Hermann the Liberator and germanic tactic

[Stefan the Berserker]

I hope everybody here knows who Hermann the Liberator is, don't you?

For those who don't the story in shorter words:
-Hermann the Liberator was the Duke of the Cherusks
-HTL formed up the Allemannen-Alliance
-In the year nine A.D. he striked out the famous Varus Battle
-He won the war between the Germanics and the Romans
-HTL tried to unite all Germanic tribes
-HTL temporaly united all Germanics but was murdered and the Empire broke off

The Germanics used a interessting mixture of Hit&Run, moral and massive attacks. Most important Units for these tactic were:

-mounted Spearchuckers
-Edeling Cavallary (Knights)
-Huscarls
-Longbowarchers
-Spearmen

And additionaly:

-Attack dogs
-Fortifactions
-Berserkers

They used the mounted Spearchuckers as a kind of first response team while the rest of the Army hides or is based a few miles away. The mounteds approached their target, cryed out, threw their Spears and rode circles around the enemy. This action trired and dismoralised the enemy, because the romans did not had Cavallary as Core Units. Then when the Enemy was really pissed off the real Army came while the mounteds were still using their Spears. Then the Longbows shot at the enemy and killed many of them. After a few moments the Huscarls and the Knights will clear up the rest with various manouvers.

If possible they added Fortifactions to place on important Waypoints and strike the enemy from there (this had also influence on the development of Castles). They used Attack dogs for Patrols and to dismoralise the enemy: What would you think if you see hundreds of a kind of Wolflike dogs approaching? Then the Berserkers were very strong men who fought in the so called Berserkerwrath .I think you know what I mean with that...

Unfortunatly this tactic can't be executed in MTW, because Horse Archers can't shoot while riding and mounted Spearchuckers arn't included... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif

[fastspawn]

just my 2 cents,

it's well and good that herman(arminius) is regarded as a liberator and all that, but imagine a world where he did not exist.

note this is all postulation,

quintintilius varus didn't lose his 3 legions and commit suicide. augustus wouldn't have issued his command to stop roman expansion. Germany would have been a much more civilised country with roman technology and all what not.
the germanic tribes would not have raided rome 500 years later (they would be neo-romans).

No Dark Age or at the most a shorter one. the romans could have been broken down by the moors instead. but in the 20th century when wilhelm II ascended the throne of germany he would have found a country of pacifists, having gone through the full gamut of romanization, feudalism, enligtenment and finally social revolution like the french and english before them. No WWI would result, and for that matter WW2 would not occur. (of course that is only a postulation, other countries might carry the mantle)

[Catiline]

the main reason that Arminius was so successful is that he was an ex officer in the Roman army, he served in one of their auxuiliary units.

[Stefan the Berserker]

To edit, through it seems you don't know enough about that:

Hermann was like most high aristocrathic youth of the Germanics to study Military tactics. Through that he was able to develop tactics against the Romans, aslike most germanic leaders too.

The romans destroyed all cultures, exepted the Greeks, they occupied. So he is the Liberator of the Germanics.

And this point with Dark Age: Germanics occupied and didn't destroy things they though of they were useful. Most Tech demishing was caused by Christianity, because most things were called Pagan in the West.

Best example is the "Thing" of the Germanics abolished because it was a "Pagan Ritual", but in fact a democrathic decision, and Roman Medicine which was called black magic by the Priests. These things wrecked the Things the germanics did not destroy.

Anyway, imagine the Roman Empire surrvived... Would you really like to live in that Country? You as so called Barbarians, no rights, Gouvanours put in place by a Dictator thousands of miles away in Rome... Just like 3rd Reich had won and was Italian...

[fastspawn]

dont forget my opinion is just a postulation, so most probably it might not occur. Anyway the roman empire would dissolve even if Herman did not attack the legions in the forest. No empire can be held on for so long.

however i stand by my opinion that the rhineland would be "more romanized" if varus had not been defeated. Whatever the implications of romanization, it is up for debate.

hermann wasn't a "gentle knight" either, he massacred the families of the soldiers ie the women and children too. And he was murdered by his own tribesmen for being a tyrant. not a very glorious death by any means.

[Azrael]

Hey Guys,

Not to take anything away from Herman the German (ah, the memories. that's what we used to call our targets on the range), but Herman managed to win some battles. He hardly "won the war" between Germany and Rome.

