The Tropaeum Traiani in Dacia portrays most Roman legions as wearing chainmail and scale armor during Trajan's 2nd century AD conquest of Dacia. Chainmail was also worn by the Romans since the early-mid Republican era. So the Romans never really got rid of their old armors and simply increased the use of their older armors.
I would also think that the amount of craftsmen with "barbarian background" (either free or slaves) was rising - through both migration and enslavement. As there was no standard blueprint, they simply produced what they knew and were comfortable with - thus increasing the amount of equipment of "barbarian" style.
Im pretty sure the Romans did have the standard blueprints though. I thought the general change in the military dress was down to downsizing and cost cutting, The Empire could still affrod a huge ammount even at its lowest, but simpler. Easier to maintain gear was what they needed in a rapidly changing army. What's the point of giving Goths handmade Sementata armour if they're just going to abandon you, or not be your mercenaries in a year or so. Give them cheap and effective stuff.
Yeah individually it was costly, but it cleaned itself according to friends I have that acutally use it, and in general is alot more easy to maintain, cant say for certain for scale. Segmentata was a problem because it was complex. And when you're running a factory something that slows down the process becomes expensive. So while I think it was cheaper to produce. The time it took made it more expensive. Scale and Mail could be made en masse. It never fully replaced Mail, you're right there@@thodan467
@@lost6516Mercenaries came with their own equipment and fighting style. If you have to equip and train them on Roman equipment, they become auxillaries. As an example, Ceasar made use of both Gallic auxillaries/foederati and Germanic mercenaries. (admittedly, his foederati also came in their own equipment). I'm not sure if chain mail is really cheaper than lorica segmentata. A few plates and some leather or thousands of tiny rings. My guess is that chain mail requires much more labor to produce. It's also quite unlikely that the barbarians had much armor to begin with; so donating them some armor/weaponry was more of a honorable gift than strategic logistics.
I've seen concept art of what Rome would look like if the Empire still existed today, but I always find myself nit-picking certain details like people still wearing togas or tunics, neon lights and signs referencing only famous Roman themes like "Anthony & Cleopatra's bar & grill", "Cicero's Department store" or "Caesar's car wash" etc. I just find it a little too contrived and obvious. If the Empire had lasted up to the 21st century, some things would stay the same, such as seeing "SPQR" drain covers in the modern city of Rome but most aspects of the Roman Empire would have changed drastically over that time.
That Rome would have probably been pretty similar to how modern China looks today. It would need to be highly centralized and probably still authoritarian to keep cohesion but still very different from to its aesthetics of its imperial days. Nor would the world have had Orthodox, Western and Islamic successor civilizations.
Exactly this. Romans who lived during the Punic Wars would have very little in common with Romans who lived under Diocletian or Constantine. It gets more removed every century from that norm.
I have written such an alternate history scenario in which the Western Roman Empire could be saved by an alliance of some old families under a guy I named Silvianus Torquatus Maximianus who was successful when his predecessor Maiorianus failed. Fast forward through history and all its crisis: Rome managed to become a super power again and rules the most parts of the Mediterranean sea as well as provinces like Honcong, Goa, Florida, Arizona, California, Pacifica and Africa Australis Romanum. It is a member of the NATO but isn't very active in that alliance. They care more about their own alliance with former provinces in form of the Foederatium Romanum which functions as a mixture between the British Commonwealth and the European Union plus the NATO. My main objective was when I started that project in the mid 1990s to figure out how a Roman Empire with at least partially the ancient mind set would react to modern crisis like climate change, terrorism, the two world wars of the 20th century, what such Romans would think about the Nazi regime in Germany and of course about all the stupidity from the political fringes from the right AND the left. I wrote about 180 pages of the alternate history and about 480 pages of the detailed world building of the Roman Empire in its present day state with its 93 provinces, a territory of a bit more than nine million square kilometers without the Antarctica territory and its 725 million inhabitants from a dozen major and hundreds of mid-sized to smaller nationalities. Here are some characteristics of my alternate Rome: - Like in real Italy Italian became the dominant language but the Romans remained Romans. Latin in its ecclesiastical form is still used at the emperors court, in the western Church and in the military as well as in some highly traditionalist aristocratic families. - After the reconquest of the eastern parts formerly part of the Eastern Roman empire from the Ottomans, the Hellenic Romans retuned back to the now only Roman Empire again and retained their status as full Roman citizen. A Gaius Ovidius Severus, a Roberto Francesco Lodola, a Dmitris Theofilis Maggidis are fully equally Romans. - In the old aristocratic families, the old Latin names still are dominating like from the Gens Severi which could be saved by the Gens Iuliana when the then Iulian Pater Familias managed to save Geta from the murder attempt by Caracalla. - In 2010, the Romans finalized the reconquest of some lost Eastern Roman parts after the war with Turkey after a conflict between Octavius Secundus and then Turkish prime minister Recep Erdogan escalated. They took back Constantinopolis, Trapezunt and some other areas. - When Imperator Caesar Octavius Secundus ascended to the throne in 1981 CE when he was 25 years old, he as a fan of the classical pronunciation of Latin ordered the court to revert to this pronunciation. - In October 2021 after the most severe phase of the Corona Pandemics Octavius Secundus announced that he intends to resign from his position as the emperor on October 2036 making room for his son. In October 2036, Octavius Secundus will be 80.5 years old. - Most cities retained or got back the old ancient names when Rome reconquewred the Mediterranean sea again from the 15th century CE onward. - The military still uses the Legions, Cohorts, Manipels, Centurae as military units. - The service uniform looks like the real history Italian ones but there are no Carabinieri, their duties are executed by the Pretorians who wear an uniform like the ones from the real world Carabinieris when paroling the streets. - In their military parades (pompa militare) they wear historical uniforms too like the lorica segmentata, the lorica squamata, the one used in the 16th century which looks like from Spain which never existed in my alternate history. - The Roman military organized the whole Earth into 13 military provinces even if they are outside of the empire like with the US-American military organization. Each of those military regions is commandeered by a Magister Militare, the newest of these military regions is the military province of Eastern Europe as a reaction to the Russian war of aggression against the Ukraine which is highly supported by Rome. - They wear modern 21st century style fashion made by the fashion labels Armani, Iulianus Fashion Corporatus. - Like with the real world Italians they love to dress sharply and very well, --> Bella figura. - The two dominant religions are the western Catholic church with about 30 % followers and the Cultus Deorum, the older religion with about 30.5 % followers. The eastern Hellenic church has about 11 % followers and the remaining 28.5 % are divided among other resurfaced ancient religions as well as other Christian fractions plus some Jewish Romans and a tiny Muslim Roman community. - Aside of the ancient cuisine still available in some specialized restaurants, modern Romans have a cuisine which strongly resembles the real Italian, so, they have pizza and pasta, picata, saltim-bocca, insalata mista, etc. "Luigi e Claudio Pizzeria" or "Hernando & Stefanos American BBQ" can be found. - To show that they belong to an almost three millennia old country, many Roman companies uses old Latin for their names. - They have modern cars like from Masserati or Severus Autocurrus Corporatus (which switches to electric cars) or Dmitri-Mobile S.a.r.L. or Taurinorum-Mobile INC. - Of course they have a modern computer industry like that from the company Severus Electronica Corporatus which is the Roman Empires equivalent of the US-American Apple Inc. - The Romans have their own social media networks like EgoVideoSum (a UA-cam like video hosting platform) or ArsPhotographica (a kind of a more sophisticated Instagram). - The cities looks like real world Italian cities mixed with some elements from New York City. The newly found city of Leptis Magna Creek east of the older mega city of Leptis Magna has a Dubai style of architecture mixed with some more traditionalist ones. - In Rome itself due to the 6th century Gothic Wars never happened in my scenario all ancient buildings, the temples, the basilicae, the Circus MAximus, the old imperial Fori are fully intact since empoeror Silvianus Torquatus Maximianus ordered the full restoration of all old temples. He even gave an imperial order that the old religion needs to be tolerated. - Currently, the Roman Empire has three space stations in the Earths orbit, the PAX-ROMANA (the civilian states operated one), the PARADISO DELLE STELLE (a privately operated by the Solaris Corporatus Nuovo) and ARES-VNVS, the military space station. In the night sky, you could see them as three points arranged as the corners of an even triangle. - The empire even has a permanently manned moon base. - On April 2024 they start their permanent Mars settlement program when the launch window for an interplanetary flight to Mars is good enough.
