@@michaelmcgee2026 what's annoying about people like you is he literally said that so many times. And it's literally right there in the info about the video. Not like he's taking credit for anything. There's so many of these comments and it annoys the fuck out of me loll sorry your the one I'm saying something to
0:00 Episode 12 "The First Samnite War" (343-341 BC) 18:18 Episode 13 "The Latin War" (340-338 BC) 32:33 Episode 14A "A Phalanx With Joints (Pt. 1)" 43:59 Episode 14B "A Phalanx With Joints (Pt. 2)" 1:01:00 Episode 15A "The Second Samnite War (Pt. 1)" (327-321 BC) 1:19:19 Episode 15B "The Second Samnite War (Pt. 2) (321-304 BC) 1:34:02 Episode 16 "The Third Samnite War" (298-290 BC) 1:49:43 Episode 17 "Pyrrhic Victories" (290-272 BC)
Kraven Moorehead just to be clear... he just compiled someone else's massive, epic, podcast. If you want to thank someone, look in the info at the top of the video. Timaeus is decent enough to give credit to Mike Duncan. I would be pissed if someone was being ambiguous about whether they were the author of such a voluminous, time consuming piece of work.
We all owe Mike a huge debt of gratitude for all his hard work. He is truly deserving of all the credit for bringing history lovers a series that truly captures the imagination.
Early Roman history feels like a well-balanced video game, where every next level is just a little harder than the previous one for the optimal difficulty curve. First they fought with Sabines and Volsci and Veiians, then they fought with Etruscans and Samnites, then with Magna Graecia and Epirus, then with Carthage, then with the Hellenistic empires of the east. Every next enemy was one step up from the previous one and neatly matched Rome's own strength at the time. They always could keep climbing the ladder step by step, and the next step was never too high. Their entire history never could have happened if an empire like Carthage or Macedonia had been close by in their early days, they would just have been subjugated, but because they wouldn't meet other big empires until they had become a big empire themselves, they could match them.
Also, they seem to consistently win two front wars (much to the envy of the germans nay?). First the Samnite and etruscans, then the carthaginians and greeks, then the kimbri and numidians, then the social wars....until the fronts are so far apart they can hardly be considered 2 front wars, like the persians and gauls
my friend was messing about on his guitar and started playing the music from history of rome, I fully lost my shit. he will never know how much this little tune means to me
EdMcStinko It’s hell when you find yourself in a tight street against phalanxes though. I buy up every phalanx mercenary I can get my hands on, if you can’t flank them, the only thing that beats a phalanx is another phalanx.
I watched your series Roman History 1,2 and halfway through 3. I would like to tell you how much i very much appreciate your content, by far the best on you tube. Thank you
You've put so much to and effort into educating others, Whilst expecting nothing in return. It bothers me that these videos don't have the amount of views that they deserve.
These videos are from Mike Duncan's podcast. I have only compiled the episodes and uploaded them to youtube. :) A link to his site is in the description of each episode.
Hank Lovechild The guy who actually made these podcasts has millions of views and I suspect has been appropriately rewarded for his hard work. Timaeus was just kind enough to take the time to upload to RUclips in nice combined chunks of the podcast episodes.
4 years later but I found these videos like 6 months ago and I'm not gonna lie almost every night I watch them and fall asleep listening lol I freaking love them so much
Does no one in the comments realise that the guy who posted this did not make this at all? This is Mike Duncan’s History of Rome podcast. Mike Duncan never posted his podcast on youtube. Mike’s History of Rome podcast and Revolutions podcast are both free on major podcasting platforms.
I have listened to quite a few audio books on the ancient Roman world. This is some of the best history and analysis I have heard. Awesome work. I will definitely do it all.
This provide such great amount of information in very short time. It give a great overview over the most important events and characters. Thank you very much for this awesome content! Best wishes from Germany
Wow. Listening to the breakdown on legions - just wanted to say this is a fine series of videos and very informative! Have you ever considered doing a similar series for ancient Greece? Or for ancient vedic or South American cultures? Cheers, and once again ty for your work on this!
+- Timaeus - you bet I do , I love it, you know , consider me a trapped guy in an stupid country iran, who loves rome and America more than anything , thanks for your efforts I now can lesson to roman history , in not an stupid language but a Latin based one :) I was just wondering if you can upload more of these, after (augustus)??!! I would love it and I'm already sharing it with friend in (the roman) in face book
Madman Loves Power No, I am compiling Mike Duncan's Podcasts into a You tube series. The link is in the description. It's easier to watch them on you tube.
i have listened to this podcast so many times. each time i get pulled back into roman history. a deeper dive into the small not so famous stories. rome truly was not built in a day and this podcast does a great job of why thats the case. i would recommend it to anyone who is interested in roman history
This stuff is fascinating to me. The military and political history especially. They were so advanced but you’d imagine they’d be more primitive in those fields. They did so much in a few hundred years. But if you’re really consider humanity there were just as advanced societies for thousands of years in the Mid East.
Was just piss farting about when,at 1hour and 59 minutes, you got me with the Old leg trick. Nice little Ohh you got me there mate. Best commentary ever.... And I mean ever, apart from some dude that was narrating a book called Kingz of the Wyld. Was on RUclips until someone got it deleted. But I digress. Greetings from Australia 🇦🇺
Great stuff, obvs, but curious if and at what chapter the sound level becomes equalized. Like to listen at night but can suddenly get much louder than previous bit.
