Romans and Germans

[soda]

I was wondering how could the Romans manage to defeat and subjugate the Gauls but never did the same with the Germans. Essentially they are very similar people with pretty much the same battle technique etc. I know the Romans struggled early on its early days with the Gauls but later on they swept through it rather quickly. Was the difference the generals? No other general really reached the ability of Julius Ceaser. Just wondering why the Roman techniques were so effective versus Gauls but they couldn't handle the German onslaught.

[Byzantine Prince]

Well Germany was very densely covered with forests and it's people were many and experienced warriors. Now you'll say so were the Gauls but it's not quite the same. Germans were much more intelligent warriors. They would strike in the dark and they were very good at ambushing.
The thing is that the Roman Empire was becoming more andmore corrupt and it was losing money. I'm not sure why but they stopped their expansion on the Rhine. Someone else should continue this. I really don't know why they started defending instead of invading.

[Gregoshi]

I know just enough about this to make myself look stupid, but in addition to the forests that BP mentioned, I think the Gauls were too attached to their towns. The Romans could better force them into battle at or near these fixed locations. I don't think the same could be said with the Germans.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

I was wondering how could the Romans manage to defeat and subjugate the Gauls but never did the same with the Germans. Essentially they are very similar people with pretty much the same battle technique etc

Gauls French born losers

Germans Germans born winners Except when it comes to world wars.

[discovery1]

Gauls French born losers

Germans Germans born winners Except when it comes to world wars.

Weren't the Franks a Germanic people while the Gauls were Celts?

Germania was left in charge of a stupid pos named varius. He really pissed off the Germans then walked into an ambush. I don't think anyone as incompetent headed up the Roman occupation of Gaul.

[Oaty]

The Romans were beaten by an inferior force at teutorborg forest wich took them decades to recover from.

Hannibal killed 300,000 Romans and allies and yet they afforded more legions and recruits to fight for the cause. They were still hurt by this but appearantly not enough.

So it's obviously the economical situation played a good role on this. Also the rhine river is possibly a good choke point with very few crossings for an army in mass, all Roman movements could be detected by a small scout party.

On top of this the Gauls had a much better road system for the Romans to use. The gauls had some elaborate paved roads between major cities and possibly of the same quality as the Romans. Now I have no idea how good the German roads were but the crossing of Teutorburg was an unfavorable road for the Romans to use and it prevented the Romans from using there cavalry on the flanks of the column to protect it better from an ambush.

Early on in the empire the Romans could quickly recover from major defeats but as she grew the recovery took longer.

So all in all Rome was becoming to big for her own good.

[Browning]

Look at the map.

In order to conquer Gaul, you have to walk form the Med to the Channel and from the Atlantic to the Rhine, obliterating anybody who opposes you and chasing those who run (lest they return). This is what Romans and especially Caesar could do and did.

In order to conquer Germania (back then in time), you have to walk from the Alps to... where to? Ahem, Nordcap?
... and from the Rhine to... ahem, where to? Urals?


Romans did try to "conquer" Germanic lands - as far as they could/found it suitable. E.G. most of the present day Bavaria was Roman. Emperors like Marcus Aurelius trashed the Germans repeatedly - thus there was nothing in the Germans as a folk that prevented them from becoming good Roman citizens...

[Adrian II]

Gauls French born losers

Funny.

[Watchman]

Gawain spell bad. Attitude smelly, too.

I've always gotten the impression the Romans never really found a reason to bother seriously trying to conquer the damn Germans. They already had the better farmlands of Gaul and an empire stretched to its logistical and adminstrative limits. Plus the Romans had had some old axes to grind with the Celts, and not coincidentially a military system that worked well against the somewhat ...limited Gaulish horde tactics.

The Germans, apparently, had a rather less accommodating way of waging war, and made far greater use of terrain.

Something to remember: the Celts had once been confined pretty much to the British Isles and northwestern France, but for one reason or another burst out of there some half a millenia earlier and overran much of wester, southern and south-central Europe. They'd apparently also driven the Latin tribes out of their old haunts in northern Italy.

But they apparently couldn't make much headway against the Germanic tribes.