Battle of Telamon 225 BC - Roman-Gallic wars DOCUMENTARY
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 сен 2024
- Kings and Generals' historical animated documentary series on Roman history continues with another episode of the Roman-Gallic Wars. The Roman expansion in Italy is spreading after the war against Pyrrhus and the local Celts invite their relatives across the Alps to help, which led to the battles of Faesulae and Telamon.
Caesar's conquest of Gaul: • Caesar in Gaul - Roman...
Roman Politics before Caesar - conflict between Marius and Sulla: • Rome: from Marius to C...
Evolution of the Roman Armies: • Armies and Tactics: Ea...
Roman history: • Roman History
Support us on Patreon: / kingsandgenerals or Paypal: paypal.me/kings... or by joining the youtube membership: / @kingsandgenerals We are grateful to our patrons and sponsors, who made this video possible: docs.google.co...
The video was made by our friend MalayArcher ( / mathemedicupdates ) while the script was researched and written by Matt Hollis. This video was narrated by Officially Devin ( / @offydgg & / @gameworldnarratives )
✔ Merch store ► teespring.com/...
✔ Patreon ► / kingsandgenerals
✔ Podcast ► kingsandgenera... iTunes: apple.co/2QTuMNG
✔ PayPal ► paypal.me/kings...
✔ Twitter ► / kingsgenerals
✔ Facebook ► / kingsgenerals
✔ Instagram ► / kings_generals
Production Music courtesy of Epidemic Sound: www.epidemicsou...
#Documentary #Rome #Gauls
We have added new Roman shirt designs: bit.ly/30QuXwd
I love your chanel
Celtic invasion of Greece next ?
Are you guys connect with DFT Tarih
you should make a video on "baba banda singh bahadur" vs mughal governor "wazir khan" at battle of chapalchiri 1710 A.D. in punjab india how rebelion baba banda singh defeated most powerful governor wazir khan
Please cover Punic wars, the Roman Empire series is incomplete without it.
Any Civilization: *killing diplomats*
Karma: How often do I have to teach you this lesson ?
History is written by the victor. They would hardly write down when they killed diplomats and won the war or sometimes they might just write that story down so that they have an excuse for starting a war.
Any Civilization that kills diplomats: "I am a slow learner!"
@@Stego1819 Also diplomats back then took own extra duties as spies. If war was inevitable it was better to just kill them and prevent them from leaking important strategic information.
Not always. The Mamelukes did it to the Mongol envoys before going on to beat them at Ain Jalut and slowly grind them down afterwards.
@@barbiquearea you can cover his head once he reach the borders until he reach the leader or chief or king house
Me and the Bois getting slaughtered by Romans
Ahhhhh... the memories
F
you mean the boiis
Those were the days
Lol. Good one.
Gengis, sitting casually on his couch watching the video.
K&G: They killed the emissaries
Gengis: *spits the drink out of his mouth*
THEY DID WHAT?!
😂😂😂
Ok bruh...that was good one
@@أحمدالعراقي-ل8م3ح Indeed They Were But They Also Had A Great Empire From China To Iran
@@reddragon6103 That is not true.. The mongols where on a whole other level and had practices most empires never had.
Mongols killed more people in 100 years then rome did in 1000.
@@أحمدالعراقي-ل8م3ح they were the worst
Other tribes: exist
Roman Republic: it's free real estate
That is an extremely simplified but true representation
@EmperorJuliusCaesar Like pretty much every empire in history.
@@juliuscaesar8925 not really, lots of celts became romanised and even willingly joined them
@@davisoneill not really, the romans didn't only conquer by force. A lot of times is was with persuasion. They incorporated the ruling class of one tribe into their political system. The rulers of the tribe lost their independence but gained riches and comfort, a lot of them benefited from romes rule and gradually became roman themselves in culture and language.
It's divide and conquer
You can forge such a large and stable empire by force alone
@@davisoneill it wasn't always like that, the Roman empire had enormous prestige and riches and was very attractive for the elite
THIS. IS. EPIC!!!
I'M LEFT SPEACHLESS BY THE QUALITY REACHED BY THIS CHANNEL, KEEP UP THIS BRILLIANT WORK!!
What are you doing here you were disbanded by Constantine
@@alpharius8264 I don’t know to say welldone for the good joke or be confused by your name if it’s named after the warhammer primarch
It's just tragic to think about what civilians and families had to go through in these conflicts. Imagine whole cities with PTSD.
I didn’t even think about that. And back then, war was noticeably more constant than it is today, so I’m sure a lot were traumatized by it.
