The Roman Empire at its height is dropped into the space between Gondor and Mordor during Frodo's journey. What happens?

The Roman Empire at its height is dropped into the space between Gondor and Mordor during Frodo's journey. What happens?

Other urls found in this thread:

np.reddit.com/r/whowouldwin/comments/2i9d1x/the_army_of_mordor_took_a_wrong_turn_and_goes_up/cl037el/
reddit.com/r/whowouldwin/comments/2i9d1x/the_army_of_mordor_took_a_wrong_turn_and_goes_up/cl037el/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

frodo and his wee pals get buttfucked and sold as slaves.

You... You do realize the Roman Empire at it's height was the size of Middle-Earth right? There isn't a "between" to put them in.

This
And also, the Romans would have wrecked everything in middle earth, then spiralled down to empire killing levels of degeneracy

At the peak of it's power, the Roman empire spanned almost the entire length of Europe.
This would give it a length of roughly 1,300 miles and a width of around 2,000 miles.
As Middle-Earth was considered by Tolkien to be Europe as a whole, just in a fantasy form, it would it equal to dropping Europe on top of Europe.

Neither side would likely survive the impact, depending on the height you dropped the Roman Empire from, but the Romans would have the higher chance to survive simply because they are the ones on top of this sudden impact.

>a woman
>fighting in the Legions

Get the cross.

>Rome at it's height had 380,000 soldiers in the legions and another 500,000 in reserve
They crush everyone

The fact that there's a woman part of the phalanx isn't even the part that annoys me.

The fact that she's too far forward, creating a break in the shield wall is what annoys me. And, apparently, the guy in the background that looks pissed off agrees with me.

>Neither side would likely survive the impact, depending on the height you dropped the Roman Empire from, but the Romans would have the higher chance to survive simply because they are the ones on top of this sudden impact.
I don't know why I laughed so hard at this.

Yeah this, Tolkien's battles were closer to medieval sizes which were much smaller...pretty sure Gondor and Rohan sent only like 3,000 to the last battle, and the army that attacked Minas Tirith was 10-20,000 in number. They would get wrecked with a couple legions.

Don't know how Romans would respond to the one ring though. Some of the Caesars were already hellbent on domination already

Fucking lol

This.
Any monster would be buried under countless showers of pila and artillery barrages and the hordes of orcs and other fell infantrymen would get crushed by the iron discipline of the legions.

I was wondering about that. We're talking about an empire that held territory on three continents (if we count Asia Minor as Asia).

This so much.
As a wargamer that enjoys a bit of historical accuracy this makes me cringe so fucking hard

.....But could they kill a Balrog?

Yeah, a huge amount of power would do really well, especially if it was right next to Mordor.

>Woman legionnaire
>Standing in front of the shield wall
>So much bust that it leaves a gaping hole in her armor
>Holding her shield up leaving her legs entirely exposed

They figured out elephants, and that was with their lightly equipped shit soldiers. They literally killed the elite terror inflicting shock cavalry of Pyrrhus with ultra-poor plebeians wearing wolf hats and armed with sharpened sticks.

No. But Sauron doesn't have any.

In a desolate world with no major roads, those numbers don't mean as much as you'd think. Then they run into Sauron, who can match them in resources and beat them in experience, not to mention monsters and actual magic at his disposal.

It probably wouldn't even come to open warfare, he'd just buy enough nobles to turn them into Black Numenoreans 2.0.

>Implying the Praetorian guard wouldn't kill the Emperor the moment he began showing signs of corruption

why wouldn't we?

Romamboos are as bad as weeaboos

>Implying the Praetorian Guard wouldn't then slaughter each other to claim the One Ring for themselves

For reference, the Roman Empire could casually deploy around 225,000 soldiers to major battles if the need pressed them.

The Siege of Gondor involved around 14,000 Western troops and 60-70,000 Eastern troops.

