To Metatron: Can a Japanese Kanabo hurt the Spartan even if the Spartan had a Aspis shield? Would the Kanabo and club weapons damage the Aspis-shield? Thegnthrand proved It.
I am greek and i was really surprised at the excellent pronunciation and accent when you spoke greek. Like so good that i wouldn't notice a difference between you and a regular greek person on the street! Great work, keep it up!
You also have to factor in that the different Greek cities hated so much each other, unlike the Romans who had unity. Greece was conquered by Rome slowly and strategically, and it's mostly the fault of Greek themselves, as many of the Greek cities invited the Romans to come and fight with them against other Greek cities. They where so focused on hating each other they went as far to ally themselves with the Romans against the other Greek cities, and the Romans took advantage of it and conquered half of Greece with the help of the other half of the Greeks. And then after the rest of the Greeks had been weakened from battle, they had to pay the Romans for mobilizing and fighting with them, but they were broke, and the Romans confiscated the rest half of Greece as a result... Even after the Romans had conquered all of Greece besides the Peloponnesian peninsula, the Peloponnesian cities like Sparta and Corinth thought of forming an alliance against the Romans, but they never formed it because each city wanted to have the leading role, and ended up disbanding the alliance as a result, and some cities like Corinth fought to the last man without any help, and others just gave up and surrendered to the Romans at that point.
Yeah, Rome was always great at diplomacy too. We often see Rome as the military power, but fail to see how they managed to ally with one faction against others. "Divide et impera" is a very fitting description and history proves that Rome not only excelled at military but on diplomatic territory too.
@@wedgeantilles8575 It's crazy how they managed to do this despite their extreme arrogance and sense of superiority when dealing with foreign nations. Surprised anyone ever listened to them, considering how rude they were.
Greeks always hate and fight each other. You just have to look at Mycenaen times, city states, hellenistic kingdoms, Byzantium, the Greek Revolution (during which Greeks fought THREE civil wars while rebelling against the Turks), WWI and the national schism, WWII and its bloody infighting that led to the aftermath of the Civil War to understand how self destructive the mindset of Greeks has always been. Ironically, it's the best proof for the Greek cultural continuity in the Millenia. My belief is that the Romans adopted this as well from the Greeks, although some infighting/factions tend to appear in most major empires that defeat all external enemies.
@@dariovirga7711 And ironically, that is one of the main reasons for the breadown of the Empire. Constant civil wars. Sure, there are a lot of reasons for the decline (und ultimately fall) of Rome. And historians argue a lot about how important each factor was. But in the end, nobody can argue that it severly weakens your empire, if your legions constantly fight each other. If you loose legions to civil war, if you have to strip your bordres to fight your civil war... Whatever other reasons there was, IMO without the civil wars the Empire would have been easily strong enough to wither all storms caused by those other reasons. Germanic invasons and stuff like that? Yeah, a serious factor - but with the legions NOT weakend, those invasions would have never been successful. Especially because constant civil war leads not only to a drain in bodies and equipment. It is a drain on "brain" too. Because if you have to constantly fear another civil war, you will never choose the best people for the job but people who you think you can trust. Or who are just not too good to be a threat to you. (Corbulo as an example - he was too good and Nero got rid of him.) Without the constant civil wars, Rome would still exist today IMO.
You speak my language so bloody well I had to replay the clip a few times. Very pleased as a native Greek to hear your dedication towards getting it right and making sure the pronunciations are spot on.
Superbly detailed and thorough analysis of the major elements of the issue right there, Raff. Excellent stuff, presented in thoroughly academic, rigorous fashion.
The way Ares and Mars are interpreted can also be applied to Athena and Minerva: Ares was the attacking god, violent and bloodthirsty, beaten in fights by other gods and sometimes even mortal, almost as if he were the laughing stock. Athena was the godess of defense, strategy, she was smart and praised for her knowledge. Mars was the war god, not only when attacking but also when defending. He also was asociated with agriculture, soldiers sonetime became farmers after serving their duty. Mars was the god of the soldiers.Minerva was still a goddes of war, but she was the godess of the generals, people who stayed away from the battlefield and guided the troops. She had more to do with knowledge, the pursuit of wisdom and arts like knitting.
I'd go further. Technology is an externalized power trip borne out of existential fears and feeling of facing overwhelming dangers that distracts us from developing our vast innate human potential. We have traditionalized ancient existential fears into abstract, recreated phantasies. We give up on love and settle for toys. And the popular claims that technological progress is unstoppable is madness in the ears of sages; a self-weakening, cultist concept, also immature because it rejects responsibility which is fully in the hands of humankind and everybody's choices. People of cold heart want to live in interesting times and are using such ideas as excuses for the disaster emerging from them.
@@GuitarsRockForever The spirit of man has always been evil, we must choose good and that's not in our nature. So, more powerful weapons are put into the hands of the monsters of the id.
Another excellent video. As someone with the blood of Rome, on one side, and Greece, on the other, I have always been fascinated by the history, culture, and mythology of my ancestors. Your videos are, by far, the best, on this subject, and every other subject I have seen you cover. I am working my way through all of them, and I have really enjoyed every single one. Your students were extraordinarily lucky to have you as a professor. Regarding the comment about you not being Italian, because of Sicily being your birthplace, it’s pretty likely that you, like me, have some Greek ancestry, if you go back far enough, as they did colonize Sicily, which, I have no doubt, you already knew. Anyway, thanks again for making this, and all of the other amazing videos on your channel.
Except Roman and Greek mythology aren't exactly the same. I mean sure the Romans took the cultural mythology of ancient Greece but they turn the gods into Villains (especially the poet Ovid who hated gods) and sadly enough a decade ago the school system banned the original version of Greek mythology and they kept the Roman version in order to be "inclusive" with other countries such as Italy...we also done other things for inclusivity that now costs us greatly. Still I applaud metatron, he's a great guy
I don't know what you are doing studying Greek, but keep doing it! Your pronunciation and grammar has improved dramatically! It shows that you are actually trying and not just reading the words with English pronunciation. Like many others. I especially hate when they pronounce xiphos as [zifos] when it really is [ksípʰos]. Thank you.
Check out the World War Two channel, they've been doing a week-by-week 79 years ago coverage of the war. There was a good bit of coverage of the Italian-Greek War in the episodes covering late 1940 and early 1941.
Yeah I’d look forward to some more modern stuff from metatron but I can’t lie he knows his stuff about ancient times very well. If it ain’t broke don’t try to fix it……
This was a great analysis you should do a series on this, or more content like this, and I wouldn’t mind longer videos on this topic from you either. Thanks! 🙏
I think its fair to say that the Roman military tradition all the advantages of the greek style of warfare with fewer of its liabilities. By organizing their armies into smaller units like centuries maniples and later cohorts they had greater flexibility especially when you factor in that commanders of those units had some liberty to act on their own judgement and press advantage where he saw it, where as a commander of a syntagma ( a phalanx unit 0f 256 men) could only keep his men in formation and push them forward. By emphasizing swords over spears legionaries would have more mobility than Phalangites and would have a clear advantage once the gap between the romans and an enemy phalanx had been closed.
