Battle of Telamon 225 BC - Roman-Gallic wars DOCUMENTARY

[@KingsandGenerals]

We have added new Roman shirt designs: bit.ly/30QuXwd

[@Stavroula9255]

I love your chanel

[@christermi]

Celtic invasion of Greece next ?

[@seyitbahcvan4230]

Are you guys connect with DFT Tarih

[@Sahildeepsingh-ki6jv]

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

[@abhishek_sikarwar]

Please cover Punic wars, the Roman Empire series is incomplete without it.

[@Pr0m3th3us]

Any Civilization: *killing diplomats* Karma: How often do I have to teach you this lesson ?

[@Stego1819]

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.

[@patrickweber3954]

Any Civilization that kills diplomats: "I am a slow learner!"

[@barbiquearea]

@@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.

[@lonelyswordsman1177]

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.

[@napolien1310]

@@barbiquearea you can cover his head once he reach the borders until he reach the leader or chief or king house

[@supergkop5678]

You gotta give the Celts some credit here. They were surrounded by Romans and yet they still put up one hell of a last stand.

[@ML-bw4yt]

Surrounded yes but also outnumbered

[@ks-qu4kj]

yeah, although going naked into battle probably wasnt the smartest idea!

[@samirplayz4907]

@@ks-qu4kj 🤣🤣🤣

[@GAMER123GAMING]

@@ks-qu4kj 2000 years from now: "Heh how stupid all those people in the 2020s for going to war in tanks when they could've easily been destroyed by aircraft!"

[@billfrehe6620]

They didn't have much of a choice, did they?

[@glitchtastic759]

Me and the Bois getting slaughtered by Romans

[@jtgd]

Ahhhhh... the memories

[@colonelgraff9198]

F

[@brentanthuenis9875]

you mean the boiis

[@liveevilentertainment1238]

Lol. Good one.

[@Tareltonlives]

Boiis in da house

[@Zeoxis6]

Aside from the terrible suffering, I do enjoy seeing the classic stories of Rome's epic victories told. All the elements are there, the diplomacy and positioning, the maniple system doing its thing, the valiant resistance of the Gauls right to the end, and the greater story as a whole surrounding all this. I'm noticing more involved visuals, context and expression of the events as well. Good to see you guys evolve with your work!

[@RexGalilae]

Seeing rampaging Gauls get butchered is only satisfying tho. They attacked and plundered hundreds of Roman cities and towns for no reason but war, loot and glory

[@richfarri168]

@@RexGalilae me when i dont understand nuance

[@RexGalilae]

@@richfarri168 You're calling for more "nuance" than an entire horde of 50k gauls could muster together if you want to see them as anything but barbaric brutes begging to be slaughtered

[@RoyalRegimentofScotland]

​@@RexGalilae The irony that the Romans slaughtered far more people than any set of gauls ever did and even slaughtered far more gauls are a far larger and more horrific scale than the gauls ever did in Italy

[@RexGalilae]

@RoyalRegimentofScotland The idea that the Romans massacred Gauls and replaced their population is completely unsubstantiated. The Gauls ended up assimilating into Roman culture

[@praetorianguard5696]

THIS. IS. EPIC!!! I'M LEFT SPEACHLESS BY THE QUALITY REACHED BY THIS CHANNEL, KEEP UP THIS BRILLIANT WORK!!

[@alpharius8264]

What are you doing here you were disbanded by Constantine

[@archdornan3068]

@@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

[@athenian9795]

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?!

[@aaronmarks9366]

😂😂😂

[@bryon5284]

Ok bruh...that was good one

[@zinetx]

@@أحمدالعراقي-ل8م3ح Indeed They Were But They Also Had A Great Empire From China To Iran

[@Bubajumba]

@@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.

[@armatolos_1234]

@@أحمدالعراقي-ل8م3ح they were the worst

[@bilicadnan]

Other tribes: exist Roman Republic: it's free real estate

[@juliuscaesar8925]

That is an extremely simplified but true representation

[@marcusfuriuscamillus5400]

@EmperorJuliusCaesar Like pretty much every empire in history.

