Top Roman Historian Rates Famous Movie Scenes RESPONSE
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 вер 2024
- Use my code METATRON to get $5 off your delicious, healthy Magic Spoon cereal by clicking this link: magicspoon.thl...
Link to the original video
• Top Roman Historian Ra...
Link to the video on Roman tattoos
• Did Ancient Romans Use...
Link to the video on Classical Latin pronunciation
• Lōrīca segmentāta legi...
Link to the video on Leather Bracelents
• No MORE Roman Wrist Le...
Link to my Top 10 Myths about Ancient Rome
• Top 10 Myths of Ancien...
Link to my review of the Roman movie the Eagle
• The Eagle - Movie Hist...
#ancientrome #movie #history
How are the ancient Romans represented in movies and films? This is a question that I believe most students of history and specifically the classical period have asked at least once. On this video we get to see what a Roman history expert has to say, and perhaps we'll get to learn a few more things too, as I try to do my best to add extra information as to make the whole experience more fun. Of course nobles ones if you have any questions, feel free to ask me in the comments below, as I always try to read and reply to as many comments as possible. Ancient Roman history is extremely interesting, but it's often misrepresented. Perhaps not as badly as the Medieval period, but still many things are not as they actually were. Through history and proper study, we can know how things actually were and on this video we'll learn a thing or two about the ancient Romans. I hope you like it.
Holy moley, I thought the blood groove nonsense had gone away. You really can stap through a carcass and pull the sword out surprisingly easily in my personal experience. A lance can penetrate very deeply and get a little trapped simply because of the twisting angle as you ride past, but biological targets are quite wet and slippery inside...
"quite wet and slippery inside..."
I doubt that the myth will go away. It is spread by people who do not know better. That twist motion has some real life application. It was used with the Fairbairn Sykes fighting knife (which does not have a fuller) and with hunting knives (some of which have fullers). The purpose is to create a more severe wound and allow air to go into the thorax cavity and let the lungs collapse. The blade is left in the wound for a few seconds. Something that might not be a good move in a formation battle.
I think the fuller may be called like that in some places, and it remained that way.
I have a different question , about the Germans in the movie. Wouldn't they be called "Germanians", since the place was Germania, not Germany ?
I would assume if you hit a bone it can get a bit harder to pull out but again, Romans named the sword after a thing that goes in and out of a wet and slippery hole and while they might have been furries I doubt they were that much into knoting.
@@Cdre_Satori I do believe it to have been the Zulu with their iklwa spear, which was named for the sound it made when penetrating someone and when pulling out.
Metatron, for what it's worth, I once read about the making of the movie, Gladiator, is that in striving for historical accuracy, the producers hired 5 historians who were experts in their time periods of Roman history. According to the article, 3 of them quit because of the inaccuracies in the movie and the 2 that remained didn't want their names listed in the end credits of the movie. I can't attest to the accuracy of the article.
What was the point in hiring them if they didn't listen to them then
@@SM853 One of the reasons for not listening to the advice of the experts is that reality can be boring and dramatic license can be exciting. Remember that movies are made not for history but to entertain and make money. There could be other reasons but as I said I can't attest to the accuracy of what I read.
@@SM853 Because it sounds like a good idea at the time but as the movie production progresses, costs increase and the higher ups only care about what looks good enough and what they believe will appeal to the largest crowds. In the end, they're making art, not documentaries.
@@SM853 So they can say they consulted actual historians. It's purely a marketing trick. In this case, it rather backfired
SM853 it's just a checkbox they need to tick in film production. Lindybeige had a rather interesting short video about it IIRC
Imagine depriving the enemy of their sword by brilliantly allowing them to stab you.
*Stabs*
"...Oh bother, Reginald, I can't seem to remove my sword from your ribcage."
"Ah, t'was my plan all along! Your sword now belongs to me!"
"By gosh, that's brilliant!"
*Laughs in Scottish*
Anime Samurai feel called out now. The cliche is a swordsman fighting a superior enemy and winning by allowing the superior enemy to inflict a nonfatal wound, which allows the inferior swordsman to kill the superior opponent.
John wick tactics
Tis but a scratch.
The comparison between a soldier and a sports fighter is golden. One is trained to kill and the other is how to fight in a specific style and show restraint.
Never thought of it that way.
Gold is softer plus pretty. I can see why it would be made for show.
I am 100% interested in a Latin pronunciation tutorial especially for Roman soldier classes from after the Marion reforms with a short summary on the purpose each of them served on the field.
I always get goosebumps when I hear many youtubers say: Triari-eye, Juli-eye and so on.
I like how this vowel lenght thing also matches the typical 'melody' of speaking Italian. There you also have those distinctly long emphases.
Mind you, over two millennia multiple modes of Latin pronunciation have evolved. Classical Latin is naturally the authentic way when discussing the Romans, but ecclesiastical Latin has its own long tradition and to most Westerners is more familiar. And that's even before we get into national pronunciations, e.g. the Austro-German, the weird English etc.
We have very scant information about vulgar Latin because it wasn't really written down that much. The Latin we get (outside of invectives) is mostly high-falutin dialects that Patricians would use. The accent of the common soldier was probably highly variable considering how far and wide the Republic and Empire stretched. Rafaelo's mother tongue is a direct descendant of Italian Latin so he's familiar with the phonemes and stuff, but there was no standardized pronunciation. British Latin and Syrian Latin probably sounded way different to Iberian Latin, which probably sounded much different to Gaulish Latin which probably sounded much different to Greek Latin (though I think Greeks mostly just stuck with Greek). In any case, we have a decent idea of what Iberian and Italian Latin sounded like largely thanks to their descendants (I believe standard Portugese is actually an attempt at re-Latinizing the language after Reconquista) but we'll probably never know about the accents and pronunciations of Latin in areas where Romance languages aren't spoken any longer.
People say Lorica Segmentata even when their pronunciation is bad because it’s the standard name in English for segmented Roman armour made of iron bands, just like how Anglophones say Rapier with an English accent rather than calling it a needle sword or something. The foreign term has become a name within English so it’s used when discussing the thing it refers to, regardless of one’s knowledge of its language of origin.
Exactly, I was going to say basically the same thing, we aren't treating a lot of these terms as Latin terms, we're treating them like loans. Here in the US we have a habit of pronouncing a lot of (hardly all, but a fair amount) of French personal and place names closer to how they'd be pronounced in modern French, even though they've been in our language for centuries and in many cases, the modern French pronunciation is quite different from the way they were pronounced when we borrowed them. I can't think of any examples offhand though...
Given its not even an original Latin name but a modern one, what version of Latin pronunciation could even be considered correct? Everyone know what the term means, its like criticising of a biologist for not pronouncing the Latin name of an animal "properly".
Excellent Bob. Love Metatron but his Latin pronunciation is heavily tainted by his Italian heritage so you cannot complain when someone else's Latin is tainted by their own native language
@@stephenede-borrett1452 Actually Metatron has made considerable study of both classical and church Latin. He is a language teacher.
@@markhorton3994 Church Latin bears little or no resemblance to how Latin was spoken in Ancient Rome (when it was spoken in Ancient Rome of course!)