Bruh, don't kill diplomats.
killing diplomats sends a message
@@Kalleosini But why would anyone want to send "please murder me in the most violent fashion possible" as a message to his enemies?
@pyropulse Bruh, the Roman republic was doing quite well at this point and wasn't the same republic that Gaius Julius Caesar had ceased from. The "degenerate" Roman republic you are referring to was when Carthage was conquered and during the life and times of Sulla.
@@christopherg2347 I think it is more of a "I'd like to see you come try bitch" kinda message.
Roman diplomats were assholes though. It seems like half the time they were trying to start wars
Please do the documentary about Marcus Aurelius and his Marcomannic Wars which inspired 'Gladiator'.
Yes but gladiator is extremely historically innacurate
Ooh yes, please do!!
Theatrics inspired gladiator. Commodus wasn't even killed in the arena and his sister was murdered by him. Maximus is strictly fiction and only done for theatrics, not historic motives.
Gladiators and arena entertainment was the inspiration certainly not Marcus or germans
Well, Commodus was in fact killed by a Gladiator, but only because he want to fight in the Arena. He noticed, that the People of Rome didn‘t like him that much, so he decided something special, which non of his predecessors did before.
But yes: that Gladiator guy wasn‘t an enslaved Military Tribune of the Roman Legion but in fact a Gladiator, a slave who was freed by his emperor to taught him fighting.
Thanks Kings and Generals, this battle is truly one of the most decisive, overwhelming and crushing victory in the Roman military history, yet known by few people in comparison with Cannae.
The Roman military machine was already so powerful at the 3th century BC that it wasn't surprising for the huge success over the Gauls and the Carthaginians.
"damn, these gauls are a pretty big nuisance. hopefully some guy will conquer them in a few hundred years and kill millions of them on the way"
**julius caesar has joined the chat**
@T. Henderson vercingetorix liked it so much, he volunteered to be in a triumph
Haha, you guys are amazing. Stuff like this never crosses my mind.
@@terner1234 LMAO
@@Nortrix87 lol
@@Nortrix87 germanicus uses /kill
I'm just gonna say this channel just has the best narrator graphics and quality content I've watched 💯
Yep these videos are amazing! I wish I could time travel to the future just to see the rest of the top quality roman videos that they'll make, but we'll have to wait :(
The main narrator has his own youtube channel, OfficiallyDevin.
Gauls better learn about diplomatic immunity before trying that stuff on an Mongols ambassador...
lol!
Kill some Mongol ambassadors, and your people will simply turn into a memory within a few months.
When somebody kills a peaceful envoy for no reason , they have ensured their destruction
They did! France actually receivex mongol ambassadors and didn t kill them ... western europe got saved from the onslaught
Gods... I hate Gauls. My grandfather hated them too, even before they put out his eyes.
So the Modern day French-Roman!?!
tHe bRUTii are the only TRUE ROMANS
@@LazarusWilhelm SCIPII FOREVER
@@Wharbuckz7 the modern day blacks
Traitors all of you. Only one true family rules Rome and it's the Julii!
Celts invade:
Rome: I'm about to end this man's whole career
Hannibal: ....
Rome: beats Hannibal, too.
Scipio Africanus: Iam in manibus meis est Africa
This makes me even more proud of my Galic name and ancestors! Great vid once again.
Wow. I had never known that issues with the cisalpine gallic tribes only a few years prior was a reason why Hannibal was able to recruit so many of those Italian Gauls into his army, who constituted a key part of his force during the Second Punic War. I'm very glad I watched this video. Keep it up you guys!
Rome: We're fortified by immense mountains to the north, our lands are secured
Hannibal: I'm gonna pull what's called a Pro Gamer Move
Carthaginian navy was shit, hence he had to come from the alps
Hannibal: Oh, you’re approaching me? Instead of running away, you’re coming straight to me?
Scipio Africanus: I can’t beat the shit out of you without getting closer.
Hannibal: Oh-oh, then came as close as you like.
*Menacing Walking*
The Boii tribe lived on both sides of the Alps -those on the northern side gave their name to Bohemia(Czech Republic) and those south of the Alps to Bologna -the chief city of the Emilia-Romagna region.
One of the four kings of the Cimbrian-Teutonic coalition that terrorised Rome centuries later was "Boiorix", "king of the Boii".
@@neutronalchemist3241 Italian separatists who want to make a new country out of northern Italy and call it "Padania" often highlight the regions Celtic pre-Roman heritage and the Celtic tribes that lived there -I think one of the newer universities in Lombardy is called "The University of Insubria" after the Insubri tribe.