1:28:30 Of my goodness does that sound both epic and silly. Given how muhc fantasy and ancient supersticions are intermingled. I can jsut imagine the consul and his men constantly rolling perception at every twick and sound breaking out. :D
so publius decius mus who recieved the grass crown for sacrificing himself, has a son, also named publius decius mus who was a consul in the second and third samnite wars, who has a son also named publius decius mus, now in the Pyrrhic wars. wtf
LanzeLLoth hardly an anomalous thing among the Patrician class. Also, those children may have been named something totally different as children, only later taking on their respective father's name after a few military adventures and entering into the political sphere.
Early Rome was very similar to Sparta after emerging victorious from the Peloponnesian War. The only real difference was that Rome won her battles when they counted and Sparta didn't. It's amazing how close almost all early Rome's battles were. They all could have easily gone the other way, but the Romans always managed to just barely pulled through by the skin of their teeth. It actually took a very long time for Rome to start to snowball out of control. I think that is testament to how formidable their opponents were during those early years.
You said that one of the consuls of 297/295 BC (who fought and won at Sentinum) was Marcus Valerius, but don't you mean Fabius Maximus? And didn't Alexander the Great ascend to the throne of Macedonia in 336 BC (instead of 338 BC)?
Thanks for watching :) This is from the podcast series The History Of Rome by Mike Duncan. He finished it years ago but no one has put them on youtube so I started making these videos putting several 20 minute episodes in each video.
Thank you for posting this and for all your research. This is truly getting me through the workday. I work in healthcare and it’s kinda going crazy (gee I wonder why). I was under the impression that while honor and glory were huge factors in terms of not fleeing from battle, wasn’t decimation used as well to ensure that the troops were more terrified by their own superiors than they ever would be by the enemy? Thank you again!!
Daniel Eriksson Very true. Which makes me even MORE interested in the situations where it was enacted and wishing (an impossible wish) that I could gain more insight into the thoughts of all those involved.
I’m coming back after listening to pretty much all of the Revolutions Podcast. He’s a lot more relaxed and easy going in those, that’s the thing I notice most.
52:00 all of this information is going to be super useful for my Rome campaign in Rome 2 total war. I was wondering why the triple line and acies were the way they were. I thought it strange to put missile infantry in front and leave gaps between the melee troops, now I get the point of that. I guess the reason they were arranged in columns rather than in a line like the missile infantry is to provide an easy avenue of retreat and improve mobility. I suppose the idea is that once the battle begins the columns would march forward and widen out to meet the enemy. I originally was treating the game a bit like battle for middle earth I guess which likely accounts for the casualties. in the campaign for battle for middle earth I found the safest strategy was to just make archer/ melee combined units, form a front line and slowly march it across the map one group at a time a short distance before stopping them again to cut down the next enemy attack. the idea was that the archers would fire over and through the melee troops in front (no friendly fire) and weaken the enemy, who would then be stopped and cut to pieces by the infantry directly in front of the archers. Boring, time consuming but effective when playing as any of the good guys and hoping to prevent the less of veteran units while standing up to the seemingly endless stream of enemies that throw themselves at you.
Ah, I love the Total War Series... From my experience playing them, compared to Middle Earth I think the Total War games in general tend to require much more tactics and over-all strategy in the "War Mode" while ordering troops to march and engage the enemy along with all the other commands involved. Even while in the Easiest Settings for the "War Mode" in Total War games it is still very involved, you can never just set the troops into regiments and set the layout of the army and then march them forward to engage whatever enemy troops you might encounter... It is always best to be totally involved on both the Macro and Micro level of tactics and orders and never just speed through with the "x2,x3 Time Button" unless you really have no orders to be made at that time. Also always be looking for fatigued troops that might be tired, for example a mistake tons of people make is marching at max speed with the entire army to get to the engagement because you don't feel like waiting, and then forcing your troops to engage right away after marching at max speed while they are still fatigued from the march is never good but is something many people end up doing when I watch Total War videos here on RUclips. So you want to make sure you are starting all your engagements with max stamina and none of your troops fatigued or tired, and then throughout the engagement you want to be checking all of the front line, or troops that are currently engaged in combat, to make sure they are not getting too fatigued or having the morale of the regiment drop too low, or else they will be beaten much faster or even just route all together. So you want to be switching out the troops on the front line that are actually engaged and doing the fighting if any of your regiments or units get fatigued and have low stamina/morale then try to switch them out with a fresh regiment that is waiting right behind the front line in the reserve so you can make a quick engage command with the reserve troops and once they engage, order the fatigued units to pull back to where the reserves are waiting so they don't end up routing and you losing any control of them whatsoever. Plus another benefit of avoiding routed units is no matter how low the regiments get during the battle, at the end of combat you can recover all your regiments back to full unit strength and the regiment gets to keep all of its combat experience, it is much more cost effective over the long-term campaign.
thuzan117 well, you're supposed to put your missile troops into skirmish mode, so they retreat if enemy infantry gets too close, then turn and fire their missiles once they have a bit of distance... they're basically supposed to soften up the enemy and fuck with their stamina and morale before your legionnaires collide with them. If you're only lining up your missile troops behind your infantry, you aren't commanding your troops well. The only exceptions to this would be if you're at a major cavalry disadvantage and don't want to expose your skirmishers and missile troops to cavalry charges, or if you're defending a town or fort, in which case you put your missile troops on the ramparts interspersed with heavy infantry to repel ladders etc. Occasionally, I will also leave Cretan archers and other super long range missile troops with very low melee and armor abilities behind the heavy infantry, as they can still hit the enemy many times before Melee begins, and just so I don't need to micro manage them in the heat of battle. After retreating behind your heavy infantry, if you aren't too worried about enemy cavalry, it's a good move to use your skirmishers as flanking forces and run them around the edges, so you can start hitting the enemy from the flanks and rear with missiles, which will help reduce friendly fire casualties and will greatly reduce enemy morale.