"The people mining the animals..."
Love it. It just conjures images of someone with a pickaxe out digging for cows.
I can't wait for the new Minecraft DLC: Moo-ncraft
😂
He said "minding", or at least that's what I heard.
@@DavidSmith-vr1nb I heard "mining", which I had to think about for a second, but I'm sure he at least meant to say "minding", if not actually said it with the 'd' sound getting a bit swallowed at the end.
@@FlinnGaidin he said minding his accent is just thick
When it comes to the mispronunciation of Latin, you've got to remember that the primary method of academic communication is written not spoken. To write lorica segmentata is much easier and clearer than an alternative term like 'Roman-style banded iron armour', so makes more sense when writing. When it comes to speaking about these things, the same terms end up getting used without consideration to the original pronunciation because speaking about the subject is secondary to writing about it.
Dosn't make it any more justified when a "professional" gets it wrong though.
@@gabzsy4924 Yes it does as he is not a language professional rather a historian. As long as people get what he means pronunciation is secondary.
My sister teaches Hebrew at Harvard. Her accent is only used by people not using it as a conversational tool as opposed to prayer language.
To the extent that the groups which use that accent for prayers _don't_ use that accent in vernacular.
@@gabzsy4924 he didn't get it wrong, historians are not the same as linguists and don't go round pronouncing every historical term or name as it was. Do you get upset when historical say Ceaser with the soft C?
@@101Mant yes I do - if I know better. And it make sense too. For example - if you pronounce Caesar with a hard "C" correctly it leads directly why germans name their Emperors "Kaiser" exactly from Caesar, I didn't know and was correctly only in university learning Latin. Ahem writing from Germany.
Point of clarity, the fuller meant that less metal was required to begin with, rather than metal was removed. It added strength by pushing metal to the sides of the center by a process known as fullering. Awesome video, very funny, well informed.
Historians aren't usually super multi disciplinary either, they don't often understand metallurgy, armed combat or those things. Some anthropologists do and some specialized historians do but the type of historian this guy is is the more, read the texts, the stories has an idea of battles, maybe high level strategy and tactics, people, places, events, maybe culture both material and written etc etc.
I'm an anthropologist who focuses on Osteology. Anthropologists tend to be very specialized which is why we have full teams of various disciplines. Nobody can know everything so having connections is key for research that is outside of your lane.
Story of Socrates. Oracle of Delphi told him he was the wisest man. He tried proving them wrong. Found the most knowledgeable of three different fields a found them fools because they talked of matter in which they knew nothing. I may misquote this but the jist of his findings were I'm the wisest man for I know I know nothing. It's hard only talking about what you know sometimes. Wish more experts would keep it clear what they were experts on. The I'm no expert in is a good caveat to add im a case like this. Talking about the expert in the video be review not Metatron or @MrSaneman. For clearification.
Okay, and? The problem isn't that he's not an expert in every field, the problem is that he's stops to going into detail on those fields in which he's not an expert.
I know a ton about vintage American guitars, but if someone asks me to judge the value of a Jackson or ESP, I'm going to direct them elsewhere.
I am a former field archaeologist (20 years), and can state quite firmly that most archaeologists have a multi disciplinary mindset and skillset. I would regard myself as a historian, draftsman, surveyor, photographer, soil scientist, manual labourer, banksman, manager, team player, and investigator.
With all do respect, would you say that you are an expert in all those fields? You are an expert at using them in an archeological context, but surely you would be cautious about giving advice outside of your field?@@anthonycliftonjones2564
22:20 there is a error though: vesuvius didn't look like that at all before the eruption, in fact there is a fresco in Pompeii or Herculaneum which rapresents it an it looks just like a smooth and woody hill, nothing to fear. The Vesuvius took the conical shape we now know exactly during the eruption, this fact changed dramatically its shape
You should see the blown out half cone of Mt. St. Helen's!
Not strictly true, stratovolcanoes cones are formed over many eruptions, mixtures of upward pressure from the rising magma. Lavaflows and pyroclastic flows, this is a process that takes millions of years. Vesuvius has a chunk blown out of its crater, similar to that of St. Helen's because of the eruption. It was the standard cone shape, now it has a bit missing.
@@peterbray5383 Are you sure the missing bit wasn't 'lost' during a subsequent eruption?
@@I_Don_t_want_a_handle There has only been one major eruption subsequent eruptions since AD79, that was a VEI 5 in 1631. It is possible, but the data suggests that the chunk was removed "St. Helen's" style in AD79
@@peterbray5383 Wasn't there one in 1944?
Fantastic conclusion. I feel a little bit bad for the historian. He was clearly put in a position where he was expected to perform.
I feel like there are four rules that if people were to constantly train themselves to never forget then it would get rid of most of the misconceptions.
1 just because someone is smart does not mean that they are correct.
2 just because someone is stupid does not mean that they are incorrect.
3 just because something sounds smart does not mean that it is true.
4 just because something sounds stupid does not mean that it is false.
We all need to be aware of our emotional reactions and understand that it can cloud our judgment.
Another rule I would add is:
5) Just because someone has credentials and is considered an "expert," does not mean that they are correct.
6) Just because someone does not have credentials and is not considered an "expert," does not mean that they are incorrect.
This is just an appeal to authority and is logically fallacious.
@@Z45HR4 Yes. Misconceptions can start from 1000 different places but they all have to get shared before they become a problem.
Personally I think every iteration of the rule could be summed up in the statement
“ intelligence is an artificial construct that has no effect on the credibility of any individual statement”
But that takes too long to explain what I’m trying to say. The more specific you are in your statements the less likely you are to be understood
@@Z45HR4 If the person says "trust me because, I am a expert". most of the times they are full of shit.
I remember an old classmate of mine, he was one of those people who were smart and he sounded smart, but couldn’t accept when he was wrong.
I’m a guy who’s smart but I’m not very confident, so people used to try to walk all over me just to find out I knew more than they did.
This guy was convinced Tony was pronounced “tinny” and I just wouldn’t have it, and when I told him that he was wrong he got furious until he saw that I was so sure I was right he had to fold. 🤣 Hell, I even used to correct my English-teachers sometimes, and this a guy couldn’t take my advice without getting angry!
@@Z45HR4 an appeal to an authority is only fallacious if you appeal to a false authority. If I appeal to a biologist for a legal issue that would be an appeal to authority fallacy. If I refer to a lawyer it wouldn’t. This is a common misconception much like the ad hominem fallacy. If I insult you it isn’t an ad hom, it’s just an insult. If I say you’re wrong because of the insult then it’s an ad hominem. “You’re stupid”=insult “you’re wrong because you’re stupid”=ad hominem
It's my experience that in English people have a tendency to anglicize foreign words in their attempt to classify things. So when the expert says "Lorica Segmentata" in an English pronunciation it's not an attempt to speak Latin but instead it's the anglicized Latin that is used to describe the armor worn by some Roman soldiers. This is also seen in the anglicized ways of saying Katana, Kabuto, Zweihander, and other such things.
Nobody, well almost nobody, goes around saying foreign or historical weapons and armour in an accurate way. Pretty sure the way English people say every Roman, Greek or other ancient weapon is not historically accurate. And this isn't even a historical term but modern one. I get he is a linguist so it probably bugs him but a weird complaint.