Greek/Macedonian cavalry and peltasts could have countered that but they were underused or misused on most of the encounters. Eastern Rome - Byzantium would combine the two systems later, fielding formidable heavy infantry with heavy shock cavalry.
I didn't know much about Roman or greek history love learning from you. Atleast you try to be 100 % accurate when you talk about history... its refreshing.
I agree, it's something that many many other people don't actually do. Most people try to spread misinformation and propagandas about my country's history and mythology (Greece not Rome).
Enjoyed the rant about the Italian peninsula I am no expert historian but seeing people claim that Italy is a modern concept infuriates me. Anyways enjoyed the video immensely have a good week mister
The Roman takeover of Greece and the greater Balkans is one of the most glossed over events in it's history. How remarkable of a nation that an empire's conquest of several modern nations is often merely considered a footnote.
It's because of a lack of sources. We are missing all of Titus Livus books after the third Macedonian war. It's a footnote because the documents we have are pretty much footnotes compared to the amount of source from the two punics wars.
I'd love to see a video of yours about Christopher Columbus: was he good or evil? I know the question isn't very meaningful per se, but I really appreciate how you dive into things and put history into perspective. Saluti dall'Italia ❤🇮🇹
@@chrismav3908 What differentiates a barbarian from a non-barbarian is basic knowledge of Greek and Latin. Especially if you want to claim you are a Roman you have to know at least one of the two Roman languages well. Metatron speaks both of them well, so he is a senator level.
I think is important to say that the clash between Greece and Rome was not exactly Greeks versus Romans but some Greek city-states had already an alliance with Rome and it's a lot more complicated. However that's another great video. ΜΕΤΑΤΡΟΝ ΣE ΕΥΧΑΡΙΣΤΟΥΜΕ !!!
Same goes for the Greco-Persian wars though. Some cities also collaborated with the Persians but we can't say that it was not a clash between Greece and Rome because of that.
Thank you for this informative video; especially as an Italo American with roots in Sicily, I truly enjoyed the meaning of ˋItalia ´, especially with itsˋ connection to Sicily. Thank you for combating ignorance. Love your competence and knowledge of history.
Aussie headcanon: A hoplite is a rabbit and a hopheavy is a kangaroo. (And a hopsweet is a beer.) 3:13 As a cultured person I learned this bit of mythological history in my childhood from playing DooM.
God bless you sir!!!! I really appreciate your knowledge and the style you present it in. I already love history but you make me love and appreciate it even more. Thank you for teaching us and striving for truth!
The sort answer is that the Greeks hated more each other than the Romans allowing gradually Rome to interfere and eventually conquer one by one the " diadochi" states EDIT :By the way.. με εντυπωσίασες με τα ελληνικά σου! Εξαιρετική και φυσική εκφορά λόγου ❤
To Metatron: Can a Japanese Kanabo hurt the Spartan even if the Spartan had a Aspis shield? Would the Kanabo and club weapons damage the Aspis-shield? Thegnthrand proved It.
Eh thats a trivial reason tbh. I doubt a united Greece would have triumphed against Rome. The problem essentially lies in the system of government; city states and the kingdoms used by Greeks and their successors could not survive the shock of heavy defeats in comparison to the Roman system. Through the baptism of fire that was the Punic Wars, Rome reinvented its military and logistical capabilities to be able to disgorge obscene amount of military force. If Phillip V won Pydna, Rome would just send more the next season.
@@cursedkei66 A united greece would have destroyed rome without any problems. Just the numbers alone are enought to say this without a reason to argue more.
@@cursedkei66 the Macedonian kingdom, the selucid empire, Egypt, and the " leagues" of the southern Greece was simply to much to handle butttttttt they was never united they often asked themselves for the Romans to intervening And ofc the Romans took advantage of it The " divide and rule" is literally a roman prohib
Wonderful video, I would like you to make a video talking about the first confrontation that occurred between the Macedonian phalanx and the Roman manipuli, which happened during the famous Pyrrhic Wars (280 to 275 B.C.), because I think it would be a perfect complement to this video and by the way You can mention what lessons the Romans learned in those confrontations that they later applied against Carthage and Macedonia in later years. Commenting now on the subject of the video, I must say that the Greeks had the same problem as the Carthaginians and that was that they gave too much value to their citizens, preventing them from conceiving models of war that were more effective against a rival as impetuous as the Romans; The children of Mars, on the other hand, gave more value to collective achievement than to the individual, because they were capable of sacrificing each of their citizens to achieve final victory (something that is reflected in the Second Punic War) and they saw the honorable death in combat, while the Greeks saw it as a waste of life.
That's pretty interesting. It has to be noted that Pirrhus, a refined and valued Hellenistic commander, faced a very "fresh" legionary model. The Romans had just adopted it, in the Samnitic wars, that had just ended when the Pyrrhic war begun. At that time, the Romans used the manipulary system as a way to fight frontal battles on rough terrain. there was not really a tactical use of the maniples. On the other side, having noticed that, in Italy, battles were not fought only on plains, Pyrrhus adapted the phalanx, intermixing the squares of phalangites with the more mobile formations of his Italic allies. As a result, Pyrrhus generally managed to inflict to the Romans more severe losses that he suffered, but not to gain a decisive victory, and his losses were less replaceable. Hannibal, that was an admirer of Pyrrhus, noted this weakness, and he made sure to fight vs. the Romans only "annihilation battles", where the entire enemy formation was destroyed for little cost of his own. If there was not that possibility, he preferred to concede a limited defeat that to gain a costly victory. Unfortunately (for the Hellenistic rulers) Hannibal "trained" the Romans to use their maniples tactically. To move them sideways, to encircle, to make faints and ambushes. As a result, when the Romans, right after the second Punic war, clashed with the Hellenistic rulers in Greece and middle east, it seemed a clash between professionals and amateurs. The phalanx could still held its own in a pure frontal battle, but too many things had to go its way for it to work and, as soon as something got wrong, it ended in a massacre. And those were still Republican Roman armies. A militia of citizens. In the last clashes, when the post-Marian reform professional Roman army clashed with the last phalanxes in the east, the legionaries won with ridiculous ease.
@@trench01 BS! Slaves were slaves, period. There were some few house slaves that had some freedom of movement and even the ability to earn money and maybe buy their freedom. The vast majority of slaves remained that way until they died. Do you think that the slaves that generated the Greek's wealth, those working on the olive and grape plantations were 'freer' than slaves of other eras? What about the slaves that worked the mines? Being sent to the mines was a death sentence. Don't believe the SJW college professors who find a few exceptions to the average conditions of slavery throughout history and try to convince you that was how it worked in the majority of cases in order to make slavery in America look more horrendous by comparison. Some slaves in America were allowed those same freedoms as well and could even purchase their own and even family member's freedom. But just like in all of the history of slavery they were the rare exceptions not the rule.
Another great and fascinating video Metatron! I really enjoy the way you not only inform but also tell stories at the same time. Usung a depth of historical, cultural and religious flavor to the overall examination of a subject. Id love to hear your thoughts on the story of Ceaser "bemoaning" that he had not accomplished as much as alexander following his conquest of Gaul. I imagined it was propaganda or just a story but on some level i could see him feeling that in spite of all he did accomplish..