Awesome awesome stuff, really enjoying these..right now im reading a series of books about Publius Corneilus Scipio: africanus and the second punic war...really really recommend them but they are not translated to english language, sooo thats a bummer...any idea where i can find maps of the different regions of that epoche?
No, I mean like the ones you showcase in your videos, so i can better picture where the different cities of the etruscan league and rome's enemies to the east and south aswell as the borders of magna greece ,the different provinces and stuff like that. Didnt mention it before but thanks for posting such great content...planing to listening to them all by the end of the summer! Thanks Tim!
I think the problem with Alexander the Great conquering Rome is that Rine would not have stayed conquered. They would just wait until Alexander died and the proceed with revenge. Or am I missing something.
I just want to say that it's nonsense that pre-phalanx armies were disorganized messes, that charged at each other and engaged in single combat. Sure armies would have been variously organized and disciplined, depending on various factors, but for an army not to engage as a unit would mean certain defeat, and no civilizations would do that.
Edward Kiel Often in the far East like Japan the warrior civilisation; "Samurai" if you will, fought one on one in the battlefield very often. It is interesting to read about the battles. They even said often before the two lines collided they were shouting out there opponents names to call them out to them so as to ensure one on one sword fights.
I think you may be viewing the Japanese warrior culture in a bit of a romantic light, but none the less, you said " before the two lines collided", so you're not talking about a disorganized mess, but an organized army, so my point stands.
Edward Kiel So obviously your taking the term disorganized mess in terms of the podcast way too literally. An army is an army and a mob is a mob its very distinct in terms. Armies are a unit and at the same time can be a disorganized mess as well as, or engage in one on one melee. So I'm not really sure what your point is that still stands. And btw I'm not thinking romantically about anything. It's simply what i read in researching the history of the Samurai.
You're quite wrong. Warfare grew out of tribal skirmishes of a few dozen warriors engaging in disorganised combat and it remained that way for a long time. We only have to look at the Iliad to see how individual warriors fought each other in single combat rather than as part of tightly disciplined units.
@@LoneKharnivore 1st the illyad is a work of fiction possibly based on a true event. The one on one fights your describing are more accuratley duels. The fall of troy was at the end of the late bronze age. Given the estimated no of greeks under various kings of course there was organisation. Even if its a simple as what kings mob as you put it attacked where. In this era the tactics were infantry and chariot ...so of course organisation was needed. The battle of kadesh illustrates that. 2 troy was a seige. Seiges by definition have to be organised to cut off a city.
Colonel Carrillo or more like the Scottish highlanders were tough Bastards like the sanmites. With sanmites being around way before Scottish highlanders were even a thing. Ain't that something.
Actually, that "ain't" something, because that "ain't" true. There is a clear record of civilization in the area known today as Scotland which dates back to at least 7,500 BC. Hope this helps.
How many kinds of Roman rules was there until first century? I need 5 different kinds before around 1 century - do any of you Historians know if this is possible? I have Kings, Republic and Empire but empire may have been the 6 rule already so....
I honestly don't know. The classic divisions are the Kingdom, Republic and the Empire. Technically it was a simple Dictatorship under Caesar and then Augustus was the first emperor. Then there was the period of the Tetrarchy starting with Diocletian from 284 to 324. I can see five over the whole timeline but not in the B.C. era alone.
Hmm... Thanks for your answer - a Tetrarchy... ahh, so this is the time of Constantine as well... I just can't get this Beast thing to fit... I feel like a child playing around with different pieces that needs to be turned correctly to get it in the box.
It was Quintus Fabius Maximus Rullianus, not to be confused with Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus Cunctator. This is a lovely podcast by Mike Duncan and is a great tour through Roman History. It is not perfect however and the certain details sometimes get confused. He usually corrects them as the series progresses. Thanks for watching. :)
The common practice in the ancient world was to have cavalry at the sides so that the phalanx cannot be flanked. However, the Romans rarely used this.( Not sure why, but maybe because the Romans were not really good with horses. For example, during Caesar's Gallic campaign most of the cavalry were men from allied Gallic tribes.)
Phalanxes tended to shuffle left... The spartans trained not to and coukd wheel and manouvre while engaged. The roman phalanx is lucky it never met the spartiate army
man, I love this podcast so much, but I find only one small tinny detail...SPOILER ALERT. Allow me to be surprised, Mike, he always says the end result before even getting into the thing.
Don't like to be pedantic, because it's hard to find much about republican Rome, and I appreciate the research, but Latin doesn't have a hard c. Decius should be pronounced as DeKious. Decemerate was dekemerate. Liked the video.