@@101Mant It was less a complaint and more a desire to understand from a linguistic point of view so I see no problem there.
People just say things in ways that are more comfortable for them, it's like asking a japanese person to pronounce something in English, the vast majority won't pronounce it perfectly, also some people feel awkward or disingenuous putting on an accent to achieve correct pronunciation
It's because English is pretty unusual in terms of vowel sounds, at least in Europe. Consonants can vary a lot between different languages, but vowel sounds are often very similar, if not identical.
My ultimate pet-peeve is listening to English-speaking history communicators trying to teach/explain an Ancient Greek word and they almost always use the Latin transliteration or anglicization. That's not fucking Greek.
6:06 Well, as someone who have a masters degree in history I must point out that for most historians I've met, correct pronunciation of Latin is of secondary importance at best. They care foremost about the ability to read and translate Latin.
I think it's because of Metatron's linguistic background and heritage, as well as general passion and desire for accuracy. As a linguist myself, I am more in line with Metatron's take on this matter. However, that does not mean that our opinion is better or has any "greater" merit to it.
Because they aren't trying to speak Latin, they're speaking English and using what is, in effect, a loanword. Like "sushi", "burrito", "katana", "pepperoni" etc. It's meant to convey meaning to other English speakers, not be understandable to Latin speakers.
@@viysnjor4811 Then why not go all the way and say "banded armor"? Why insist on lorica segmentata?
@@crusaderACR because "banded armor" isn't specific enough. Even saying "roman banded armor" isn't specific enough, and saying "late Imperial Roman banded steel armor" is too much
@@viysnjor4811 It's just "Roman banded armor"
Early, late, republic, or imperial; all of them are Lorica Segmentata
Lorica segmentata is as vague as it gets already.
Or shall we, then, call 19th century German muskets by their name in German? Why would the German name only apply to a specific century?
Evolutionary biologist in training here: you’re absolutely right that fullers would probably have evolved if it were advantageous in teeth. As far as I am aware, the only widespread hollowing or groove in teeth seen in a classification of animals is fangs in venomous snakes so they can pump (or spit) venom. Some other venomous animals like certain lizards have groove like structures but not as pronounced as a fuller.
Med student here: if you stick a hole in someone's abdomen, that implement is not getting sucked in. If they are standing, stuff will want to exit the abdominal cavity that you don't want coming out. Well, if you intend to kill them, then you do want the stuff to come out. If they are fighting you, stuff will positively fly out if the hole is big enough, and pour out if the hole is bigger still.
Cats do have a little groove along their canines. I am not sure about the purpose but placque accumulates in them so u see them as dark lines
@@jafsterlordbib It is so that blood flows away from and out of the mouth instead of pooling up in it.
@@brandondriver99that doesnt make alot of sense
I first heard the funnel described as a "blood groove" in HS from a history teacher. It was years later from my own reading outside of a school setting that I learned the design was about reducing weight while still keeping strength in the blade. (Like an I-beam used in skyscraper construction.)
yes like an I beam it stops the flexing of the blade caused by compressive loads on the tip of the stabby object whist reducing weight aka longer blade for the same weight thats more ridgid with longer reach which is superior than one without a fuller
Honestly the term "Blood Groove" is the funniest thing in the entire world to me
@@DatBoiOrly One important thing to be careful of here, is that the fuller does not add structural rigidity. It simply is made in a way that maintains much of the rigidity while reducing the weight. Were you to fill in the "empty" space of an I-beam, the resulting solid steel bar would be far stronger, just a lot heavier.
Honestly, the community of the sword here on youtube should be advisors for historical movies.
I think most historians would give great advice.
@@michaelterrell5061 The historians worth their salt, for sure.
But when looking at hollywood productions, it seems like they hire the most awful historians and military advisors imaginable for every single production.
I'm willing to bet that if a movie crew decided to consult with Raf, Shad, Jason Kingsley and the others and followed their advice, you'd end up with a film that even the most nitpicky viewer would have trouble finding faults with in terms of historical accuracy.
@@michaelterrell5061 My reasoning here is that many typical historians are academics first and foremost. They study the manuscripts and the archeological finds.
The community of the sword in contrast seek to live and breathe history. They don't just want to "look" at history, but try it out in practice (wearing armour, testing weapons, doing HEMA, archery and such).
Even though most of them may be more like enthusiasts than academic scholars, I think their knowledge and experience would translate much better to film.
that would imply that movie makers even want that. they are just looking for a name they can slap on and claim historical accuracy.
@@sevenproxies4255 No offense, but professional historians in general are a good bet for historical accuracy, you tubers aren’t peer reviewed and aren’t professionally trained to be historians, guys like Metatron have backgrounds in linguistics and things like the history of Japan and Rome so he gets a say in these things, but overall it’s like a choice between getting someone who knows things about medicine and makes UA-cam videos on it as a consultant vs a doctor trained for years to be able to heal the human body. In other words, while I love guys like Metatron, Shad, Raf, etc, I trust the words of the experts more than them, I hope you understand.
Also as for your second point, I agree. I think it translates to things like sword fighting much better. Seriously if Japanese and Chinese film makers can consult their weapons experts so can the European and American film makers(its what we used to do).
As soon as I saw the original video the only thing I could think was, "Ooh, Metatron is not going to like this, hope he gets the last word so I can watch it." :) You're a legend, thank you.
Glad to hear!
I've started to read a book in German, it is called "Legionär in der Römischen Armee, der ultimative Karriereführer" (Matyszak, Philip), in English perhaps something like "Legionary in the Roman Army, the ultimate career guide". It is written with a lot of Humor and Anekdotes BUT... he also brings up this Gladius Myth, when he comes to the Equipment. It is such a good book and I enjoyed it so much... On the Inside I was about to throw it out of my window... Well I obviously kept it and still have to read the last part of it but WHY? These myths are as sticky as molasses...
Greetings from Germany, to be precise, the former area of the tribe of the Semnonii, later called a part of the Germanica Slavika, finally it was called Brandenburg ;)
Maximus from the Gladiator is inspired to three historical people:
1) Marcus Nonius Macrinus (as you pointed out already)
2) Narcissus (the slave / wrestler / coach that killed Commodus)
3) Tiberius Claudius Pompeianus (deserves his own video, tbh)
You forgot about Cincinnatus. They added that facet to him as well.
@@svan81 ah yes, giving up great power to go back to your farm to plough your field and plough your slaves... The peak ideal a Roman could strive for
@@svan81when does Maximus become dictator then retire to the countryside? And his boon for saving Rome and relinquishing absolute power was to have the third shittiest city in Ohio named after him
The Romans knew that the way to a man's heart was trough his stomach.
Why would you want to try and reach for the heart by stabbing the belly? You'd have to go underneath the ribs for that, very impracticle. A good stab to the belly is lethal anyways.
@@wulfheort8021 missed the joke buddy
@@ManiacallyQuiet can hardly call that a joke, BUDDY. maybe mind the arrogance, online you're very brave of course talking that way, go do that to someone's face in real life, you coward.