If I could like this content three times I would! Good work!
We appreciate it!
As always, brilliant job fellas! Your Roman and Ottoman Videos are still my favorite and require more than one play! Thanks Guys!
2:45
I can't be the only one who cracked up at this
Yeah you just can't help but go oooof
They ammased another army but in turn this army was also defeated with heavy casualties.
Aka the one with the naked guys getting double-teamed and sandwiched
I actually learned about this one from Time Commanders: aka the Rome Total War game show
Tareltonlives : That was a great show, aired in 2004 I think. BBC should remake it.
If one plays Rome Total War, the naked warriors should be used in the second line when your first line has tied down the first Roman line. When I play as the Romans and are faced with those armed and angrily screaming tatooed Chippendales, I just yawn and let my archers cut them down at a distance and then let the Velites cut down even more of them as they get angry and come closer. When the few survivors break and run, I let my Equites cut them down in flight.
@@thabomuso6254 : Yes, they are best used as reserves, and committed when the enemy has exhausted their missiles.
But of course, that's anti-historical, since in real life their pride demanded that they be the first into battle - and their discipline was terrible, they were prone to charging without orders.
@@timonsolus they were also known for head hunting during the battle. They were rewarded by their chieftains based on the number of heads that they could bring.
@@timonsolus They did a few years ago, but only made 3 episodes
Diplomats: No! You can't just execute us and expect our people to not retaliate!
Every civilisation, especially enemies of Mongols: Haha! These human heads are great diplomatic gifts!
Oh man, who could have predicted that fighting naked without any armor or protection on the body whatsoever wouldnt be such a good idea??
It was never a problem for me.
General but naked disagrees.
Perhaps if they were main characters instead of extras, the amount of armor wouldn't matter.
Worse part was their shields didn't cover their entire body.
They fought naked so their clothes did not catch on the brambles.
Celts: Destroy Rome and raze it to the ground. Incessantly raiding Roman lands and killing Roman citizens.
Rome: Okay. They're too annoying, we need to conquer them to put them in check.
Celts: This is unfair! I want VENGEANCE!!
You are equivocating a single state (Rome) with an entire group of numurous celtic tribes. Just because some Celtic tribes were enemies of Rome it doesn't mean all Celtic tribes deserved to be annahilated by Rome lol.
@@kafon6368 It didnes'"t because empires don't need moral reasons to expand.. they just do.
@@theonlygoodlookinghabsburg2081
That joke flew over your head faster than Cassius Chaerea's dagger plunged into Caligula's nuts
@@RexGalilae I have no nuts, didn't u know that I have tranformed into Venus?
@@dariusgreysun
Yep lol
Dan Carlin does an amazing job going over the history of the late Republic before the Empire in his Hardcore History episode "Celtic Holocaust." Roman history was the first history I ever fell in love with.
Same here. The Romans and their history are so interesting
If only Rome's enemies coordinated even a little bit you could've been reading this in Etruscan!
God forbid!
If the Romans didn't exist, the parts of Europe north of the Mediterranean would still be barbarian
@@RexGalilae lol no
getting reinforcements who advance on the Romans but turn on each other before even seeing a Roman soldier is not a good start.
Unfortunately Etruscans were not a Nation but city states "a la Greek fashion" often fighting each other for local interests,their Twelve Towns League (la Dodecapoli) was only a Religious thing not a military alliance,if they had realized what Rome's spirit was and had united from the start there would have been no Rome at all (Lars Porsenna the Etruscan Lord of Chiusi (Clausium) conquered and ruled Rome for some time during the "age of Kings".
Carthage would of taken Rome's place as boss of Europe.
"Not willing to go gently into that good night" nice one. I can appreciate great phrasing when I hear it.
Thanks for putting all this in context. Rome’s Future was never guaranteed and they could have easily been wiped out before the Republic reached its peak.
"Gaesatae naked warriors."
Thanks, K&G. Another thing I just HAD to learn.
This was amazing! Fantastic content! Keep it up and thank you!
I really liked the devotion of the Naked warriors as said: "why you need armor when you have the blessings of the gods?"
1:20 a diplomat killed on a diplomatic mission? Why do I have the feeling of Déjà vu?
🎵🎵Déjà vu, i have been in this place before ?🎵🎵
You have watched our Mongol series? :-)
@@KingsandGenerals oh, right!
Were there graphical mods used for the machininas? I don’t remember Rome II looking this good.