Mzee Watk If you don't like to be pedantic, than don't be pedantic. Do you call Julius Caesar, Iulius Kaiser? No, because you most likely speak English, and don't speak Latin, and as such, generally use English pronunciations. Even modern Italian has a soft C. A person named Caesar, would pronounce their name "Chezz-aer-Ay". If this podcast was about the Latin language, then your comment would be highly topical and useful. As it is, you really are just being a pedantic asshole to gratify your own sense of superiority.
It is proper for English speakers to use conventional English transliterations when referring to these events. Besides, Latin has changed over time. What was true in the time of Julius Caesar, was not true in the time of Constantine, certainly not true in 400bc! We have no idea how they pronounced Latin way back then.
If I could go back in time I would choose a time in which I could have talked to Alexander of Macedonia and try to convince him not to worry about Persia. Better to conquer Italia. You could take care of Persia later. As they were not unified in these times. He might have had me beheaded.😂😂😂
I love it! 😂😂😂 eagles got lucky with Brock purdy getting hurt. Agree. Short lived. Team was built to win this year. This eagles roster will get worse every year from here on
Romans, Persians, Greeks, Turks, Arabs, Aramaics, Armenians, Russians, Sumerians, Phoenecians, And Portuguese really knew how to handle large land swaths
I found it fascinating that the Roman hero Corvus Valerian has a very similar name to the fictional character Corlys Velaryon from Fire and Blood by GRR Martin. Must have been the inspiration for the name
"If I can stretch it out into one more podcast episode I can die happy." -Etruscan Commander
lol :)
@@larrymays4244 he just uploaded the podcasts. He's not the one that made them
@@michaelmcgee2026 @1:35:40 is the comment from the podcaster (Mike Duncan) which he is joking about x)
@@michaelmcgee2026 what's annoying about people like you is he literally said that so many times. And it's literally right there in the info about the video. Not like he's taking credit for anything. There's so many of these comments and it annoys the fuck out of me loll sorry your the one I'm saying something to
🎉@@-timaeus-9781
Listening to the troubles and accomplishment of Romans and other people's throughout the ages is cathargic.
0:00 Episode 12 "The First Samnite War" (343-341 BC)
18:18 Episode 13 "The Latin War" (340-338 BC)
32:33 Episode 14A "A Phalanx With Joints (Pt. 1)"
43:59 Episode 14B "A Phalanx With Joints (Pt. 2)"
1:01:00 Episode 15A "The Second Samnite War (Pt. 1)" (327-321 BC)
1:19:19 Episode 15B "The Second Samnite War (Pt. 2) (321-304 BC)
1:34:02 Episode 16 "The Third Samnite War" (298-290 BC)
1:49:43 Episode 17 "Pyrrhic Victories" (290-272 BC)
"The first Samnite war would prove to be mere foreplay between the Romans and the Samnites" And people say history isn't sexy........
57badarse I’ve tried tellin my wife it was, she wasn’t impressed...
Dude….. You have saved thousands of people months if not years of dedicated sturdy… THANK YOU!!!! really
Thanks for watching man. Glad you enjoy it. :)
Kraven Moorehead just to be clear... he just compiled someone else's massive, epic, podcast.
If you want to thank someone, look in the info at the top of the video. Timaeus is decent enough to give credit to Mike Duncan. I would be pissed if someone was being ambiguous about whether they were the author of such a voluminous, time consuming piece of work.
Thanks timaeus and Mike Duncan. Love these podcast and it’s ease of accessibility here on RUclips.
Its pretty basic
If you really believe this podcast is the equivalent of *years* of study, then perhaps studying isn't for you anyway.
I listened to this entire Podacst by Mike Duncan several years ago. Absolutely fantastic series.
This is a podcast by Mike Duncan, Timaeus is only the uploader.
We all owe Mike a huge debt of gratitude for all his hard work. He is truly deserving of all the credit for bringing history lovers a series that truly captures the imagination.
10 minutes of this is better than everything Mary Beard has ever said or written about the Romans
She’s a diversity hire pushed by a morally bankrupt organisation.
Early Roman history feels like a well-balanced video game, where every next level is just a little harder than the previous one for the optimal difficulty curve.
First they fought with Sabines and Volsci and Veiians, then they fought with Etruscans and Samnites, then with Magna Graecia and Epirus, then with Carthage, then with the Hellenistic empires of the east.
Every next enemy was one step up from the previous one and neatly matched Rome's own strength at the time. They always could keep climbing the ladder step by step, and the next step was never too high. Their entire history never could have happened if an empire like Carthage or Macedonia had been close by in their early days, they would just have been subjugated, but because they wouldn't meet other big empires until they had become a big empire themselves, they could match them.
Also, they seem to consistently win two front wars (much to the envy of the germans nay?). First the Samnite and etruscans, then the carthaginians and greeks, then the kimbri and numidians, then the social wars....until the fronts are so far apart they can hardly be considered 2 front wars, like the persians and gauls
They never quite got Parthia, Persia, India, or China
@@Danaluni59what if Trajan kept marching east…
@@jeffspicoli8293fall off world 🎉
O😊
"At least if they faught, they could be the subject of at least one more podcast episode." Classic.
I wish he had continued through Byzantium myself.
Fought*
my friend was messing about on his guitar and started playing the music from history of rome, I fully lost my shit. he will never know how much this little tune means to me
But did you truly lose your shit?