My guess is actual historians don't spend much time on armour and weapons unless it's their specific area of speciality, really just minor details compared to people, events, politics and societies. All the sword nerds (myself incldued) care a lot but its a pretty minor thing when looking at history. I've read a lot of history books as I enjoy them and unless it's specifically about arms and armour such details are often barely mentioned.
I never understood why weapons are so overlooked from history :( most of history is fitting and wars..... for peace of land, for religion, because my grandma liked me more than you....and yet it is a great way to get young people to be interested in it.
We had a great bit of luck in Highs School with our history teacher. One of the first things he said to us was:"If you want to know history, start with history weapons. There is a weapon for every time and every weapon will be different in every period because if there is something humans do across ages a lot, it is fighting."
And he was right. We were in Sweden and there was old multipart costal fortress....just by looking at it defences and windows etc I was able to guess the century of those certain parts....and as I found out later, quite correctly.
There's also a strong bias agairt military history in general in the modern community of historians, due to an overemphasis on it by previous generations of historians. Many of today's historians studied under teachers who taught nothing but military and political history and they got sick of it, there's a swing back towards it in the last 20 years or so as the same thing happened in reverse, with a huge glut of social and cultural historians. There's also a generally lower number of experimental historians than research historians, though with this guy saying one of his fields was archeology, he's likely to have at least some field experience, if only at digs rather than practical reconstruction. Professional history is largely about studying texts, both primary and secondary, to expand our understanding of the people of the past, anything more detailed than that is specialty.
Generally yes, but he specifically mentioned he is a roman military historian 31:21 , so he should have known all those details pretty well
@@osek64 most of history is not fighting and wars, its juts often how its taught and what some people focus on. People spent much more time not fighting than fighting. There are people who can tell you about the battles in a period of history but not about what life was actually like for people during that time, what did they do, what did they think or believe, wear, eat, work etc.
Military history also tends to be tied to thr great men approach to history which concentrated on important figures who were often military leaders, but that fell out of favour and more broad social and economic factors are often studied rather than the details of battles and equipment. For example it's important to understand Rome had the resources to equip its troops well, but you don't really need to understand exactly how all their weapons worked when learning history. Likewise learning key battles won or lost without knowing all the details of how.
Personally I do like the weapons and armour and battles, I expect most viewers of this channel do, but its just a small slice of a much bigger picture that some people seriously overemphasise.
@@ksubota Roman history goes on for centuries and its military was completely entwined with its politics. I can totally see someone studying aspects of Roman military for years without learning or needing to know exactly how a gladius wounds someone.
Using terms like Lorica Segmentata or Lorica Hamata, in context of discussing armor or history, are in my experience, even when mispronounced, very helpful to specify the type of armor one is talking about. There are many different styles of mail armor, long and short sleeve shirts, some cover the thighs, others stop at the waist, ect. Where as Lorica Hamata is Lorica Hamata. It is specifically Roman Legionary mail. It's for specificity, not immersion.
You could just call it segmented armor. There is no reason for him to use term from a different language, without explaining it. Its not more specific to just change the language for no reason, but to appear smart.
lorica hamata is chain mail so call it chainmail.
lorica squamata would be scale armor. I wouldnt know if I didnt just googled them.
@@nostalji93 But there's tons of kinds of segmented armor of various varieties, even in "Rome" if one counts the Byzantines, so saying "Roman segmented armor" is not specific enough and "Late Imperial Roman segmented armor" is a lot longer than just saying "lorica segmentata"
This goes for tons of loanwords in English, like why do we call it sushi instead of "Japanese raw fish on rice"? Because its easier and the word is only ever used for that specific thing in English, so it sticks. Japanese does the same thing btw, they will use a native Japanese word for a more general concept, then an English (or German) loanword, pronounced incorrectly, to mean something specific that is usually an import or foreign style.
The thing is it's not meant to be pronounced properly, it doesn't matter that in Latin it would be pronounced one way, the purpose of the term is to communicate to other English speakers, not Latin speakers.
This is just a fundamental aspect of English and Japanese that you will see used everywhere and for centuries, it's not some specific attempt to sound smart or whatever, it's literally how the languages work.
@@viysnjor4811 Yeah and its a bad habit of the language and its user. To be hyperbolic its kinda fascistic, to take loanwords, associate new meaning to it and expect people to understand the same. I literally had people explain my first language to me. "Educating me" a "Zweihänder" is a specific 16 th century great sword. And not what it means in German: A sword wiehlded by two hands.
To say "Sushi" instead "Japanese raw fish on rice" sure is easier, shorter and more precise, because even your translation or definition for sushi is wrong. The word firsh doesn't even exist in the name.
If you want to communicate to English speaker there is absolute no reason to use a foreign language except for aestetic reasons. Its not more precise, and simply more difficult than the english equivalents. Its pretentious to talk latin instead of the perfectly fine direct translations into English. Like Roman segmented armour or chain mail. If I want to talk about Byzantine segmented armour I just say that. You can be a lot more precise and easier to understand by simply using the language you are speaking.
If you use foreign words just to sound fancy, you sound pretentious to me.
There is also a difference to adept some words and sounds from a different language and using them as names or fully implementing them into your language with a new specific meaning. Like if Iam japanese and I give my house or a fictional sword a German name. That doesnt distract or even overwrite its original meaning like I see it happen in the English language plenty of times.
@@nostalji93 ..What? How is it a "bad habit of the language" or "fascistic"..? It's just how it works jfc.
You also entirely missed my point, the use of lorica segmentata in English is AS a loanword, just like sushi or burrito
@@viysnjor4811 No you missed mine. English isn't even your first language. is it? If so do you say silentium instead of silence? Its just silly.
"I always admit my mistakes and apologize."
That's a hard, valuable, and honourable quality that we need more of.
Your rant on the use of the word italy actually reminds me a lot of the same issue regarding germany. Because whilst the Federal Republic of germany or even just the german empire is still quite recent, you can go back a thousand years, look into the sources, maybe the "Annolied" from 1085 and you already find notions of a german language, a german people and a german country (though of course the language has gone through quite the evolution, and back then instead of the modern "deutsch" it would instead use the word diutisc).
I think a lot of people tend to miss that most nation states in europe actually are preceded by a sort of national identity that can reach back hundreds of years.
People completely gloss over that the concept of a German People/Region is what was used as an excuse by some of them to gradually claim the other nations within that sphere, yes. Wars typically involve an attempt to 'legitimize' the action, and one of them is that you're simply taking what's yours.
Obviously more or less speaking the same language creates a similar identity but let's take Italy, a man from venice although speaking the same language more or less as a man from genua I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have identified as both having the same nationality
@@tomz5704 the common people not so much (at least until the 1800s), but the noble people, the literary people and the people who traveled (including Dante, who clearly talked about Italy as a nation) definitely did.
@@tomz5704 Remember Machiavelli wrote his book in the 1500s specifically as a guide to create a unified Italy. To me I think Italy or Germany at this time were a lot like latin america is today, the people identified with their city states and local kingdoms over the region, and they sure didn't all love eachother (see Colombia and Venezuela...) but they still had some notion of a shared cultural identity, and that they had more similarities among eachother than with outside cultures
There was a shared cultural identity among the educated classes of both the Germanic world and Italic world but for the Lords and Serfs it wasn't the case as each Serf identified with its Lord and the Lord with his King.
The rant about fullers reminds me of the bronze sword that Skalgrim was asked to test. The guy who made it said its probably the best test of a bronze weapon ever done since most people who "test" them are academics who know nothing about the non-theorical use of swords and tools.
Skall is good about testing. Especially rough, practical testing to see how it holds up in use and abuse.
@@AnotherDuck I like his mordhau test, specifically made to shit on non-believers. Yes, he cut his hands, but it's way less than haters say it would.
@@TheKarabanera That test really showed what reality usually is like. Neither camp is entirely correct, and the truth is somewhere in the middle. It works as a technique, but it's not something you'd use if you have better options.
@@AnotherDuck That is a complete and dangerous logical fallacy that the middle ground is correct.
@@carbon1255 It's only a logical fallacy if you think it's the right answer because it is in the middle.
It's not a logical fallacy if it's an observation based on what we've seen, because that's not something that pretends to use logical reasoning. Or at least not in that manner.
It's also not a middle ground fallacy because it doesn't fit the structure of the fallacy. The fallacy is about reaching the best solution in the middle. This isn't about a "best solution" at all, so the fallacy doesn't apply.
I love metatron. “He is a historian so I should learn something from him, but you guys sent me this video and that is a huge red flag. You don’t send me the good stuff…”
@@daegnaxqelil2733 Your mom.
@@daegnaxqelil2733 I'm sure this is a joke.... right?
@@extremel.z.s3140 the fact hez criticize himq?
@@daegnaxqelil2733 No I'm asking you if your reply was a joke
@@extremel.z.s3140 it's his video which is a joke!
most hisrotically factual movie should be Life of Brian
I can't believe I made it into my 6th decade without learning about the "blood groove"....
I am now going to put fullers into that small knife I use to poke holes in a Lamb joint before I slide in garlic and rosemary.
I remember actually angrily yelling when my fiancée and I watched that nonsense about blood grooves or whatever.
Yeah I did a double take myself.
you were yelling? like you were yelling at the computer screen? have i got that right? there’s medication for what you have.
@@God-mb8wi It's basically the same thing you do just now, only he had his fiance next to him and he could talk to/with her.
God Yes, instead of him ranting about the movie with his fiancee, which he clearly states was there in his comment, he just has a medical condition. Amazing reading comprehension.
@@christiancinnabars1402 read more to me like he was shouting at a youtube video while his fiancee watched. not a very fun time for her, i imagine
I took a lot of courses in Roman-Greek history at the university. Anything military was kind of omissed there and the same goes for medieval or modern history. My final oral exam was frowned upon because I chose the Civil war, the Thirty Years war and the Allied invasion of Italy. The latter was officially changed into the economic history of my country’s food production.
The Bible is truth.
The key to understanding that is in combining personally reading the Bible with putting the teachings Jesus Christ gave us into action in your own life. Start with forgiveness, parents are easiest, they’ve loved you. That’s a very important step in understanding all this. You have to work though your inner drama and forgive. Also, make sure you at least read three books of the Bible, Genesis Mathew and one you chose yourself.
Jesus Christ is the way truth and life,
Interesting since most things I see covering history covers the military aspect of it.
@@jamesmayle3787 "The Bible is Truth"
Sorry no, it's no more truth than any other religious book, it's just the one that you're attached either because you were raised to believe in it or grew up in a culture surrounded by it, regardless of the evidence for its claims or its historical accuracy.
You went to university? And you never learned how to spell the word omitted? Or that there's no such word as "omissed"? Incredible!
Considering that Metatron is clearly fluent and an expert in English, as well as Japanese, I am surprised that he seems unfamiliar with the English (and Japanese) propensity towards loanwords. The reason lorica segmentata is mispronounced, is because it's not a Latin word (in this context), but a Latin-derived English loanword used to specifically denote this very specific type of Imperial Roman armor.
It's the same reason we say "sushi" and not "Japanese style raw fish on white sticky rice", or "burrito" and not "Mexican style rolled flatbread with refried beans and beef and Mexican style tomato sauce"
Japanese does this a lot as well, which I assume Metatron would know, though perhaps he just hasn't really thought about it much, but both languages use tons of loanwords which are "mispronounced", but the point of them isn't to be pronounced the exact same way, or even mean the exact same thing as the original word in the original language, but to denote a specific concept in the new language in which it is now a loanword, like "sushi" for English or "arubaito" (derived from Arbeit, German for "work", yet the loanword meaning a very specific type of work) in Japanese.
If you go up to an English speaker and ask if they know who Caesar is, but pronounce it the actual Latin way "kah-eh-sahr", they're at worst not going to understand what you're saying, and at best think you said "kaiser", because in *English* the word, despite its Latin origin, is pronounced "see-zer".
Conversely, if I, an English speaker, go to a Japanese person and ask them for a camera (in Japanese), but pronounce the loanword for camera the same way I pronounce it in English (kam-ruh) they're not going to understand what I'm saying, because despite it being derived from the English word, in Japanese it is pronounced "kah-meh-rah"
I think it's fine to give him a pass for misidentifying a gladius as a spatha. What he said about the differences in use makes sense and seems to be accurate enough since Metatron didn't comment on it. Anyone can see things wrong on occasion.
Also, I think you can give most of these commentators a pass for not mentioning something since it might just have been cut out of the video. There's usually a lot of stuff that gets cut out for length or because it wasn't interesting enough to the editor.
Never mess with a Sicilian when historical accuracy is on the line. Edit: also hearing just the weird detritus and peculiar in the Italian version shows just how much Rome affected our Western language.
That historian has fallen victim to one of the classic blunders.
That went very badly for the Sicilian though.
@@jeremypnet You need to be Cary Elwes for this to end badly for Sicilian. And the historian has clearly never played Robin Hood in a parody.
@@daegnaxqelil2733 That's your problem then.
@@Fatherofheroesandheroines yours too.
A genuine answer to a genuine question: Honestly I don't think that it's necessary (or even desirable) to put on a mock-Latin accent when speaking English. Imagine if you were talking about your holiday to France (sorry fRoNs) in English and you said you went to paRee (Paris) and saw the eefell (Eiffel) tower. I mean you'd just sound like a spanner - and you would be a spanner. That's the behaviour of a spanner there. I myself did a degree in Sanskrit, and the word atman should be pronounced with a dental t and the a vowel should not be a schwa but closer to the u vowel in up. Just to take one example. But I don't complain that people pronounce it the English way when they speak English because they're speaking English. And I don't wonder why they use a Sanskrit word if they can't be bothered to learn to pronounce Sanskrit because it's a loanword, and it's used in English as a technical term for something non-English. So a loanword is appropriate, and when languages loan words they modify the pronunciation. The Romans themselves did it all the time. They didn't half butcher the Celtic word they turned into 'Britannia', but hey they were Romans, speaking Latin, so it's fine. You wait till you find out how 'Jesus' was pronounced in Aramaic!!
