Roman Legions vs Medieval Armies

[CiceroD]

Hypothetically would a Roman Army's internal cohesion be able to beat heavily armored knights? would the superior fortifications of castles confound legionary siegecraft?

(to be perfectly clear I'm assuming proffessional Augustan era legions against a Western European High Middle Ages pre-gunpowder army)

 

Fellow nerds chime in!

[roman wargamer]

Hypothetically would a Roman Army's internal cohesion be able to beat heavily armored knights? would the superior fortifications of castles confound legionary siegecraft?

(to be perfectly clear I'm assuming proffessional Augustan era legions against a Western European High Middle Ages pre-gunpowder army)

 

Fellow nerds chime in!

 

if you could move play those men of war in board; then let's play it. a ten thousand men.

 

the legio horn was sounded;

 

by then,(my) the Roman Legio was preparing for battle formation in 'triplex acies' quadratum form.

[Pantagathus]

would the superior fortifications of castles confound legionary siegecraft?

Why do you say that castles were superior to any classical fortress? I think Roman siegcraft would make mincemeat out of most castles...

[roman wargamer]

where are the High Middle Ages "main" armies of (King or General?) CiceroD.

 

my legiones men of war can not see them in the battlefield... where are they???

 

as the Roman Equites advance scout reports they are nowhere to be found nearby!!!

and waiting for the covert axulia intellegence men to report enemy number and disposition.

 

CiceroD take your action or i will siege your castle.

 

be brave to take an open field battle of your life... i am waiting.

[CiceroD]

Im saying that Roman Forts were far more cost-effective structures then medieval castles. Around the time of Augustus, Forts reflected the confidence of Legions that they would quickly be relieved by reinforcements. It was only later (Think Hadrian's Wall) that the Romans hunkered down relying on masonry to guard the frontiers. I dont believe that the Romans had Trebuchets did they? (At least Ive never heard of one) They relyed instead on siege towers. (I thought)

 

Huh this is useless Roman Wargamer neither of us would ever concede that we lose!

 

all the same I'm inside Krak des Chevaliers You cant get me

 

Its a castle with two concentric walls on the top of a 650 meter cliff in the burning Syrian desert!

 

enjoy!

Edited December 14, 2006 by CiceroD

[Titus001]

roman infantry in my opinion were better armed better armored and better deciplined then the medieval armies,now talking cavarly medieval armies had the edge in armor,but most battles it comes down to infantry not to mention medieval armies were smaller in numbers.

[CiceroD]

The many fortified strongholds present in Medieval Europe would most certainly make a Roman conquest much harder. Walled cities in the Ancient world generally had lower walls than later castles did. They would have to wouldnt they? A city would have a greater circumference and therefore any increase in the height of a wall would be an astronomic increase in price.

[roman wargamer]

all the same I'm inside Krak des Chevaliers You cant get me

Its a castle with two concentric walls on the top of a 650 meter cliff in the burning Syrian desert!

do you remember the Masada. the Roman conquer it... and sold most Jew to slavery after that,

as warning to all the ancient world city state,kingdom and empire... that Rome can also be savage.

 

if you hide inside the castle, are an indication that your armies can not win in open battle.

but i thought you were in European castle, how come you hide there to escape a legion siege.

 

just all plain joke... for everything is all hypothesis, hope got it.

Huh this is useless Roman Wargamer neither of us would ever concede that we lose!

he! he! he!

what i am saying is a boardgame that we could play in this thread.

shall we try it, just for fun... i will send the rules.

 

it is name Roman Wargame III.

[CiceroD]

do you remember the Masada. the Roman conquer it... and sold most Jew to slavery after that,

as warning to all the ancient world city state,kingdom and empire... that Rome can also be savage.

 

it is name Roman Wargame III.

 

I'd Like to quote Livia from the BBC Miniseries I Claudius

" When I begin to forget things you can light my funeral pyre and set me on it dead or alive"

 

Oh Dear! the supplies you need to feed your men and build siege engine have been cut off!

Such a pity Roman Wargamer that the 2000 men I left in Tripoly have cut off your supply lines to the sea!

 

I guess Im just full of surprises

Edited December 17, 2006 by CiceroD

[Divi Filius]

Why do you say that castles were superior to any classical fortress? I think Roman siegcraft would make mincemeat out of most castles...

 

Castles of the Middle Ages actually were a byproduct of later Roman fortifications. As the Roman empirial strength declined and the protection starting swinging more and more to the local -- add this to the disestablishment of the legion as a concentrated force(later Roman legion usually comprised about 1,000-3,000 men in numbers, which is why there were so man in the later Empire) -- new systems of defenses were created. The later foritications of the Roman empire were usually built on inclined position in a rectangular, or if possible round, shape. These foritications were meant to house locals in the time of emergency.

 

In the west this happened during the later 3-4th century decline in urban life throughout much of Gaul and other parts of the empire...

 

What developed in the Middle Ages were heavily based, sometimes actually built, on these structure.