The mods we used in this video :
*Orbis Terrarum II - Open Beta
*ROME II HD - Heroes of Zama
*ROME II HD - Sons of Mars
*Petellius Particle Effect
*Divide et Impera
*Benjin's AAA Generals
*Reshade
Best wishes,
Malay Archer ڤمانه ملايو
@@MalayArcher when are you gonna upload?
@@johnisaiah985 upload what?
@@vandamsel5022 malay archer wasn't uploaded in 2 months
@@johnisaiah985 Honestly, I really can't promise when I'm going to upload videos on my channel because I'm working with K&G now.
So it seems Rome's enemies made the classic "movie brawl henchman" mistake: They attacked one at a time.
If only Pyrrhus, Carthage and the Celts attacked Rome all at once from three different vectors (as well as the Samnites revolt), history might have turned out differently.
And why would that be a good thing?
Because, nobody’s main purpose was destroying Rome basically. Everyone acted according to the conjecture and for their political gains. Pyrrhus threatened both Rome and Carthage, so they allied for example. Why would Carthage and Pyrrhus attack Rome together?
Have you seen anything as satisfying as cavalry sweeping up units and those making the cracking sound?
I studied at the university of Insubria. This ancient Celtic region still lives on.
So good! Love this!
Punic Wars next? Yess I'm ready
Future idea: you can make a series about the lives of notorious outlaws and law men from the Old West, quite an interesting subject
naked warriors should've just activated frenzy and charged at the hastati, charge bonus alone would've won lol
Love dis shit!!! thank you for your service to history nerds everywhere!!!
Can you please one day make a documentary on the punic wars. There is just so much about it
Excellent work as always.
Could you make a video about the gauls in the 2nd punic war please.I love your stuff
Disciplined and well trained army of Rome showed its value. Roma Invicta!
Although I am not interested in this period of history, the quality and the music of this video make it irresistible.
It's nice to see a history channel that still uses BC instead of BCE.
Potato Potato, both things means the same in essence. The only reason to complain about the use of one or the other is because you are purposefully trying to find something to be contrarian about
@@larslundandersen7722
They aren't really the same if you see the meanings. I prefer BC because it came first and has been used for centuries so I don't see any reason to change it to BCE.
@@thorshammer7883
BCE -> Before Current Era
BC -> Before Christ
AD -> Anno Domini
CE -> Current Era
They both share the birth of Christ as Year 0. So, they really mean the same thing in essence. But I respect your preference.
Gaul battle wit Romans before Hannibal.. Great informative video as always,
Kings and Generals..
Great video! The only thing that could have improved it might have been that it is definitely worth mentioning that these battles were the conflict where Hannibal's eventual nemesis, Marcellus 'the Sword of Rome' began building his reputation. He built up an incredible reputation as a soldier fighting the Gauls. The more Marcellus comes into view, it becomes small wonder that Hannibal sent Marcellus back to Rome respectfully, after his death in battle.
But then again, Marcellus was enough of a hero to deserve his own series!
Awesome work Kings and Generals.
Marcellus was a good general, but Scipio Africanus was Hannibal's nemesis.
Just sayin'
@@Extra-dg7uv Not really accurate. Marcellus was genuinely brilliant on his own merit. He refined and perfected the strategies of delaying, containment and avoidance which helped win the war. Scipio copied everything Hannibal had done, then beat him only after metting him at his lowest. And his family had something of a habit of taking credit for other's achievements. Nothing Scipio achieved would have had any effect were it not for Marcellus and Nero keeping Hannibal contained, and Carthage purposely keeping Hannibal weak.
Sure, credit where it's due, where Zama is concerned, a win is a win, but it's not exactly "nemesis" material. Your Nemesis is someone who outfights and outwits you, and can match your every move. Marcellus was a nemesis. Fabius was a nemesis. Nero was a Nemesis. Scipio was absolutely not.
Your nemesis isn't the guy who sits on the bench for entire game, then stands beside the goalpost when he's subbed on, and slots the winning goal in with a cheap shot in the final minute.
Scipio never commanded against Hannibal until the final battle, when Hannibal's army was depleted, and his brothers were dead. Scipio spent the whole war under either his father's command, or others, then went to Hispania. On the other hand, Marcellus was the first Roman general to beat Hannibal in the field, restored the morale of the state and the army after Cannae (without which, Scipio would never have had his moment) and he came back several times to repeat the feat, and conquered Sicily.
Scipio, like Pompey, was a hack, who stood on other people's work and claimed credit. Winning a 20 year war in the last moment is not the work of a "nemesis".
