and the 1st Century Roman Army? Would the technological gap be enough to ensure the French victory?
2007-05-06 12:52:10 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Well, this would be a VERY close call. The Roman legions would be at a serious disadvantage, using only bows & arrows, spears, and swords.
But the French Army doesn't have the best record for persistance or endurance or success, either (with the marked exception of World War I).
I'd have to go with the French, though. The Maxim machine gun and the 75mm howitzer would mow down the Romans like threshing grain.
2007-05-06 13:38:47 · answer #1 · answered by Dave_Stark 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think the WWI French would win, because they would have riffles, machine guns, and artillery,. The standoff range of these weapons would slaughter the Roman Army before they even got close.
So yes the French would benefit from the technology gap!
2007-05-06 13:15:41 · answer #2 · answered by csn0331 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
All the people who say Rome are pure idiots. Just hearing a French Howizer beigng fired would make the Romans run in Fear. Machine guns would decimate the Roman ranks before they even got close.Round apon round of rifle fire would Break Morale.
2015-05-23 06:05:09 · answer #3 · answered by Cameron 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'll play devil's advocate and go with the French, just to add some variety to the answers to this question.
2007-05-06 13:04:42 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Uh nooooooo. You should know better than this. The roman generals employed many many techniques that could challenge even the most skilled and well equipped modern general.
2007-05-06 13:00:48 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
I would have to go with the Romans...the French would surrender before any blood was shed
2007-05-06 12:55:28 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
the romans for sure, seeing as how Gaul, (France was technically Roman Territory anyway)
2007-05-06 13:35:23 · answer #7 · answered by arkainisofphoenix 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