What're the chords??
Thank you for having these videos they pass so much time at work when I listen to you.
I remember the Phalanx from Rome Total War. Very frustrating.
Then I figured out "Oh, all you have to do is flank these guys?"
EdMcStinko It’s hell when you find yourself in a tight street against phalanxes though. I buy up every phalanx mercenary I can get my hands on, if you can’t flank them, the only thing that beats a phalanx is another phalanx.
@@rossblack2507 and archers
I watched your series Roman History 1,2 and halfway through 3.
I would like to tell you how much i very much appreciate your content, by far the best on you tube. Thank you
Glad you like it. Thanks for watching :)
Mike Duncan is the one to thank.
You've put so much to and effort into educating others,
Whilst expecting nothing in return.
It bothers me that these videos don't have the amount of views that they deserve.
These videos are from Mike Duncan's podcast. I have only compiled the episodes and uploaded them to youtube. :) A link to his site is in the description of each episode.
Hank Lovechild The guy who actually made these podcasts has millions of views and I suspect has been appropriately rewarded for his hard work.
Timaeus was just kind enough to take the time to upload to RUclips in nice combined chunks of the podcast episodes.
4 years later but I found these videos like 6 months ago and I'm not gonna lie almost every night I watch them and fall asleep listening lol I freaking love them so much
Is it odd that I enjoy soaking up this knowledge at bedtime? 🤣 Fantastic work 👏 👏
Couldn't agree more. Sincerely, another oddball.
Does no one in the comments realise that the guy who posted this did not make this at all? This is Mike Duncan’s History of Rome podcast. Mike Duncan never posted his podcast on youtube. Mike’s History of Rome podcast and Revolutions podcast are both free on major podcasting platforms.
I have listened to quite a few audio books on the ancient Roman world. This is some of the best history and analysis I have heard. Awesome work. I will definitely do it all.
Brace yourself for long hours of immersion into a fascinating subject. And I mean really long hours.
Thank you from Danmark, you have spared me many monts of research.:)
This provide such great amount of information in very short time. It give a great overview over the most important events and characters. Thank you very much for this awesome content! Best wishes from Germany
Hallo
@@thisgamer2791 hello
Great Job! Really incredible. Well told, witty, cohesive, ... Wauw! Thank you for bringing this to the world.
Thank you for this wonderful history lesson on the Roman Republic/Empire, it is very enjoyable. Thank you again!
Read Livy
Really glad this is on RUclips.
Wow. Listening to the breakdown on legions - just wanted to say this is a fine series of videos and very informative! Have you ever considered doing a similar series for ancient Greece? Or for ancient vedic or South American cultures? Cheers, and once again ty for your work on this!
This man didn't make the videos. Mike Duncan did. This person merely uploaded his podcast to RUclips.
May the gods bless the uploader, for he is the unsung hero
Was Rome oblivious to the efforts of Alexander of Macedon? What did they make of him?
They were busy with the samenites
18:20
31:10
44:00
1:01:00
1:19:19
1:34:00
1:49:40
Bump I can't find it
I just wanna give you an apperaciation and thanks as huge as roman history , thank you for making this :)
Thanks for watching! Glad you like it. :)
+- Timaeus - you bet I do , I love it, you know , consider me a trapped guy in an stupid country iran, who loves rome and America more than anything , thanks for your efforts I now can lesson to roman history , in not an stupid language but a Latin based one :) I was just wondering if you can upload more of these, after (augustus)??!! I would love it and I'm already sharing it with friend in (the roman) in face book
+Snaggle Toothed ive listened to Hardcore History before History of Rome. Dan Carlin offers awesome new perspectives.
are you the guy in the audio logs.
Madman Loves Power No, I am compiling Mike Duncan's Podcasts into a You tube series. The link is in the description. It's easier to watch them on you tube.
Love your videos mate, loving this series so much 🙂
Your work is also some of the finest audio work I’ve heard in Roman history respect from Scotland
Thank you for this series. Love from Sweden.
' learned more from you than on my history classes... Thanks mate!
;)
Incredible depth of content and engaged presentation. I'm finally getting the education I always wanted.
Can't beleive I'm enjoying the first 3 this much and we aren't even at the fun part of Rome yet!!
morale of the story: don't piss off the Romans, it might be the last thing you do.
as it is with any empire , until it isnt.....
I love it. Incredibly detailed
It's a good Podcast. :)
"How to build a wall" I died hahaha
Antonella Weisner Caesar, my man, always made walls.
Pyrrhus of Epirus ! A Pyrrhic victory inflicts such a devastating toll on the victor that it is tantamount to defeat.
Massive thanks from Brazil, Timaeus!
Quite impressive work :)
“Rodents of unusual size...I don’t think they exist”
As you wish...
You should do more history podcasts not just Rome’s because I love your narration and comparasons
He did
I know this comment is old. But this guy didn't make the videos. Mike Duncan did.
think how amazing this podcast would be if it was remade in classical Latin? we need Luke Ranier to get in on this.
i have listened to this podcast so many times. each time i get pulled back into roman history. a deeper dive into the small not so famous stories. rome truly was not built in a day and this podcast does a great job of why thats the case. i would recommend it to anyone who is interested in roman history
This stuff is fascinating to me. The military and political history especially. They were so advanced but you’d imagine they’d be more primitive in those fields. They did so much in a few hundred years. But if you’re really consider humanity there were just as advanced societies for thousands of years in the Mid East.