All hypotheses of the origin of the name Italia come down to one latin word: Vitulus - which means calf. The latin word derives from the Osco - Umbrian (Center-South Italian region) word Vitlus, again meaning calf. When the Greeks colonized parts of South Italy the refered to it as the "Land of calfs". Later and after they mixed with the locals, they refered to them selves as Italoi, meaning 'People in the land of calfs" . Ancient Greek dropped the letter V, thus Vitulus was pronounced "Itulus". Later Greeks refered to those colonized regions (not including Sicily) as Italia, basically meaning the central-south region of the "Italian boot", however the boot's tip for some reason was not included. So, not to confuse things, Greeks did not invent the name, they simply named the region by the use of a local word, they did not create one based on a Greek word. All of this happened way before Rome became what we know it to have been. Later the Romans expanded the name to describe the whole of the Roman penincula. Yet there is another theory, again going back to the Ancient Greeks. It is possible that the name may have it's origins in the ancient Greek word "ΑΙΘΑΛΙΑ" (AETHALIA). Aithali means ashes. Land of the ashes, because of the volcanos. Then there is another hypothesis about a king named Italus, who united the Oscans and turned them from a nomadic people to farmers and city settlers. Nevertheless and regardless of which of all theories is the right one, Ancient Greeks refer to the Land as Italia from at least he 5th century bc, so any theory that claims Italy is a more recent term is bogus.
True. They had strategic abilities that Greeks didn’t. Which is mainly to say that the Greeks were interested in maintaining city states while the Romans were interested in building an empire
I really enjoy your channel! I studied anthropology, history, and philosophy. And I love how precise and important accuracy is to you! Very satisfying to watch!
What also needs to be taken into account is that Alexander’s conquest catastrophically depleted Macedonian horse stocks. Meaning that by the battle of Cynoscephalae the Greeks didn’t really have that deadly companion cavalry that could deliver the killer blow against their enemies. Relying too much on the powerful but inflexible phalanx that the romans were able to undermine
In the one battle I saw the Greeks undermined their own phalanx. The Romans were fast to take advantage of their opponents mistakes. Strategy and tactics win battle and so wars.
not only that, but the romans had the largest cavalry force of their history, compared to the number of footsoldiers. They had recruited this gigantic cavalry in order to counter the massive cavalry forces of Hannibal. And after they defeated Hannibal, they took thousands of numidians as auxiliaries into their army. The even the seleucids who had the largest greek cavalry force, were dwarved in comparison of the huge roman cavalry during the second roman and macedonian war.
That's just plain dumb. The Battle of Cynoscephalae was fought in 197 BC, 125 years after Alexander's death (give or take some months). The reason why they didn't have the deadly Companion cavalry wasn't because Alexander's conquest depleted Macedonian horse stock, it was because they didn't have a commander of Alexander's calibre (or at least one such as Pyrrhos of Epiros) and then there was all that infighting between his generals, strategoi and satraps over who's going to inherit (and what) - which also included endless wars in Greece herself (as soon as Antipater died). That said, breeding and trading of horses in Macedonia, Thessaly etc. didn't stop when Alexander took his army and crossed the Hellespont, and, tragically, never returned. Also, Alexander didn't take all or even most of Macedon's horses with him, he left a good portion of horses and trainers at home with Antipater.
I have been watching your channel for quite a while now and i have to say that your presentation is excellent as is your knowledge of civilizations. I am a big learner of history (Kings and Generals, History Marche, Epic history tv and others) and have studied the life of Alexander the Great since i was a child. As a Greek i admire your level of knowledge of the hellenic language and mindset. I really wish the best for this channel 🙏 Thank you, you are an enlightening individual :)
8 minutes and 30 seconds in, one of my favorite videos in a long time! Nice work. Loved the info on Italia referring to Calabria before 42 BC, (where my family is from) love the Greek/Roman comparison topic in general, you can make as many videos as you want like this and I will watch them, 1 question you may or may not have any insight on… why does the pilum absolutely suck in “Mount and Blade 2 Bannerlord?”
I also remember an ancient account of how horrified the Greeks were of the battle wounds suffered when clashing with Rome. Specifically the effectiveness of the Gladius for severing limbs and the stabbing into Greek groins in combat. Such wounds would no doubt have a psychological effect on the Greeks.
To any Greeks or Italians reading this, u don't have to pick which side is better or your favourite. Many Greeks have Roman blood and many Italians have Greek blood. The 2 areas have been exchanging population way earlier than the first recorded history about the 2. Both has the right to celebrate each other's achievements.
About war innovation, we should not forget Archimedes war machines. Machines that Romans would never imagine, or they would need many many decades to design and construct. The most important factor of Roman conquest against Greece was that Greeks were divided and they were against each other. The second reason is the fantastic organisation of Rome. Wonderful video. I learned much from it
Nice video but some things not mentioned I feel. 1 The Greeks lost to the Greeks working with Romans. So no Romans alone did not defeat the Greeks. Greeks lose when they get outnumbers by great numbers. Romans evaluated the weakness of Greece and took advantage of Greece weaken state when Greece battled itself which oddly was not mentioned. 2 Roman poet Horace 65 BC[ said "Captive Greece took captive her rude conqueror and brought the arts to the rustic Latin lands" This quote reflects the idea that while Rome may have conquered Greece through military power, it was Greek culture and arts that eventually had a profound influence on Roman society. Which shows Greece took over Roman which Greeks did not mind as long as the Romans Hellenized towards them despite Romans messed up many times. Romans wanted to be identified as Greeks to say they are descendants of the Greek Trojans in a way. 3 Sicily was part of Greece and so was many parts of Italy. Greeks have been around the world over 2500 years as admitted by evidence in China, America, Easter Island, etc. Sicily is 2 Greek words (siké & elaia) FIG & OLIVE, based on the two plants typical of the island. 4 Greek language of the educated which is why Christ and the Apostles spoke Greek as various historians say and not a dead language as some assume. As John Adams said Greek is the perfect language and a shame Americans do not speak it. 5 When people say Roman architecture, Roman engineering, Roman etc. It means during the time of Roman in what Greeks have done since Romans hired Greeks to do most things. 6 This also reflects when Byzantium fell when the Greeks left and went to Italy and help started the renascence to bring more Greek knowledge to the region. 7 Italy has a saying "una faccia una razza" (one face one race) due to how many people in Italy were Greeks which is why some DNA tests at times gets can not tell the difference. Greek colonization had a significant lasting effect on the local genetic landscape of Southern Italy and Sicily (Magna Graecia). This shared history and genetic mixing make it challenging for DNA tests to distinguish between the two. 8 why was Greece always outnumbered? Due to barbarian nature of stealing, slaves, hareem, and oppression of its citizens. Greece did not do that to the extent others did and so it got outnumbered. In short the Machiavellian way of winning wars to make everyone appressed more than Free.