The Roman Empire's usual large-scale deployment would outnumber them both combined and annihilate them. That was also the biggest army the West could field, not counting around 6,000 more militia and reinforcements, so 20,000 is the best they got. They're done.

Sauron is better off. He may've had as many as 400,000 troops within Mordor, 320,000 not counting what he'd lose as Minas Tirith.

The Roman Legions would have no trouble until they got into Mordor itself, where they'd be dealing with Sauron's own sorcerous power, stronger and bigger Orcs, Trolls, Olog-hai, and other monsters that lived in the region, all fighting a guerrilla war and skirmishing the Romans while Sauron plotted a way to destroy them.

The Romans also possessed nothing capable of laying siege to Barad-dur, Sauron's fortress.

They would march into Mordor and it would be a grueling slugfest on both sides, and eventually the Romans would be forced to pull out, occupying the Black Gate and Minas Morgul but unable to get further in to Mordor itself. The Roman Empire was one of the finest armies in history at conventional melee/antiquitous warfare, but it fared poorly against guerrilla attacks and unconventional warfare, as the Germanic campaigns showed. Imagine the Germanics, except now they have evil monsters at their side and are led by an extremely powerful sorcerer.

Then there'd be a watchful peace, they'd grow lazy, and Sauron would return.

>All the factions try to struggle with the new and instant dynamic shift.
>It's a way better distraction than anything else and Frodo drops the ring off on time.

Why take bribes when you can just take everything?

Romans were pretty arrogant and self-centered. Well they had pretty good reasons for that at the time.

Made for you, user

>certus responsa

Let's take a moment to mention how Rome was not a well-oiled machine wholly dedicated to the science of war, but rather a bunch of fucktarded patricians raising armies out of their own pockets and going out to conquer foreigners for glory points. They knew how to fight, but against organized armies they'd usually lose over and over again until either the other side runs out of men or they get a lucky roll on their new commander. Remember Hannibal, and much they struggled against basic cavalry tactics in their eastern conflicts.

Ringwraiths though.

Actually is there anything left to corrupt? Romans already were pretty much hellbent on domination. Some caesars could have probably outdominated Sauron.

The moment they got means of travelling to Valinor they probably would have tried to conquer it. Because, why not?

Pilumed, chained and buried alive in stone prisons.

>breaking formation
>poor stance
>no helmet
1/10 would decimate

This is the single stupidest post I've ever seen. The Romans had massive military losses at times, but they learned and adapted from their defeats. It was their literal greatest strength.

Every defeat was a lesson. After Cannae, where most Romans lost a loved one, Fabius reinvented warfare. After Crassus marched 30,000 Romans to death or slavery following his senile ambitions, the Romans adapted and would later get each of their standards lost at Carrahe back at the point of the sword. In the first Punic war they went from not having a real navy, to defeating the greatest thalassocracy of the time in open naval warfare and became the most powerful state in the Mediterranean.

Do we also drop Olympus and a very pissed Mars Ultor on top of Ilúvatar or only on the Ainur in Valinor?

I'm not even a realisticfag but this is all kinds of wrong.

>Why take bribes when you can just take everything?
Because that's not a given by any means, against a mighty enemy who knows his way around guile, strategy and logistics. Because raising troops costs money. Because glory and plunder go to those who fight and win, which might not be you. Because this barbarian king is basically buying you into supreme power, which you can use to fuck over your immediate enemies. Because you're arrogant and self-centered. Sauron brought down an enlightened empire of literal supermen, he'd treat corrupting Rome as a vacation.

Then there are the Nazgul. Romans have no way of dealing with them, Sauron could attack them with nine separate armies that they can't stop.

>I'm not even a realisticfag
yes you are

Well if we drop Olympus let's also drop all the gods. All of them.

>Because that's not a given by any means
Somehow it rarely stopped Rome.

The Roman Empire vs The Mongol Empire, fought on the place usually abandoned by God when people fight; Central Europe. Poland, Hungary, Bohemia, those fun places.