Is this Mike Duncan’s History of Rome？
Yes.
You should do a medieval period it would be epic !!!! 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻😎😎😎
They're reposting other ppls podcast
Did Alexander the great ever cross paths with the Romans?
EXCELLENT DETAIL
Thank you
Was just piss farting about when,at 1hour and 59 minutes, you got me with the Old leg trick.
Nice little Ohh you got me there mate.
Best commentary ever....
And I mean ever, apart from some dude that was narrating a book called Kingz of the Wyld.
Was on RUclips until someone got it deleted.
But I digress.
Greetings from Australia 🇦🇺
Excellent video
Why do everyone skip over the detail of Philonides of Tarentum? Too gutsy for modern historians?
Great stuff, obvs, but curious if and at what chapter the sound level becomes equalized. Like to listen at night but can suddenly get much louder than previous bit.
I am enjoying this... 😊
1:28:30 Of my goodness does that sound both epic and silly. Given how muhc fantasy and ancient supersticions are intermingled. I can jsut imagine the consul and his men constantly rolling perception at every twick and sound breaking out. :D
Pyrrhus of epirus: the first man in history to get so sick of winning that he lost the war.
I can sleep in peace
Love this, thank you
Love these broadcast.
:)
Magnificent vdeo. Clear as a bell, easy to understand. Thanks.
so publius decius mus who recieved the grass crown for sacrificing himself, has a son, also named publius decius mus who was a consul in the second and third samnite wars, who has a son also named publius decius mus, now in the Pyrrhic wars. wtf
LanzeLLoth hardly an anomalous thing among the Patrician class. Also, those children may have been named something totally different as children, only later taking on their respective father's name after a few military adventures and entering into the political sphere.
Like the Americans today. Tom Cruise's real name is Thomas Cruise Mapother IV.
These maps are terrific.
Early Rome was very similar to Sparta after emerging victorious from the Peloponnesian War. The only real difference was that Rome won her battles when they counted and Sparta didn't. It's amazing how close almost all early Rome's battles were. They all could have easily gone the other way, but the Romans always managed to just barely pulled through by the skin of their teeth. It actually took a very long time for Rome to start to snowball out of control. I think that is testament to how formidable their opponents were during those early years.
You said that one of the consuls of 297/295 BC (who fought and won at Sentinum) was Marcus Valerius, but don't you mean Fabius Maximus? And didn't Alexander the Great ascend to the throne of Macedonia in 336 BC (instead of 338 BC)?
anybody know where I can get some good maps from the early roman era like the one in this video?
The internet.
Tactics against war elephants were developed a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away lol !
What happened the the other roman playlist ?
hi you always take about a podcast. how is it called and where do you get it? great content by the way
Thanks for watching :) This is from the podcast series The History Of Rome by Mike Duncan. He finished it years ago but no one has put them on youtube so I started making these videos putting several 20 minute episodes in each video.
Thank you very much for doing this. It has helped me a lot to satisfy my curiosity about Roman history!
Thank you for posting this and for all your research. This is truly getting me through the workday. I work in healthcare and it’s kinda going crazy (gee I wonder why). I was under the impression that while honor and glory were huge factors in terms of not fleeing from battle, wasn’t decimation used as well to ensure that the troops were more terrified by their own superiors than they ever would be by the enemy? Thank you again!!
Decimation was not commonly used. And I understand why. Why would you want to lose 1/10th of your army
Daniel Eriksson Very true. Which makes me even MORE interested in the situations where it was enacted and wishing (an impossible wish) that I could gain more insight into the thoughts of all those involved.
@@seoulv8427 You and I have the same wish. Can't even imagine that you would have to club your friend from mayby 18yrs to death...
Looking forwars to hearing about pyrrhus this is great
Mike had troubles with sound quality in the early years.
I wouldn't say the early "years" perse just the first several episodes. Maybe the first 15 or so. I tried to even it out on the compilations.
I’m coming back after listening to pretty much all of the Revolutions Podcast. He’s a lot more relaxed and easy going in those, that’s the thing I notice most.
52:00 all of this information is going to be super useful for my Rome campaign in Rome 2 total war. I was wondering why the triple line and acies were the way they were. I thought it strange to put missile infantry in front and leave gaps between the melee troops, now I get the point of that. I guess the reason they were arranged in columns rather than in a line like the missile infantry is to provide an easy avenue of retreat and improve mobility. I suppose the idea is that once the battle begins the columns would march forward and widen out to meet the enemy. I originally was treating the game a bit like battle for middle earth I guess which likely accounts for the casualties. in the campaign for battle for middle earth I found the safest strategy was to just make archer/ melee combined units, form a front line and slowly march it across the map one group at a time a short distance before stopping them again to cut down the next enemy attack. the idea was that the archers would fire over and through the melee troops in front (no friendly fire) and weaken the enemy, who would then be stopped and cut to pieces by the infantry directly in front of the archers. Boring, time consuming but effective when playing as any of the good guys and hoping to prevent the less of veteran units while standing up to the seemingly endless stream of enemies that throw themselves at you.