One of the oddest and funniest things about learning Roman history, was the confusion over Hastati, Though it is so Roman to keep the name despite the reforms. Thank you for mentioning that, helped make my day! xD
One of the biggest factors in the Roman conquest of the Macedonian / Greek powers was population. By the 2nd century BCE, both sides had access to the oblong shields and javelins--the Greeks called such troops Thyreophoroi and Thorakitai, and they were armed in a manner that was very similar to the armament of the Polybian legions. What the Romans had that the Greeks lacked was depth of manpower. The late Hellenistic Greek kingdoms mostly raised their armies from mercenaries--being kingdoms, ruled by royal houses, they did not have a citizen class anymore. The Romans, though, did have a citizen army, and it gave them a huge manpower advantage. A defeat for a Hellenistic Greek kingdom left it with no army, and often with no money to hire a replacement army. A defeat for Rome meant that it needed to raise a new army, which was something it could do. This is how Rome could absorb multiple defeats in battles against enemies like Hannibal or Pyrrhus of Epirus, and still bounce back to win the war.
I think it’s also the fact that Rome was more interested in fighting in general so they continued to develop their military tactics much more than anyone else
@@yoeyyoey8937 Because the dates we currently use were invented by the Roman Church. Gregorian calendar. Those priests calculated the dates VEERY accurately, and it would be tough doing that even in our current times. So it's pretty disrespectful throwing BC out to appear more "scientific", when it's religious to begin with.
In the end the two cultures merged into one and we have a half Greek half Serbian with Greek surname Greek speaking Roman emperor defending Constantine's city in 1453.
@@JokerX350 Serbian as in "born in today's Serbia" (which had a different name back then - the Serbians came in later) not ethnic Serbians or Slavs. They were Romans. Justinian for example was born in the 5th century A.D. and the Slavs came in about the 6th century A.D.
The Short Answer: Disunity Greeks were used to fight other Greeks.. A United Hellenic World, with all their resources, manpower, & technology would have not only defeated Rome, but Conquered the West as well! 👍🏻
Roman diplomacy too. Local Greek allies of the Romans (Aetolians, Pergamese, Rhodians etc.) played a key role in the wars (e.g. the Aetolians at Kynoskephalae, Pergamese at Magnesia)
Hello Great stuff. I got to point out some things though 1. According to sources Rome's population was much higher than Greece at the time which would have a major impact. 2. At the point Rome went off to fight in the Macedonian wars They had already fought the Greeks and Greek style armies for at least a century while the Greeks had no such experience fighting the romans. (Persians and Asians pretty much fought the polar opposite of how romans fought) Basically what you said but with a little extra insight.
i know you most likely won't see this comment but i love these videos. i could sit and listen to you talk about this stuff all day brother. you have a way of making everything you speak about really interesting and it has a way of drawing me in like very little else in life has. i think about being a kid in school and wonder... if more of the teachers i had could do this i would've paid better attention and probably graduated. keep on making kickass ass videos bud!
Could be worse if you were calabrian... funny how so many people always put about 600 years into 1 bag, while we witnessed how fast inovation can take place; pocketable mini computers are with us for roughly 15 years now and while most keyboard warriors will use those to watch and comment using a touchscreen, we still call it a phone
As a native Greek speaker, I must congratulate you on doing a great job and, yes, I did quite enjoyed hearing it.
👏😃
I don't know. It was Greek to me. ;-)
@@throatwobblermangrove8510 Alright, it's nap-time, grandpa 😂
@@allrequiredfields Don't forget your binky, youngster. ;-)
Kalos!
To Metatron:
Can a Japanese Kanabo hurt the Spartan even if the Spartan had a Aspis shield? Would the Kanabo and club weapons damage the Aspis-shield? Thegnthrand proved It.
As a Greek, i want to say that you nailed the Greek accent. Keep making these High-Quality Content videos.
Which Greek accent?
He spoke Greek
As an Irishman, I don't know what it feels like to be conquered by the Roman Empire. Somebody give me a hug.
Honestly would have been better than having the British conquering you
well at least they left behind patricius to cure you of your primitive ways 😆
and normans@ZoomerStasi
No, but you do know what it's like to be invaded. Actually, the Romans are pretty much the only foreign nation to reach England and not invade Ireland
come out ye romans come out and fight me like a man
I am greek and i was really surprised at the excellent pronunciation and accent when you spoke greek. Like so good that i wouldn't notice a difference between you and a regular greek person on the street! Great work, keep it up!
Let's be honest the difference between a regular Greek and him IS there but he was really good at the pronunciation regardless
@@Aki-kh2qe-StreetKidZZZ shhh I'm being as supportive as possible.
He does that with many languages!No idea how.
Hey Metatron. I am a Greek viewer of 8+ years. You are my favorite channel, keep it up.
Greek here, bless you for all the knowledge these years.
The Greek sentences were spot on, with very good accent too.
Love Roman content.
You also have to factor in that the different Greek cities hated so much each other, unlike the Romans who had unity. Greece was conquered by Rome slowly and strategically, and it's mostly the fault of Greek themselves, as many of the Greek cities invited the Romans to come and fight with them against other Greek cities. They where so focused on hating each other they went as far to ally themselves with the Romans against the other Greek cities, and the Romans took advantage of it and conquered half of Greece with the help of the other half of the Greeks. And then after the rest of the Greeks had been weakened from battle, they had to pay the Romans for mobilizing and fighting with them, but they were broke, and the Romans confiscated the rest half of Greece as a result...
Even after the Romans had conquered all of Greece besides the Peloponnesian peninsula, the Peloponnesian cities like Sparta and Corinth thought of forming an alliance against the Romans, but they never formed it because each city wanted to have the leading role, and ended up disbanding the alliance as a result, and some cities like Corinth fought to the last man without any help, and others just gave up and surrendered to the Romans at that point.
Yeah, Rome was always great at diplomacy too.
We often see Rome as the military power, but fail to see how they managed to ally with one faction against others.
"Divide et impera" is a very fitting description and history proves that Rome not only excelled at military but on diplomatic territory too.
@@wedgeantilles8575 It's crazy how they managed to do this despite their extreme arrogance and sense of superiority when dealing with foreign nations. Surprised anyone ever listened to them, considering how rude they were.
Greeks always hate and fight each other. You just have to look at Mycenaen times, city states, hellenistic kingdoms, Byzantium, the Greek Revolution (during which Greeks fought THREE civil wars while rebelling against the Turks), WWI and the national schism, WWII and its bloody infighting that led to the aftermath of the Civil War to understand how self destructive the mindset of Greeks has always been. Ironically, it's the best proof for the Greek cultural continuity in the Millenia.
My belief is that the Romans adopted this as well from the Greeks, although some infighting/factions tend to appear in most major empires that defeat all external enemies.
United we stand, divided we slowly fall while fighting each other to the bitter end and blaming the others for the defeat? (In short, we fall)
@@dariovirga7711 And ironically, that is one of the main reasons for the breadown of the Empire.
Constant civil wars.
Sure, there are a lot of reasons for the decline (und ultimately fall) of Rome.
And historians argue a lot about how important each factor was.
But in the end, nobody can argue that it severly weakens your empire, if your legions constantly fight each other. If you loose legions to civil war, if you have to strip your bordres to fight your civil war...
Whatever other reasons there was, IMO without the civil wars the Empire would have been easily strong enough to wither all storms caused by those other reasons.
Germanic invasons and stuff like that?
Yeah, a serious factor - but with the legions NOT weakend, those invasions would have never been successful.
Especially because constant civil war leads not only to a drain in bodies and equipment. It is a drain on "brain" too.
