Legionnaires in one-on-one combat

[Anonymous]

Let me clear up some things. Firstly, when I said sheer numbers I was referring not to the actual battles themselves but to the theaters of operations in which the Romans operated. You are quite right to point out that the Romans were quite often outnumbered on the battlefield during both the Republic and Empire. This is not my point, such victories I would chalk up to "tactical brilliance", as I said before. What I meant by sheer numbers was that operationally the Romans were able to continue to throw forces into a particular theater/region even after suffering major tactical defeats. The Jurguthine war, Punic Wars, Judaea, Gaul, Tacfarnias,Macedonian Wars etc. That's not to say that many Roman victories weren't a result of superior disclipine, morale, tactics on the battlefield, I have already stated, this was the case. My point is the Romans could sustain many more tactical defeats than their foes. Take Boudicca's revolt, Ambrones invasion , the Gallic uprising in 52BCor the Judaen rebellion of 66 AD and many others. If these cases one or two major defeats at the hands of the Romans were enough to doom their causes, while the Romans were able to suffer even heavy losses throughout the conflicts and still emerge the victor. Do not think I am taking anything away from the Roman Army tactically, but logistics, mobility, adaptability, unity of command and strategic mass were the major keys to Roman success as the Empire grew and less and less soldiers in the ranks were so fanatical about fighting for Rome. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=rufuscaius>RufusCaius</A> at: 3/30/04 5:51 pm<br></i>