Ah, I love the Total War Series... From my experience playing them, compared to Middle Earth I think the Total War games in general tend to require much more tactics and over-all strategy in the "War Mode" while ordering troops to march and engage the enemy along with all the other commands involved. Even while in the Easiest Settings for the "War Mode" in Total War games it is still very involved, you can never just set the troops into regiments and set the layout of the army and then march them forward to engage whatever enemy troops you might encounter...
It is always best to be totally involved on both the Macro and Micro level of tactics and orders and never just speed through with the "x2,x3 Time Button" unless you really have no orders to be made at that time. Also always be looking for fatigued troops that might be tired, for example a mistake tons of people make is marching at max speed with the entire army to get to the engagement because you don't feel like waiting, and then forcing your troops to engage right away after marching at max speed while they are still fatigued from the march is never good but is something many people end up doing when I watch Total War videos here on RUclips. So you want to make sure you are starting all your engagements with max stamina and none of your troops fatigued or tired, and then throughout the engagement you want to be checking all of the front line, or troops that are currently engaged in combat, to make sure they are not getting too fatigued or having the morale of the regiment drop too low, or else they will be beaten much faster or even just route all together. So you want to be switching out the troops on the front line that are actually engaged and doing the fighting if any of your regiments or units get fatigued and have low stamina/morale then try to switch them out with a fresh regiment that is waiting right behind the front line in the reserve so you can make a quick engage command with the reserve troops and once they engage, order the fatigued units to pull back to where the reserves are waiting so they don't end up routing and you losing any control of them whatsoever. Plus another benefit of avoiding routed units is no matter how low the regiments get during the battle, at the end of combat you can recover all your regiments back to full unit strength and the regiment gets to keep all of its combat experience, it is much more cost effective over the long-term campaign.
thuzan117 well, you're supposed to put your missile troops into skirmish mode, so they retreat if enemy infantry gets too close, then turn and fire their missiles once they have a bit of distance... they're basically supposed to soften up the enemy and fuck with their stamina and morale before your legionnaires collide with them.
If you're only lining up your missile troops behind your infantry, you aren't commanding your troops well. The only exceptions to this would be if you're at a major cavalry disadvantage and don't want to expose your skirmishers and missile troops to cavalry charges, or if you're defending a town or fort, in which case you put your missile troops on the ramparts interspersed with heavy infantry to repel ladders etc.
Occasionally, I will also leave Cretan archers and other super long range missile troops with very low melee and armor abilities behind the heavy infantry, as they can still hit the enemy many times before Melee begins, and just so I don't need to micro manage them in the heat of battle.
After retreating behind your heavy infantry, if you aren't too worried about enemy cavalry, it's a good move to use your skirmishers as flanking forces and run them around the edges, so you can start hitting the enemy from the flanks and rear with missiles, which will help reduce friendly fire casualties and will greatly reduce enemy morale.
How do the Total War games compare/contrast with the Civilization games?
I just realized that at 1:59:36 he's referencing a star wars battle. Took me a second to figure out what the hell he meant by imperial walker lol.
Good job.
Great stuff, yet so much omitted.
Awesome awesome stuff, really enjoying these..right now im reading a series of books about Publius Corneilus Scipio: africanus and the second punic war...really really recommend them but they are not translated to english language, sooo thats a bummer...any idea where i can find maps of the different regions of that epoche?
Not physical ones
No, I mean like the ones you showcase in your videos, so i can better picture where the different cities of the etruscan league and rome's enemies to the east and south aswell as the borders of magna greece ,the different provinces and stuff like that. Didnt mention it before but thanks for posting such great content...planing to listening to them all by the end of the summer! Thanks Tim!
I think the problem with Alexander the Great conquering Rome is that Rine would not have stayed conquered. They would just wait until Alexander died and the proceed with revenge. Or am I missing something.
I just want to say that it's nonsense that pre-phalanx armies were disorganized messes, that charged at each other and engaged in single combat. Sure armies would have been variously organized and disciplined, depending on various factors, but for an army not to engage as a unit would mean certain defeat, and no civilizations would do that.
Edward Kiel Often in the far East like Japan the warrior civilisation; "Samurai" if you will, fought one on one in the battlefield very often. It is interesting to read about the battles. They even said often before the two lines collided they were shouting out there opponents names to call them out to them so as to ensure one on one sword fights.
I think you may be viewing the Japanese warrior culture in a bit of a romantic light, but none the less, you said " before the two lines collided", so you're not talking about a disorganized mess, but an organized army, so my point stands.
Edward Kiel So obviously your taking the term disorganized mess in terms of the podcast way too literally. An army is an army and a mob is a mob its very distinct in terms. Armies are a unit and at the same time can be a disorganized mess as well as, or engage in one on one melee. So I'm not really sure what your point is that still stands. And btw I'm not thinking romantically about anything. It's simply what i read in researching the history of the Samurai.
You're quite wrong. Warfare grew out of tribal skirmishes of a few dozen warriors engaging in disorganised combat and it remained that way for a long time. We only have to look at the Iliad to see how individual warriors fought each other in single combat rather than as part of tightly disciplined units.
@@LoneKharnivore 1st the illyad is a work of fiction possibly based on a true event. The one on one fights your describing are more accuratley duels. The fall of troy was at the end of the late bronze age. Given the estimated no of greeks under various kings of course there was organisation. Even if its a simple as what kings mob as you put it attacked where. In this era the tactics were infantry and chariot ...so of course organisation was needed. The battle of kadesh illustrates that. 2 troy was a seige. Seiges by definition have to be organised to cut off a city.