Just sayin'
@@TheSamuraijim87 "Not really accurate. Marcellus was genuinely brilliant on his own merit. He refined and perfected the strategies of delaying, containment and avoidance which helped win the war."
I never disputed that Marcellus was a talented commander.
"Scipio copied everything Hannibal had done, then beat him only after metting him at his lowest."
I don't think its fair to just say that Scipio copied Hannibal. Was he to some extent inspired by Hannibal's tactics? Probably. But that doesn't make Scipio any less brilliant a commander in his own right. Repeatedly he was able to out-manoeuvre and outflank enemy armies, with his refused centre and flank attacks at Ilipa and double envelopment at the Great Plains being two highlights.
And while Hannibal's army at Zama was certainly not as good as the one he had invaded Italy with, he still had a solid core of elite veterans, a large number of elephants, and a numerical advantage in infantry. The battle's outcome was not inevitable.
"Nothing Scipio achieved would have had any effect were it not for Marcellus and Nero keeping Hannibal contained, and Carthage purposely keeping Hannibal weak."
There is no evidence that Carthage purposely kept Hannibal weak. Carthage committed huge resources to the war with Rome and ordered Hasdrubal Barca to reinforce him on several occasions.
"Your Nemesis is someone who outfights and outwits you, and can match your every move. Marcellus was a nemesis. Fabius was a nemesis. Nero was a Nemesis."
None of those 3 guys, talented though they were, ever managed to decisively defeat Hannibal in battle. They had successes, sure, and definitely played important roles in ensuring Rome's survival. But ultimately their achievements pale in comparison to Scipio's.
"Your nemesis isn't the guy who sits on the bench for entire game, then stands beside the goalpost when he's subbed on, and slots the winning goal in with a cheap shot in the final minute."
Scipio was hardly sitting on the bench for the entire game. He took command of the Roman armies in Spain in 210 BC just 1 year after his father and uncle had both been killed in a major defeat and in just 4 years he completely destroyed Carthaginian hegemony in the Iberian peninsula. Then he invaded Africa, destroying two large Carthaginian armies at Utica and the Great Plains before Zama. That hardly counts as a "cheap shot in the final minute".
"Scipio spent the whole war under either his father's command, or others, then went to Hispania."
Scipio spent the first 8 years of the war in a subordinate capacity because he was only 17 when the war began and thus too young to be given an independent command.
"Scipio, like Pompey, was a hack, who stood on other people's work and claimed credit."
How did he stand on other people's work in Spain? He turned around a desperate situation there and in Africa crushed Carthage's armies, forcing them to sue for peace.
@@Extra-dg7uv
"How did he stand on other people's work in Spain? He turned around a desperate situation there and in Africa crushed Carthage's armies, forcing them to sue for peace"
Fair is fair. Admittedly, in Spain, Scipio did some decent work. I don't deny that success. However, he did it in absence of much of Carthage's strength, which Hasdrubal had taken to Italy. But again, it was against subordinate commanders, and a depleted Carthaginian Hispania, while the true enemies was being handled by others. It would be fair to name Scipio the conqueror of Hispania, but that is as far as would be reasonable.
Scipio's chief achivement in Africa was diplomatic, in accomplishing the defection of Numidia, and obtaining the Numidian Cavalry so vital to Hannibal.
But I still wouldn't call him the nemesis of Hannibal, considering he encountered him at the end of the war.
"None of those 3 guys, talented though they were, ever managed to decisively defeat Hannibal in battle. They had successes, sure, and definitely played important roles in ensuring Rome's survival. But ultimately their achievements pale in comparison to Scipio's."
Hardly. Marcellus held command during the war at its *most* critical stage for Rome, the aftermath of Cannae. That alone is worthy of ranking him among the greatest of Roman generals, certainly more than defeating freshly levied armies, which was what the forces in Africa were reduced to. Marcellus' conquest of Syracuse and the reduction of Sicily is easily a feat equal to either of the conquests in Hispania or Africa. That, taken in conjunction with his work in Southern Italy, and his restoration of order, and his continuous containment of Hannibal, easily equal the work of Scipio in Spain and Africa. You're essentially viewing Marcellus as lesser by dint of not being Scipio. Certainly, he was less glamorous, with fewer decisive battles, though that was by design. But his work was far more critical, and to say it pales in comparison to Scipio, who came to command late, when the war was essentially winding down because of other people's work, is to elevate him above better men.
You also badly underrate Nero, considering the Metaurus is considered by most historians to be the critical battle of the war. Sure, Hannibal was not present, but that was critically by Nero's design, and it was a far more decisive battle for the outcome of the war than Zama, which was at most, a last gasp.