 

However if we are talking gunpowder then I could never see Romans possibly breaking the defenses with their own engines. However ingenuity could help them pick up a few things.

Edited December 18, 2006 by Divi Filius

[Titus001]

Medieval armies for the most part were made up by peasants that were not well trained,not well armored and lacked the decipline of the romans,im talking about the infantry about medieval period,For the most part a deciplined infantry will hold the charge of any cavarly.For the most part most medieval armies the only rich elites got the armor and the common person got nothing at all and little training unlike the roman army.

[Kosmo]

In the field - any decent roman force would seriously outnumber the largest armies of the Middle Ages. If we have 4 legions, alae, independent cohorts and auxila this will mean a force of, at least, 50.000 men against, let's say, french army at Azincourt 8-12.000 men.

 

The roman army was made of profesional soldiers while the french one was made of levies. Even given the training a knight received from childhood the diference between formal training and how it was done in the Middle Ages will be visible.

 

The roman army of the early empire was a manouvering force with a clear chain of command. A medieval army was a conglomerate of armies conected by political relations were some might choose to run away like at Poitiers where a third of the army fled without enemy contact.

 

Roman generals were usually good, selected in time and trial while medieval armies were led by the sovereign, that could be good like the Black Prince, or by apointees like the extremly young Boucicoult.

 

The medieval armies had superior horsmanship and could deliver a lot of missiles (long bow archers, crossbowman, some mercenaries like the genovese)

 

So, if they are of a resonably close size, and with equal leadership, on open terrarain the medieval army has a good chance. It could shower with missiles and the charge and break roman formation. The pilum will thin the first line, but when the heavy horses break the formation the advantages of the long lances and of long swords against the gladius will tell a diferent story.

 

Of course, if there are enough romans they would outflank the kights, drove the infantry away and encircle the stationary cavalry. Once they are tightly packed the gladius will deliver deadly blows while the knights must abandon swords and lances and use iron whips and axes.

 

Siege warfare - major Midlle Ages fortifications far exceded roman ones in hight of walls and towers and thru the use of stone. But when someone it's so well locked that no one can came in, that means that it can not get out. So, blocking and walling will be the first roman option and then the waiting game.

 

Of course, this does not mean that active siege will not be undertaken despite the difference in the walls between the abandoned Massada and the famous Krak.

 

The sieges of Byzantium and Hatra by Sever show the problems the romans might have when sieging a well defended fortification.

 

Well...this was fun!

Edited December 18, 2006 by Kosmo

[roman wargamer]

I guess Im just full of surprises

 

if you are really full of surprises, then surprise me by defeating me this game.

 

did you really even tried to play a military wargame board.

then why not try this one... shall we. no dices; no cards and no tape measure needed.

 

Oh Dear! the supplies you need to feed your men and build siege engine have been cut off!

Such a pity Roman Wargamer that the 2000 men I left in Tripoly have cut off your supply lines to the sea!

i never know that Continental Europe in Middle Age have and possess ships that could be compare to

Roman navy in the era of Augustus.

 

could you explain to me why you hide in Syrian castle

and wasted all those logistic manpower, food and money just to run away from a legion seige.

[roman wargamer]

Oh Dear! the supplies you need to feed your men and build siege engine have been cut off!

Such a pity Roman Wargamer that the 2000 men I left in Tripoly have cut off your supply lines to the sea!

 

I guess Im just full of surprises

 

then, if you are afraid to be defeated in a simple boardgame- i will play your thesis game.

 

as we have the same number of men of war- 10,000 men.

___________________________________________________________________________

 

you left 2,000 men to cut me off... let me see if that is a good idea.. i then begin my battle.

i immediately ordered my legiones council of war and all centurion commander for a battle plan.

 

we will do a "Nero Strategy" to elimanate all those 2,000 CiceroD men on our rear.

the Metaurus River Tactical Move technique will be very good to annihilate all those poor soldier.

 

i will march back my whole legio to those annoying rear enemy presence.

as we near to those 2,000 poor men.

 

the 9th and 10th cohortia detached to do an initial right flank attack.

and the 7th and 8th cohortia also detached to do an another left closing gap left flank attack.

 

as the 4 cohort close in to engage in my simultaneous two sides prong flank attack manuever.

my main body of 6 cohortia of Italian Legiones slowly march in the center to give a piece meal murder.

 

as your 2,000 poor men struggle to survive a swift 10,000 men Scipio Africanus Manuever.

 

i give order that all enemy men that resist will be killed immediately in the field, no mercy!!!

 

as my whole legio slowly murder those CiceroD soldier.

i am already contemplating to attacl Krak.

 

while CiceroD hide in a castle with two concentric walls on the top of a 650 meter cliff in the burning

Syrian desert!. He say's all the same I'm inside Krak des Chevaliers You cant get me.

 

i will get you with my Tenth Legio. you will become like Masada after i get you and your poor soldier.

[CiceroD]

Uncle!!!!

 

I'll be dragged through Rome in Golden Chains then be executed ad bestius

Cicero was a non-military man and so am I