The Romans only suffered two major defeats in Germany: Lolius, and Varus (the generals not the battles). Lolius' defeat was embarassing. Varus' was more problematic, since along with the general, three legions, their auxilliary, and all the general staff were massacred to a man.

Varus captured the Roman Standards. Humiliating to the Romans, yes, but the Romans got them back.

Under Augustus, the Romans drove the Germans behind the river Elbe, except for the Suebians and Sigambriands, who surrendered to them and agreed to settle in Gallic territory, keeping any tribes that were thinking of stirring up trouble in check.

Germanicus' army wanted to make him Emperor (they didn't get their way, and this may have been why he was - allegedly - though probably almost certainly - poisoned).

This makes me wonder though. Where does Germany come from?

It's not German. In Germany they call their country Deutchland.

Did Germany get it's name from Germanicus or did Germanicus get his name from Germany.

Somebody out there knows.

Tell me.

Azrael

[ShadeFlanders]

Citaat[/b] (fastspawn @ Nov. 15 2002,18:02)]just my 2 cents,

it's well and good that herman(arminius) is regarded as a liberator and all that, but imagine a world where he did not exist.

note this is all postulation,

quintintilius varus didn't lose his 3 legions and commit suicide. augustus wouldn't have issued his command to stop roman expansion. Germany would have been a much more civilised country with roman technology and all what not.
the germanic tribes would not have raided rome 500 years later (they would be neo-romans).

No Dark Age or at the most a shorter one. the romans could have been broken down by the moors instead. but in the 20th century when wilhelm II ascended the throne of germany he would have found a country of pacifists, having gone through the full gamut of romanization, feudalism, enligtenment and finally social revolution like the french and english before them. No WWI would result, and for that matter WW2 would not occur. (of course that is only a postulation, other countries might carry the mantle)
Well this is highly speculative, who knows maybe far worse things would have happened during history. I just think that, in contrary to most people, the dark ages did have a positive effect on western european development. There is this emperical law that says something like: before you can reach the highest peak you must cross the deepest valley. In other words dark ages are necessary to have golden ages afterward, bad times force society into efficiency. Most technological advancements are made during times of war (WW1 and 2).

[nokhor]

from 'online etymology dictionary'

German (2) - mid-14c., from L. Germanus, first attested in writings of Julius Caesar, who used Germani to designate a group of tribes in northeastern Gaul, origin unknown, probably the name of an individual tribe.

[Catiline]

The germans were in fact Gauls, but for most of history the Romans weren't bothered about distingiushing between Gauls and Germaans, they thought of them as pretty much the same thing.

Germanicus itself is a cognomen. The Romans had hundreds of Gaius Julius', consequently they added the cognomen to distinguish them, hence Gaius Julius Caesar (Gaius Julius the Hairy). Of course in time these stuck to families, so the famous Caesar was by no means the first to bear that name, and was perpetually embarrased by it, he himself being bald and somewhat sensitive about that state of affairs. There are plent of others Caecus - blind, Pulcher- pretty boy.

Conquering generals who got a triumph for their troubles were allowed to add a cognomen based on the peoples they'd conquered, so a Marcus Antonius got Creticus for conquering Crete, though it also means man of chalk, Numidicus was awarded for conquering the Numidians, germanicus for conquering the Germans. Needless to say comprehensive conquest doesn't always seem to have been necessary. the germanicus we're talking about here had his name bestowed upon him because of his father Drusus, who had the name awarded to him and his descendants for his successes against the Germans by the senate.

[Stefan the Berserker]

Where the name "deutsch" comes from: The Germanics had no name for them all in common, so when the East of the Frankish Empire became more important than the West one, the people of the so called "Holy roman Empire" needed a word to make a diffrence between them and the Italians. Deutsch is relative to the word "deutlich" and means nothing diffrent than "understandable". So "die Deutschen" means something like "those we understand" as a term for "my people". So, a word like "Allemannen" which means "Allmen".

You make me laugh making Arminius slaughtering Roman Civilists or Families: He never entered Roman Territory with his Troops The Romans were the Attacker.

The War between the Germanics and the Romans can be compared to Operation Overlord, the Romans thought to swep through Germania but it caused Time and more Time... After even Slavic tribes allied with the Allemannens they recognised that this was more a Death Trap than the road to victory.

