Fiercest Barbarians

[Macilrille]

Actually, he asked for the fiercest barbarians, and if there's anything I can assure you with certainty, than it will be the fact that the Romans are indeed not very fierce. Maybe in the bedroom though.

I do not wish to derail the thread, but you have an agreement with EB to read more history. If we count the Romans as barbarians then they were historically fiercer than anyone. Disciplined yes, but warlike in the extreme and savage in victory. Harris, W. V.: "War and Imperialism in Republican Rome, 327- 70 BC," Oxford, 1979. Goes into much detail on this. I do not agree on all his points, but I do percieve the Romans as incredibly brutal even for a brutal time, a belief supported by much evidence.

However, they were brutal sort of like the Germans of WWII were, not very "wild, untamed and barbarian", but rather organised and brutal.

The most untamable barbarians would be the Germanic tribes probably and in EB I would say Sweboz with Getai as second, those 4+ Chevron units really kick behinds...

[artavazd]

I do not wish to derail the thread, but you have an agreement with EB to read more history. If we count the Romans as barbarians then they were historically fiercer than anyone. Disciplined yes, but warlike in the extreme and savage in victory. Harris, W. V.: "War and Imperialism in Republican Rome, 327- 70 BC," Oxford, 1979. Goes into much detail on this. I do not agree on all his points, but I do percieve the Romans as incredibly brutal even for a brutal time, a belief supported by much evidence.

However, they were brutal sort of like the Germans of WWII were, not very "wild, untamed and barbarian", but rather organised and brutal.
The most untamable barbarians would be the Germanic tribes probably and in EB I would say Sweboz with Getai as second, those 4+ Chevron units really kick behinds...

We can say that about all of the participants of wwII (destruction of Drezden?, Hiroshima Nagasaki?)

[Cute Wolf]

I think Romans are barbarians in some aspect, but in this thread, classifying Romans as barbarians will derailing this good thread, and we need to classify that what did we said as barbarians in this thread are those who have "barbarian culture on EB", as no one speak about the Nomads as a barbarians.....

[Macilrille]

We can say that about all of the participants of wwII (destruction of Drezden?, Hiroshima Nagasaki?)

I think this is not the place for such a discussion and was but providing an example, but to my mind there is a world of difference between bombing civilian populations to break the will of a state to fight and the organised mass murder carried out by Nazi Germany. No one else had Einsatstruppen and extermination camps. That debate, however, does not belong here, I just cannot abide historical inaccuracy- five of my balloons was earned by correcting inaccurate claims on the Waffen SS.

I especially cannot abide it from apologists, which- I am sorry to say (I hope it is not so)- your comment to my example smacks of. With heads of state denying The Holocaust there is the more need than ever to keep the memory of it without blaming the poor Germans of today- how can they be responsible for what their grandparents did? I for one has no bad conscience because my ancestors plundered the civilised world a thousand years ago ;-) But we must remember!


Now the thread is about the EB timeframe, and I believe the OP meant barbarian factions in the sense of having barbarian building tree, in other words West European cultures/peoples without an organised state or at most organised on the level political scientists call Chiefdoms.

[Ludens]

This is indeed not the right place to discuss that subject. A similar discussion is currently going on in the Monastery, though.

Let's go back to topic. Any further "Romans are Barbarians" nonsense in this thread will be deleted.

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

Wow, Romans as the nazis of antiquity, that's a new level. I want to point out that Macilrille does not belong to the Romaioktonoi and step out of this thread because it was derailed and I don't want to be drawn into this, and especially not into some kind of German bashing.

[ziegenpeter]

I think this is not the place for such a discussion and was but providing an example, but to my mind there is a world of difference between bombing civilian populations to break the will of a state to fight and the organised mass murder carried out by Nazi Germany. No one else had Einsatstruppen and extermination camps.

We can say that about all of the participants of wwII (destruction of Drezden?, Hiroshima Nagasaki?)

I don't want to talk down to you guys and I appreciate the effort. I myself like to be corrected wether it's in a foreign language or even in my mother tongue, so it is:

Dresden and Einsatztruppen ;)