If any general deserves to be called 'Hannibal's nemesis', it is far more appropriate to accord the title to the man who killed Hannibal's brother and confirmed that Rome controlled Italy. Did Nero beat Hannibal tactically on the field? No. But did he strategically eviscerate the Carthaginian war effort with a single season's campaigning, yes, he did, far more than Scipio ever did. Moreover, again, Scipio was only able to establish himself as ruler of Hispania, because again, another man had done the work of defeating Hasdrubal, who as you point out, had kept the Scipio brothers at bay for so long.
Moreover, the idea of "Hannibal's veterans", that he returned with the army that had conquered its way through Italy, is a debunked myth.
The army that Hannibal commanded at Zama was a hastily assembled mob, and it was badly lacking in cavalry, although that superiority in cavalry is perhaps an achievement which Scipio could take credit for. But Scipio had unquestionably the superior quality army, and the superior cavalry. And the elephants were no longer a relevant factor in the war. Hannibal himself seems also, to have become by this point, a spent force, as for once in his entire career, he simply relied on a frontal charge against Roman lines in an almost textbook fashion. His brothers were dead or wounded, and he had been at war for sixteen years. So the battle of Zama, the only meeting of Hannibal and his so called "Nemesis" was if anything, deeply underwhelming.
The evidence of keeping Hannibal weak is in Carthage's overt lack of reinforcement to Italy, while supplying peripheral efforts such as Sicily and Spain, neither of which was critical to the war. The government in Carthage was also dominated by the Hannonids, who were rivals of the Barcids.
"Scipio spent the first 8 years of the war in a subordinate capacity because he was only 17 when the war began and thus too young to be given an independent command."
This only further proves the point. As I said, had he fought Hannibal personally when he was at his peak, there is no question Scipio would have been thrashed sideways. But the years of fighting Hannibal were left entirely to other men. Scipio met the man you claim he was nemesis to, only once, and then when he was so tired, exhausted, under equipped and broken that the best he could offer was a frontal charge.
The story of the meeting between Scipio and Hannibal is of course, entirely apocryphal on the part of Livy, but there is merit in one part of it, that being Hannibal did not accord Scipio a level of skill equal to his own. Hannibal was better, and he knew it.
Scipio won a war against a defeated man and broken nation, coming in and taking credit for winning a war built on victories which others had accomplished in his absence or youth. If I was dismissive of Scipio's successes in Hispania and Africa, you are certainly equally so to Nero and Marcellus and overly generous to Scipio.
@@TheSamuraijim87 "However, he did it in absence of much of Carthage's strength, which Hasdrubal had taken to Italy."
Only after suffering a heavy defeat at Scipio's hands at Baecula. You're also forgetting about Hasdrubal Gisgo and Mago Barca, whose large combined army was obliterated by Scipio at Ilipa.
"But again, it was against subordinate commanders, and a depleted Carthaginian Hispania,"
How was Carthaginian Spain "depleted"? When Scipio arrived there in 210, he was outnumbered at least 3-1 by the Carthaginian armies there.
"Scipio's chief achivement in Africa was diplomatic, in accomplishing the defection of Numidia, and obtaining the Numidian Cavalry so vital to Hannibal."
Diplomacy is a very important aspect of generalship. Von Clausewitz said that war is merely the continuation of politics by other means.
"Hardly. Marcellus held command during the war at its most critical stage for Rome, the aftermath of Cannae. That alone is worthy of ranking him among the greatest of Roman generals,"
Marcellus certainly deserves credit for his repeated defences of Nola, and other successes, as I have already said.
"certainly more than defeating freshly levied armies, which was what the forces in Africa were reduced to."
Scipio could only defeat the enemy armies facing him. And besides, you have to look at what Scipio did in these battles. He totally revolutionized Roman tactical doctrine, endowing his armies with a flexibility hitherto undreamt of by Roman commanders. The manoeuvres he carried out at Baecula, Ilipa and the Great Plains were way beyond anything ever accomplished by Marcellus.
"Marcellus' conquest of Syracuse and the reduction of Sicily is easily a feat equal to either of the conquests in Hispania or Africa."
I would say that Scipio's swift capture of New Carthage was one of the most impressive conquests of a city in the entire Punic Wars. Although Marcellus certainly did a great job at Syracuse.
"But his work was far more critical, and to say it pales in comparison to Scipio, who came to command late, when the war was essentially winding down because of other people's work, is to elevate him above better men."
