Genitics overlooked?

[rv]

I do not think the gladius was the savior for the Romans against 'taller' people. I do not care how many thrusts are used the Gladius was still just along knife,pretty though. First, the Romans were not that short,there were basic height requirements. Also, taller is not the advantage in hand to hand anything unless all other things being equal. Strength and agility is what is the advantage. The gladuis would be useless against an enemy who also has a deadly weapon,any deadly weapon. The only equalizer for the slower,weaker less agile man has not been invented-firearms.

[Tarbicus]

I think the biggest problem I have with the entire argument is that the 'Romans' are being defined as an individual genetic group here, when the 'Romans' were generally made up of the same people they fought with by and large, at one point or another with some exceptions. It's a bit like saying the Soviets were genetically different to the East Germans in the 1960's because people from Moscow had a particular genetic makeup.

Cheers.

[Theodosius the Great]

Nubians have along history in the Mediterranean conflicts. Hannibal used them as many others did.

I hope you're not confusing Nubians with Numidians

Some were used against the Spartans by Exerxes. The Romans prized them as warriors and gladiators.

I just get the impression that Nubians were something of a novelty more than anything else in the Roman world like female gladiators.

Lord Maurice(st.Maurice) probably originated here.

Yes, I'm aware of him. I'd like to learn more but it seems difficult to find anything concrete on him.

[Marcus F.]

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

There's no evidence for that claim (unless you would classify the simple loop of some Hun's saddle as a real stirrup). It's overrated anyway...

[Conal]

RV

I fail to see how individual athletisism can be of use in a pitched battle.

You talk of all other things being equal .... how does that happen ... the Romans become Nubian ... the Nubians become Roman ? They both fight with the same gear ?

This hand to hand you have experienced ... can you expand on this and your martial arts experience please. natural disposition towards athletic physicality only helps marginally within martial arts. I have seen many a big impressive physical specimin put on his butt by someone who knew what he was doing.

I have ny doubts about your motives here and indeed your martial arts experience.

[Robert Vermaat]

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

Well, there's stirrups and stirrups.
Stirrups meaning the one you can stand up in aren't evidenced before the Avars.
But there are the simple thongs that can steady you enough to replace a four-horned saddle. The Romans did not need these because they used that saddle, but other cultures did.
Huns had no 'strong' stirrup, they sat down in the saddle (as I was told yesterday, we can see that because their bows are shorter on the lower half).
Scythians we have no evidence for either sort of stirrups afaik.

"Germanic/Slavic Goths"? Wot's that supposed to mean? hock:

[Magnus]

arvee said:

" I do not care how many thrusts are used the Gladius was still just along knife,pretty though."

I'd like for you to point out to me any culture that would deem a 17" blade as a knife, and not a short sword. Even the japanese, being a foreign, isolated culture used a system that dictated anything over 12" and below 23" is a wakizashi.

I get the impression that you have little understanding of the effective use of the gladius combined with the shield wall in close quarter battle. For a good read, check out A. Goldsworthy's "Roman Warfare".

"Also, taller is not the advantage in hand to hand anything unless all other things being equal."

Taller can very well be an advantage if the combat is one on one. Boxers who are taller for example, have a longer reach than shorter opponents. They can easily jab from a safer distance without having to close the distance as much.

"Strength and agility is what is the advantage."

You're kidding, right? Not sure what type of martial arts you are studying, but experience and training will beat strenght and agility 80% of the time at least. Take any legitamate sensei in japan with a high dan rank say, in Aikido. I've personally seen videos of international gradings and competitions where short japanese men are throwing around or using submissions on western counterparts who are 10 inches taller and 40 lbs heavier like they were rag dolls. And these japanese martial artists weren't rippling with muscle, although I do admit they had lighting fast reflexes and precision coordination.

"The gladuis would be useless against an enemy who also has a deadly weapon,any deadly weapon."

First, provide a specific reference for this grandiose statement. Secondly, you're basing victory on the weapon, when in fact it entirely depends on the fighter. This is not a debated statement either. Just look at the myriad number of "samurai vs knight" threads that abound all over the internet. The bottom line is that the weaponry or armour are just tools..it's the person using them which determines who wins. Here are a few:
[url:24vghhzq]http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=46523&highlight=knight+vs+samurai[/url]

[url:24vghhzq]http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=36952&highlight=knight+vs+samurai[/url]

And saying the gladius is useless against an enemy who also has a deadly weapon is complete garbage. The Romans fought against the Dacians, remember? Are you familiar with the Falx? The roman infantry were still using the gladius at this point...seemed they ended up conquering Dacia. That in itself fills your theory with a few holes, to say the least.

At this point rv, just about everyone of your far fetched theories have been blown out of the water. Are you going to provide references for the rest of us to browse and draw our own conclusions, or are we going to just continue to debunk your claims?

[Mithras]

I have ny doubts about your motives here and indeed your martial arts experience.

I think, judging from his other posts, that he's just trashing Roman culture to get us all riled up. He's a troll. Not that I'm against a good argument or discussion. This is just blindfolded mudslinging.