Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Getae and Dacians? Are they the same? Or is this unknowable?
Alanus wrote:
Quote:Oh dear. I hope you really didn't mean that. Without a standard (imposed) language, the Roman troops and cavalries could never have conquered the territories they did. And we wouldn't be discussing these matters on RAT.
...I don't think this necessarily holds true. 'Barbarian hordes' will have/must have contained a multiplicity of ethnic groups/tribes who spoke different languages and/or dialects, whether they be 5 C BC Gauls/Celts or 5 C AD Goths, and it does not seem to have been a bar to military efficiency/success.
For a fairly well-documented example consider Punic armies, especially Hannibal's of the second Punic War, containing as it did Africans - Moors and Libyans, various Spanish Iberians and Celt-Iberians, Gauls from Southern France, Alpine Gauls, Cisalpine Gauls, Italians, Greeks etc....as has been noted, only leaders needed to speak the 'lingua franca'. Knowledge of basic commands doubtless sufficed for the rank and file.... Smile
"dulce et decorum est pro patria mori " - Horace
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)

"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" - George C Scott as General George S. Patton
Paul McDonnell-Staff
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Getae and Dacians? Are they the same? Or is this unknowable? - by Paullus Scipio - 11-12-2009, 09:42 PM
Re: Getae and Dacians? - by Vincula - 11-15-2009, 09:48 PM

Forum Jump: