Roman Legionary Interview THE BEST INTERVIEW EVER! Military Odyssey 2013 | HD Video

[@nonanon666]

This guy knew his kit so well I was expecting him to start bitching about the officers and general staff.

[@Manperor]

the way he's dresses he is an officer

[@sokadikacc]

@@Manperor as optio

[@earthman6700]

Daniel Stephens-Hunt and fed up with the locals moaning about brexit again. All we did for them, give them roads, etc. and that's the thanks you get.

[@formam1022]

He may know his kit, but a few things are off- some soldiers if they wanter could dye there tunic and the gladius (mainly gladius hisspania) where also really good at cutting, and they where trained in stabing and cutting. But in tight formation you have extream truble cutting, and the helmet did not cut the neck unless tied wring. And all that is nit picking yes but still there

[@couchpotatoe91]

@@formam1022 Agreed on the slashing, one can imagine slashing at the sword hand would be pretty effective as they were not armored. Scholagladiatora and Metatron have some interesting videos about the topic.

[@sadisticincubus]

Just like in the movies, the Roman soldiers always have British accents.

[@rikpien2925]

But you have to admit This guy knows his stuff

[@kixigvak]

They spent several hundred years in Britain. Picked up the accent. If they'd been to Texas they'd talk like Texans.

[@intanto1]

​@summit nigga many British soldiers (often valued)

[@Slipmahoney21]

They still would have spoke Latin.

[@fernandogarcia3957]

@Mark Gable There was no English at the time, and by the time there was English only some Church people would have spoken it in the Isles, not mainland Europe.

[@mr.crighton9491]

I have found re-enactors are way knowledgeable on their particular era. They usually make much of their equipment, and try to mimic even the diet of that period. this guy is a great example.

[@66kbm]

Seeing as it wasn't rehearsed or scripted, went pretty well I think. Thanks for posting.

[@StrikingScorpion82]

Yes I think it went very well!:)

[@jasemac5391]

66kbm I thought you were very knowledgeable, I enjoyed watching this, good work my friend well done

[@FlatSpinMan]

YOU are the guy I want to watch! No idea who the uploader is, but holy shit do you know your stuff. I've read a decent amount about the Roman Army but your very simple, pragmatic explanations, arranged so sensibly, really added to my understanding of what the real men used. Brilliant.

[@pagancenturion94]

Oooh yeah Oooh yeah!

[@jamiehoover33]

Good stuff! Have you considered creating your own videos?

[@sancho7863]

I spent 4 years in the marines and i once read something about the everyday lives of roman legionaries and it was exactly the same life i was living. Lots of gear, lots of marching, and lots of digging

[@rabidspatula1013]

They had perfected the grunt life 2000 years ago :D

[@johnking9196]

great interview..the "soldier" knew his stuff and you did a great inteview by letting him speak and not interupting him but asking questions...good job...

[@damnyourpasswords]

VERY good point about the interupting. even journalists interupt ALL the time

[@thetayterminator1436]

The Celts actually built the roads and the Romans took credit for it, so there's one thing he didn't know.

[@thetayterminator1436]

Oh and the dangling lashes hanging down from his belt would have his legion identifying information and about his rank. it was not fashion. Roman soldiers didn't do fashion. Generals, Emperor and high ranking soldiers did fashion, like the horse hair mane on the helmets of Legionnaires and Centurions you could consider fashion. Then again they were also used to tell the difference between the two, with one having the hair going front to back and the other side to side. So the moral of the story is the Romans didn't wear anything that didn't have a purpose.

[@RavenioTheHatamoto]

@@thetayterminator1436 that's true, the ancient Britons built many roads (I'd say many predate the arrival of Indo-European groups), but not paved roads like the Romans did. This doesn't mean they were just primitive trails of dirt of course, it's just that paved roads make the movement of armies and carts much easier.

[@thetayterminator1436]

@@RavenioTheHatamoto M. Miretti Romans definitely built roads when they arrived. Well built might not be the right word to use, repaired or repaved is maybe more appropriate. I had always thought that the Romans showed up and built roads too and all that was there before was just dirt trails but apparently that's not the case. Its probably more likely that because the romans used the roads so much they had to repair the roads themselves. Here's some text from an article I found on It: Archaeologists have uncovered an ancient highway built before the Roman Conquest which suggests that Iron Age man may have beaten them to it. The discovery is the first of its kind and proves that ancient Britons built and used complex roads a century earlier than the invaders. It even raises the possibility that the Romans were inspired by Iron Age man, as their road was built on top of the original foundations, which date from 2,100 years ago. Tim Malim, the archaeologist leading the project, said his team had been brought in to investigate what was believed to be a Roman road. But on closer inspection, they realised that the construction was actually built upon the original foundations of another road, which was found to date from the Iron Age. The discovery is now likely to prompt archaeologists in other parts of Britain to re-examine some more typically Roman-looking roads to see whether they too were constructed by Britons. The road was built in three phases with elder wood, silt and cobbles. The foundation is made from the elder wood which has been carbon dated to the Iron Age. The next layer was made from silt with the surface compacted with river cobbles. There are also fire pits that date back to the Bronze Age and upright timbers from the middle of the same period, suggesting it was used as a route for droving livestock to market before it was upgraded to meet the modern-day needs of the Iron Age travellers. The road was cambered to allow drainage and even has a kerb fence system to hold the edge in place. It was rebuilt twice with a fresh layer of silt and stones before the Romans invaded.

[@juliemcneely-kirwan9314]

Excellent interview. This man is a natural teacher, one who loves his subject matter.

[@Skovit72]

Perhaps one of the most informative and professional interviews I have ever scene. Our "Roman" is indeed a very educated man with a great personality. Quality and preparation here.