Hermann was no Tyrant, this is prooved He held glorious speeches in the Allthing and did his very best to unite whole Germania... He defeated the foes of an united Nation by the Militaryway, but the Shadowgates were still open A feudal lord who thought he would lose his power if Hermann followed his plan to modify the Thing-Ritual and the Allthing that way so Germania turned in to a Constitutional Monarcy with him at the top murdered him. No oppositional Politics, just one (A)sshole was enough to kill him while a Blot festival... After his death all Dukes of the bigger tribes wanted to be the new Leader, but none had enough Skill or the idea that they could elect a new Boss

[Stefan the Berserker]

Where the name "deutsch" comes from: The Germanics had no name for them all in common, so when the East of the Frankish Empire became more important than the West one, the people of the so called "Holy roman Empire" needed a word to make a diffrence between them and the Italians. Deutsch is relative to the word "deutlich" and means nothing diffrent than "understandable". So "die Deutschen" means something like "those we understand" as a term for "my people". So, a word like "Allemannen" which means "Allmen".

You make me laugh making Arminius slaughtering Roman Civilists or Families: He never entered Roman Territory with his Troops The Romans were the Attacker.

The War between the Germanics and the Romans can be compared to Operation Overlord, the Romans thought to swep through Germania but it caused Time and more Time... After even Slavic tribes allied with the Allemannens they recognised that this was more a Death Trap than the road to victory.

Hermann was no Tyrant, this is prooved He held glorious speeches in the Allthing and did his very best to unite whole Germania... He defeated the foes of an united Nation by the Militaryway, but the Shadowgates were still open A feudal lord who thought he would lose his power if Hermann followed his plan to modify the Thing-Ritual and the Allthing that way so Germania turned in to a sort of an Constitutional Monarcy with him at the top murdered him. No oppositional Politics, just one (A)sshole was enough to kill him while a Blot festival... After his death all Dukes of the bigger tribes wanted to be the new Leader, but none had enough Skill or the idea that they could elect a new Boss

To inform you: A Blot is a Barbeque for a lot of people, no Tyrant would have the Nerves to walk directly through the Crowd. This Killer (A)sshole talked to him and then murdered him...

Anyway: Don't throw dirt in direction of the Germanics, Romans have done enough unright and much more unright If you are realistic Romans should be called Nazis because their Worldview was just the same. And I needn't say that "Ave" means Hail, or must I?

[Mithrandir]

Moved to the monastery, like all historical discussions.

[fastspawn]

Quote[/b] (Stefan the Berserker @ Nov. 17 2002,08:40)]Where the name "deutsch" comes from: The Germanics had no name for them all in common, so when the East of the Frankish Empire became more important than the West one, the people of the so called "Holy roman Empire" needed a word to make a diffrence between them and the Italians. Deutsch is relative to the word "deutlich" and means nothing diffrent than "understandable". So "die Deutschen" means something like "those we understand" as a term for "my people". So, a word like "Allemannen" which means "Allmen".

You make me laugh making Arminius slaughtering Roman Civilists or Families: He never entered Roman Territory with his Troops The Romans were the Attacker.

The War between the Germanics and the Romans can be compared to Operation Overlord, the Romans thought to swep through Germania but it caused Time and more Time... After even Slavic tribes allied with the Allemannens they recognised that this was more a Death Trap than the road to victory.

Hermann was no Tyrant, this is prooved He held glorious speeches in the Allthing and did his very best to unite whole Germania... He defeated the foes of an united Nation by the Militaryway, but the Shadowgates were still open A feudal lord who thought he would lose his power if Hermann followed his plan to modify the Thing-Ritual and the Allthing that way so Germania turned in to a sort of an Constitutional Monarcy with him at the top murdered him. No oppositional Politics, just one (A)sshole was enough to kill him while a Blot festival... After his death all Dukes of the bigger tribes wanted to be the new Leader, but none had enough Skill or the idea that they could elect a new Boss

To inform you: A Blot is a Barbeque for a lot of people, no Tyrant would have the Nerves to walk directly through the Crowd. This Killer (A)sshole talked to him and then murdered him...

Anyway: Don't throw dirt in direction of the Germanics, Romans have done enough unright and much more unright If you are realistic Romans should be called Nazis because their Worldview was just the same. And I needn't say that "Ave" means Hail, or must I?
i didn't say he invaded rome's territory

i said he killed civvies. the 3 legions carried along their families at the rear and arminius killed them all the same

listen, i am not dissing hermann, i recognize what he did was right in his time and in his eyes. i am just putting all the perspectives in view.

