How do historians define or quantify the ability of less "civilized" people to engage in violence?

by cockofgod

As an example, the prodigious war capacity of Romans in the peninsula have way to administrative roles while the provincials did the fighting. Then the provincials were administrative and Germans did the fighting. Or take the ability of Afgans to resist the Soviets. Or the Vietcong. I don't think this phenomenon is questioned.

Have historians reached a consensus on a "cause"? Are urban civilized less exposed to violence in daily life and this less capable in battle? Or is life in urban civilized environments just that much better in comparison to war that war less desirable an option?

Does this tie into the general decrease in rioting in the US over the last 100 years?

Rustadk

I can honestly say I have never heard this discussion before, and I think the reason is that it isn't about history. Your question is sociology unless I am completely misreading this.