@@michaelstaengl1349 I love alternate history, but it doesn't really make sense to have major deep time changes and have other modern events largely unchanged. You're not going to get a Third Reich when the First Reich was an attempt to revive the empire that in your scenario didn't fall in the first place, for instance. I do like the idea of exploring how a modern Roman (or Byzantine) state would look in the modern world, either after a history of constant independence or one more like China where you had periods of foreign conquest that resulted in the absorption or expulsion of the conquerors. I do like the theme of mixing classical and modern cultural elements, exploring what would survive (or be revived, the way some elements of classical architecture came back between the renaissance and 19th century) and what would be replaced permanently.
Another big factor was that cavalry got much more important during the crysis of the third century. Before, infantry was much more important. Fun fact: Already during the reign of Diocletian, Roman soldiers looked like the armies of the early middle ages. Only experts can distinguish between the cavalry of Charlemagne and the cavalry of Diocletian, for most people they look the same.
@@matejbabjak9678 As far as I know, stirrups became more and more common in the third and fourth century. It's a prerequisite for an efficient cavalry soldier with a spear/ lance. Without it, you have troubles staying on your horse when you hit an enemy. At least from what I have read, this topic is still debated as far as I know...
"Only experts can distinguish between the cavalry of Charlemagne and the cavalry of Diocletian, for most people they look the same"...thats absolute nonsense.Infantry continued to be most important part of Roman army long after diocletian and Roman soldiers of that time look medieval to you just because you are used to see just one version of the Roman army-that most commonblyx depicted and imitated cliché of 1-early 2nd centtury.
Reenactor here. I’ve re-enacted both late antique and early antique and I can tell you with certainty late antiquity is far more aesthetic and comfortable. There’s a reason we started to wear pants!
I could also imagine them starting to wear trousers simply because the climate became colder. So they started adopting the warmer clothing style from Germanic tribes in the colder north.
@@holeeshi9959not really, but considering how many germans that enlisted in the late roman army. Which they used pants all the time.... it very easy to say they adopted it from germans....
Since the late 1st century AD. You can see that same kind of changes in Chinese history. For example the Chinese military equipment from the early Ming Dynasty were inherited from the Tang and Song Dynasty with a bit of Middle Eastern influences due to the previous Mongol Conquest, however in the late Ming Dynasty, European equipment were widely replicated with modifications and adopted such as German Gothic Plate Cuirass, English Royal Arsenal 42 pounder Culverin cannons and Swedish Matchlock muskets. The Chinese in the late Ming Dynasty era even adopted early linear tactics maximize the potential of European firearms. Also, the Chinese clothing from Early Ming Dynasty era look similar to the Late Song Dynasty era, but these gradually look different during the Late Ming Dynasty.
I think Middle Eastern armour in the Middle Ages (Mongol Conquest period) was also influenced by Northern China. The Mongols brought over the Jin/Juchen style armour to the Middle East. Mamelukes in Egypt had similar armour styles to the Mongols they were fighting.
I dont know how many people can think, that a roman from 20 AD looked the same as a roman from 400 AD. Of course clothes change during the history. It would be the same as saying people from 1600 AD had the same clothes as we now.
A chillier climate seems to have been noted for the time. That did not help agricultural surpluses which had to support a military which was longer seizing great volumes of loot in Persia and Carthage.
That was also certainly a factor, although I doubt that it was ever really warm in northern Britannia and Gallia :) But yes, climate certainly also must have had some sort of influence, possibly explaining the higher prevalence of trousers. Although I have the suspicion that the cultural influence played a greater role.
Sebastian, I really admire, appreciate your passion for this strange, fascinating, yet oft overlooked historical subject. To me, the Fall of Rome & the French Revolution are the two most confusing historical events. Thank you for your efforts.
@@Beyonder1987 How so? I would say the clothing present clear forward progress. With more elements, like trousers and long sleaves. Wider array of patterns and colors. Clearly more developed than a simple tunics. Also leather shoes which gave way to the sandals were pure improvement. Togas were ceremonial clothing - from the times when clothing was much simpler in construction. Also the armor and weapons: Cavalry became much more developed in the later roman times. It was the common trend in Europe. As metallurgy progressed, swords became longer. Together with spears which became more of a focus, and shields became lighter as well - this was all done to adapt to this new more mobile and cavalry heavy combat. A sticking point for a lot of people is lorica segmentata. But I would argue that it's over rated. And it was in fact chosen because it enables mass production and easy fitting , not because it would be superior compared to lorica squamata or hamata. And let's not forget that lorica hamata progressed as well compared to Republican times. It covered more body and was made of better steal on average. So all this is why I would not call later Roman army regressive. But progressive if anything. Rome did not "fell" because it's army would be inadequate. It "fell" because of political reasons. Late Roman army was excellent. And later Byzantine army continued this trend. It had one of the best armies during the middle ages. However the gap between the Romans and other cultures and nations wasn't as wide. As for centuries Romanization took hold over much of Europe. And Germanic, Slavic and Middle eastern people have copied and used Roman technology. It was this technology that they used during the middle ages. Even the Roman language - Latin - was standard amongst them and served as a lingua franca during post roman period.