In the context of talking about the word from the language, it should be pronounced correctly.
no, that's a behavior of knowledgeable person and pronouncing names correctly should be promoted at all levels of society, especially when one claims to be an expert in the field
you wouldn't call a professor of french culture saying Paree instead of Paris a spanner.
@@wilhelmu to be fair, i still would. But maybe that's just me
@@wilhelmu But if you speak English then Paris isn't a French word, it's a loanword. It's the English word for the French city. The variations are even stronger with some words. You wouldn't pronounce Finland as Suomi, because that's another word. The same goes with Paris and Paris, when you are speaking English.
You also pronounce other loan words differently than the original, like angst or auto, or über, or sauna, and so on.
Pronouncing the name of a city the way it's pronounced by the natives and not the people speaking the language you are speaking is just pretentious. How would you pronounce Munich or Cologne?
@@GothamClive You make a fair point about some of the words, but if I saw munich and cologne, I'd pronouns it Munich and Cologne, and I'm pretty sure I'd use a correct pronunciation there as I don't even know how english people mangle these names(and I don't really want to know)
Kinda like I experienced a culture shock of sorts when I learned that Americans pronounce Schwarzenegger as Schuarzenegger and not Schvarzeneger. As for me, I'm not gonna mangle a fine Austrian surname when talking to American no matter what pronunciation he's used to. The only reason why these americans read it like that is because w is read as u in english language, and no one ever told them any better. Mistake repeated 1000 times is still a mistake, even if it becomes a "tradition". At any rate, there is a fine difference between mangling loanwords that functioned in the language for centuries, and mangling names.
I can even agree that for example Germany is a different word from Deutschland. I can also agree that Saber is a different word from Szabla.
But if a word is spelled exactly the same it's not a different word, it's mispronunciation. The various historians who pronounce names of armor and arms wrong don't do it because it's a "tradition" to mispronounce them in English language, they simply don't know any better. They are no different than people who say Arnold's surname wrong.
Commodus when he "fought" as a gladiator would give his opponent weapons made from Lead. To heavy to wield and to blunt to cut. He also would wound them and/or poison them before battle. He was a real piece of work.
Blood grooves are also a way to add structural stability to the blade. You're effectively adding the negative I-beam shape running down the length if the blade. If that shape is fully hardened, it adds a fair amount of torsional stability to the blade, which is especially helpful when you're expecting it to apsorb a ton of impact energy coming in on the diagonal for sword to sword fighting or with use from horseback.
Dr Simon Elliott is a capable classicist historian from the books I've read of his. I recommend his Septimius Severus in Scotland: The Northern Campaigns of the First Hammer of the Scots book. It's quite a good overview of Septimius's later military campaigns in Caledonia.
One thing that a lot of people don’t mention with the Roman cavalry in Gladiator is the fact that their saddles have stirrups when in actuality their Gallic style saddles didn’t have any. Stirrups weren’t present in Europe until around the 6-7th century AD
I understand that the decision to use stirrups was made on health and safety grounds.
@@tonyoliver2750 Yeah, you cannot film a movie with cavalry without stirrups on most western countries.
That was an intentional decision
Pretty sure it was because they couldn’t get insurance without them.
Understandable because safety reasons.
Hopefully future historical filma portraying civilizations that used horses but without stirrups use _stirrups with green paint or green covering_ and CGI'd them out.
This would also apply to other forms of modern health and safety equipment, too.
With the whole Soldier vs Gladiator thing 1 thing to remember is Roman Soldiers were trained to fight in formation and that solid formation was the key to victory, where as to my understanding Gladiators although participated in team fights or in pairs they were more often duellist's fighting 1 v 1 being their speciality.
1 v 1 I'd side with the Gladiator to beat a veteran, however if it's a group of veterans vs a group of gladiators i'd choose the vets
I like your point.
The difference between a marine and a WWE wrestler basically
@@Ballin4Vengeance wwe wrestler are actor and not real fighters while gladiators k ewhow to fight. Not a good comparison
@@idirbouchdoug1567 Wrestlers are supposed to look like they’re fighting while they don’t. Gladiators were supposed to look like they’re fighting to death while they mostly didn’t.
Either way it was mostly an act
@@Ballin4Vengeance Not the same , gladiator actually know how to fight. They are basically an ancient version of an mma fighters + weapons.
They actually know how to beat the shit out of each other and i'm sure they can kill each other if they wanted to (in fact there were cases of deaths) While WWE fighters are just fit people that are basically doing acrobatic moves without actualy hurting each other. and they're doing moves that don' tactually work in an actual fight (a lot of them).
IT's like comparing WWE wrestlers to MMA fighters or actual real pro wrestlers. Not the same.
Blood groove is unnecessary. The reason blades get stuck is not vacuum. It's because the blade gets hung in a rib
Correct. Fullers were used to lighten the blade to make it more nimble in the hand, AND it helped strengthen the blade...
I am a butcher, I use a 14 inch scimitar also known as a breaking knife for all my large cuts when processing carcasses. Never in my life have I had to twist or jerk my knife because it doesn't have a blood groove. That same knife has been used in ending the suffering of an Elk and once again no problems, I'll never understand this myth but I would be curious what caused it since ive heard it too many times to count
I've never heard the myth that fullers were to prevent blades from getting stuck in wounds. What I always heard was that fullers were to prevent blood from spurting onto the attacker.
Here in the comments I read that fullers make the blade more durable because of the not flat shape being resistant to twisting/bending.
Maybe its true dead carcasses are different than something alive
English speakers are really arbitrary on how they pronounce the letter "i" so I think it's a little nitpicky to call him out on "lorica". After all, half the time I hear peope say "eye-talian". And I think armor and weapons are something people just like to overclassify, and I think some of that goes back to Victorian era and later tabletop or video games. They want to say what type of armor in a descriptive way, but at the same time sound authentic or exotic, when in contemporary periods people often would just call it a "sword" or "armor" without a need to specify what kind.
@Metatron I've been watching your channel since 2013 and just re-joined because I lost my channel, you are the best and you have really educated me over the years, so happy to see you looking so healthy! Thankyou so much for educating people in depth for free.
I'm also sure as an Italian speaker you could also explain a lot of "complicated" french word to ... french people :). By the way I really appreciate your vidéo because, regarding the way you speak I can see that you are really keen, I love that!
Not exactly. French is a weird language. Pretty apart as romance languages go. I'd say people who speak romance languages in general can pretty much understand each other's words to a slight degree and be mutually rewarding in discussion.
I think in the opening battle, Maximus is using an ivory hilted spatha as his primary weapon and when he loses it, he draws his backup sword which is a Gladius.
Not only to reduce the weight of the blade... but the amount of metal used! Metal was enormously expensive back then. And pulling a blade out will ALWAYS be a lot easier than pushing it in.
Fun fact, the germanic chieftan at the start of Gladiator speaks norwegian. He shouts "JEG ER SKIKKELIG FORBANNA!", wich means "I'M REALLY PISSED OFF!"
No. He said “Ihr seid verfluchte Hunde!” which means "You are damned/cursed dogs!" in modern German.
@@the_ag_101 Yes its definitely german.
@@the_ag_101 That's the first thing he says, afterwards he shouts "JEG ER SKIKKELIG FORBANNA!"
