles. The romans relied a lot on them to break enemy morale. Also they used a lot of slings and they also started to bring eastern archers (with the composite bow) in the west, but they had some trouble in the rainy northern europe.
Barbarians usually had slingers and bowmens too but much less then the romans and their bows slings and training were much poorer.
I'm talking about earlier empire ofc, in the late empire germans fielded really good archers.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2011, 09:42:15 pm by Sharky »

Offline Phalanx300

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 45
  • Infamy: 24
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
Cimbri known for their two handed axes and clubs? What source? Are your talking about Roma Surrectum 2? And as I said I'm sure some tribes perhaps used a two handed sword but it would only be a small minority of the entire army. Not everyone charging in with two handed weapons.

Early Germanics would also have good archers, seeing hunters generally used bows.