This guy puts high school to shame
Lmao @ 1:59:00 as soon as he mentioned the ropes and elephants I thought, battle of hoth!!!
The Samnites were tough bastards. Italy's very own Scottish highlanders.
Colonel Carrillo or more like the Scottish highlanders were tough Bastards like the sanmites. With sanmites being around way before Scottish highlanders were even a thing. Ain't that something.
Actually, that "ain't" something, because that "ain't" true. There is a clear record of civilization in the area known today as Scotland which dates back to at least 7,500 BC. Hope this helps.
How many kinds of Roman rules was there until first century?
I need 5 different kinds before around 1 century - do any of you Historians know if this is possible?
I have Kings, Republic and Empire but empire may have been the 6 rule already so....
I honestly don't know. The classic divisions are the Kingdom, Republic and the Empire. Technically it was a simple Dictatorship under Caesar and then Augustus was the first emperor. Then there was the period of the Tetrarchy starting with Diocletian from 284 to 324. I can see five over the whole timeline but not in the B.C. era alone.
Hmm... Thanks for your answer - a Tetrarchy... ahh, so this is the time of Constantine as well... I just can't get this Beast thing to fit... I feel like a child playing around with different pieces that needs to be turned correctly to get it in the box.
When did the theocracy start in Rome? Or what about it - would that be considered a government form of its own?
4:00 .....and put grain shortages and famine behind them.....
Laughed so hard....
I think there is mistake in thus video as the second consul in the battle of sentium was Fabius maximus not Marcus valarus
It was Quintus Fabius Maximus Rullianus, not to be confused with Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus Cunctator. This is a lovely podcast by Mike Duncan and is a great tour through Roman History. It is not perfect however and the certain details sometimes get confused. He usually corrects them as the series progresses. Thanks for watching. :)
- Timaeus - thanks for the feedback , cleared my confusion.Also I glad you decided to upload the history of Byzantium podcast as well .Subbed
Soooo....who protected the guy on the far right of the phalanx then?
The guy behind him and so on. If a phalanx is surrounded it breaks
The common practice in the ancient world was to have cavalry at the sides so that the phalanx cannot be flanked. However, the Romans rarely used this.( Not sure why, but maybe because the Romans were not really good with horses. For example, during Caesar's Gallic campaign most of the cavalry were men from allied Gallic tribes.)
Phalanxes tended to shuffle left...
The spartans trained not to and coukd wheel and manouvre while engaged. The roman phalanx is lucky it never met the spartiate army
1:00:00
man, I love this podcast so much, but I find only one small tinny detail...SPOILER ALERT. Allow me to be surprised, Mike, he always says the end result before even getting into the thing.
Don't like to be pedantic, because it's hard to find much about republican Rome, and I appreciate the research, but Latin doesn't have a hard c. Decius should be pronounced as DeKious. Decemerate was dekemerate. Liked the video.
Sorry, I meant to say Latin doesn't have a soft c. My apologies.
Yeah, the letter G is actually an extension of the letter C adding a hook to it to designate the hard G sound from the K sound of the C. Awe Kaisar!
Mzee Watk If you don't like to be pedantic, than don't be pedantic. Do you call Julius Caesar, Iulius Kaiser? No, because you most likely speak English, and don't speak Latin, and as such, generally use English pronunciations.
Even modern Italian has a soft C. A person named Caesar, would pronounce their name "Chezz-aer-Ay".
If this podcast was about the Latin language, then your comment would be highly topical and useful. As it is, you really are just being a pedantic asshole to gratify your own sense of superiority.
It is proper for English speakers to use conventional English transliterations when referring to these events.
Besides, Latin has changed over time. What was true in the time of Julius Caesar, was not true in the time of Constantine, certainly not true in 400bc! We have no idea how they pronounced Latin way back then.
@@histguy101 We have only a vague idea of the Latin language through Catholicism’s preservation of it.
Centurions did command 100 men 80 combat soldiers 20 mule skinners and sappers.
If I could go back in time I would choose a time in which I could have talked to Alexander of Macedonia and try to convince him not to worry about Persia. Better to conquer Italia. You could take care of Persia later. As they were not unified in these times. He might have had me beheaded.😂😂😂
,,, The Grass Crown! ...
Yea cool
I love it! 😂😂😂 eagles got lucky with Brock purdy getting hurt. Agree. Short lived. Team was built to win this year. This eagles roster will get worse every year from here on
Romans, Persians, Greeks, Turks, Arabs, Aramaics, Armenians, Russians, Sumerians, Phoenecians, And Portuguese really knew how to handle large land swaths
I don't think aramaics or Armenians every had a large Empire and Sumerians were a collection of city states
Love this series and learned a lot, but the Marian reforms were hardly the last phase of the Roman, not even the Western Roman, Armies.
Horse archer phase best phase
Its come to the triari
1:44:00
The word is cavalry
How do you spell the manapol ?
Thanks for watching :) I believe you are referring to the Maniple. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maniple_(military_unit)
Well thanks for the quick answer with a link on top of that ! :D
I found it fascinating that the Roman hero Corvus Valerian has a very similar name to the fictional character Corlys Velaryon from Fire and Blood by GRR Martin. Must have been the inspiration for the name