[@paulmelville11]

Its like I have been transported back in time and the interview is with a real grunt on the front the line - amazing

[@oiurehj]

And then you should bring some salt in case you meet some Carthaginians and you want to sterilize their lands :D

[@inkvoltage1325]

:D

[@TheMan-je5xq]

Jonny B especially cause Carthage became a big important city for Rome later on

[@Lieutenant_Dude]

Sure, but there's a bit of room for poetic interpretation of that stuff. A lot of the amateur historians from ancient times spiced up their tales a bit. Herodotus comes to mind.

[@domenicomarzolla3045]

Yes that is actually a legend that came up in the 19th century. In reality, after razing the city and selling the inhabitants as slaves, they simply sold the land to the highest bidder as ager publicus, public farmland.

[@Gabriel-br4qe]

Yeah I doubt this really happened. Salt was way too expensive and precious to waste it like that. There was no need to use tons of this valuable resource when they could just raze the city and enslave its population.

[@stevesandford1437]

This interviewee is BRILLIANT!!! He REALLY knows his subject and makes reference to actual archaeological finds to support his factual statements. I wouldn't be at all surprised if this re enactor had ACTUALLY served in the modern Military at some point, as he speaks like an Army Instructor! xx SF

[@TheBOUNCERCHANNEL]

The English chap seems to have been on the field fighting as a Roman. THE MAN WAS THERE.!!!

[@Manperor]

lmao definitely reincarnated

[@sMASHsound]

i was there in -174, the rations were sh@t

[@mukkaar]

Vampire confirmed.

[@ENoob]

My understanding of the Gladius is that its a very effective cutting weapon as well, mainly due to the broad blade. Certainly the descriptions of the wounds inflicted suggest it could take an arm off at the shoulder as well as being good for draw cuts in close quarters in combination with the shield.

[@silverhand9965]

yeah,it may have been made primarily as a stabbing weapon (and a hell of a good one at that) because of the way Romans fought,but if you needed something cut,the Gladius wasn't gonna fail you

[@John2r1]

As to what he is carrying .. Extra clothing, 3 days rations, one man carried a pickaxe , one carried a shovel , etc. Basic camping supplies , after the Marian reforms of 107 BC they carried more of their supplies each tent of 8 men got one mule to carried extra stuff they needed. We can all thank Marian for the concept of the modern Rucksack and route march or ruck march.

[@ericsalles3393]

The 5000 year old guy they found in the Italian mountains had a ruck sack

[@davidzubiria3783]

Double this man ration.

[@dirt0133]

I knew most of this, but his presentation was quite good. Thanks for posting, good job not interrupting the speaker. Was slightly disappointed the "legionaries" name didnt appear in the credits.

[@SnoopyDoofie]

I'm sure this guy is a real Roman and time traveled from the past.

[@HO-bndk]

Nah, he's way too old. Most real Roman soldiers were teenagers or early 20s. Just like soldiers today. The re-enactment groups always give a totally false impression.

[@bartomiejzakrzewski7220]

@@HO-bndk Hastiati were about 35-45 years veterans the best soldiers in the legion after them in the late republic and early empire Evocati cohort- the fucking veterans imagine so experienced soldier ,,never underestimate old soldier who is still in the bisnes,,

[@raphwalker9123]

You ever heard of the French Old guard?Dipshit.

[@placeholder8768]

Raph Walker from Napoleonic France, 1400 years after Rome fell? Yeah, I do know them, their actual fighting ability compared to parade and propaganda ability is disputed due to them never being used.

[@Perkustin]

Dunno a real Roman would definitely be drunk and if he wasn't in the field or at home he'd be gambling or whoring.

[@derekburge5294]

Scutum are *heavy,* yo. A HEMA club I used to attend had some mock scutums and gladii to play with. The shield was genuinely tiring to use for any prolonged spar. The athleticism demanded of the SPQR infantry was wild to be able to fight with them as long as they must have.

[@spartanpawn007]

True, though the Romans even had a solution for this as the front rank would periodically shift to the rear of a formation, allowing fresh troops to engage. The HBO series Rome has a good example of what this may have looked like.

[@derekburge5294]

@@spartanpawn007 THIRTEEEEEEN!

[@lindgrenland]

@@derekburge5294Get back in line, you drunken dog!

[@derekburge5294]

@@lindgrenland Sorry! Can't hear you over the sound of dead gauls!

[@lindgrenland]

@@derekburge5294 *Sigh* Very well. Just make sure you execute the wounded gauls PROPERLY this time, soldier. I really don't want to stand there and be yelled at by the primus pilus again because the legatus couldn't sleep from the loud cries of anguish

[@TheCrusaderRabbits]

It always impresses me how much people can know about a subject

[@williamtheshake8739]

Romans where incredible and This guy is an encyclopaedia!

[@hajjibarbara2900]

I did 20 years in the US Army. I could see me settling in pretty quickly into the Roman army. Well besides learning Latin and trading in my M4 for a gladius. Then there's the fact that 99% of my ancestors came from Britannia, Germania, and Gaul.

[@BuckmeisterSupremeWithCheese]

So did 99% of the Roman military if it helps. You could have been a soldier in the Auxilia.

[@Daketnietweet]

AxelFive More like 50%

[@warbossgrotsmasha23]

you'd fit right in xD donno if you'd like their food though

[@SteveSmith-ty8ko]

Well the romans employed your ancestors anyway, so you’d have fit in regardless.

[@thalmoragent9344]

@@SteveSmith-ty8ko True, especially Gaul and Germania. Britannia a little less so, but overall yeah, they all had many of their peoples serving in the Legions, or rather, the Auxiliaries I believe.

[@tommyfred6180]

his is one of the best off the cuff interviews by a reenactor I have ever seen on youtube

[@hundwyn7530]

"The Germans were so efficient..." Big surprise

[@ewigesgermanien4174]

where did he say that? :)

[@Presbiter]

@FullBlown yeah, like the first jet engine, the first automobile, the first space rocket, the first nuclear fission, the first helicopter, the first tv, the first telephone, the first motocycle, the first fridge, the first computer, the first painkillers, first antibacteria...etc^^ all that "overbuilt shit" ... and what has a miserable existence like you to show? ahh yeah thats what I thought^^

[@Hugh_Morris]

@O Mouro Germans are efficient though, ever since they adapted Roman technology, tactics and government, so from the 400s til the present day they've been stronger than Italy. They even became Emperors over Italian subjects. That is saying something, they stopped being barbarians and used the Romans' own weapons against them.

[@t.gracchus1786]

@@Hugh_Morris The fall of Rome is the result of a combination of difficulties the empire faced, not the Germans alone

[@Surv1ve_Thrive]

@15:00 he only mentions that the Huns 'efficiently' stripped the Romans of their gear. Wasn't exactly a compliment.

[@FlymanMS]

After watching the one with Briton chieftan, this guy seems like he's not only recreating the armor and gear, but also the spirit of Roman legionari. DIsciplined, descriptive and straight to the point.

[@mckinnhe]

Excellent interview with a reenactor who is a pleasure to listen to.

[@jaelge]

That man was an absolute encyclopedia of knowledge. I hung on every word. I love everything about Roman culture, military, politics, and especially how the elite as well as common citizens lived and conducted their everyday lives.

[@kickinthegob]

Many of the Romans had a bald spot under the chin where their beards refused to grow from the constant rubbing of the chinstrap (I've heard). As an ex firefighter that spent many hours in a helmet, I too have that bald spot now.

[@DarthTaterson]

RIP beard, cool fact!

[@HO-bndk]

That was just made up for a movie. No evidence for that from Roman times at all.

[@hugememedaddy2.083]

@@HO-bndk i believe the made up part was the scar not the bald spot.

[@KarlPHorse]

Wasn't it more fashionable in both the republican and imperial eras to be clean shaven?

[@smokybear4204]

@Lazar Živadinović wasn't mentioned have you read the Octavian accounts of the proper Roman male citizen it literally stated a young man from the ages 16-26 is too be expected to be clean shaven and have no dirt on his arms, neck and face

[@huldu]

A great interview and very informative without being over the top or exaggerated. You really hit the jackpot finding that guy.

[@CborgMega]

Very interesting! Thanks for the opportunity to see this interview! Greetings from Romania! :)

[@froggystyle642]

I could listen to someone (who knows what theyre talking about and are passionate) all day, no matter the subject. Came across this video by accident, even though I'm a history nerd. Would love to get along to something like this in the UK in future.

[@Espanyol_Espaghetti]

Wow! He must be a thousand years old. And what a matching British accent. 100% Roman 👍

[@sputumtube]

There's a similar re-enactment site here in Middlewich called Harbutts Field where there was once a Roman encampment. I learned a lot from this 'soldier' - thanks for posting.

[@CJLiveFromTheOutdoors]

Well done. As it was noted previously, you didn't interrupt with any redundant questions or statements and he knew his stuff. Very well done!

[@Shaylok]

I could listen to this man chat for hours. He knew his hobby well.

[@toriwisdom6667]

I was searching for totally different information, but I couldn't pull away from this interview, it's so interesting!

[@RobVaderful]

He even can say Mainz correctly...

[@HO-bndk]

He can't say "Kalkriese" properly though.

[@thrownswordpommel7393]

@@HO-bndk that's asking too much.

[@dustjunky2000]

Wow! That was a hell of a good interview. This guy is really on top of his game. Very impressive indeed.

[@robertocorradi7571]

Very good . . . and the gentleman demonstrating did a first rate job . Extremely well done . Thank you sir .

[@tiffsaver]

I really enjoyed this video! I always wanted to know about what the Legionaries wore, and why. This man explained everything beautifully. Kudos.

[@SlightlyFoxed84]

Wow! Latin sounds so much like modern British English! All those movies casting Brits as Romans got it right after all.

[@GarrisonFall]

That soldier has been living in England for nearly 2000 years. He's had plenty of time to learn the language and even pick up the accent.

[@_manzo_0287]

No, italian is the closest language to latin, english is german language

[@_manzo_0287]

No, english is german language

[@berno8535]

@@_manzo_0287 English is mainly a German, French and a Latin language. Majority of words in English are Latin.

[@Cissonius]

@@berno8535 this guy gets it. English and a lot of other languishes derive from Latin. which of its self derives from etruskin if I'm not mistaken

[@Ronin4614]

What an outstanding presentation.

[@shaun_177]

Awesome video thanks . Ancient Rome just amazes me . I can't ever get enough when it comes to their history. I was fortunate enough to be stationed in Italy with the Army. Loved seeing all the history out there. Amazing amazing society they were.

[@johnnym11]

Do you now that in some period of Roman Empire Legionars where be paid by salt. That is English name for Salaray from latin word for Salt. In that time salt was very expensive.

[@patrickbrennan1317]

Johnny M worth his salt originated then.

[@jonathan-kh3zy]

Take this salt soldier As payment? Yes... Proceeds to salt carthage otw to another civil war

[@nathanrock8107]

Also those javelins/spear things were thrown at the enemy to be a nuisance bc they would get stuck in your shield. A lot of early enemies would find it so cumbersome that they would just toss their shield and go without one.

[@agnostic47]

In a letter home from a legonary posted to Hadrian's Wall (possibly the least popular posting in the Roman army) "send socks".

[@hamidious]

Very knowledgable and informative. Also hands on description is very helpful. Great vid.

[@terrygray4508]

Very well informed. And very interesting thanks

[@VLSG]

Still my favorite reenactor video on YT. Very knowledgeable and enjoyable

[@mrlume9475]

Very knowledgable guy, excellent video. 👍

[@oviros]

seeing the costume close enough to admire stitching in leather,ornaments,almost felt like touch and smell.The shining of metal blade,armour details,bindings ,sandals ,felt like some inheritated cell still remembers...

[@ZoggyWoggyII]

It would be incredible the same about Triarii, Hoplites, Pikemen etc. Best video on the subject I have ever seen!

[@Alesxandros]

This re enactor is really good and knows is things, thank you from italy...the motherland of roman empire

[@pochola4550]

11:18 scutum momemt, very frightening. You never know from where the sword is coming for you.

[@tomh2572]

Had a dream about a floating scutum coming straight for me... didnt know what to do at all

[@hannannah1uk]

You're right. That was scary!

[@steirqwe7956]

If i remember correctly they learned this technique from greek goplits who would keep their weapon hidden behind large round shield for the very last moment before strike. Romans weren't ashamed to learn and adapt when they saw something worthy.

[@silverhand9965]

@@steirqwe7956 that's one of the reasons why they grew to be so effective indeed. In fact even in the video,the Roman soldier mentions that for their helmet. They were proud of their stuff,but not too proud to accept what others did right

[@MyHentaiGirl]

@@silverhand9965 Hannibal use deception and spies so the Roman also copying such tactic, Invictus make a new video about this I also think that the Penitus Occulatus in Skyrim also some what base on the concept

[@JD-pd3gl]

What a fascinating interview! I can imagine actually wearing the kit yourself would give a lot of insight into why certain things were the way they were, that some historians might not understand fully.

[@Sony-Fanboy]

yes, indeed this guy is very good!

[@hendrikmoons8218]

Thanks for the explanation, very much to the point and great information.

[@Kusunoky]

For some reasons, I always felt some how scared with the roman sword. They were huge and just imagine being stab with that... dang.

[@MyHentaiGirl]

Build for deadly stabbing Imagine such a big broad sword pushing through your organs, the wound also big enough for you to bleed out

[@ENIGMAXII2112]

Now this was VERY good to view! I liked VERY much how the interviewer let the Roman Re - enactor speak... This day and age it is all about the interviewer. Now that does NOT make sense! But the above video does make much sense... Thank you for sharing this with all of us..

[@bennyrashasha9920]

Man. Reminds me of when I was enlisted and putting all my shit on.... Ahhh the glory days.

[@thewitchking852]

when you realize grunts have been doin the same shit since 100 BC lol

[@gogogeedus]

Wow! can you believe it, he's 2000 years old and still kicking!

[@BelloBudo007]

Thanks for an enjoyable & informative interview. It was very good. A question please - I've noticed (watching interviews, films, books, etc) that once the shield is up, that the legs appear to be the obvious exposed target for the enemy to have a shot at. Could it be though that men of that time were shorter & therefore the shields protected their legs better?

[@StrikingScorpion82]

yes probably...and also some invested in metal leg guards:)

[@cseijifja]

actual romans(and not the lombard now-a-days italians), were 155-160 tall.Everyone was smaller actually.

[@BelloBudo007]

***** Thanks for that. Everyone smaller? Frankly I wonder about that. Viking graves found in Britain suggest that warriors were big men even by today's standards. It's an interesting subject & I'm sure there's no end of theories about diet (higher protein), exercise (rowing) and training.

[@cseijifja]

Bill Blinky Exceptions, in all ages, are found,africans for example, have always been extremely tall, more so than any other ethnic group.Contrary to popular belief, we eat far better than anyone before us has, since we actually have knowledge of what we are stuffing in our mouths, that plus healthcare gives us the edge over any other ancestor.Training does not make you particularly taller, thou, or else spartans would tower above us, its more about diet(like any doctor today would tell you), and genetics.

[@BelloBudo007]

***** Yep agree about the training point 100%. The Vikings were rowing, lugging gear & booty, that helped develop strong bones. Plus no doubt enjoying plenty of high protein food from plundering or when they became mercenaries. Modern diets - I know we should be more educated & therefore eat better. My observations are that too many eat far more than they should and have easy access to fats, salts & sugars.

[@manuelkong10]

EXCELLENT....would love to meet him....where is his Legio posted now??

[@BillyTheBigKid82]

The romans must have been aliens. They were just so amazingly innovative. The guys had a taxi system for crying out aloud...

[@BillyTheBigKid82]

@C Lively Yeah I wasn't seriously suggesting that, if you thought so.

[@PoliticusRex632]

That dude is a time traveller. We need men like him in our classrooms.

[@DragunovSniperElite]

The legionary red tunic is not just a Hollywood myth. iconography preserved at Pompeii depicts two Roman legionaries: one wearing red tunic, another wearing white. Also red dye was the cheapest type of die, that is also the reason why the English parliamentary forces and the subsequent English army chose red. Wearing bright red colour was also a tactical advantage in ancient times. Generals can easily identify which block of men was his own troops and see the over shape of their formation. Soldiers can easily identify each other during heat of battle.

[@paprskomet]

Fresco in pompey you are reffering too is far to little to make any definitive conclusion about it.Reality of Roman military clothing was far more complex than hoplesly limited popular image who simply saw legionaries as those guys who wear red tunics.Thats a kind of super-cliché.Roman soldiers certainly used red tunics...however many other colors as well.The best existing research on this subject is that by Graham Sumner.Please read his books(if only more people would do it!).

[@jasonren7391]

@@paprskomet i stated wearing red was not a myth and there was evidence that it was done. I never stated red was worn exclusively. I know there are historical text that mention other colors such as blue. But overall we have no idea which other colors exactly, what they signafy, and if the colors were uniform. Only way we can speculate is looking at which color dye was cheap enough to make it practical possibility.

[@paprskomet]

@@jasonren7391 We can do far more than just speculating.we actually have very rich color preserved imagies and also preserved literary references to colors.I advice to read the works Ive already mentioned.Only after that there could be a good debate about this.

[@fattiger6957]

The concept of distinct military uniforms is one a lot of people like to apply to the Romans. However, uniforms are are fairly recent invention. While armour and weapons were relatively standardized, many modern historians think legionarii wore whatever colour tunics they wanted.

[@ryanhampson673]

There are a few preserved order requests from quartermasters asking for white tunics for the soldiers from the fronts....If they wanted red they would have ordered red ones..

[@cristianne3040]

How really interesting. This fella knows what he is talking about. Thank you.

[@nonnobissolum]

No disrespect, but I never know how to feel about re-enactors. On one hand, it seems a silly game of dress up by grownups. On the other hand, it seems terrifically important to keep the knowledge and experience alive, and I myself do love it so and find it fascinating. Thanks for posting.

[@theotterguy]

I feel the same way.But I would probably do it if I could afford such an expensive hobby.My (late) uncle used to do it and I got to shoot flintlock muskets when young.

[@petrolekh]

Excellent and informative. Interviewee knows his adopted trade.

[@jamesmorgan403]

Might have been polite of you to include the name of the guy you interviewed.. kinda thoughtless of you not to do that.

[@owainmeurig]

You presume he wanted his name on youtube.

[@Freyia935]

Should have asked where they bought this stuff

[@threestepssideways1202]

@S F I think he was referring to the present day and the process of re-enactment and the kit they display now as opposed to provision of kit in the historical legions. Many make their own gear Tom that being the case, but you know as I do that their are many places you can go to buy 'realistic' time specific kit. I too would have liked to know who crafted much of this gear they are wearing though.

[@lockingBlock]

Pay attention next time, he did tell you at 17:12!

[@threestepssideways1202]

@@lockingBlock Are you being purposefully obtuse ? Do you not think there is a significant difference between wondering where they obtained all their re-enactment armour, weapons and other period specific ancillaries as opposed to him showing off a turf-cutter that is ''similar to what you can buy in B&Q nowadays''.

[@lockingBlock]

@@threestepssideways1202 Whoooosh!

[@robertrichards8418]

no substitute for enthusiasm and devotion to something you love this guy has both and me too snapshott classic film dioramas xx

[@maxdecphoenix]

While humans have grown/used cotton for several thousand years, there is NO WAY IN HADES that a roman soldier would have had a cotton tunic. Even a cotton blend. NONE. Cotton is UNBELIEVABLY tedious to clean, card and spin by hand because the fibers are short and incredibly naggled. Only by commission from an ultra-rich patron would a weaver even bother with it. And it would take months to produce enough finished cloth to even make a garment. It would be ridiculously expensive. And forget about any form of mass production on any scale, even with slave labor. It was entirely a trapping of the gentrified elite. I doubt even Rome's richest generals would have worn cotton, due to the cost. Soldiers would have worn linen from either flax or hemp (almost certainly hemp for Romans). Humanity wouldn't know cotton as an economical cloth until 1800s in the Cotton Bubble, after the invention of the Cotton Gin which mechanized the most tedious part of fabric production. Slave plantations converted their farms to cotton (historically American plantations grew legumes. Cotton only became a viable crop in the last half-century of American slavery). The whole reason for them converting their entire plantation to cotton production was because the value of cotton was astronomically high, and had been since time immorial, but the price crashed rapidly. Which is why it is so cheap today.

[@johnnym11]

They use letter or slik for tunics

[@T_bone]

I have to look into this, interesting detail I just became curious about because of your assertion. Hopefully there will be good information out there.

[@ericsalles3393]

I cottoned on to that slightly ,I thought cotton? ???

[@senlac1000]

@@johnnym11 Wool actually, or linen

[@HaNsWiDjAjA]

Dont be silly. Cotton was the primary clothing material for the Chinese, the Indians, the Middle Easterners and the inhabitants of Central and South America for millenias. Sure it was laborious to make but its not like linen or wool weren't. Cotton might be laborious to pick out and spin, but linen was laborious to ret, that is to rot the stalks and then beat and separate the linen fibers from the surrounding cellulose, which is a step you dont have to do with cotton. And cotton had the added advantage of yielding a lot more fibers per acre of land than either. The only reason that Romans did not wear cotton widely was simply that cotton cultivation hadn't spread to that part of the world yet, and shipping technology wasn't very advanced. Hence cotton was a costly imported textille, something only the European elites and middle class wore during the ancient and medieval times. Even this wasnt exactly true all over Europe; in the Balkans and Italy with its proximity to the cotton growing region of the Middle East it was widely worn by everyone, though the rich preferring silk. A huge cotton cloth manufacturing industry existed in Venice as early as 1150 AD, using cotton imported from Syria, Sicily, Cyprus, etc. www.jstor.org/stable/2117188 Once European shipping technology and trade routes to Asia developed sufficiently in the 17th century cotton clothing was widely worn by the European masses, because it was CHEAP. The British parliament even passed the Calico Act in 1721 because the influx of cheap imported Indian cotton clothe (calico) threatened the business of the British wool weavers. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_cotton en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calico_Acts

[@Coste1072]

Good informational video. Showed quite a few items I didn't know anything about.

[@ursus8068]

In deed very nice! Still I'm not entirely convinced about the tunics color. What he sais might be true for campaining, but if one invests a lot of money in a crest and cingulum and all the other decoration I would figure them to have had died "parade tunic"

[@Zamolxes77]

+Fabian Behrens Very well possible, it could also be a mark of your status. Sadly we have little to no evidence, as most bio material, like leather and cloth, would have rotted away very quickly.

[@paprskomet]

Fabian Behrens.It is actually known from the Romans themselves that during parades they wore specialy bleeched white tunics.The best existing research on this subject is that by Graham Sumner.Please read his books(if only more people would do it!).

[@ishitrealbad3039]

another usefull thing about the pilum, is that not only pierces shields. it makes it almost impossible to retract the pilum out of your shield, making the enemies shield more of a burden and unuseable in formation. Essentially the pilum disrupted shield formation, and formations in general. It's like being bombarded by artilery in a short distance.

[@jujerjamalah7552]

Does the "roman" guy has a youtube channel?

[@hundwyn7530]

kzbin.info I believe this is him.

[@robw1571]

Great explanation of Roman kit, but I wish it was zoomed out a bit so the things he was pointing out were in frame.

[@blogobre]

Cool. A tip, perhaps not face the camera towards the sun. Otherwise people are in their own shadow as per this interview in the first few mins.

[@sparsh415]

Really informative and interesting interview.I reckon one reason there may not be hardly any finds left in the forest is that the materials have perished over the millenia.

[@Intranetusa]

Great video, the guy knew his stuff. I'd like to add a correction to 12:03 when he says the pila is a throwing javelin and not a spear. The pila was a 6 foot long multi-purpose throwing spear that was used as both a throwing javelin and as a thrusting spear in melee. Some modern historians believe that the Romans used pila at any stage of the fighting - not just in the beginning when it is thrown. We have reliefs on Roman artwork showing Romans using pila in melee combat stabbing at Dacian infantry, as well as records saying the Romans used pila in melee against cavalry: classconnection.s3.amazonaws.com/513/flashcards/1997513/jpg/tropaeum_dacian_archer1352066434960.jpg Plutarch in Life of Antony 45 talks about Mark Antony's legions using their pila to thrust at Parthians in melee. In this incidence, pilas would definitely be of primary importance and much more useful in melee than their short swords: penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Plutarch/Lives/Antony*.html Arrian in Array against the Alans talks about legionary heavy infantry equipped with some type of infantry version of the kontos, which was a heavy pila that was both thrown and used as a thrusting spear: "And the front four ranks of the formation must be of spearmen, whose spearpoints end in thin iron shanks. And the foremost of them should hold them at the ready, in order that when the enemies near them, they can thrust the ironpoints of the spears at the breast of the horses in particular. Those standing in second, third an fourth rank of the formation must hold their spears ready for thrusting if possible, wounding the horses and killing the horsemen and put the rider out of action with the spear stuck in their heavy body armour and the iron point bent because of the softness." members.tripod.com/~S_van_Dorst/Ancient_Warfare/Rome/Sources/ektaxis.html#GR6 www.fectio.org.uk/articles/arrian.htm It seems the common theme is that the pila was at least the main melee weapon of primary importance to fight cavalry. Pila was sometimes used in melee to fight infantry, but the pila being used in melee seems to have been the default method for fighting cavalry. Furthermore, the Romans carried two pila. The first pila was usually thrown - that first pila was what was only useful in the beginning of the engagement. The second pila could be thrown or used for melee against opponents. The Romans also developed the heavy pila that was specifically geared for thrusting.

[@45calibermedic]

You've presented an interesting array of citations which, when combined with ThegnThrand's practical pila tests make a decent argument for the pilum's use in melee. However, I am not so sure about the selection from Arrian. A spear POINT that ENDS in a thin iron shank does not sound like a pilum to me. The head (if that's what Arrian means by point) should begin with the iron shank instead of end with it to be a pilum, right? The "kontos" described there sounds more like a certain type of ancient spear which looked like this: www.manningimperial.com/catalogue/arms/spears/bayonet-spear-head/520 (this example is Celtic, however, and I don't know if the Romans used any) Of course, he and/or the translation may not be as precise as we'd hope, so my attempt to dissect the passage that you've posted may be in vain. In fact, re-reading the translation, your interpretation of Arrian simply describing the pilum isn't so far-fetched. What do you think? Thanks.

[@Intranetusa]

@@45calibermedic I think it does describe the pilum because of the following reasons: 1) The pointy end of an pilum is a "thin iron shank" rather than a broader spearhead attached to the wooden shaft. Even the triangular/square pilum point itself is pretty thin compared to a regular spear. A shank is a stabbing point, and so "thin iron shank" sounds like thin stabbing point or thin stabbing point attached to a thin pole. 2) Furthermore, the pilum came in a variety of different shapes and sizes. Not all pilum have the triangular or square shaped point that we typically think of. Some pilum points were shaped like thin spear points. For example, see this bronze pilum head: ancientpoint.com/inf/145650-circa___50___100_a___d_large_british_found_roman_period_bronze_pilum_type_spear_head.html 3) The Romans also developed the heavy pila that blurred the line between throwing spear and thrusting spear even more. 4) There is also a reference to "iron point bent because of the softness." This either refers to the pila bending at the shaft, or refers to the Roman weaponry being somewhat mediocre in quality and the actual tips (of either the pila or the spear) getting dulled and bent. 5) Finally, Arrian lived during the 2nd century, so this era should be before the Romans re-equipped many legionaries with thrusting spears that weren't thrown. Furthermore, from what I understand, I believe the Kontos is a lance that was used by cavalry?

[@45calibermedic]

@@Intranetusa Hi, interesting points again, I agree that it's possible for them to be pila. Kontos indeed usually means lance, but the meaning was stretched to refer to long, heavy, spear-type weapons also. As for that bronze piece, I'm not so sure it's a pilum. It seems like its being called pilum type due to its tanged design, but there are definitely pilum heads in iron with more traditional spear heads. I can still see the slim tip of that spear that I posted getting bent/broken and getting stuck, but I think you make a good argument, if not final, for the pilum's being in Arrian. Thanks for chatting, by the way.

[@Intranetusa]

@@45calibermedic Interesting points. Do you think it was possible that the Roman legionaries already got reequipped with standard thrusting spears during the mid 2nd century? That would move up the date people typically think of when they think of the archetype of the late Roman legionaries with spears.

[@ZoggyWoggyII]

Absolute legend. This guy is ready to kick ass.

[@miguelsuarez-solis5027]

He missed an important point about the pilum... It bending wasn't just about not having it used against you... It was also about rendering an enemy shield useless... You have one of these sticking out of your shield bent and you can't pull it out and good luck using that shield effectively

[@Chooong7]

When I read the title I was excited. I thought there was a video of an actual interview with an ancient roman soldier but then I was like "wait a minute"

[@ice111110]

He is dressed as a republic legionary, I prefer the imperial legions because they used the Lorica Segmentata which I love so much, the spatha was used by some legions in the 3rd century AD. So my favorite time for the legions was the 3rd century AD/CE

[@travis3487]

+Luke Song Hamata was used all during the Empire as well, while Segmentata offered better protection in some cases it was expensive to produce and hard to maintain. This guys demonstration would fit an early imperial impression, almost to then of the 1st century AD.

[@paprskomet]

+Luke Song No he is not dressed like republican legionary.Reality was not as simple as Republic-chain shirts,Empire-plate armour.Segmentata is definitely the most overhyped armour of all times.And by the way by 3rd century usage of segmentata was already in deep decline.

[@paprskomet]

Massively propagated image of a roman legionary in segmental armour only is solely the work of Trajanus collumn(who iflluenced pop culture image about legionaries the most) who however depicts legionaries in segmental armours so strictly only because it use that armour as artificial instrument to clearly visually separate citizen soldiers from non citizen Auxiliaries(who are in the same artifficial strictness depicted in chainmaile armour).Problem is that this collumn is the only work of Roman art who is using such convention and suggesting such thing.Collumn of Marcus Aurelius gives much more realistic picture where it is not so easy to distinguish citizen soldiers from non citizen as equpment there is very much mixed not uniformly separated and much more diverse.Also all other artworks we have are speaking against convention used on the Collumn of Trajan-including other artworks made directly during Trajanus and showing those very same wars.Some of these are even generally considered more realistic by the scholars. Segmental armour is widely depicted in Roman art of the 2nd century(but not only at that of the 2nd century) and known from very numerous finds throughout the entire territory of the Former Roman Empire.So it is not known from just a few finds but from many.Most are however small fragments only.Our best preserved and most complete remains were discovered in Britain at the sites connected with the presense of Auxiliary garrisons which suggests that segmental armour was maybe not really exclussive to legionaries only as Collumn of Trajan is suggesting(suggesting it from reasons stated above and not supported in it by all other Roman art) although that it was recovered from Auxiliary site does not necessarily means that Legionaries were not involved there.So it is not truth that all finds are just from places without Legionary presense. Use of segmental torso armour saw its high point between ca.50-150 AD.Since 2nd half of the 2nd century its use evidently fell into decline as is told to us by both Roman art and archeology(so by 4th century it was already for a long time a kind of torso armour not normally used).Our earliest currently nown fragments of this armour type are from 9 AD(from the site of famous Teutoburg battle)and from 9 BC.The very last were very recently discovered at late 3rd century and early 4th century context at Spain and Britain.ayichenw

[@BzykN7]

Not republic. Just early imperial-type of roman legionary.

[@TheAiurica]

Rather an early imperial legionary, from early to mid I'st century AD (probably the time of emperor Claudius). Lorica segmentata came in use by late I'st century BC and never fully replaced lorica hamata. The Trophaeum Trajani (Adamclisi, modern day Romania), built after Dacian Wars, shows roman soldiers wearing exclusively lorica hamata, nobody on that monument wear lorica segmentata. And the helmet is a typical early Imperial Gallic type.

[@harrygary1052]

Great practical info. Honestly more informative then half of the tv documentaries out there which tend to be short on information but long on romanticism and showing the same slow motion fight scene over and over and again.

[@manuelmamann428]

I dont agree with trust only. I belive it is thrust heavy. Slashes still hurt. And if you can slash someone will.

[@slycoopers4257]

+Manuel Maßmann you can slash but the romans who used it only thrusted now if they are about to die but the can stop it with a slash they'd do it otherwise it was used for thrusting

[@lutzh9490]

yeah, whats the point of having an edge if you dont slash, a short spear would be bether then

[@justKdG]

@Russ Hawthorne I agree, its more efficient to stab. However if the need arises I assume a soldier would slash or cut depending on situation and the fight. Maybe thats why they also got a waisted blade, since they realized it still has slashing potential.

[@Schwarzvogel1]

@@justKdG I believe that Vegetius remarked on the efficacy of stabs versus slashes/cuts. He remarked that while a 4 in. stab wound was often fatal, a man could survive (and keep even keep fighting) with a footlong slash or cut on his body. The gladius was capable of severing limbs and other extremities with a well-aimed cut; it was a vicious weapon overall. It's also much harder to parry or block a lightning-fast stab than a clearly telegraphed cut.There are historical accounts of Roman soldiers using the gladius for cuts, with predictably grisly results on the enemy.

[@kevcaratacus9428]

I thought the dangling belt thingy was to simply keep thier kilt from blowing upwards . I've found military belt fittings, & lorica buckles as well as other bits and loads of coins .

[@BasedInBrazil]

Damn I bet he could give that interview in Latin.

[@shine2347]

I'm putting together a documentary about Roman armour, may I please use brief segments of your video showing the display and wearing of the battle dressing. I would give full credit to you for any portions used in it.Thank you very much for your wonderful work.

[@steinstemmer8963]

german efficiency for more than 2000 years (15:15)

[@weisthor0815]

another reason for this also is that they still are not completely sure were the battle took place, and it probably stretched over miles because the romans marched on and tried to escape, while being pursued and harrased constantly by the germans.

[@steinstemmer8963]

@@weisthor0815 that is what I read too but the book(s) and articles that I read are old (like at least 10y+). there was even a map of the finds and the sssumed path they took but my comment was just meant as a joke. The articles coming out now, about how scholars debate whether or not they casn even call it all a battle or what, are annoying but I would have to look into it more again. Seems like some people dont like the glorified idea of a "free germania" and are going to tell us that "the 3 legions" where actually destroyed by... whatever... food poisoning. Just a little rant on my part, sorry for that. Looking forward to university. Then I will have plenty of time to research topics like this.

[@HellStr82]

@Dick Fageroni its not like the british ware any different before the romans came.

[@ConcealedCourier]

StrikingScorpion88?! I didn't know you did these videos too! This was a great video, loved this guy's presentation.

[@StrikingScorpion82]

Yes it's me. I love military history:)

[@timothymichel1677]

the front covered your you know what..it wasnt just to be pretty.

[@GonzoVideo7]

Very informative and fascinating. As all the details give it a deeper feel of what it was like to live in the Roman Army

[@hennessyblues4576]

one thing all these re-enactors get wrong, is roman armour would not be all shiny steel, the romans mastered steel but they didn't master stainless steel, stainless steel is more of a 20th century find. roman armour would actually be grey because of being exposed to the elements.

[@SirAlex-jb5dl]

Shiny steel isn't stainless steel. Stainless steel can't rust, and isn't the best steel for weapons or armor. Shiny steel is just polished.

[@TemenosL]

Sir.Alex Correct! Not to mention, Hennessy, that most soldiers would want to polish their armor, not only to be rid of rust, but to look more impressive.

[@hennessyblues4576]

Janas Aurora it doesn't make much sense to keep polishing something that is already going to get dirty. Just to make yourself look impressive. I can see if you need that for ceremonial purposes, but fighting on the battlefield with a bunch of shiny armor doesn't make much sense, especially if you're trying to hide from the enemy and ambush them, you'll stick out easily with the sun light or moon light reflecting off of you.

[@TemenosL]

On the contrary, both of those purposes make sense, and if you seek to deny them you simply aren't reading enough, (if any) history, or don't know ancient warfare very well. First of all, using your logic you'd never make a bed or polish shoes because they would 'get tarnished anyway'. Something you may not think about, but I'll enlighten you, in particular when it comes to metal, be it your weapons or your armor, polishing not only makes them look brilliant and more intimidating and impressive on the field of battle, it also eliminates rust. Rust that will eat at that metal if you let it. Looking the part for combat is not only historically attested to, it's a known extension of human psychology when it comes to combat; posturing. Again, using your logic, plumage shouldn't exist. What purpose do you think plumage atop helmets serve? Dozens of feathers held upright, big cantankerous horsehair crests that often leave helmets a little unwieldy and unbalanced. That Celtic bronze helmet that actually has an articulated bird on it, that flaps up and down as the wielder moves about. It's posturing. It's looking taller, more impressive. Especially when it comes to hand to hand combat. Armor is polished, more often especially with professional troops or elite troops, or otherwise anyone who could afford it. See, the antics of warfare differ, and your ideas about ambush do apply but they apply moreso in modern combat, (which is largely over very large distances with accurate firearms), where concealment is of extremely high importance. This is much less relevant in an era or situation in which the majority of your soldiers are going to fight at javelin's range or spear/sword range. 'especially if you're trying to hide from the enemy and ambush them, you'll stick out easily with the sun light or moon light reflecting off of you.' - If they would pull off an ambush, they would consider this. Largely, we're talking about formation combat, for which hiding plays almost no part. Some people over time would have done this, historically there is a group of Germanic folk who would paint themselves and their shields, dark, to operate with night ambushes more effectively. But it doesn't mean that a big, professional, melee-fighting force who makes use of formations in the open would not have tall creasts, beautiful, elaborate shield emblazons and gleaming armor if they could afford to, which would terrify any lower quality opponents on the field. I highly suggest you read more ancient history.

[@hennessyblues4576]

Janas Aurora I get what you're saying, but i'm just stating that majority of the time soldiers wouldn't stop every 5 minutes to make sure their armor was nice and shiny, once a bit of rain hits it, or if they just got done walking through a wet forest. regular steel stains very easily and produces a grey type of color. I sure soldiers who wore armor polished them every now and then to keep rust from forming like you said, but I highly doubt they did it every chance they could get, just to impress someone.

[@kevcaratacus9428]

These enthusiasts really do know thier stuff. As an archaeologist that lives & works in what was one of the biggest Roman citys in Roman Britain. I've come into contact many times with these re- enactment enthusiasts .

[@gezzaschannel]

Wouldnt really just call them enthusiasts, this is in Britain, and there are alot of historical sites which hire these people to give a more interactive experiance than just a museum, so I'm guessing its his job. Theres a great one in Wales called st.fagans. they also tend to go to some old roman castles around Britain in summer and show their stuff too. definitely enthusiastic tho.

[@kevcaratacus9428]

@@gezzaschannelof all the times ive chatted to them id never thought about asking wether they get payed or not for some of the events they attend. Because I know the work they do at the museum in Stalbans is voluntarily, i just assumed everything they did was voluntary too. A couple of times when I've has to pop upstairs to the office to grab some documents & ive noticed one of the legionaries doing his talk to the kids explaining how military life was like & all about their kit , I've listened a couple of times & its very informative. They do it a couple of times a week twice a day for about 30 mins. I do know all thier kit is very expensive , so maybe they do get paid for some of the events they attend. Next time I see one I'll have to ask, because imo they do deserve to get something.

[@MrCanum]

Excellent interview, this gentlemen has an incredible amount of knowledge. Is he a professor or just a hobbyist?

[@66kbm]

He/I is/was a Truck Driver lost in time.

[@theotterguy]

Nice.I wish I could do re-enactment also.I am too poor to afford all the equipment as I have a girlfriend at the other end of the world.I am also a truck driver (tractor-trailer) now and have been a soldier and worked for an armoured truck company.I am sure you were a soldier also.Cheers from Canada,I really enjoyed your presentation.

[@DrumsTheWord]

Fascinating! Each soldier would carry TWO Pilums? I never knew that!

[@LuisBrito-ly1ko]

www.DrumsTheWord.com That’s nothing. The Roman Velites could carry up to 6 Javelins per soldier.

[@christinadavis5582]

Watched this video because I am doing a Study and teaching on Ephesians 6 in the New Testament. He did an awesome job and I felt like I could really imagine the brutal battles that took place and the Romans tremendous skill as a soldier.

[@totalwar69]

StrikingScorpion82!! Didn't know you had a history channel. Immediate sub!

[@idontwanttopickone]

Great video. Constructive criticism: always film with your back to the sun then your subject will always be well lit and not in shadow.