@@elefandados Oh that. Yeah, sounds kind of like that I guess. I stand corrected. Although, it doesn't really make sense to say that before a battle, but it's Hollywood. Anything goes.
Chieftan: É ASSIM QUE MEU FUSCA ANDA!!!
Germanic mob: vruuum... vruuum...
Chieftan: E É ASSIM QUE ELE VAI PARAR...
(Battle begins)
I like that even when you debunk someone, you still show a lot of respect. That's great. Stay true to yourself.
He's not debunked them, he's wrong.
@@SergyMilitaryRankings in what is he wrong? You think commodus was killed by the imaginary Massimi decimo meridio?
@@marcobelli6856 strawman
@@SergyMilitaryRankings Tell me in what this video is wrong? I am more than happy to educate myself
@@SergyMilitaryRankings I was of course provocative in my first comment but if you want to talk seriously tell me what incorrect information is given in this video
Something I've noticed going to college to become a historian is that this generation of historians, and the following generations, will far outclass the existing generation; and in many ways we already have. As a historian pre-internet, the only way you really learned about things was reading them or attending lectures or conferences. This drastically limited the scope you had, and it meant you only got exposed to the information you got exposed to; so if one of your professors said "blades had fullers to allow the blood to leave the body", you believed it. But with the internet, I can google and have answers from sword experts in 5 seconds.
The internet gets a bad rap for the amount of bad information, but in skilled hands its an excellent tool for research and fact checking. I've already corrected my professors on some myths they've believed their whole lives, like a winch was needed to get a knight on horseback
Sometimes having knowledge in one area doesn't always translate into knowledge of a different area of the same subject but it's easy to fall in the trap of thinking you know.
So, an impalement is basically a vacuum seal unless there’s a fuller?
I guess so, dont stand on a nail it'll be impossible to remove, it doesn't have a fuller XD
"There's no way for the air to come out."
You mean besides the massive stab wound...?
I really like the choice of sponsor in this video.
I think that with all of these, '"Expert rates movies" videos the expert may say lots of things that gets cut. Proper deep dives take almost as long as the movie itself, covering ~10 movies in a 10-20 minute video does not leave enough time to cover everything.
In the UK, when we learn Latin at school or university there's hardly any focus on pronunciation or phonetics, it's almost always a literary affair where the focus is on reading and writing, mainly because it's considered training for reading historical sources or understanding living languages better. Thus most British scholars end up learning it with British-style pronunciation and therefore it's considered normal and acceptable in academic settings to speak Latin this way. I imagine there's a different attitude in Catholic countries who use Latin a lot more in religious rites and also countries whose languages are much more closely related to Latin, such as Italy.
Yeah, but they don't use, as Meatron does, the restored pronunciation, which is considered scientific (though that's wildly disputed in academic circles), and is not the ecclesiastic pronunciation of Latin.
I would also add that Fullering a blade, not only lightened the blade, but it also served to strengthen the blade as well by changing its cross sectional density. A fullered blade had more resistance to bending along its longitudinal axis to it in comparison to a non fullered blade. The Fullered blade didn't bend as easily in either a thrust or a shash, and prevented the blade from flexing as it was thrust into one's opponent. Fullering, was a huge step in the evolution of edged weapons, and we can see this evolution in both the iron age, as well as improvements in the Classical, Medieval and Modern Ages.
I would imagine, that having one's Gladius, Spada, or Broadsword bend into a "U" in battle, would be a right pain in the posterior, as well as getting one gutted.
23:05 - I just know of that one guy that ran far enough away to escape the lava, but then a giant rock that was launched by the volcano fell on his head and he died.
it's like a scene from a comedy movie or something...
I really love your vids Raf but you GOTTA chill with the pronunciation thing. It's literally absurd to expect people to either have the level of linguistic detail as you, an Italian born polyglot linguist, has or just not use foreign words... it's absurd. In American culture we feel douchey and pretentious when we try to over do foreign pornounciation in regular conversation. It sounds like you're trying to hard so it's natural for us to just anglicize things to keep with the natural flow of speaking... you gotta relax on that 1 thing.
Interestingly enough, in American English we actually tend to make things sound more 'foreign' than they should. People constantly turn habanero into habañero, but what's at work here isn't accent... it's people reading a word and pronouncing it how they think it should be, which will rarely work with how inconsistent English spelling it. If someone told you their name, would you try to say what they said, or would you ask them to spell it and then pronounce it differently to what they told you?
He makes a good point about soldiers vs gladiators. A veteran of several campaigns would have the discipline and ease in combat which would carry him well, but there's the aspect of ungentlemanly combat and theater that a soldier might have trouble with.
As someone who has actually had formal education in history, I can attest that a lot of people who also have formal educations don't understand every single fine detail like some enthusiasts. Microhistory is relatively new in the field, but you still have a lot of people with PHDs in history who think that more than 90% of Medieval European peasants were illiterate, or that knights would go into battle with a plate harness that weighed 100 pounds/40 kilos.
People argue that nitpicking the details of history, especially military history, doesn't matter and is just something that autistic young men obsesses over, but it can tell us a lot about an authoritarian regime that focused intensely on its military.
"would an American Marine be a really good MMA fighter?"
as it stands, no, but any Marine that actually tries is liable to be a very good *shooter*
If we still only fought hand to hand.... maybe? Not all the skills translate, by all means, but it's absolutely possible that SOME of them would be trained by the military to be great at hand to hand. Not every Roman soldier would be, but some surely would.
Soldiers who retire and get into competitive shooting have a leg up on the average person but it still takes a lot of additional practice to get to a professional level.
Soldiers are still generalists, while professional athletes are always specialists
@@bolieve603 Yeah, not all soldiers will be better shooters than an average civilian, let alone one that competes. You have to shoot a lot too. However, some inevitably will shoot a lot during their military career in a variety of roles and jobs.
The idea of a normal Roman soldier being a relatively good gladiator is probably a bit silly. But there will be a few Roman soldiers around who would make really, really good ones. The ones who are used to train other soldiers, the ones with lots of combat experience, etc.
Your knowledge knows no bounds Metatron
New to the channel , the accent slips into a kind of London twang from time to time
That’s what’s UP!!! My Ethnicity says I have Northern Italian, Southern Italian, and Sardinian. I love Roman History too, and this has definitely been an enjoyable experience watching your videos.
It just occured to me that the reason the historian gives for the "bloodgroove" would mean the needle of a syringe would be incredibly hard to pull back out. IThe needle has no "bloodgrooves" and so no "air could come out"... (What air anyways, humans are not balloons.)
Great to see you back monetised btw 👍👏👏👏
My comment is that although you may know Latin pronunciation from the carved inscriptions- my thought is that to say their an he only one way of saying the same word in the same language is incorrect- e.g. in English the word for the stuff lawns are usually made of can be either ‘grass’ or ‘grahs’ (short a or long ‘ah’) - both are correct, no!?
Great to see the YT issue has been sorted😎
Little late to the party, but to point out another issue with the blood groove claim. The body's internal pressure is positive, that is things that are pushed in then have a tendency to be pushed out. At most, pressure equalizes as the blood fills the void as the sword is removed.