I think it's more cyclical than regressive, to a point. They went from spears and shields, to Gladius and larger shields with heavy armor, then longer swords and different shields, then back to spears and shields. Cavalry was the catalyst for this cycle, I believe. First it was the phalanx that led to new tactics and strategies, then slowly it became all about how to employ and defend against cavalry. Obviously there is way more involved than what I said, but you can probably see what I'm saying.
@@Member_zero the clasical Roman empire of Augustus era was a far bigger and professional army with a huge logistics. Christian Holy Roman empire was smaller, it had many mercenaries. The Armour was weaker. Nothing progressive, it was an empire that was destined to fail. This weakness allowed barbarians and others such as Persians to continue to get stronger over time. The Romans did influence later empires but it too was influenced by other that came before it such as Greeks. Thats just the way its been
The use of longer swords (Spatha) hints to different tactics and more loosend up infantry formations as well. You need more space for movement for the individual soldier.
i would agree partially. But I dont think it has to do with fighting tactics going from tight to loosened formations. On the Contrary, when the roman empire started to employ wide spread cavalry units (and also faced foreign forces employing mostly cavalry) they had to transform their infantry from a shock infantry type (Pilum, Gladius) to a unit that can effectively repell horse charges. this was done by replacing the pilum with a longer spear. spears favor phalanx-like, tight formations. the sword (gladius) has lost its position as an integral part of infantry tactics i.e. throwing the pilum and then crash into the enemy formation with your gladius. Now you need a sword that is useful when shit hits the fan i.e. when your formation broke and you find yourself now in a chaotic melee.
That's flat out wrong and based on an already debunked myth that simply won't die away on the internet: 1-The first wrong assumption is legionaries supposedly using the spatha as primary weapon. Easily falsifiable when considering the the actual primary weapon they switched to was the SPEAR, which requires soldiers to actually form TIGHTER formations to maximize the surface area covered by spear tips, capitalizing on their quirk of not needing as much space as swords to be used. The Spatha was relegated to being a side arm. 2-The second wrong assumption is that Principate Era legionaries fought in extremely tight formations and only used gladii to thrust. In the contrary, and we know thanks to several sources such as Polybius, Caesar and Vegetius, that legionaries needed at least three square feet of surface to properly fight. Legionary formations weren NOT slow moving box squares of shields with swords poking out, but dynamic and fast squares that could outmaneuver other infantry kinds and easily switch between projectiles and melee combat. You cannot have legionaries throwing a pilum far away from the second+line, rotate with the rank behind or fighting if they're too tight. 3-The third wrong assumption is the Gladius not being used to cut, which we know from the descriptions of the Punic wars and experimental testing to be bollocks. Gladii could cut very well and was feared for it, ita mode of use being primarily in very tight swings. Spatha, on the other hand, could very well be used to thrust, much like later medieval arming swords. Nothing suggests it was only used from wide swings. 4-Spear and shield combat was not a barbarian way of fighting. It was the way Greek Hoplites and the Republican Romans fought themselves before and after introducing the Gladius and Pilum being overall the most used heavy infantry configuration used in Antiquity by civilized peoples among Egyptians, Assyrians, Persians....etc. 5-Fighting barbarian raids implied also fighting horsemen, which moved way faster than infantry and were a major hazard for unescorted Roman infantry wielding only swords and javelins. Cavalry was increasingly more armored and sported bigger horses, which required Rome to upgrade its own way of fighting.
@@MrAlepedroza You could even go so far as saying the spear is the default melee arm of war throughout all history until the end of the pike and shot era.
