Genitics overlooked?

[rv]

Not leadership,strategy or tactics obviously but simple ferocity,brute strength(but not tallest people on average) and agility of the foot soldier. Their foot soldier really never last a battle without being trapped or fall victim to superior technology(compound bow,stirrup or horsemen). Most Cases t hey were out numbered too(except..perhaps they outnumbered Hannibal..records strange because accounts of how many italic/oscan people sided with Hannibal) This is not a romantic notion obviously and too simple for most to digest...but I feel if the Romans were beaten by foot soldiers superior to them(like Nubians..very strong and agile like them but larger) scholars would have been aware. This is not intended to offend like some feel but just coming up with a theory and their is so much evidence from their enemies who feared the foot soldier as individual fighter. All people of that era were trained since childhood how to fight too..just that my answer is genetics ...so overlooked.

[Robert Vermaat]

Hi RV,
That's an interesting question..

Btw, for the record, could you alter your profile please and enter your real name?

[hoplite14gr]

In an ancient a battle the big guy certainly had an edge.
But how much was this edge really against formed troops with spears or pikes and good moral?
The african warbands that Herodotus mentions in Xerxes army failed to make an impression on the Spartans at Thermopulae.
As for the heights and structure. Who says that the Romans were midgets?
Most burial excavations arround the Mediteranean lead the experts to belive that though the percentage of very tall people was not a majority they populations of the Mediteranean Basin were not actually midgets!
Kind regards
Stefanos

[rv]

Never said the Romanos were midgets. Just that the Nubian's are some of the most muscular and athletic people in the world. Of course this matters in hand to hand. Xerxes did not utilize them properly and the Spartans were very physically fit as Europeans go. The Romans perhaps were the strongest of Caucasians I am suggesting. Only Suggesting. Perhaps some Neanderthal there..even though geneticists say not. They were not the tallest in Europe and am sure not the shortest but they had to be near the strongest. They were not the best in strategy either. Even Caesar,for example...do you think Patton/Rommel would put 60,000 against 240,000 as Caesar did? Not what an intelligent officer would do,irrespective of the victory. This just assists my point that the Roman foot soldier had all the physical attributes. However they were very vulnerable to the arrow and mobile cavalry with arrows when used effectively. Romans never responded to this correctly as strategy goes.

[Tarbicus]

Even Caesar,for example...do you think Patton/Rommel would put 60,000 against 240,000 as Caesar did? Not what an intelligent officer would do,irrespective of the victory.

A definition of 'talent': That which others find difficult to do.
A definition of 'genius': That which talent finds impossible to do.

:wink:

Patton and Rommel (and correct me if I'm wrong) tended to take care of battles from a far more remote point than Caesar, whereas Caesar was usually there with his men, sometimes in the thick of it. I feel he would have had his finger on the pulse far more than the aforementioned, and take advantage of any opportunity as it happened there and then.

[rv]

Remote is relative. Modern warfare made Patton/Rommel at risk too, maybe more so. Think many legionaries surrounded Caesar at all times. The fact he allowed himself to be so surrounded is suspect. Yes,he was a motivator for sure,as all good politicians can be.

[Magnus]

RV, again, what have you used as a source to make these claims? Also, strength is relative to a person's diet and upbringing/training in as much as it is genetics.

And 99.9% of the times, winning in individual combat depends entirely on the fighter....it has little to do with perceived advantages.

[Theodosius the Great]

Never said the Romanos were midgets. Just that the Nubian's are some of the most muscular and athletic people in the world. Of course this matters in hand to hand. Xerxes did not utilize them properly and the Spartans were very physically fit as Europeans go. The Romans perhaps were the strongest of Caucasians I am suggesting

Hmm..well that flies in the face of Vegetius who conceded that the Spaniards were stronger, the Greeks more intellegent, the Africans more treachoreous and the Germans being bigger than the Romans

Who's supposedly "overlooking genetics" ? :?

[Marcus F.]

Their foot soldier really never last a battle without being trapped or fall victim to superior technology(compound bow,stirrup or horsemen).

The (West) Roman Empire never faced an enemy, who had stirrups for their horses as far as I know.

[rv]

I used the genetics example as conjecture and an explanation of the enormous success of the Roman Army. A different outlook perhaps but sometimes opening your mind the truth can be found. The Romans fell into many traps and fought their way out,sometimes from the impossible. This was from hand to hand,not tactics or cavalry or archery. I am involved in martial arts so i know training has its place. However, all were trained to fight from Persia to Britain from a very early age at that time. Natural strength and agility cannot be taught and is a huge advantage. Their is no doubt in my mind the ancient Romans were a very strong lot. I am not including their marches with heavy items either...this conditions yes but all were conditioned in this era probably more than we know. I do feel that an army of Nubian foot soldiers would be more than a match for the Romans other things being equal. Strength and agility is the answer to hand to hand combat. Romans excelled at this but failed in the archery and cavalry area for the most part. Knowledge with hand to hand combat plus the seemingly obvious,the success and failures they had are my theory. This is not for all to accept am sure...theories seldom are ,especially when viewed from a closed mind.

[rv]

I believe the Huns and Scythians had stirrups....and perhaps the Germanic/Slavic Goths had it during the late Roman empire(west).

[rv]

Vegetius used poetic license as many did at that time. (sometimes present writers too) This was needed to make points,rally people and many other reasons. Given all I read plus experience with hand to hand....am ancient Roman would not be my choice if I had to utilize my skills in hand to hand. For the Caucasian people of course. Like I said...a Nubian would be more than any ones match here. Simple philosophy, yes, not romantic, yes, but could be the simple truth which is the truth.

[Mithras]

Like I said...a Nubian would be more than any ones match here. Simple philosophy, yes, not romantic, yes, but could be the simple truth which is the truth.

Rubbish. Just rubbish. So the Ethiopians/Sudanese are the toughest fighters in the world today??? How did you get to that result?

Just 'the truth' I guess :roll:

We generally deal in facts here, with a little idle speculation thrown in. Don't just start claiming all sorts of rubbish because you think its the truth.

[Theodosius the Great]

For the Caucasian people of course. Like I said...a Nubian would be more than any ones match here. Simple philosophy, yes, not romantic, yes, but could be the simple truth which is the truth.

I don't think necessarily that bigger is better, especially when the weapon of choice is a gladius - a weapon designed for use against a bigger man by a smaller one.

Besides, why is "Nubian" continually being referenced ? There was very limited contact between them and the Romans.

Unless you're speaking hypothetically, of course :wink: . When I watch "Zulu" (1964) I imagine this scenario : if they were somehow transported back in time and space to ancient Rome, how would they have fared against the legion ? Remember "the two horns" formation from the movie ?

[rv]

Nubians have along history in the Mediterranean conflicts. Hannibal used them as many others did. Some were used against the Spartans by Exerxes. The Romans prized them as warriors and gladiators. Lord Maurice(st.Maurice) probably originated here. He is famous for carrying the'spear of christ' into battle. famous also for being martyred for not honoring Roman gods long with the decimation and final annihilation of his regiment he led. Yes,led. Nubians are not Ethiopians either, very different. Ethiopians are very frail in comparison, Nubians are extremely naturally muscular.