[@JayzsMr]

@@juliuscaesar8925 not really, lots of celts became romanised and even willingly joined them

[@JayzsMr]

@@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

[@JayzsMr]

@@davisoneill it wasn't always like that, the Roman empire had enormous prestige and riches and was very attractive for the elite

[@Barwasser]

My Boii looking fresh!

[@jtgd]

Look at what they did to my Boii

[@Barwasser]

@@jtgd they massacred my boii

[@anemicsilence]

😆😆😆

[@jorgelimon328]

Dammit came to say “look how they massacred my boii “ but y’all beat me to it

[@the_chosen_one5642]

B O I I

[@pikachu-chan8893]

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.

[@jonovathomas8851]

Just when you think that Kings and Generals covered the entire Roman era, they come up with a new unheard battle scenario! I love this channel!

[@jakeg3733]

I'd love to see some more on the Byzantines. Not just battles but an in-depth look at equipment, organization and tactics. That period is arguably better documented because we have wonderful, detailed manuals written by warrior emperors like the Strategikon and Tactica. I own them both and they are so specific, I could go out tomorrow and train my own Byzantine army. Well, provided I had the money and access to thousands of crazy history lovers like myself 😂

[@ignaciocristobal4639]

This is one of your best videos, and that's a lot to say. Thank you very much for bringing up this not famous episode in such a well placed context (Hannibal, sack of Rome, etc).

[@Krylov223]

It's just tragic to think about what civilians and families had to go through in these conflicts. Imagine whole cities with PTSD.

[@mx_cyber]

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.

[@nuttawutnumpet3393]

Please do the documentary about Marcus Aurelius and his Marcomannic Wars which inspired 'Gladiator'.

[@hannibalccg702]

Yes but gladiator is extremely historically innacurate

[@nickcitron2369]

Ooh yes, please do!!

[@chucktowne]

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.

[@bop1886]

Gladiators and arena entertainment was the inspiration certainly not Marcus or germans

[@Wowa9305]

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.

[@thabomuso6254]

The Romans learned a lot from the Celts in terms of warfare, such as adopting their shields, chainmail and helmets. It also appears that the Celts failed to learn from Roman warfare. Even as the Celts gradually adapted some Roman political features by creating their own republics. They also got a taste for Roman wine and that tradition lives on today, as Frenchmen are the largest wine consumers per capita in the world. But the Celts lacked discipline, coordination, a navy, proper operational planning (often leading to their armies getting encircled in the Italian peninsula). Perhaps worst of all, they lacked a good logistical base and relied on loot and plunder as their armies advanced. If some of their larger tribes had developed really large trade centers, they could have both built more lasting professional armies but more importantly, have less of a need to send so many of their young men as plundering warriors to the Mediterranean lands. It almost seems as they sometimes used invasions of Rome as a way to deal with overpopulation.

[@thabomuso6254]

@Jimbo Jones the Celts were also absolutely excellent smiths. During most of the time period of the Roman republic, I would say that they on average had more skilled warriors compared to the Romans on an individual basis. Most Roman generals until the imperial era were also quite poor. What they lacked were large centrally organized states and therefore large organized armies in which all soldiers fought together in their specific role but for a common objective. The Celts were very good warriors while the Romans were good soldiers. And still they suffered terribly against the Carthaginians. The combination of a mostly drafted army together with a decent military technology and ability to truly learn from their mistakes made the Romans prevail in the end.

[@thabomuso6254]

@@rimacalid6557 the French of today certainly also have to do with the Celts. The French are essentially a mixture of Celtic, Germanic and Latin peoples. I don't know if you have been to and travelled around France or studied the French language, but if you do, you will notice that there is a clear regional pattern in their appearances. For instance, you will find more taller and blond people in the north (the main center of germanic settlement), more people that are shorter, darker and often with black curly hair in Provence (the main area of Roman settlement), as well as many red haired persons particularly in the western regions and particularly in Britanny/Bretagne (the main area of surviving Celtic communities). Then you of course have the Basques in the Southwest of France. Even the French dialects/patois are related to the various ethnic origins of the French people. for instance, in Provence they say "si" instead of the standard French "oui", when they say "yes". To be more precise, the Celts learned how to drink wine from the Romans and that cultural tradition was adopted by Germanic settlers.