[Catiline]

the Romans were of the opinion that Germany was pacified, which goes some way to explaining the incompetence of Varus. His three legions were marching back to winter quarters when they were ambushed. Tactically arminius was very astute , it was evident three Roman legions in battle array wouldn't be defeated by the germans. three legions strungout and not on alert were a very different proposition.

Why on earth does Ave translating as hail mean that the Romans were nazis?

[Hakonarson]

I had thought that Germanicus got his name from defeating Germans, but I see he's listed as "Germanicus Julius Ceaser", so perhaps not.

Appart from that most of what Stephan posts is unadulterated trash of course.

Which is a shame 'cos otherwise it's quiet a good story.

His supposition that a "Rome" 2000 years after Teutonberger Wald would stil be the same as it was way back then is a good laugh for sure.

And then of course his statements that he Romans didn't have cavalry, that the Germans had longbowmen, knights and huscarles?? ROFLMAO

Oh you gotta love these nationalist fools for their sheer entertainment

there are a zillion "what if"'s from history.

Herman saved us? Well so did the Merovingian Franks - I don't recall the Franks being part of Hermans coalition. And then there's the Vandals and Goths of course - Germanic maybe, but they settled Spain and Nth Africa of all places - fortunately the Arabs saved us from them, and then the French saved us from the Arabs again at Tours.

And all praise for the English, who saved us from teh Upstart French at Agincourt and Crecy - can you imagine what life would've been like if hte French hadn't been hobbled by the HYW??

Zeut alors mon ami - and we'd all be speaking worse French than that with our snails and Frogs Legs (apologies to any Frnech folk reading this - I hope you've got a sense of humour http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif)

[Oda Matsu]

Spanish Jinettes ARE mounted spear-throwers.

[BlackWatch McKenna]

Hark -

The original poster is posting in a language which is non-native to him.

Don't take those descriptions literally - you need to allow for translation. The other option is that he could post in German and you could read it in that format.

[Azrael]

Hey Guys,

The Romans were like the Nazis?

Um, no.

A good little book that gives a nice overview of Rome around that time is "The Twelve Caesars", by Suetonius, a Roman Historian from around the Time of the Emperor Hadrian.

It gives a history of the Emperors, and to some degree, Roman society, from Julius Caesar to Domitian.

For a scholarly peice of work, this book is an extremely easy and interesting read.

I think you'll be surprised just how very much like our modern day selves the Romans seem to be (and possibly in some ways ahead of ourselves)?

In English, I recommend the Robert Graves translation, however, I'm sure there are some equally excellent translations in Deutche.

Both the Romans and the Nazis left us a great wealth of information about themselves. The Nazis in particular (since they didn't really take the time to destroy their archives during the allied advance).

I'm sure if you compare the two, you'll find there are numerous differences between Nazi Germany and the Roman Empire.

Anyone interested in the Roman Empire should give "The Twelve Caesars" a read.

Azrael

[Hakonarson]

Quote[/b] (BlackWatch McKenna @ Nov. 18 2002,13:37)]Hark -

The original poster is posting in a language which is non-native to him.

Don't take those descriptions literally - you need to allow for translation. The other option is that he could post in German and you could read it in that format.
I know that - that's why I didn't say anything about the mounted "spear chuckers", or Herman being a "Duke" and various other things.

However the other troop characterisations were nonsense in any language.

Also we forget the other nations that have "saved Europe" - famously the Poles at Leignitz and Vienna, the Serbs at Kossovo Pole, the British at Waterloo (hey - they saved us from the French Twice&#33http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif, the Swedes at Brietenfeld, the British at Trafalger (Thrice&#33http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif, Leonidas and his Greeks vs teh Persians at Thermopylae, Alex the Great.

I'm sure there are others - oh yeah, the Romans at Chalons lol

Imagine if Herman had defeated Rome then the Huns wouldn't have been defeated at Chalons and we'd all be riding small ponies, eating dried meat and lassoing our enemies

rofl....oh let's have some more of it please??