What do you think happened to them before?
They still broke out, they'll just do it again, and inevitably the one ring will call to them.
Forever, until they complete their task.

>Every defeat was a lesson.
Yes, that's what I said. And Rome lived to learn those lessons only because they could afford getting their face kicked in every time they run into something new. For Fabius to reinvent warfare, Cannae had to happen. Crassus had to have fucked up against Parthia for them to realize rich retards being able to wantonly play war might not be the best policy.

If you want others to think you're smart, don't reply to sentence fragments.

>All these people talking about Rome fighting Mordor

Why? Why would the Romans pick a fight with the biggest and strongest military power in Middle Earth, when they could just make peace with Sauron, and get to work crushing Gondor and Rohan instead, and seizing lands that are already monster-free and fit for cultivation? Then there's the whole of western Middle Earth to colonise - Lindon, Dunland, the Shire and the old kingdom of Arnor.

The Romans would be far better off becoming Sauron's allies, and conquering everyone else.

>In a desolate world with no major roads, those numbers don't mean as much as you'd think.

The legions brought civilization with them. Hell, the legions probably spent more time building than they did fighting, especially during instances like the Gallic Wars. It's hard for modern people to image it, but the legions were totally self-sufficient and could in theory remain in hostile, undeveloped territory indefinitely. Let's go over some things Caesar did with his Legions.

>In response to the Gallic army building a massive fort, and another massive Gallic army on the way, the Caesar's response is to build an even bigger fort AROUND the Gallic fort.
>Caesar wants to be the first Roman to step foot onto Britain. The fact that he has no ships and no ports doesn't phase him; he orders his legions to build several hundred ships, FROM SCRATCH, in the middle of hostile and undeveloped northern Gaul.
>In Britain, Caesar and his legions are able to survive several months and wage successful campaigns despite the fact that they are totally cutoff from the mainland, have no knowledge of Britain in the slightest, and every single person on the island wants murder them.

Mongols specialized in one form of warfare Romans never managed to deal with effectively.

so, like Gondor?

Depending on from how high it is dropped it either crushes everything under it or destroy a good portion of the planet if not causing Armageddon.

>The legions brought civilization with them.

If they actually did, how come they only ever conquered places that had cities and kingdoms and had been part of the intercontinental trade network since stone age?

>implying the Praetorian guard need a reason to assassinate emperors

Really, from how much Romans get wanked in Veeky Forums I figured they were perfect and unbeatable. They never truly tasted defeat, and were gods of the battlefield with their superior tactics and discipline.

>Goddammit Titus, this is the last time we listen to your suggestions!
>B-but Amazonian auxiliaries sounded like a good idea at the time!

...

>What is Gaul
>What is Hispania
>What is Illyricum
>What is Britain
>What is Dacia

This must be b8

As much as I enjoy romeaboo posting I feel it's important to remind you people that rome was not done unbearable god of war. Even at its height it was regularly posed by Germanic barbarians that would pose an existential threat to the existence of the empire. At its height. It was by no means an unchallenged hegemony and it spent more time killing itself than it ever did killing anything else.

Saurons orcs would be many times more difficult to defeat than any of the powers Rome has fought because unlike the Germans or the parthians or the Greeks or the carthagians it has literal magic it can call on and the ability to corrupt literally anything. If you thought the Easterners were bad Rome would be many times worse.

> 1/10 would decimate

Ok I chuckled.

>Caesar wants to be the first Roman to step foot onto Britain. The fact that he has no ships and no ports doesn't phase him

user, that tin from South England didn't swim all the way to fucking Egypt itself.

They do. It's usually just "this other guy would pay us more and wok us less."

Places with kingdoms, cities older than Rome and oftentimes even roads.

Unlike say... Germany.

>The legions brought civilization with them.
And the expenses of doing that ruined Rome. Roads don't appear out of thin air and food and supplies don't magically travel down them. It all requires money, men, money, time, money, and more money. After you've pillaged every significant nation in the neighborhood and the raid money stops flowing in, standing army of 400,000 rapidly diminishes in value.