[@user-gj1np9rp4d]

@@thabomuso6254 The celts in Britany came from brittain.

[@thabomuso6254]

@@user-gj1np9rp4d my understanding is that it is the other way around. Namely that the Celts in Britanny who survived Caesars onslaught largely migrated to the British Isles.

[@user-gj1np9rp4d]

@@thabomuso6254 But when rome abandoned the British isles and Anglo-Saxons invaded. The Celts from Brittain fled to Brittany. Breizh language is related to welsh.

[@lorenzjudeceloso2444]

I'm just gonna say this channel just has the best narrator graphics and quality content I've watched 💯

[@nkvdcomradeorion7336]

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 :(

[@R3GARnator]

The main narrator has his own youtube channel, OfficiallyDevin.

[@jamesshore3191]

That Kings and Generals Roman history Playlist is on its way to becoming a video graphic encyclopedia. More complete with every upload; thank you so much for your videos.

[@Dis-advantaged]

This makes me even more proud of my Galic name and ancestors! Great vid once again.

[@ElBandito]

Imagine if Hannibal crossed the alps before Telamon.

[@JaM-R2TR4]

Celts would most likely not like to have Hanibal's army crossing through... they even fought him on his way to some extent... Telamon was an event that changed the perspective for them..

[@marcob1729]

Rome could have arguably done the same thing that they did in the second Punic War. When Hannibal completely depleted his homeland of troops, he should have been mentally accepting the fact that the Romans could decide to strike

[@neutronalchemist3241]

Hannibal had problems with the Gauls on his way to the Alps (his brother's Hasdrubal's trip through southern France had been much faster for that reason. At that point the Gauls considered the Barcids to be allies). Without Telamon he would have had problems after the Alps too.

[@shanecarubbi7864]

I have heard Hannibal did use Celts from Iberia and Berber missionaries when he invaded Italy. He had problems with other Celtic tribes in Gaul when crossing the river Rhone.

[@neieduardodepaula4556]

Imagine if elephants flied, and crapped our heads from above

[@JodenPaoloPeroy]

Bruh, don't kill diplomats.

[@Kalleosini]

killing diplomats sends a message

[@christopherg2347]

@@Kalleosini But why would anyone want to send "please murder me in the most violent fashion possible" as a message to his enemies?

[@christiansciberras7107]

@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.

[@Kalleosini]

@@christopherg2347 I think it is more of a "I'd like to see you come try bitch" kinda message.

[@owenb8636]

Roman diplomats were assholes though. It seems like half the time they were trying to start wars

[@theoutlook55]

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!

[@realtangerine4910]

"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**

[@terner1234]

@T. Henderson vercingetorix liked it so much, he volunteered to be in a triumph

[@SAMUELSKUWAR]

Haha, you guys are amazing. Stuff like this never crosses my mind.

[@napolien1310]

@@terner1234 LMAO

[@SAMUELSKUWAR]

@@Nortrix87 lol

[@fabioferrarese5600]

@@Nortrix87 germanicus uses /kill

[@lukezuzga6460]

As always, brilliant job fellas! Your Roman and Ottoman Videos are still my favorite and require more than one play! Thanks Guys!

[@marmanlive]

I don't know who's the narrator of those videos but he's absolutely great, brilliant voice, diction and of course lovely British accent... so comprehensive and flawless!!! Thank you guys! Great Job

[@droopmasterflex2822]

If I could like this content three times I would! Good work!

[@KingsandGenerals]

We appreciate it!

[@emresar6364]

Gods... I hate Gauls. My grandfather hated them too, even before they put out his eyes.

[@Wharbuckz7]

So the Modern day French-Roman!?!