[AvramL]

I read somewhere that the word "German" or "Germani" was originally a corruption of a phrase that meant something like "shouts as a warrior". I have no way of confirming this though.
As for the types of soldiers employed by the ancient Germans, they fought mostly on foot with spear, javelin,sword or axe and consisted largely of trained household warriors or thegns along with their chieftains and escort. Specific weapons, dress and tactics varied slightly from one tribe to another, though all showed relatively little ability in terms of tactical maneuvers because they mainly trained as individuals (their greatest weakness). In really important campaigns these men would be supplemented by large numbers of poorly armed and armoured "fyrdmen" (as with all Germanic warriors they had to provide their own equipment, and, because they were not warriors, this usually amounted to a light spear or axe + a round Germanic shield - if they were better off, and for the most part, no other body protection) or militia. Though naturally such levies are limited because to conscript all the men in an area at once would leave no one to tend the crops etc. Therefore, Germanic armies tended to be composed mainly of the more proffessional men (still under armoured and to a lesser extent armed compared with the Romans who had the infrastructure to mass produce weapons/armour, even renowned Germanic warriors rarely posessed expensive body armour such as chain mail, but instead only a shield) who did most if the actual fighting and depending on the time of year, many fyrdmen to provide weight of numbers. The Germanic warrior was not payed a salary (though he took loot from campaigns) but was instead bound by an oath of loyalty to his chieftain who might elevate his status, the greatest dishonour a warrior could suffer was either betraying his chieftain or surviving him in battle.
Note: accounts of the time always inflate the numerical strength of Germanic armies in order to stress the greatness of the battle.
Also, because someone mentioned it. Traditionally, the Teutonic peoples (Germans) came down from sweden and took position of much of central Europe which at the time would have been occupied by other peoples such as the Celts (who originated in southern Germany). So, the Germanics were more of a mixed race than many people seem to think, given that a great deal of mixing must have occured between the Teutonics and others in order to create the Germanics that Julius Ceasar spoke of.

[fastspawn]

Quote[/b] (Hakonarson @ Nov. 18 2002,15:43)]
Quote[/b] (BlackWatch McKenna @ Nov. 18 2002,13:37)]Hark -

The original poster is posting in a language which is non-native to him.

Don't take those descriptions literally - you need to allow for translation. The other option is that he could post in German and you could read it in that format.
I know that - that's why I didn't say anything about the mounted "spear chuckers", or Herman being a "Duke" and various other things.

However the other troop characterisations were nonsense in any language.

Also we forget the other nations that have "saved Europe" - famously the Poles at Leignitz and Vienna, the Serbs at Kossovo Pole, the British at Waterloo (hey - they saved us from the French Twice&#33http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif, the Swedes at Brietenfeld, the British at Trafalger (Thrice&#33http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif, Leonidas and his Greeks vs teh Persians at Thermopylae, Alex the Great.

I'm sure there are others - oh yeah, the Romans at Chalons lol

Imagine if Herman had defeated Rome then the Huns wouldn't have been defeated at Chalons and we'd all be riding small ponies, eating dried meat and lassoing our enemies

rofl....oh let's have some more of it please??
the franks at tours against the moors, The british vs the spanish armada, wassiname at salamis, ...moses at the red sea... (hey all christians were at first hebrew ok),

[Catiline]

I htink it's more a case of expressing the greatness of the Romans rather htan the greatness of the battles, but Ancient figures are notoriously unreliable( for which read simple mindedly of maliciously made up). that said the huge sizes of German armies are undeniable even if as seems likely you have to reduce the figures by at least a factor of ten. these are amies though with no effective tactical control, and certainly no room for manuever. Roman legions arrayed for battle on ground of their choosing are almost invariably victorious in this period, the only exception being when they fought each other.

[Red Peasant]

For a good impression of what the 'Germans' were like, then read Ammianus Marcellinus' Histories. He fought as an officer in the armies of Constantius II and, especially, Julian in the 4th C. Now this is some 350 years after the events of Varus in the early empire, but even at this time the Germans fight mainly on foot. The leaders have mounts but their men insist that they fight alongside them as infantry. This is after 3 centuries of Roman-German conflict and the Germans were more savvy, and generally better equipped (usually copying a Roman pattern) than earlier, but a well trained and competently led Roman army was still a potent force.

It's a good account cos it is eye-witness, whereas the accounts of Tacitus and Suetonius were not eye-witness and most probably constructed around notions of historical probability and to certain rhetorical formulae. For example, accounts of battles in Tacitus are based around events that can be found in Livy. As Cat' says you have to be very careful with these sources, especially so with Suetonius because he is not a 'critical' writer but just spews forth 'facts' about his subjects.

[Catiline]

Suetonius is just asvalid as a source for this period of history, but it's tabloid journalism compared to broadsheets. Biography and history seem similar at this distance of time, but they provide different sorts of information and have very different agendas.