Pulla! Get back in formation!

To be fair, the Romans are the fathers of Western civilization (which has become global civilization whether you like it or not, through various means) in all ways, shapes and forms (except for what they stole from the Greeks). Between that and their many great achievements, it's close to impossible to overstate the importance of the Romans. If you said they were the single most important civilization to have ever existed and it's unlikely that they'll ever be surpassed, you'd be pretty close to the mark.

Not that guy, but you do realize that he had to build ships in at best untamed and at worst downright hostile territory, right? His legions were already away from Transalpine Gaul (the province), deep into central Gaul, with hostile Belgae to the North (who had to be fought off first) and Caesar basically told his men to chop down trees, build ships and sail them up the river into the Atlantic so they could invade Britain because why the fuck not.

Having kangz and muddy cart trails does not civilization make.

Haha holy shit, I just re-read OP's post again, and realised there's a whole other layer of stupidity to their question:

>is dropped into the space between Gondor and Mordor
>the space between Gondor and Mordor
>Gondor and Mordor

Gondor and Mordor border each other. There is no space between the two countries. For OP's scenario to make any sense, the entire Roman Empire would need to defy our understanding of Euclidean space, and somehow exist at all points along the highly fluid Gondor/Mordor divide, simultaneously. OP is asking what would happen if Quantum Romans invaded Middle Earth.

The Roman empire at its height Is dropped onto the Warhammer fantasy world, replacing both the Empire and Tilea. What happens?

To be fair, that's an unfair comparison as there is well over half a millennia time difference between the fall of Rome and the Mongols. The Romans did face and defeat horse-archer/cavalry-centric armies in the past though. They were able to defeat the Huns, for example, and enemies like the Britains and Parthians were also partial to cavalry.

Horse-archers are not the end-all be-all perfect type of unit, they have a great deal of vulnerabilities. The Mongols succeeded because they combined horse-archers, excellent heavy cavalry, and employed phenomenal generals and siege-engineers.

VOTE DENETHOR
MAKE ITHILIEN EUCLIDEAN AGAIN

They get wanked because they're everyone's dad. If you are a European from anywhere west of Germany and South of Scotland, Rome had a hand in your past. Roman law guided your kings, and for Americans, it was Roman heroes and patriots who inspired our own heroes and patriots. George Washington was called the American Fabius, and in his most important act as our first president he choose to emulate Cincinnatus instead of Caesar or Sulla.

>OP is asking what would happen if Quantum Romans invaded Middle Earth.
Gondor and Mordor exist in a state between conquered and not-conquered until either one of the following happens

>Copenhagen interpretation
As soon as Tolkien observes what has happened to his universe, Gondor and Mordor collapse to either the "conquered" or "not-conquered" state.

>Many Worlds interpretation
Two diverging timelines emerge, one in which Gonder and Morder have become provinces of the Roman Empire and one in which they have not.

>Not that guy, but you do realize that he had to build ships in at best untamed and at worst downright hostile territory, right? His legions were already away from Transalpine Gaul (the province), deep into central Gaul, with hostile Belgae to the North (who had to be fought off first) and Caesar basically told his men to chop down trees, build ships and sail them up the river into the Atlantic so they could invade Britain because why the fuck not.

It's what he said, but the fact is that commerce across the channel happened, we know that for a fact. So shipping definately happened and the locals knew safe landing spots up and down the english coast for sure.

Gotta remember that Cortez styled his own report on how he totes toppled an Empire without the help of a couple of million of natives after Caesar's books.

>quantum romans
hah!

>Places with kingdoms

Tribal "kingdoms" and confederations hardly pass as such.

>Cities older than Rome

No they didn't, places like Gaul and Britain were made up of villages and forts. They were never proper cities with actual dense population, permanent structures, and planning.