[@LazarusWilhelm]

tHe bRUTii are the only TRUE ROMANS

[@peurtoricanhoor1420]

@@LazarusWilhelm SCIPII FOREVER

[@caorusso4926]

@@Wharbuckz7 the modern day blacks

[@Wharbuckz7]

@@CrazyNikel lol

[@l0singzanity1]

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!

[@thehistoryguy4277]

Thank you for this! There are not too many books out there on this battle!

[@Uridien]

Can't say enough how much I appreciate this channel.

[@noping4100]

"Not willing to go gently into that good night" nice one. I can appreciate great phrasing when I hear it.

[@Dartaen]

Gauls better learn about diplomatic immunity before trying that stuff on an Mongols ambassador...

[@thabomuso6254]

lol! Kill some Mongol ambassadors, and your people will simply turn into a memory within a few months.

[@juliuscaesar8925]

When somebody kills a peaceful envoy for no reason , they have ensured their destruction

[@nicolascavadini3570]

They did! France actually receivex mongol ambassadors and didn t kill them ... western europe got saved from the onslaught

[@TwinIonEngines]

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

[@MegaBaddog]

Carthaginian navy was shit, hence he had to come from the alps

[@LuisBrito-ly1ko]

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*

[@napoleonibonaparte7198]

The most perfect victory I’ve seen...

[@Loyal94]

I liked the build up very much. Nicely done as always.

[@antoniopimentel3546]

Quite interesting the amount of respect Polybius showed the gauls in this battle, really surprising indeed one can imagine that their bravery in this war was truly remarkable for a Roman to say they were equal to the legions in courage and combat ability

[@GabrielBelmont4727]

That was due to his account being written by first hand accounts of a person who was at the battle.

[@FreeFallingAir]

Ahhh this made my day, y'all the best! Me n the Boii's love this channel!

[@RexGalilae]

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!!

[@theonlygoodlookinghabsburg2081]

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.

[@theonlygoodlookinghabsburg2081]

@@kafon6368 It didnes'"t because empires don't need moral reasons to expand.. they just do.

[@RexGalilae]

@@theonlygoodlookinghabsburg2081 That joke flew over your head faster than Cassius Chaerea's dagger plunged into Caligula's nuts

[@theonlygoodlookinghabsburg2081]

@@RexGalilae I have no nuts, didn't u know that I have tranformed into Venus?

[@RexGalilae]

@@dariusgreysun Yep lol

[@nickcitron2369]

Love dis shit!!! thank you for your service to history nerds everywhere!!!

[@darkzi1431]

Celts invade: Rome: I'm about to end this man's whole career Hannibal: ....

[@LuisBrito-ly1ko]

Scipio Africanus: Iam in manibus meis est Africa

[@Tareltonlives]

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

[@timonsolus]

Tareltonlives : That was a great show, aired in 2004 I think. BBC should remake it.

[@thabomuso6254]

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.

[@timonsolus]

@@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.

[@thabomuso6254]

@@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.

[@Tareltonlives]

@@timonsolus They did a few years ago, but only made 3 episodes

[@mikelurbin]

This was amazing! Fantastic content! Keep it up and thank you!

[@anarcho-boulangistllamaent2023]

Oh man, who could have predicted that fighting naked without any armor or protection on the body whatsoever wouldnt be such a good idea??

[@tarquiniussuperbus21]

It was never a problem for me.

[@danieltsiprun8080]

General but naked disagrees.

[@theogiannop5961]

Perhaps if they were main characters instead of extras, the amount of armor wouldn't matter.

[@rifleman4005]

Worse part was their shields didn't cover their entire body.

[@projectilequestion]

They fought naked so their clothes did not catch on the brambles.

[@jarronsmith3733]

More Rome videos!!!l And it’s a Sunday and I’m sick!! So what better way to spend sunday!!!

[@rodrigofilho1996]

Impressive how Rome was such a powerful war machine, so many wars and they always prevailed...

[@rodrigofilho1996]

@@Internetbutthurt most successful empire ever, their legacy is everywhere...