Because if you have to constantly fear another civil war, you will never choose the best people for the job but people who you think you can trust. Or who are just not too good to be a threat to you.
(Corbulo as an example - he was too good and Nero got rid of him.)
Without the constant civil wars, Rome would still exist today IMO.
You speak my language so bloody well I had to replay the clip a few times. Very pleased as a native Greek to hear your dedication towards getting it right and making sure the pronunciations are spot on.
Superbly detailed and thorough analysis of the major elements of the issue right there, Raff. Excellent stuff, presented in thoroughly academic, rigorous fashion.
Much appreciated!
As a Greek, I liked this very much! And your Greek pronunciation was really quite good!
Im surprised Metatron hasnt made this video yet. A very core topic, Ancient Greece & Rome coming together. A great topic for a video!
I did many years ago, so this is a sort of high quality remake :)
This is a teacher I would enjoy taking a class with.
The way Ares and Mars are interpreted can also be applied to Athena and Minerva:
Ares was the attacking god, violent and bloodthirsty, beaten in fights by other gods and sometimes even mortal, almost as if he were the laughing stock. Athena was the godess of defense, strategy, she was smart and praised for her knowledge.
Mars was the war god, not only when attacking but also when defending. He also was asociated with agriculture, soldiers sonetime became farmers after serving their duty. Mars was the god of the soldiers.Minerva was still a goddes of war, but she was the godess of the generals, people who stayed away from the battlefield and guided the troops. She had more to do with knowledge, the pursuit of wisdom and arts like knitting.
basiclly romas compared to grece were not feared death i battle
@@whiteeye9584 i think is more likely because the romans were more used to attacking other tribes than the greeks.
Aphrodite was less a goddess of war than was Venus how did you leave that out? Artemis and Diana hunted with bows and arrows sometimes even humans.
@@hydrolito true.
"Just because technology is improving doesn't mean our humanity is." -John Lovell (Warrior poet)
I'd go further. Technology is an externalized power trip borne out of existential fears and feeling of facing overwhelming dangers that distracts us from developing our vast innate human potential. We have traditionalized ancient existential fears into abstract, recreated phantasies. We give up on love and settle for toys.
And the popular claims that technological progress is unstoppable is madness in the ears of sages; a self-weakening, cultist concept, also immature because it rejects responsibility which is fully in the hands of humankind and everybody's choices.
People of cold heart want to live in interesting times and are using such ideas as excuses for the disaster emerging from them.
Sadly we are going backward for decades now (I'd say more than half century). We have better tech, but humanity itself goes worse and worse.
Usually has an inverse relationship
@@yoeyyoey8937 🔨（ >﹏
@@GuitarsRockForever The spirit of man has always been evil, we must choose good and that's not in our nature. So, more powerful weapons are put into the hands of the monsters of the id.
Thank you for the mini-rant on Italia. It was overdue.
I hadn't thought about the Romans today so thanks for the video.
Thank You very much for this video !! 😊
You're welcome
Another excellent video. As someone with the blood of Rome, on one side, and Greece, on the other, I have always been fascinated by the history, culture, and mythology of my ancestors. Your videos are, by far, the best, on this subject, and every other subject I have seen you cover. I am working my way through all of them, and I have really enjoyed every single one. Your students were extraordinarily lucky to have you as a professor. Regarding the comment about you not being Italian, because of Sicily being your birthplace, it’s pretty likely that you, like me, have some Greek ancestry, if you go back far enough, as they did colonize Sicily, which, I have no doubt, you already knew. Anyway, thanks again for making this, and all of the other amazing videos on your channel.
Except Roman and Greek mythology aren't exactly the same. I mean sure the Romans took the cultural mythology of ancient Greece but they turn the gods into Villains (especially the poet Ovid who hated gods) and sadly enough a decade ago the school system banned the original version of Greek mythology and they kept the Roman version in order to be "inclusive" with other countries such as Italy...we also done other things for inclusivity that now costs us greatly.
Still I applaud metatron, he's a great guy
@@Aki-kh2qe-StreetKidZZZ In Italy we could give a heck, what you do with your Gods we are not African Americans. LOL
I don't know what you are doing studying Greek, but keep doing it! Your pronunciation and grammar has improved dramatically!
It shows that you are actually trying and not just reading the words with English pronunciation. Like many others. I especially hate when they pronounce xiphos as [zifos] when it really is [ksípʰos].
Thank you.
Both your Modern and Ancient Greek are perfect, bravo! Greetings from Greece
Darn it, thought of the Roman empire again
Like every day or two...I was a day away from my next one
Try balancing your mind's diet by...
...
thinking of the Mongol Empire and the Aztec Empire too.
Greek noble one here!
Your efforts are being appreciated 👍
Been really enjoying your videos the past few years just wondering when is that next video on Egypt coming keep up the honourable work
As a native Greek I enjoyed your take on this topic. However I’d like to see a video on how the Greeks defeated Italy in world war 2 😂
The channel warpgraphics, I believe, did one recently. The defense of Crete was a wonder
Check out the World War Two channel, they've been doing a week-by-week 79 years ago coverage of the war. There was a good bit of coverage of the Italian-Greek War in the episodes covering late 1940 and early 1941.
Yeah I’d look forward to some more modern stuff from metatron but I can’t lie he knows his stuff about ancient times very well. If it ain’t broke don’t try to fix it……
@@JokerX350 "modern warfare is nowhere near as interesting as ancient."
Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
@@brucetucker4847He's right though?
You speak greek correctly and so fast! This is REALLY amazing!
This was a great analysis you should do a series on this, or more content like this, and I wouldn’t mind longer videos on this topic from you either. Thanks! 🙏
I think its fair to say that the Roman military tradition all the advantages of the greek style of warfare with fewer of its liabilities. By organizing their armies into smaller units like centuries maniples and later cohorts they had greater flexibility especially when you factor in that commanders of those units had some liberty to act on their own judgement and press advantage where he saw it, where as a commander of a syntagma ( a phalanx unit 0f 256 men) could only keep his men in formation and push them forward. By emphasizing swords over spears legionaries would have more mobility than Phalangites and would have a clear advantage once the gap between the romans and an enemy phalanx had been closed.
Greek/Macedonian cavalry and peltasts could have countered that but they were underused or misused on most of the encounters. Eastern Rome - Byzantium would combine the two systems later, fielding formidable heavy infantry with heavy shock cavalry.
Maybe Greeks weren't thinking about Roman Empire every day, therefore they fail to prepare for the attack?
Happened to Kemet.
We always fought with our own kind and even sided with outsiders which caused the invasion
A unification of people.
We're all descendants of Atlantis.
Greece fell cuz of globalism
As a Greek, great video and great Greek pronunciation
Modern Greek pronunciation?
I didn't know much about Roman or greek history love learning from you. Atleast you try to be 100 % accurate when you talk about history... its refreshing.
I agree, it's something that many many other people don't actually do. Most people try to spread misinformation and propagandas about my country's history and mythology (Greece not Rome).
Greek with a Capital G 👍🏻
LOVE these kind of videos of you! What a treat
Enjoyed the rant about the Italian peninsula I am no expert historian but seeing people claim that Italy is a modern concept infuriates me. Anyways enjoyed the video immensely have a good week mister
Well made video on this subject 👏
Bravo frate!
