Comments by "" (@neutronalchemist3241) on "Viking VS Legionary" video.

  1. At Teutoburg the Romans were basically led by the enemy commander, an unicum in history. Other times the Romans won while being inferior in numbers.
    4
  2. Late-republican / early imperial Roman armies lost to Germans only when they were at a great numerical disadvantage. We remember the scarce Roman defeats, because the Romans described them, but the legions massacrated entire German populations without problems. Legionaries were professionals, and to fight warriors with different equipments and fighting styles (and among those Celts and Germans) was their daily bread.
    4
  3. The comparison is "average Bjørn vs average Caius". In this case Average Caius would be a professional, while Average Bjørn would be a merchant or farmer that occasionally became a rider.
    2
  4. The average height of male Danes of 9th to 11th century was 1.71m. The average height of adult males bodies found in Pompeii was 166cm, and in Herculaneum was 169cm (so just a couple of cm shorter than the average Norseman). However legionaries were not "average" The minimum height to join the legion was 165cm, and 172cm to be an equites. "For the army as a whole a reasonable estimate of a soldier's average height is around 170 cm" (Roth, Jonathan, and Jonathan P. Roth. The Logistics of the Roman Army at War: 264 BC-AD 235. Columbia studies in the classical tradition, Vol. 23. Brill, 1999). So there would not have been any real difference.
    2
  5. +Merl Ball "There were professional soldiers among the vikings", yeah, but they were a restricted elite, while the rest were peasants, fishermen and merchants that occasionally became riders and pirates. In that, and in their equipment, they were not that different from the barbarians that were the legionaries' daily bread. A late republican - imperial legionary was a professional by definition.
    2
  6. Actually in "Viking" era the main weapon production area was in France-Germany-Northern Italy. The more sophisticated weapons the Norses had were usually imported from there.
    1
  7. The problem at Teutoburg was not one on one combat. Having to march, the Romans were deployed in a long thin line, while the Germans could group unseen and attack having a STRONG local numerical superiority. The Iceni one on one? When?
    1
  8. Actually there was a minumum height to join the Legion (170 cm), and Vikings were not that tall (the skeletons found are 172cm on average) . The average legionary was easily taller than the average Viking.
    1
  9. No. Actually there was a minumum height to join the Legion (170 cm), and Vikings were not that tall (the skeletons found are 172cm on average) . The average legionary was easily taller than the average Viking.
    1
  10.  @bored_and_has_no_clue  No. First of all gladiuses were made of steel too. Then, steel swords doesn't cut easily through iron (infact iron mail armors were more than enough to stop them). Finally "extremely strong swords made of crucible steel" were items reserved to a very small minority. Most Vikings had a spear and an axe.
    1
  11.  @bored_and_has_no_clue  The evidence is that "extremely strong swords made of crucible steel" ARE rare in respect to other kind of blades.
    1
  12. Actually there was a minumum height to join the Legion (170 cm), and Vikings were not that tall (the skeletons found are 172cm on average) . The average legionary was easily taller than the average Viking.
    1
  13. Provided he still had fingers to hold the axe after the first blow. Scutums were used in gladiator games, by some of the most successfull classes (Samnite, Murmillo and Secutor). They were not useless in 1v1 fight.
    1
  14. Not by much. The minimum stature to join the legion was 1.64m for legionaries and 1.72m for equites. The average stature of a Norseman of 9th to 11th century was 1.72cm. So they would have been only 2-4cm higher than the average legionary.
    1
  15. At Teutoburg the problem for the Romans was not that they couldn't fight 1 vs. 1, but that they had to march anyway, so they were deployed in a long, thin, line, while the Germans could group and decide where to attack, so gaining a strong local numerical superiority.
    1
  16. Roman legionaries actually trained a lot in 1v1 combat. Their formations were not as tight as oplite ones, so their style of fight was much more mobile and they had to cope with the fact that an enemy could come from the flanks.
    1
  17. It had not been the first nor the last encounter, but the only one where the Romans were led by the commander of the Germans.
    1
  18. Actually there was a minumum height to join the Legion (170 cm), and Vikings were not that tall (the skeletons found are 172cm on average) . The average legionary was easily taller than the average Viking.
    1
  19. From skeletal evidences (That Pompeii and Ercolanum provided plenty) The average Roman male was 165 cm tall, not 150, so only 7 cm shorter than the average Viking. Romans had actually the same average height than medieval British, and were taller than much northern European populations during the industrial revolution (when the quality of food decreased for much of the working class).
    1
  20. The Romans didn't abandoned the use of such weapons because they were ineffective, but because they begun to rely on local troops, that adapted the weapons to their style of fighting. Romans had ranged weapons as well. It's better to take them out of the equation because otherwise the winner would be simply the one that will hit first a vulnerable point. Mind that the Roman Armor was a better protection against projectiles than the average Viking warrior's armor. Romans routinely defeated much larger German armies. Viking era swords were exceptional cutters. Unfortunately no cutting sword ever would have cut through a Roman chainmail or segmented armor and helmet, and to think that it could cut through a gladius is like believing a kantana could cut through a tank. Metal doesn't need to be exceptional to make the work done. It only needs to be good enough.
    1
  21. Scutums were used in gladiator games, by some of the most successfull classes (Samnite, Murmillo and Secutor).
    1
  22. Smackdown tend to not be a life and death affair.
    1
  23. 1) ALL gladiator matches were life and death affairs. None was fought with wooden or blunt weapons, so you can die in any of them, even in the ones that were not intended to be to the last blood. 2)The classes of gladiators were no different in any case, and the scutum was used by some of the most successfull ones (Samnite, Murmillo and Secutor). It doesen't seem that the ones with smaller shields (like the Hoplomachus, or the Thraex) had any advantage (Murmillo Vs. Thraex or Hoplomachus were normal pairings).
    1
  24. My bet is on the immortal.
    1
  25. The average height of adult males bodies found in Pompeii was 166cm, and in Herculaneum was 169cm (so just a couple of cm shorter than the average Norseman). however legionaries were not "average" The minimum height to join the legion was 165cm, and 172cm to be an equites. "For the army as a whole a reasonable estimate of a soldier's average height is around 170 cm" (Roth, Jonathan, and Jonathan P. Roth. The Logistics of the Roman Army at War: 264 BC-AD 235. Columbia studies in the classical tradition, Vol. 23. Brill, 1999). So there would not have been any real difference.
    1
  26. Actually there was a minumum height to join the Legion (170 cm), and Vikings were not that tall (the skeletons found are 172cm on average) . The average legionary was easily taller than the average Viking.
    1
  27. Actually there was a minumum height to join the Legion (170 cm), and Vikings were not that tall (the skeletons found are 172cm on average) . The average legionary was easily on par or taller than the average Viking.
    1
  28. The post-Marian Reform Roman Army was composed of professional soldiers, not conscripts.
    1