[@fiddibelow]

@@Internetbutthurt they suffered defeat In Germany and were essentially crushed

[@fiddibelow]

@@Internetbutthurt it's military technology that made Rome what it was it has happened several times trough history giving certain nations an advantage it takes other nations a long time to catch up with

[@OkurkaBinLadin]

@@fiddibelow No, if read about early Republic, Romans had technology no different from their neighbours. It was their political system.

[@enoppp167]

@@fiddibelow like Germans at idistavisus?

[@hiteshrabha1174]

Gaul battle wit Romans before Hannibal.. Great informative video as always, Kings and Generals..

[@EmperorConnor]

The sheer man power of ancient Rome was honestly staggering, it was literally an army factory just churning them out

[@aizseeker3622]

Or basically like ancient modern state army and government.

[@neutronalchemist3241]

Pretty much yes. The census-based recruitment, the alliance treaties (half or the "Roman" armies were always composed of Italic allies) and the compelte integration of military career in the "cursus honorum". Gave them a deepness of field unparalleled among "advanced" civilizations (in tribes, every man was a warrior, so che Gauls could raise armies of similar dimensions, but with not near the same level of discipline and command structure).

[@diapason89]

"Gaesatae naked warriors." Thanks, K&G. Another thing I just HAD to learn.

[@kaloarepo288]

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.

[@neutronalchemist3241]

One of the four kings of the Cimbrian-Teutonic coalition that terrorised Rome centuries later was "Boiorix", "king of the Boii".

[@kaloarepo288]

@@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.

[@ImperatorIke573]

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.

[@mx_cyber]

Same here. The Romans and their history are so interesting

[@benwalter6564]

Love ur videos ur good at explaning things love romes history thankyou mate

[@C0wb0yBebop]

One of your best videos K&G! Tho HistoryMarche and BazBattles have done well in competing with your swag you still have the magic 👌

[@Koopinator]

Boii will never cease to be a funny name.

[@paultyson4389]

Wonderful presentation as always. Thanks.

[@chrisdjernaes9658]

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.

[@frannyfranfrancis]

So much to learn! I was assuming this was going to be about British and Roman's fight

[@Fenniks-]

The Gallic tactic at 11:15 was a genius deception tactic

[@christianstroex6705]

I really like this channel, but could you please do series in chronological order instead of putting weeks/months between episodes? I often have no clue what happened in previous episodes..

[@RexGalilae]

2:45 I can't be the only one who cracked up at this

[@yusassin1449]

Yeah you just can't help but go oooof They ammased another army but in turn this army was also defeated with heavy casualties.

[@Zantides]

Gotta love early roman history.

[@panagiotiskaragiannis2674]

I love your videos so much keep going a good job

[@ISTVAN1127]

Who in their right mind would give a thumb down to these videos. What’s wrong with you people? K&G channel great job, as always. Thank you!

[@rechalnorbu4740]

Wow I am 12 years old and am hooked in history thanks to you Thank you

[@declanlambe9671]

Could you make a video about the gauls in the 2nd punic war please.I love your stuff

[@richardpeters1669]

Excellent work as always.

[@sstsaldana24]

Your graphics look great brother!!

[@sstsaldana24]

No doubt! By far the best battle channel there is!

[@brokenbridge6316]

Wonderful video. I think this video was quite informative. I sure hope you do more video's on more wars the Roman's fought against out barbarians. My compliments to all those who made this video a reality.

[@ziraka.5716]

Keep up the work lads. Can we get a Gutian empire, Land of Karda or Carduchi people history video?

[@animeyahallo3887]

That Hannibal guy looks like a good general. I wish him good luck!

[@wojackhistoriajedi3148]

Amazing video as always.

[@2014alfred]

Future idea: you can make a series about the lives of notorious outlaws and law men from the Old West, quite an interesting subject

[@hannibalccg702]

Can you please one day make a documentary on the punic wars. There is just so much about it

[@chenlevy3773]

I really liked the devotion of the Naked warriors as said: "why you need armor when you have the blessings of the gods?"

[@22vx]

So good! Love this!

