|
|
Post by karl on Jul 12, 2020 2:40:24 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Jul 12, 2020 3:48:04 GMT
I think the Romans would win. From what I remember from my worse subject in school (history) the Romans were very strong. I don't remember Mongols being mentioned as much as them so my vote goes to the Romans.
|
|
sai123
Full Member
Lifelong learner
Posts: 118
Likes: 86
Country: India
Region: Andhra pradesh
Ancestry: Globalist
Politics: Apolitical
Religion: Agnostic
Age: 18
Philosophy: Analytical
|
Post by sai123 on Jul 14, 2020 6:40:10 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by karl on Jul 14, 2020 13:00:43 GMT
I'm undecided on this. One reason why the Mongols did well in Europe was that the European foot soldiers were not professional and would often run away, while European knights did much better. I would have liked to see a test of Roman weaponry against Mongol armour, and Mongol weaponry against Roman armour and shields. Romans in their heyday were very adaptive. When facing Carthage, they knew little about shibuilding, but learned quickly, and eventually gained naval supremacy. One lost battle against the Mongols would have had them reconsider their strategy, tactics, weaponry, shields, and armour.
What I'm imagining is a Roman army lead by a Julius Caesar or a Scipio Africanus. Whether these leaders were less or more brilliant than Ghengis Khan is beyond me to know.
|
|
|
|
Post by nightvvisher on Jul 15, 2020 7:33:16 GMT
Romans would win, only reason they lost vs Parthians was bcs Parthians had organised constant supply of new arrows, so they couldnt just sit in testudo and wait for them to run out of arrows and then slaughter them
for more details look "Battle of Carrhae"
it would be hard battle, but similar to "Battle of Dorylaeum" where heavy infrantry smashed missile cavalry
but thats just my opinion, who knows...
|
|