The Roman takeover of Greece and the greater Balkans is one of the most glossed over events in it's history.
How remarkable of a nation that an empire's conquest of several modern nations is often merely considered a footnote.
It's because of a lack of sources. We are missing all of Titus Livus books after the third Macedonian war.
It's a footnote because the documents we have are pretty much footnotes compared to the amount of source from the two punics wars.
Top notch video as usual.
Innovation, adaption and social, political and economic cohesion win the age.
So ready for this...
Amazing video! Excellent! Thank you for the greek segment! We appreciate it!
I'd love to see a video of yours about Christopher Columbus: was he good or evil? I know the question isn't very meaningful per se, but I really appreciate how you dive into things and put history into perspective.
Saluti dall'Italia ❤🇮🇹
This video should of been 1h at minimum. This was great!!!❤
man you speak greek?!? had no idea! μπράβο φίλε μου!
ευχαριστώ!
Every one who claims to be descendant of the Romans must speak Greek.
@@Sp-zj5hw or else they must be descendants of the barbarians?🤣🤣
@@chrismav3908 What differentiates a barbarian from a non-barbarian is basic knowledge of Greek and Latin. Especially if you want to claim you are a Roman you have to know at least one of the two Roman languages well. Metatron speaks both of them well, so he is a senator level.
I think is important to say that the clash between Greece and Rome was not exactly Greeks versus Romans but some Greek city-states had already an alliance with Rome and it's a lot more complicated.
However that's another great video.
ΜΕΤΑΤΡΟΝ ΣE ΕΥΧΑΡΙΣΤΟΥΜΕ !!!
Same goes for the Greco-Persian wars though. Some cities also collaborated with the Persians but we can't say that it was not a clash between Greece and Rome because of that.
Fascinating video. As someone of Greek (Samos) and Italian (Campania) Heritage, I thoroughly enjoyed it. Thank you.
Thank you for this informative video; especially as an Italo American with roots in Sicily, I truly enjoyed the meaning of ˋItalia ´, especially with itsˋ connection to Sicily. Thank you for combating ignorance. Love your competence and knowledge of history.
My pleasure, thanks for watching. Grazie
Great video! I esp liked the visuals used. The analysis is top rate as usual.
Very well done for a short presentation. You could go on for hours and still have something left to say.
Nice, where did you get your sheild or can you make a video on how to make a roman sheild?
Fabrica Cacti on facebook
Brilliant video lecture Sir! Your over view of the Hellenic and Roman war culture was a complete bullseye. I await your next video lecture.
Aussie headcanon: A hoplite is a rabbit and a hopheavy is a kangaroo. (And a hopsweet is a beer.)
3:13 As a cultured person I learned this bit of mythological history in my childhood from playing DooM.
God bless you sir!!!! I really appreciate your knowledge and the style you present it in. I already love history but you make me love and appreciate it even more. Thank you for teaching us and striving for truth!
The sort answer is that the Greeks hated more each other than the Romans allowing gradually Rome to interfere and eventually conquer one by one the " diadochi" states
EDIT :By the way.. με εντυπωσίασες με τα ελληνικά σου! Εξαιρετική και φυσική εκφορά λόγου ❤
Very correct ✅
To Metatron:
Can a Japanese Kanabo hurt the Spartan even if the Spartan had a Aspis shield? Would the Kanabo and club weapons damage the Aspis-shield? Thegnthrand proved It.
Eh thats a trivial reason tbh. I doubt a united Greece would have triumphed against Rome. The problem essentially lies in the system of government; city states and the kingdoms used by Greeks and their successors could not survive the shock of heavy defeats in comparison to the Roman system.
Through the baptism of fire that was the Punic Wars, Rome reinvented its military and logistical capabilities to be able to disgorge obscene amount of military force. If Phillip V won Pydna, Rome would just send more the next season.
@@cursedkei66 A united greece would have destroyed rome without any problems. Just the numbers alone are enought to say this without a reason to argue more.
@@cursedkei66 the Macedonian kingdom, the selucid empire, Egypt, and the " leagues" of the southern Greece was simply to much to handle butttttttt they was never united they often asked themselves for the Romans to intervening
And ofc the Romans took advantage of it
The " divide and rule" is literally a roman prohib
Brilliant video. Always love when you make these.
Wonderful video, I would like you to make a video talking about the first confrontation that occurred between the Macedonian phalanx and the Roman manipuli, which happened during the famous Pyrrhic Wars (280 to 275 B.C.), because I think it would be a perfect complement to this video and by the way You can mention what lessons the Romans learned in those confrontations that they later applied against Carthage and Macedonia in later years.
Commenting now on the subject of the video, I must say that the Greeks had the same problem as the Carthaginians and that was that they gave too much value to their citizens, preventing them from conceiving models of war that were more effective against a rival as impetuous as the Romans; The children of Mars, on the other hand, gave more value to collective achievement than to the individual, because they were capable of sacrificing each of their citizens to achieve final victory (something that is reflected in the Second Punic War) and they saw the honorable death in combat, while the Greeks saw it as a waste of life.
That's pretty interesting.
It has to be noted that Pirrhus, a refined and valued Hellenistic commander, faced a very "fresh" legionary model. The Romans had just adopted it, in the Samnitic wars, that had just ended when the Pyrrhic war begun.
At that time, the Romans used the manipulary system as a way to fight frontal battles on rough terrain. there was not really a tactical use of the maniples.
On the other side, having noticed that, in Italy, battles were not fought only on plains, Pyrrhus adapted the phalanx, intermixing the squares of phalangites with the more mobile formations of his Italic allies.
As a result, Pyrrhus generally managed to inflict to the Romans more severe losses that he suffered, but not to gain a decisive victory, and his losses were less replaceable.
Hannibal, that was an admirer of Pyrrhus, noted this weakness, and he made sure to fight vs. the Romans only "annihilation battles", where the entire enemy formation was destroyed for little cost of his own. If there was not that possibility, he preferred to concede a limited defeat that to gain a costly victory.
Unfortunately (for the Hellenistic rulers) Hannibal "trained" the Romans to use their maniples tactically. To move them sideways, to encircle, to make faints and ambushes.
As a result, when the Romans, right after the second Punic war, clashed with the Hellenistic rulers in Greece and middle east, it seemed a clash between professionals and amateurs. The phalanx could still held its own in a pure frontal battle, but too many things had to go its way for it to work and, as soon as something got wrong, it ended in a massacre.
And those were still Republican Roman armies. A militia of citizens.
In the last clashes, when the post-Marian reform professional Roman army clashed with the last phalanxes in the east, the legionaries won with ridiculous ease.
Really enjoyed the Italy rant :) (rest of the video is great as well)
Can you make a video discussing why when we think of Greece we never think of Slavery?
I think it would be a cool topic for you to dive into.
we very much think of slavery when we think of ancient greece..