I am so glad you're channel and you exist. As an amateur historian, movies can drive me nuts. Most of them are what I call, "History-wood," Hollywoodised history. As a side note I have British ancestry and am related to the Romanised Britons which makes us essentially family to the Italians and Greeks. 🙂
The Bible is truth.
The key to understanding that is in combining personally reading the Bible with putting the teachings Jesus Christ gave us into action in your own life. Start with forgiveness, parents are easiest, they’ve loved you. That’s a very important step in understanding all this. You have to work though your inner drama and forgive. Also, make sure you at least read three books of the Bible, Genesis Mathew and one you chose yourself.
Jesus Christ is the way truth and life,
"People take offense to those that come into their world and start dictating to them how it is, and how it looks, and how to do it, when they have no fucking clue......YA DIG?!?!"
-The Madman from Kryptic Art
Leather vambraces are one of the few leather armour pieces for which we have archaeological evidence.
We have of course documentary evidence of industries for leather cuirasses (from Italy for example).
Leather bracelets or vambraces are the most acceptable, because they are also fashion items just like today
Just seeing the image for the video had me think "Is this the one where he says the gladius gets stuck because it has no fuller?"
You say you're not a historian or an expert, but you get all your info from BOTH. If it's a true passion, then I declare you a historian and an expert.
I love the details that you point out. You would make a great person to sit next to on a long airplane trip, so i could pick your brain about history.
This is a classic example of someone who knows what they are talking about and someone who thinks they do!
There's "exercising"...and then there is "working out" which often implies some type of schedule and regularity..and then there is "training" which should be reserved for sentences describing how you are getting ready for the Olympics or the big fight lol
About the linguistic anecdote: I’m an Indonesian teacher with primarily a history background, and for years I’ve had to explain to my students why English has special names for some animal meats whereas other languages don’t, and it was all because of the Battle of Hastings 1066. The part about the aristocracy being the ones that could afford the pricier meats has always been a theory of mine but I’ve never been sure. Thank you for confirming it for me.
Why do English speakers pronounce latin words like lorica segmentata without an accurate accent? For the same reason we pronounce Germany's capital city as "Bur-lynn" as opposed to German "Berr-leen". Or how we say "Rome" instead of "Rrroma". Different language, different phonetics, different "muscle memory" when it comes to making sounds. I'm similar when it comes to saying Italian place names or names in English conversation - I feel like a bit of a bellend when I overly pronounce something in the correct Italian manner. It's not that I feel embarassed, it just doesn't sound right mid-English. It just sounds off.
Lorica segmentata as he said it just feels natural to us, just like Caesar as "See-zur" sounds more natural than "Kai-sar", or "Claw-dee-us" instead of "Clow-dee-ooos" for Claudius. If it's how you first hear it/interpret it I imagine the latin pronunciation would stick, but for most English speakers they will almost never hear an actual Latin pronunciation of these words.
I agree. I appreciate the effort some people put in to actually trying to use the correct foreign/native words for things. But as an English speaker myself, I also struggle to get the right inflections or tones when saying foreign words. The muscle memory for vocalising sounds is strong.
I wonder how many speakers of classical Latin there are? Maybe fewer (not less) than 1000 in the whole world?
A video of the correct Latin pronunciation would be brilliant, I'd love to be able to say those words correctly ⚔ Latin is such a wonderful language 👌🗡😉
The problem is you won't be understood if you use those words in *English* conversation, whereas using the "mispronunciation" (really more of a loanword) will make you understood.
The video in this popped in my suggested so I started it, then saw this in the videos under it and was here so fast xD
Welcome!
I suspect the blood runnel was called that for a prosaic reason: when you go to clean the sword, where does the blood get stuck so you have to work a bit to get it out? In the runnel. The flatter, smoother parts of the blade would be relatively easier to clean.
Nothing seems to define the "experts" of our age more than their self assurance whilst presenting false assertions. I appreciate this channel because each explanation is presented honestly, with a genuine passion for the truth, and yet with a modicum of self questioning humility. If only the "experts" had half your character.
"Hello citizen. Here's some free grain.🍞Don't forget to vote for your friend Titus Milo!'
27:33 It should also be added that during the Social War from 91-87 BC, the allies that fought against the Romans also saw themselves as Italians and even renamed their capital of Corfinium to "Italica".
Roman historian? Can't be. I've been assured Rome didn't exist.
Based tiktok enjoyer
Everybody knows it was just a creation of the spanish inquisition 🙄🙄💅💅
Id take the shield hold as more a muscle memory, universal representation of holding a shield. Same way people use their hands to show a gun being shot even though its not accurate but everyone recognises it.
Ive had a similar exoerience with language. I used to be fluent in spanish, and when i was in portugal, that made me good enough at portugese to be cimolimented by the cabbies. And then i was able to at least understand most italian. Enough to be functional.
I really love the debunking of these myths and inaccuracies. I often notice reenactorisms (historical inaccuracies and myths spread by reenactors) in films, and it makes those of us who are passionate about history and the truth look bad. It’s also very frustrating when you are watching something and then get pulled out of it by wrong costumes, weapons and armor, tactics, phrases, architecture, behaviors, etc. It is unfortunate that this Roman historian wasn’t very knowledgeable about military culture and equipment or how to properly pronounce Latin phrases. Thank you for making us more knowledgeable about period correct weapons, armor, tactics, and Latin.
I am a veteran that served in the United States Marine Corps. As part of the hand-to-hand combat training that we received we were told by the instructor that we were only being taught enough to get our asses kicked in a bar. For the most part our training focused on two things. One, putting enough distance between you and the other guy to shoot him. Two, how to keep protesters from disarming you or crossing a physical line that they're not supposed to physically cross without actually having to use deadly force. There was also some of the, "Oh s***, I lost my rifle and someone's trying to kill me!" training. None of that training would be helpful in an MMA tournament.
This is why my kitchen knives need to get grooves, they keep getting stuck locking inn air in my food making me pass wind all day.
Man, you are so freaking smart and knowledgeable, love your channel!
And here I am again, re-viewing metraton reviwing the review.
He gives vibes of either being a historian who hasn't focused on these areas in a long time or a professor or teacher who hasn't updated his knowledge of things in years
I have a book on blacksmithing, which explains making a blood groove in a sword.
I’m not saying that it supports the theory of the blood groove. Rather, it shows how far myths and misinformation can travel.
I love the word “detritus.” It’s a great word, and I use it when appropriate.
Been doing LARP and HEMA since I was 16. Fighting in line/teams is a different skill set than and one-on-one duel. For instance. Many parries that are great in a dual will just get the guy next to you stabbed in a line. A primary line skill is one guy distracts, the other guy attacks, doing the same is a duel exists, but in a very different way involving timing, feints, and psychology. It's very different. The mental hardness, familiarity with equipment, and physical fitness of a soldier would be a great asset in dual though.
I would say this comparison, is a fine representation if the difference between;
"Book smart"
And
"Street smart"
Have you seen Tod's recent Pilum throwing experiment videos? Based on them 100 yards seem quite excessive.
Yep
Oh heck yeah please make a pronunciation video/series