08-21-2003, 01:21 PM
Salve,<br>
<br>
A number of misguided preconceptions on Germanic warfare cloud the discussion. Concerning Germanic weaponry being more geared to individual combat it should be noted that there is no proper basis for this assumption. What shield boards survive do not indicate a significant difference in weight and size between the types used by Roman and Germanic troops. Therefore it is difficult to understand how Germanic shields would offer an advantage in single combat. Germanics were not primarily swordsmen, the spear, used for stabbing as well as throwing, being the main weapon and for many warriors their only one. Shafted weapons of various types were available to the Romans as well, but these were backed up by sword and dagger. When swords were carried by Germanic warriors they were generally not different from the types employed by Roman adversaries. The concept of long sword wielding Germanic warrior against short sword wielding Roman soldier is not correct. Germanic weaponry reflected Roman types rather than the other way around. Thus in the first centuries of the principate short swords of the Roman types predominate in finds from Germanic sites while longer blades start to predominate once these became more common in the Roman army.<br>
<br>
Single combat was given a prominent place in (later) Germanic fiction, but these stories do not necessarily have to reflect actual battle conditions and tactics. Other peoples (Greeks, Romans) with similar traditions of fighting in close ordered groups likewise have stories concentrating on the exploits of individual heroes and champions instead of the anonymous mass of troops. What is good for storytelling need not have been put in practice in combat. Individual combat could take place in preliminary stages of battle, but it did not constitute the main method by which war was decided. Germanics tended to deploy for battle in close formations rather than as a mass of individuals each intent on engaging in separate single combat (eg Tacitus <em>Annales</em> 1.51 <em>... densis Germanorum catervis ...</em> '... by the dense hordes of the Germans ...',; <em>Germania</em> 6 <em>... Acies per cuneos componitur. ...</em> '... The battle order is composed of wedges. ...'; <em>Historiae</em> 4.16 <em>... cuneis componit ...</em> '... he deployed in wedges ...'). Germanic battle did not center on single combat, but was as much a group affair as that of Roman warfare. Roman formations may have been on average more ordered and better disciplined, but their northern enemies deployed in dense formations as well.<br>
<br>
The Romans had their own traditions on engaging in individual combat. While the set piece battle required concentration on group effort and cohesion, there was room for displays of individual prowess at other times, including the preliminary fighting before the contact of main formations in battle.<br>
<br>
<br>
On Germanic warfare:<br>
<br>
Raddatz, K., 'Die Bewaffnung der Germanen vom letzten Jahrhundert v. Chr. bis zur Voelkerwanderungszeit' in: <em>ANRW</em> 2.12.3 (1985), 281-361.<br>
Thompson, E.A., 'Early Germanic warfare' in: E.A. Thompson, <em>The early Germans</em> (Oxford 1965), 109-149.<br>
Todd, M., <em>The early Germans</em> (London 1992).<br>
<br>
Translation of the <em>Germania</em> by Tacitus.<br>
<br>
On Romans and individual combat:<br>
<br>
Goldsworthy, A.K., <em>The Roman army at war 100 BC-200AD</em> (Oxford 1996) 311p.<br>
Maxfield, V.A., <em>The military decorations of the Roman army</em> (London 1981) 304p.<br>
Oakley. S.P., 'Single combat in the Roman republic' in: <em>Classical Quarterly</em> 35 (1985), 392-410.<br>
Wiedemann, T., 'Single combat and being Roman' in: <em>Ancient Society</em> 27 (1996), 91-103.<br>
<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Sander van Dorst <p></p><i></i>
<br>
A number of misguided preconceptions on Germanic warfare cloud the discussion. Concerning Germanic weaponry being more geared to individual combat it should be noted that there is no proper basis for this assumption. What shield boards survive do not indicate a significant difference in weight and size between the types used by Roman and Germanic troops. Therefore it is difficult to understand how Germanic shields would offer an advantage in single combat. Germanics were not primarily swordsmen, the spear, used for stabbing as well as throwing, being the main weapon and for many warriors their only one. Shafted weapons of various types were available to the Romans as well, but these were backed up by sword and dagger. When swords were carried by Germanic warriors they were generally not different from the types employed by Roman adversaries. The concept of long sword wielding Germanic warrior against short sword wielding Roman soldier is not correct. Germanic weaponry reflected Roman types rather than the other way around. Thus in the first centuries of the principate short swords of the Roman types predominate in finds from Germanic sites while longer blades start to predominate once these became more common in the Roman army.<br>
<br>
Single combat was given a prominent place in (later) Germanic fiction, but these stories do not necessarily have to reflect actual battle conditions and tactics. Other peoples (Greeks, Romans) with similar traditions of fighting in close ordered groups likewise have stories concentrating on the exploits of individual heroes and champions instead of the anonymous mass of troops. What is good for storytelling need not have been put in practice in combat. Individual combat could take place in preliminary stages of battle, but it did not constitute the main method by which war was decided. Germanics tended to deploy for battle in close formations rather than as a mass of individuals each intent on engaging in separate single combat (eg Tacitus <em>Annales</em> 1.51 <em>... densis Germanorum catervis ...</em> '... by the dense hordes of the Germans ...',; <em>Germania</em> 6 <em>... Acies per cuneos componitur. ...</em> '... The battle order is composed of wedges. ...'; <em>Historiae</em> 4.16 <em>... cuneis componit ...</em> '... he deployed in wedges ...'). Germanic battle did not center on single combat, but was as much a group affair as that of Roman warfare. Roman formations may have been on average more ordered and better disciplined, but their northern enemies deployed in dense formations as well.<br>
<br>
The Romans had their own traditions on engaging in individual combat. While the set piece battle required concentration on group effort and cohesion, there was room for displays of individual prowess at other times, including the preliminary fighting before the contact of main formations in battle.<br>
<br>
<br>
On Germanic warfare:<br>
<br>
Raddatz, K., 'Die Bewaffnung der Germanen vom letzten Jahrhundert v. Chr. bis zur Voelkerwanderungszeit' in: <em>ANRW</em> 2.12.3 (1985), 281-361.<br>
Thompson, E.A., 'Early Germanic warfare' in: E.A. Thompson, <em>The early Germans</em> (Oxford 1965), 109-149.<br>
Todd, M., <em>The early Germans</em> (London 1992).<br>
<br>
Translation of the <em>Germania</em> by Tacitus.<br>
<br>
On Romans and individual combat:<br>
<br>
Goldsworthy, A.K., <em>The Roman army at war 100 BC-200AD</em> (Oxford 1996) 311p.<br>
Maxfield, V.A., <em>The military decorations of the Roman army</em> (London 1981) 304p.<br>
Oakley. S.P., 'Single combat in the Roman republic' in: <em>Classical Quarterly</em> 35 (1985), 392-410.<br>
Wiedemann, T., 'Single combat and being Roman' in: <em>Ancient Society</em> 27 (1996), 91-103.<br>
<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Sander van Dorst <p></p><i></i>
