What do you mean by “strong”?

Throughout Late Antiquity, the Romans win the majority of their engagements against non-Romans. The Romans continued to enjoy their traditional advantages over the Germanic barbarians in organization, logistics, training, and equipment.

Even though Roman authors found it convenient to speak of wider groups such as “the Goths” or “the Alamanni”, it must be remembered these were not cohesive groups (and they most certainly did not possess a group identity). Germanic society in Late Antiquity was extremely decentralized and localized, with power exercised by petty kings and local elites. Geographic and “tribal” kinship ties formed the nexus of identity. Lacking writing and political centralization, Germanic groups rarely possessed the ability to sustain large forces, or effectively besiege Roman cities. Most Germanic raiding parties rarely exceeded several hundred men, and could be dealt with relatively easily by the soldiers stationed along the Rhine and Danube frontiers (the limitanei), who were supported by a complex infrastructure of fortifications (which included fortified bases of varying size, watchtowers, supply depots, bridges, and fortified landing zones). While Germanic weapons were qualitatively equal to those of the Romans, they lacked the logistical ability to produce them in sizeable quantities. Swords and defensive armor were thus confined largely to the elite classes.

By contrast, the Romans possessed a far more sophisticated military system. Weapons and military equipment was produced in large quantities by state-run arsenals (the fabricae), such that, at least in the fourth century, most soldiers would have been equipped with mail body armor and a helmet, along with a sword, shield, thrusting spear, and some type of missile weapon. Roman bureaucratic administration oversaw the distribution of equipment and supplies with great effectiveness, ensuring that (in theory), Roman forces could operate continuously in the field. As the army remained a thoroughly regular force, staffed by long-service professionals, Roman units engaged in constant training and drill. Training emphasized the maintenance of formation and the proper execution of battlefield maneuver, as well as weapons drill and physical conditioning. While the quality of training naturally varied from unit to unit (given the competency of regimental commanders), on aggregate, Roman units continued to exhibit high levels of training and discipline. By contrast, in Germanic society, only the elites and their armed retainers engaged in regular training. While the martial culture of Germanic society conditioned courage and discipline, ordinary Germanic warriors would not have undergone any real sort of systemic training regimen, especially at a unit level.

Centuries of interaction between Romans and non-Romans had a profound impact upon both, and as such it is possible to see an increase in Germanic tactical abilities during Late Antiquity, though we should be careful not to overemphasize this point, as there remained much continuity with earlier periods. While Roman sources often denigrated the combat ability of the Germanic peoples (in line with a standard trope of Roman literature, the “ill-disciplined barbarian”), it is clear that they possessed tactical abilities, especially through their use of ambushes, coordinated charges, and defensive barriers such as a wagon laager. Yet, as in earlier periods, Germanic peoples continued to avoid pitched battle with the Romans, as their preference for ambush attests. The principal Germanic tactic consisted of an ordered charge, spearheaded by elites and their well-armed retainers, the objective of which was to break a Roman line in a singular assault. As most Germanic warriors were relatively unarmored, and Germanic units, arrayed by geographic or kinship ties, lacked the training to maneuver like the Romans, Germanic strategy sought to avoid a protracted engagement, as the Romans, due to advantages in armor, training, missile weapons, and cavalry, tended to be favored in such contests.

In Late Antiquity, Roman soldiers were better equipped, better trained, and better supplied than their Germanic opponents. While Germanic warriors could be quite courageous, they remained critically disadvantaged against the Romans in battle. This is highlighted by the fact the Romans won the majority of their fights against the barbarians. While it is possible to see an increase in Germanic tactical abilities, they remained strategically disadvantaged, given the strength and dynamism of the Roman logistical system. The barbarians did not become “stronger” while Rome became “weaker.”