>even roads

If glorified trails and forest paths counted as such, then everyone had roads I guess.

But what about Khorne?

True, but Mongols went all the way with the concept, they were completely mobile. Meanwhile Romans did not have castles and fortified towns every 15 kilometers.

Should have used them as rearguard Titus

Their contributions to Western society isn't what's being questioned, or challenged. It's their supposed battlefield dominance, at least that's my issue with the disproportionate amount of love the Roman Legions get.

They get immediately fucked By beastmen, skaven, orcs, goblins, Bretonnia and either turn into a Khornate civilization or collapse within a few generations. Having no magic, no defense against magic, and no experience against monsters is a recipe for disaster

But, user, how could you not love that?

>It's what he said, but the fact is that commerce across the channel happened, we know that for a fact

Yes it did, but the fact still stands that the Romans never set foot there and only knew about Britain from second-hand accounts, and the trade that occurred between Gallic and British tribes wasn't formal in way that facilitated anything more than some fishing villages with some jetties.

>locals knew safe landing spots up and down the english coast for sure.

But the Romans didn't, so what's your point? The Romans flew into Britain totally blind and survived and returned in one piece.

>Gotta remember that Cortez styled his own report on how he totes toppled an Empire without the help of a couple of million of natives after Caesar's books.

Baseless speculation and irrelevant to the current discussion.

Well, you may have a point there. Rome's big strength wasn't so much being unbeatable as being able to bounce back from even the greatest defeats. In Italia Hannibal scored three great victories in quick succession, utterly brutalizing the Roman armies. This *should* have destroyed them, yet it didn't. Personally I'd say their unique citizen-soldier system is responsible for this. To Rome's soldier, in every battle more hung in the balance than just their lives and their paychecks. This is also why Germanizing the army was a mistake.

Jesus fucking Christ... My sides...

>Using wrong picture for that

a fucking a post

The Romans perfected the concept of heavy infantry, though. It's an apples and oranges type of situation.

>Having kangz and muddy cart trails does not civilization make.

It's pretty hilarious when you remember that the Romans marched with celtic helmets on their heads, celtic body armour covering their hides swinging celtic swords, spears and shields.

The pointy sticks they used to fortify their camps with were their own creations though. Admittedly.

This is why I still come to this board

>he Romans did face and defeat horse-archer/cavalry-centric armies in the past though.
>They were able to defeat the Huns

Okay, I know what you're saying, but this really shows just how nonsensical it is to talk about "The Romans" as a single monolithic entity. Rome's heyday lasted for the best part of a millenium, and underwent innumerable changes and shifts throughout its lifetime.

The Romans who beat the Huns were not the Romans who beat Hannibal, were not the Romans who beat the Gauls, were not the Romans who conquered Egypt, were not the Romans who were conquered by Brennus, were not the Romans who were conquered by the Goths. All of these conflicts occurred at different times, for different reasons, in different contexts, to different people. There is no ur-Roman one can look to as a standard.

The Marian reforms where a mistake, not Germanizing the army. The Marian reforms, paired with the rise of the latifundia destroyed the roman pastoral class who was the backbone of Roman society, and led to the armies being totally made up of Proletarii soldiers working with absolute loyalty to the general that got them loot instead Rome.

...

There's a somewhat famous, extremely detailed reddit (yes I know) post exactly about this which is probably where OP got the idea. The conclusion there was that the romans would win. Although it was against mordor and against everyone

np.reddit.com/r/whowouldwin/comments/2i9d1x/the_army_of_mordor_took_a_wrong_turn_and_goes_up/cl037el/

>Ay yo hol' up
>Smacks topknot
>So youz be saying
>Fucks sheep
>Youz be saying that
>Sacrifices virgin
>We wuz kangz n shiet?
>Gets conquered