Its absurd to say that the war was "winding down" in 210 BC. The war against Macedon was still raging, much of southern Italy was still in Hannibal's hands and the Carthaginians had taken back control of most of Spain.
"You also badly underrate Nero, considering the Metaurus is considered by most historians to be the critical battle of the war."
If anything, you seem to be exaggerating the importance of the Metaurus here. The danger posed by Hasdrubal Barca shouldn't be over-emphasized, given that his army had been badly mauled by Scipio at Baecula, which forced him to replenish his losses with fresh Gallic recruits of questionable quality. Not to mention that Rome's position in Italy in 207 had improved greatly since the dark days following Cannae, with Capua and Tarentum having both been retaken (the latter thanks to Fabius), and the war in Sicily was now over (thanks to Marcellus). Furthermore, it would have difficult for Hasdrubal, arriving in northern Italy, to link up with Hannibal, who was in the south.
Had Hasdrubal been able to invade Italy in 215, when he was originally ordered to do so by Carthage, it might have been quite different.
"Moreover, the idea of "Hannibal's veterans", that he returned with the army that had conquered its way through Italy, is a debunked myth."
Debunked by who? AFAIK, its widely accepted that Hannibal returned to Italy with a sizable number (probably around 15,000) of his veterans. Obviously nobody says that he still had the full army he invaded with in 218 lol.
" And the elephants were no longer a relevant factor in the war. Hannibal himself seems also, to have become by this point, a spent force, as for once in his entire career, he simply relied on a frontal charge against Roman lines in an almost textbook fashion."
The elephants were made irrelevant by Scipio's rather ingenious use of lanes to channel them through his army. And as Adrian Goldsworthy points out (The Punic Wars, p.307): "Hannibal's basic plan was sound and might easily have succeeded...Hannibal's use of three lines of infantry, with the best troops in the last line, did much to weary the Roman foot, exhausting the hastati, and taking the edge off the principes. It was only Scipio's skill as a commander and the discipline and high morale of his men that allowed them to reform and then hold their own in the final engagement."
"The evidence of keeping Hannibal weak is in Carthage's overt lack of reinforcement to Italy, while supplying peripheral efforts such as Sicily and Spain, neither of which was critical to the war."
Spain was highly important for Carthage, given that it was a huge source both of financial revenue (important in a war) and manpower for Carthaginian armies. Once Carthage lost Spain, all hope of reinforcing Hannibal died with it and invading Africa became possible.
"This only further proves the point."
So basically its Scipio's fault that he was too young to command armies himself when the war began?
"As I said, had he fought Hannibal personally when he was at his peak, there is no question Scipio would have been thrashed sideways."
Ah, I see you're a fan of Dodge. Try reading some other authors though. Scholarship has moved on a tad since the 19th Century.
"If I was dismissive of Scipio's successes in Hispania and Africa, you are certainly equally so to Nero and Marcellus and overly generous to Scipio."
I would never claim that Scipio won the Second Punic War entirely on his own. Clearly, it was a collective effort by the Roman Republic in which many people contributed. However, I do think that Scipio was the most brilliant Roman general of the conflict, for the reasons I have already explained.
Hello guys! Malay Archer here and I'm one of the creators of this video. I'd like to give a shoutout to my mates from ROME II HD Project team which I'm also part of the team as well. Please do check our collection of ROME II HD mods by this link below: steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2077863859
Mods used in this video :
*Orbis Terrarum II - Open Beta
*ROME II HD - Heroes of Zama
*ROME II HD - Sons of Mars
*Petellius Particle Effect
*Divide et Impera
*Benjin's AAA Generals
*Reshade
Best wishes,
Malay Archer ڤمانه ملايو
That gallic revolt really got me as if you were on your way ready to crush your enemy only to go back just to quell a bunch of your homies who were bickering over who is who.
Me: Boy I realy could use a new battle tactics video to inspire my new campaign in Rome 2
Kings and Generals: Say no more fam
Could you do a video on Geiseric (king of the Vandals) trying to get his family married into the royal line in the West? His inability to do so is supposedly one of the reasons for the sacking of Rome. It also shows how "the barbarians" weren't totally outside Roman society. I'd say more problems arose more from Germanic tribes wanting to rule the Roman Empire than Germanic tribes wanting to destroy it. The emperors of the East, the Senate and the Roman people wouldn't stomach a Germanic emperor so I think Germanic leaders eventually said "fuck it, if I can't be emperor, nobody can".
Keep up the work lads. Can we get a Gutian empire, Land of Karda or Carduchi people history video?