[@YassirYHamid]

Amazing videos animations and graphics

[@DailyDipo]

You may be outsmarted me but i outsmarted your outsmarting

[@gunsroses6289]

Great video and we want more like this here

[@cinnamon3578]

Punic Wars next? Yess I'm ready

[@denysd7241]

If only Rome's enemies coordinated even a little bit you could've been reading this in Etruscan!

[@RexGalilae]

God forbid! If the Romans didn't exist, the parts of Europe north of the Mediterranean would still be barbarian

[@lewistaylor2858]

@@RexGalilae lol no

[@thabomuso6254]

getting reinforcements who advance on the Romans but turn on each other before even seeing a Roman soldier is not a good start.

[@M4NAH1MEK0]

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".

[@R3GARnator]

Carthage would of taken Rome's place as boss of Europe.

[@princessportsassociation]

I love the fact you used total war for the armies

[@dannyvandendungen2343]

I would love to see a episode about Basil II, one of the most badass Byzantine emperors of all time!

[@concept5631]

Wasn't he the longest reigning Roman emperor as well?

[@redshirt1917]

Fabulous video!

[@PranavMV]

loving your videos. I have a doubt on the timeline. I have watched most of your videos and before watching this one I watched the video on greek city-states. My question is what exactly is the timeline, here you are talking about Gallic Wars around 225 BC. I have read that there was a roman kingdom before Rome became a republic around 530 BC. But I have also read that there were greek city-states which formed leagues in Italy (does Latin league have any relevance here?). did a roman kingdom exist when there were greek city-states and leagues? Another small suggestion, if you have a forum where we can post our doubts it would really help or if you are active on any forums?

[@saptsagn3697]

Yeah Boii my favourite channel

[@TheSamuraijim87]

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.

[@Extra-dg7uv]

Marcellus was a good general, but Scipio Africanus was Hannibal's nemesis. Just sayin'

[@TheSamuraijim87]

@@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'

[@Extra-dg7uv]

@@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.

[@TheSamuraijim87]

@@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.

[@Extra-dg7uv]

@@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.

[@jonathanrivolta8691]

I studied at the university of Insubria. This ancient Celtic region still lives on.

[@alexbeedie6940]

Instantly regretting turning up to a battle naked.

[@danielvisky]

Have you seen anything as satisfying as cavalry sweeping up units and those making the cracking sound?

[@Bazerald777]

Okay it wasn't even a minute and an envoy was killed. I know how the next event will unfold. **15 seconds later** nailed it

[@richmondlandersenfells2238]

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.

[@thorshammer7883]

It's nice to see a history channel that still uses BC instead of BCE.

[@larslundandersen7722]

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

[@thorshammer7883]

@@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.

[@LuisBrito-ly1ko]

@@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.

[@omarabobakr9590]

What is the background music playing from 20:50 to the end?

[@mohammadsaida4603]

Nice history video thanks 👍

[@praeposter]

Were there graphical mods used for the machininas? I don’t remember Rome II looking this good.

[@MalayArcher]

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

[@johnisaiah985]

@@MalayArcher when are you gonna upload?

[@vandamsel5022]

@@johnisaiah985 upload what?

[@johnisaiah985]

@@vandamsel5022 malay archer wasn't uploaded in 2 months

[@MalayArcher]

@@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.

[@Miamcoline]

Excellent one!

[@barbiquearea]

Roman general wins a battle. His reward; Getting to loot and pillage the Gauls up north. Best gift ever.

[@KHK001]

Yes! Love those Roman wars

[@zacharynorton9796]

Nice Independence Day line drop there

[@sebastianbravo5028]

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 ?🎵🎵

[@KingsandGenerals]

You have watched our Mongol series? :-)

[@sebastianbravo5028]

@@KingsandGenerals oh, right!

[@marmanlive]

It would be great to see some videos of the glorious past of Armenia please, maybe some scenes from Tigranes The Great or even Cilician Armenia that contributed so much to crusades and was a safe house and shelter for pilgrimages and crusaders in the hostile region of Asia.

[@NaYangKo1M]

K&G is the best for me. The English CC helps alot too.