@ZoomerStasiCorinthians would beg to differ
For the most part, slaves in Ancient Greeks were more free than most free people today. They can buy their way out of slavery and they had rights.
its not part of the agenda. we can only ever talk about the atlantic slave trade
@@trench01 BS! Slaves were slaves, period. There were some few house slaves that had some freedom of movement and even the ability to earn money and maybe buy their freedom. The vast majority of slaves remained that way until they died. Do you think that the slaves that generated the Greek's wealth, those working on the olive and grape plantations were 'freer' than slaves of other eras? What about the slaves that worked the mines? Being sent to the mines was a death sentence. Don't believe the SJW college professors who find a few exceptions to the average conditions of slavery throughout history and try to convince you that was how it worked in the majority of cases in order to make slavery in America look more horrendous by comparison. Some slaves in America were allowed those same freedoms as well and could even purchase their own and even family member's freedom. But just like in all of the history of slavery they were the rare exceptions not the rule.
Always a pleasure to listen to you, teacher.
Another great and fascinating video Metatron! I really enjoy the way you not only inform but also tell stories at the same time. Usung a depth of historical, cultural and religious flavor to the overall examination of a subject. Id love to hear your thoughts on the story of Ceaser "bemoaning" that he had not accomplished as much as alexander following his conquest of Gaul. I imagined it was propaganda or just a story but on some level i could see him feeling that in spite of all he did accomplish..
HE HE HE HE HE 🤣
I loved this video! Made with so much care, I also loved your Greek speaking! You spoke my language so beautifully. 😌🤍
It was my pleasure
I am a simple man, with but a simple sense of importance. I see Metatrons' video - I give a like, and then I watch the video.
Respect for your Greek pronunciation!!
It's literally amazing !
Μπράβο ! 🇬🇷🇮🇹
All hypotheses of the origin of the name Italia come down to one latin word: Vitulus - which means calf. The latin word derives from the Osco - Umbrian (Center-South Italian region) word Vitlus, again meaning calf. When the Greeks colonized parts of South Italy the refered to it as the "Land of calfs". Later and after they mixed with the locals, they refered to them selves as Italoi, meaning 'People in the land of calfs" . Ancient Greek dropped the letter V, thus Vitulus was pronounced "Itulus". Later Greeks refered to those colonized regions (not including Sicily) as Italia, basically meaning the central-south region of the "Italian boot", however the boot's tip for some reason was not included. So, not to confuse things, Greeks did not invent the name, they simply named the region by the use of a local word, they did not create one based on a Greek word. All of this happened way before Rome became what we know it to have been. Later the Romans expanded the name to describe the whole of the Roman penincula. Yet there is another theory, again going back to the Ancient Greeks. It is possible that the name may have it's origins in the ancient Greek word "ΑΙΘΑΛΙΑ" (AETHALIA). Aithali means ashes. Land of the ashes, because of the volcanos. Then there is another hypothesis about a king named Italus, who united the Oscans and turned them from a nomadic people to farmers and city settlers. Nevertheless and regardless of which of all theories is the right one, Ancient Greeks refer to the Land as Italia from at least he 5th century bc, so any theory that claims Italy is a more recent term is bogus.
Great holistic analysis. Superb!
The answer here is that Rome wasn’t alone.. Greeks fought with Rome against other Hellenistic kingdoms
True. They had strategic abilities that Greeks didn’t. Which is mainly to say that the Greeks were interested in maintaining city states while the Romans were interested in building an empire
Thank you….
I really enjoy your channel! I studied anthropology, history, and philosophy. And I love how precise and important accuracy is to you! Very satisfying to watch!
What also needs to be taken into account is that Alexander’s conquest catastrophically depleted Macedonian horse stocks. Meaning that by the battle of Cynoscephalae the Greeks didn’t really have that deadly companion cavalry that could deliver the killer blow against their enemies. Relying too much on the powerful but inflexible phalanx that the romans were able to undermine
In the one battle I saw the Greeks undermined their own phalanx. The Romans were fast to take advantage of their opponents mistakes. Strategy and tactics win battle and so wars.
not only that, but the romans had the largest cavalry force of their history, compared to the number of footsoldiers. They had recruited this gigantic cavalry in order to counter the massive cavalry forces of Hannibal. And after they defeated Hannibal, they took thousands of numidians as auxiliaries into their army. The even the seleucids who had the largest greek cavalry force, were dwarved in comparison of the huge roman cavalry during the second roman and macedonian war.
That's just plain dumb. The Battle of Cynoscephalae was fought in 197 BC, 125 years after Alexander's death (give or take some months). The reason why they didn't have the deadly Companion cavalry wasn't because Alexander's conquest depleted Macedonian horse stock, it was because they didn't have a commander of Alexander's calibre (or at least one such as Pyrrhos of Epiros) and then there was all that infighting between his generals, strategoi and satraps over who's going to inherit (and what) - which also included endless wars in Greece herself (as soon as Antipater died). That said, breeding and trading of horses in Macedonia, Thessaly etc. didn't stop when Alexander took his army and crossed the Hellespont, and, tragically, never returned. Also, Alexander didn't take all or even most of Macedon's horses with him, he left a good portion of horses and trainers at home with Antipater.
Well organized, well presented, well spoken. Subbed.
Quite an enjoyable digression on Italia!
Kudos for nailing the Greek pronunciation Metatron! Great video!!
I have been watching your channel for quite a while now and i have to say that your presentation is excellent as is your knowledge of civilizations. I am a big learner of history (Kings and Generals, History Marche, Epic history tv and others) and have studied the life of Alexander the Great since i was a child. As a Greek i admire your level of knowledge of the hellenic language and mindset. I really wish the best for this channel 🙏 Thank you, you are an enlightening individual :)
Thanks I very much appreciate
I love your language of hand movement. I've learned that Sicilians speak with such gestures. Beautiful.
Eξαιρετικά Ελληνικά Μέτατρον, εύγε!
8 minutes and 30 seconds in, one of my favorite videos in a long time! Nice work. Loved the info on Italia referring to Calabria before 42 BC, (where my family is from) love the Greek/Roman comparison topic in general, you can make as many videos as you want like this and I will watch them, 1 question you may or may not have any insight on… why does the pilum absolutely suck in “Mount and Blade 2 Bannerlord?”
Fastest click on a metatron video ever!
4:12 Holy crap, that was amazing & sounded effortless!
I also remember an ancient account of how horrified the Greeks were of the battle wounds suffered when clashing with Rome. Specifically the effectiveness of the Gladius for severing limbs and the stabbing into Greek groins in combat. Such wounds would no doubt have a psychological effect on the Greeks.
Check what the Romans experienced on the Sarissa Phalanx…
What's the source? I knew that some romans described the sight of a macedonian phalanx as frightening
Thank you so much. Best channel on UA-cam in my opinion.
The Metatron is a Sicilian? Inconceivable!
It would explain why he is so smart 😂.
Seen other content &, thank you for the unbiased way you describe history.
To any Greeks or Italians reading this, u don't have to pick which side is better or your favourite. Many Greeks have Roman blood and many Italians have Greek blood. The 2 areas have been exchanging population way earlier than the first recorded history about the 2. Both has the right to celebrate each other's achievements.
italians arent romans. italians are germans. greeks are romans. only some southern italians have some roman blood.
@@dziosdzynes7663what a load of absolute nonsense
We are all Romans here in Greece!
Rome died in 1453 in Greek Constantinople.
Another fine historical piece. Very informative. Thank you.