Who the hell loves the Romans? I was wholeheartedly with the Celts in this battle.
Like many people. Especially when the Celts are the attackers.
Gaesatae commander: "Don't worry Boiis. We know how to deal with those 'Romans' that you fear so much. We prepared them a surprise they'll never forget!"
Boiis: "Wow! What is it? A new tactic? New weapons?"
Gaesatae commander: "We'll go in battle butt-naked!"
Boiis, facepalming: "That's not going to end well..."
Is it an introduction for second punic war and Hannibal ingenuity?🧐🧐
Great video and we want more like this here
Nice Independence Day line drop there
K&G is the best for me.
The English CC helps alot too.
Would love a video on the history of the Royal Marines
Sounds like we may finally get a series on Hannibal Barca......FINALLY!
Nice history video thanks 👍
A historical battle in Rome Total War!
Excellent one!
PUBLIUS QUINTILLIUS VARUS,GIVE ME BACK MY LEGI-oh wait wrong video
germanic tribes>celtic tribes
@@alpharius8264 Rome was overextended when they bordered the Germans and so hunkered down behind the Rhine. That's the major difference.
I recognize the Imperator Rome soundtrack playing in the video.
Plz continue the Caesar documentary
9 years later in 216 BC the Gallic Boii destroyed a Roman army of 25 000 men in the ambush in the Silva Litana, only ten men survived
The music if epic!!!
You know, I'm watching this again 1 year later....and all I can think of this go around is how damn effective their Interrogations we're back then🤔
Love the roman history.
Last time i was this early Rome hasnt been sacked yet !
Hey I know you are very busy and probably have a whole schedule planned out for the next few month but if you have time which would be suprising between this channel and the Cold War and those Podcasts. Can you make a video series on the Second Punic War. I know about that armies and tactics video about Rome vs Carthaginian Armies but to be honest that doesen't do a sixteen year long war justice. . It's like on the level of the Third Crusade.
Thank You
Yeah Boii my favourite channel
These Gallic were true warriors they could run and save their lives but they chose to stay fight to dead
They were surrounded.
Venete betrayed their Celtic brethren... Classic Venetian moment
7:17 the oldest of the Swiss mercenaries we all know and love.
225 bce , a roman army numbered over 100 000 men and probably if all of them died would replace them swiftly. at the dusk of the western empire, they were immensely hard pressed to levy some scant 20 000 levies from an entire western hemisphere where the population went into tens of millions and had to beg foederati for assistance against the huns. it just shows how much corruption can kill an empire before their enemies can do the same.
Cool vid
Ah Yes Mighty Rome, known only in Scotland for having toeless stubs for legs.
Eventually adopting our Tanning techniques to make boots, I mean I'm not sure why it took centuries of wearing sandals in snow before they did anything about it.
10:54 More likely Polybius was just making stuff up.
What map software/pics do you use? as in for closeups of italy/europe etc. without cities, borders etc? I want to try drawing my own borders for an alternative history
Roblox Telamon: YO DATS AN ADMIN
Historical Telamon: *pain of people and death*
Super video
Now I think that the Roman's were not wrong in enslaving or punishing the celtic people
Never had been
>Generalizing an entire group based on what a more specific group did
This isnt even Racism at this point its severe retardation. The inability to comprehend the fact that sometimes a group can also be apart of a bigger group leading to the dysgenic ape in question to just default into generalizing the bigger group is always hilarious to see.
Does Kings and Generals have a series on the Punic wars? I can't seem to find it.
It's a crazy to think there were probably many romans who fought at Telamon who died at Cannae.
2:06 - Ye boii
Pyrrhus a "mercenary king" ?!?
Yes
Pyrrhus was the king of Epirus. The rich Greek cities of southern Italy asked him for help against the Roman threat, and offered to pay handsomely for his services. Epirus was a poor kingdom by Greek standards, and Pyrrhus needed the money. So yes, in a way, he was a mercenary.
Battle of Beneventum was not disastrous for Pyrrhus. It was inconclusive. Neither side has been willing to admit it's defeat.
Can you make please a series of documentaries about the second punic war
TFS Vegeta would've been like "You know, I'm sure there was an advantage for fighting naked, but for the life of me I just don't see it."
Ohh Hannibal. He sure knew how to win a victory but he didn't know how to use it.
I hope they make Rome 3 one day and it is everything we dreamed of
he man i am a huge fan but can you make a videos about pharaohs history and battels
Man I really wish you guys put down a modlist of mods used to create the videos.