As much as I don't like leddit this explains it pretty well

reddit.com/r/whowouldwin/comments/2i9d1x/the_army_of_mordor_took_a_wrong_turn_and_goes_up/cl037el/

not against*

"I believe people are seriously underestimating the Roman legions. First, let us talk about the size of the Roman Army under Trajan. The largest number I can find for the orcs is 250k at Pellanor Fields. This represented the vast bulk of Sauron's strength, if memory serves. The Roman Legions under Trajan are estimated to be around 350-400k. Keep in mind that a large majority of these troops are battle-hardened career soldiers.
While there may be initial shock value in the first engagement, the hallmarks of the Romans were adapting their tactics to suit their enemies. The Romans developed sophisticated methods to deal with war elephants, for example. It is unreasonable to assume they would not do the same for Mumakil etc. Keep in mind that Mumakil where effectively routed by a force of 6,000 Rohirrim cavalry. To say that the Romans are not capable of the same with their already established superior number is ludicrous.
As to the orcs themselves, they are usually portrayed as generally being inferior to men in their fighting abilities. They have less morale, fighting skills, and arguably worse equipment then then the Romans. They lack the discipline, unit cohesion, and fighting experiences of the Romans. While Mordor would be able to make initial strides with what I would consider specialized shock troops, they would soon be cut off and surrounded as Mordor's basic line infantry falls to legionnaires."

>The Marian reforms where a mistake

>t. Equite

This. Even with the lack of steel weapons, they would habe too many number and just roll over everyone.

(Cont) "Keep in mind the martial mentality of the Romans, these are the people who lost an estimated 50-70k men at the battle of Cannae. To put that in perspective, the Romans took as many causalities in ONE DAY as the United States took in the ENTIRE VIETNAM WAR. Further consider population levels at the time: loosing 60k men when the entire population of Rome was around 400k was an enormous loss. This is also not counting the casualties they had already sustained from Trebia and Trasmine which approximates to around an additional 40k losses. Even after sustaining these horrendous loses against arguably the greatest general in history, the Romans absolutely refused to surrender. They went so far as to outlaw grieving in the city itself. After these setbacks, the Romans adapted their tactics (weird!) and continued fighting for another 10 years before finally claiming victory.
This should give a small glimpse into the absolute single-mindedness of the Romans--they will not be intimidated, they will not back down, and they will not cut and run. You will have to kill each and every single one of them to defeat them. Ok, that last sentence was a bit of hyperbole, but you get the point.
So before this gets any longer:
Unless Mordor can effectively disorganize and completely rout the Roman army in the opening engagement of the battle, they will be outmaneuvered and defeated.
Without the prospect of a decisive battle to thoroughly defeat the Romans, this is even worse for Mordor, again they are defeated.
While Sauron's presence greatly enhances the capabilities of Mordor, if he does not have the ring, the Romans still win. Albeit with significantly greater casualties.
Ninja edit: also people, think about how Mordor has to advance through the fire OF THE ENTIRE ROMAN ARTILLERY CORPS. Think of the beginning of Gladiator, now multiply that by a thousand."

So, this is what happens when someone think that wanking on a roman history book is actually learning about antiquity.
How can one even pretend to know anything about Rome or Romans when they display such massive show of ignorance about their enemies? I mean, the next step in your arrogance and gullibility is to start to actually believe that Carthage did children murder once a week. But you don't, right?

>all that romeaboos

I like Rome Rome was cool but please remember Sauron had millions of orcs, trolls, the nazgul, and servants with the fel powers of necromancy

Aragorn was a literal super human descended from ancient superhuman ubermensch wielding a sword that cut a fallen angel with at one point an army of undying spectres

And the elves, Jesus fuck the elves

Rome was nothing if not pragmatic. They would see the reason in forming a temporary alliance with the western men as they were suddenly a buffer state between them and literally satans cock sock. They provide a huge confusing distraction which allows the ring to be destroyed without Aragorn marching out his army from Gondor and suffering casualties at the gates of the black lands

As for what happens after Sauron is destroyed, who can say. I think Rome would look East for easier pickings than the literal returned king of prophecy though