Man the greeks were really lucky that the roman empire didn't exist
Glad to see Metatron back up and putting out content on UA-cam.
It's always entertaining and educational.
I hope you are getting paid!
Cheers
As Greek i think at the end you said what i think is the real reason (Greece was in decline and Rome started rising).Thank you for your work.
Greece wasn’t United, the Romans were. The Greeks fought each other. Thats the simplified reason..
About war innovation, we should not forget Archimedes war machines. Machines that Romans would never imagine, or they would need many many decades to design and construct. The most important factor of Roman conquest against Greece was that Greeks were divided and they were against each other.
The second reason is the fantastic organisation of Rome.
Wonderful video. I learned much from it
Nice video but some things not mentioned I feel.
1 The Greeks lost to the Greeks working with Romans. So no Romans alone did not defeat the Greeks. Greeks lose when they get outnumbers by great numbers. Romans evaluated the weakness of Greece and took advantage of Greece weaken state when Greece battled itself which oddly was not mentioned.
2 Roman poet Horace 65 BC[ said "Captive Greece took captive her rude conqueror and brought the arts to the rustic Latin lands" This quote reflects the idea that while Rome may have conquered Greece through military power, it was Greek culture and arts that eventually had a profound influence on Roman society. Which shows Greece took over Roman which Greeks did not mind as long as the Romans Hellenized towards them despite Romans messed up many times. Romans wanted to be identified as Greeks to say they are descendants of the Greek Trojans in a way.
3 Sicily was part of Greece and so was many parts of Italy.
Greeks have been around the world over 2500 years as admitted by evidence in China, America, Easter Island, etc.
Sicily is 2 Greek words (siké & elaia) FIG & OLIVE, based on the two plants typical of the island.
4 Greek language of the educated which is why Christ and the Apostles spoke Greek as various historians say and not a dead language as some assume. As John Adams said Greek is the perfect language and a shame Americans do not speak it.
5 When people say Roman architecture, Roman engineering, Roman etc. It means during the time of Roman in what Greeks have done since Romans hired Greeks to do most things.
6 This also reflects when Byzantium fell when the Greeks left and went to Italy and help started the renascence to bring more Greek knowledge to the region.
7 Italy has a saying "una faccia una razza" (one face one race) due to how many people in Italy were Greeks which is why some DNA tests at times gets can not tell the difference.
Greek colonization had a significant lasting effect on the local genetic landscape of Southern Italy and Sicily (Magna Graecia). This shared history and genetic mixing make it challenging for DNA tests to distinguish between the two.
8 why was Greece always outnumbered? Due to barbarian nature of stealing, slaves, hareem, and oppression of its citizens. Greece did not do that to the extent others did and so it got outnumbered. In short the Machiavellian way of winning wars to make everyone appressed more than Free.
You are right. The strategy of Rome was much different, which includes the fact that it’s Rome and Greece was dozens of different states
One of the oddest and funniest things about learning Roman history, was the confusion over Hastati, Though it is so Roman to keep the name despite the reforms. Thank you for mentioning that, helped make my day! xD
One of the biggest factors in the Roman conquest of the Macedonian / Greek powers was population. By the 2nd century BCE, both sides had access to the oblong shields and javelins--the Greeks called such troops Thyreophoroi and Thorakitai, and they were armed in a manner that was very similar to the armament of the Polybian legions. What the Romans had that the Greeks lacked was depth of manpower. The late Hellenistic Greek kingdoms mostly raised their armies from mercenaries--being kingdoms, ruled by royal houses, they did not have a citizen class anymore. The Romans, though, did have a citizen army, and it gave them a huge manpower advantage. A defeat for a Hellenistic Greek kingdom left it with no army, and often with no money to hire a replacement army. A defeat for Rome meant that it needed to raise a new army, which was something it could do. This is how Rome could absorb multiple defeats in battles against enemies like Hannibal or Pyrrhus of Epirus, and still bounce back to win the war.
Using BCE is gay
@@Michael_the_Drunkardwhy
Great analysis.
I think it’s also the fact that Rome was more interested in fighting in general so they continued to develop their military tactics much more than anyone else
@@yoeyyoey8937 Because the dates we currently use were invented by the Roman Church. Gregorian calendar. Those priests calculated the dates VEERY accurately, and it would be tough doing that even in our current times. So it's pretty disrespectful throwing BC out to appear more "scientific", when it's religious to begin with.
Kudos, good presentation lad. I must watch again.
Both Italy and Greece has really good food .
Big thumbs up
In the end the two cultures merged into one and we have a half Greek half Serbian with Greek surname Greek speaking Roman emperor defending Constantine's city in 1453.
*half-Greek and half-Illyrian. The Serbs would come in the 6th century.
@@JokerX350 Serbian as in "born in today's Serbia" (which had a different name back then - the Serbians came in later) not ethnic Serbians or Slavs. They were Romans. Justinian for example was born in the 5th century A.D. and the Slavs came in about the 6th century A.D.
WE WUZ GREEKS AND SERBIANS
WE WUZ ALSO ROMANS
GERMANS CANT BE ROMANS CUZ WEZ SAID SO
@@Michael_the_Drunkard1453 was the 15th century.
Outstanding work, mate. Great video.
Thanks a lot
The Short Answer: Disunity
Greeks were used to fight other Greeks..
A United Hellenic World, with all their resources, manpower, & technology would have not only defeated Rome, but Conquered the West as well! 👍🏻
Roman diplomacy too. Local Greek allies of the Romans (Aetolians, Pergamese, Rhodians etc.) played a key role in the wars (e.g. the Aetolians at Kynoskephalae, Pergamese at Magnesia)
@@SockAccount111 Use, that’s true! But it was probably easy for them, considering they were already fighting each other like crazy at that time! 😂👍🏻
Love your channel. Keep the facts coming!
Italia comes from the Oscan "víteliú" meaning "Land of bull calves."
Thank you again for another extremely informative and well put-together video Metatron. The Greek was a favourable add-on. Ευχαριστούμε!
Hello Great stuff. I got to point out some things though
1. According to sources Rome's population was much higher than Greece at the time which would have a major impact.
2. At the point Rome went off to fight in the Macedonian wars They had already fought the Greeks and Greek style armies for at least a century while the Greeks had no such experience fighting the romans. (Persians and Asians pretty much fought the polar opposite of how romans fought)
Basically what you said but with a little extra insight.
Nice points
The United Hellenic World would have steam-rolled the Romans. To think otherwise, is delusional!
i know you most likely won't see this comment but i love these videos. i could sit and listen to you talk about this stuff all day brother. you have a way of making everything you speak about really interesting and it has a way of drawing me in like very little else in life has. i think about being a kid in school and wonder... if more of the teachers i had could do this i would've paid better attention and probably graduated. keep on making kickass ass videos bud!
This was very informative. Thank you!
So it's pasta versus Moussaka!
Impressed by your Greek as well as knowledge and viewpoints. Thumbs up.
Could be worse if you were calabrian... funny how so many people always put about 600 years into 1 bag, while we witnessed how fast inovation can take place; pocketable mini computers are with us for roughly 15 years now and while most keyboard warriors will use those to watch and comment using a touchscreen, we still call it a phone
I always love your long videos keep ‘em coming!