I wondered about that myself, but if you tell the average person that they are going to look at you like you're crazy. To be honest there was definitely some Slavic and native Balkan influence as well though.
yup, that´s what crossed my mind 4 hours ago... I paused the video at min 13.32 and had to search for pictures (internet, books that I have, etc), as I had to be sure that my imagination is not playing wild. It doesn´t. And not only on menswear, but on woman´s also. It´s fascinating how some of the imbrodery follows almost the same rules. I could talk hours about it, but - don´t worry - I won´t, I´m not an expert and duty calls somewhere else :D And yes, one can see the influence all over the Balkans (plus the Slavic and Turkish influences, there are 1700+/- we are talking about). Ty for your comments!
I honestly like the late Roman ridge helmet a lot more than the older designs. It looks way more stylish, and with the crest attached it has 100% Roman vibe to it.
The clothing styles within the Roman Empire were diverse, reflecting the cultural influences and resources of different regions. In the eastern provinces, such as Syria, Egypt, and Anatolia, silk fabric played a prominent role in clothing. Silk, with its luxurious texture and vibrant colors, became a symbol of wealth and refinement. Silk garments, adorned with intricate patterns and embroidery, were favored by the elite. There were inumerous regional variations in clothing in the Roman Empire and this enhances our understanding of the rich cultural tapestry that existed in that nation.
@@greyfells2829 I have no strong feelings about Russia one way or another..because I don’t believe the Msm narrative about them. It’s hard to take someone serious who’s from Brazil and virtue signals for Ukraine..or Russia for that matter.
The most massive change is the change from the Short Sword to the Spear as the primary weapon. The Short Sword as a primary weapon is unique in history, whereas the Spear and to a lesser extent the Pike was usual in European history.
Also eastern Rome had it's own fashion revolutions in XI centuries. They wore varied clothes and hats unlike the frescoes, and comparable to colorful fashion of italy. Remaining frescoes skew the clothing picture because they depict just the "suit and tie" of the medieval roman fashion.
Another great topic. What I've always found surprising is that the ancient Greeks and Romans seemed not to have winter clothes. Yes, Greece and Italy are relatively warm, but they're not in the tropics. Besides, the Roman empire stretched far north. Yet, there is no evidence of the Romans wearing warm clothing. Or am I mistaken? It is only toward the end of the Roman empire that we start seeing warmer clothing. The Middle Ages, however, were the opposite. Judging by whatever visual evidence we have, medieval people dressed in very warm clothes even in the summer. Wealthier people wore fur and gloves year round.
They did have special clothing for warm comfort even in classical times.They knew(and used)large winter scarfs and gloves,cloaks a led wrappings and of course also extra tunics.
There was of course the famous Birrus Britannicus, a woolen garment which as the name suggests, originated in Britannia, and was well known across the Roman Empire.
OMG, another very high quality video. The Republic and the early Empire are so imprinted in the brains of modern humans that we are/were completely unaware that something other than our highly romanticized fantasies even existed. Let's give all the credit to Hollywood, the seller of the stuff with which our dreams are made.
I would not consider lorica hamata to be a downgrade to the lorica segmentata: it is likely way easier to repair since if some leather straps and hooks fail, a big portion of your armour fails with it while replacing some rings to fill holes should be easy enough. Which provides better protection is very hard to „prove“ with static experiments. In the end roman practicality won and the hamata prevailed.
Since yesterday I've been thinking about this and I've come to the conclusion that the Romans, while they were still united in a single people, never lost their identity, they just improved it, we can see this both in the clothes and in the military equipment of the late period, either through the Germanic influences that modified the aesthetics of the Empire in the fourth and fifth centuries as well as in the oriental influences that, added to the previous innovations, they have taken a greater leap in creativity, especially in the Constantinople imperial court. And speaking of which, I feel that there is now a lack of a video detailing the evolution of fashion and military equipment in the eastern part of the empire from the time of Theodosius to the time of Justinian, basically showing how much the empire has been orientalizing itself over time. Generally that's it, thank you so much for your content, Sebastian, may God bless you and see you next time!
3:12 "Berkasovo" type helmets, named after the village of Berkasovo (~ Bear-cass-owo) in modern day Serbia (but at that time in the wider vicinity of Sirmium) where the famous early 4th century AD helmets were found.
Spata isn't a "Longsword", Longsword is a category of a two handed or 1,5 handed (Bastard sword) medieval swords. Spata is an ancestor of medieval "normal" one-handed swords (aka Arming swords). Spata is long in a comparison to Xiphos or Gladius but it's not a "Longsword". I blame Dungeons & Dragons for outright lying to people about historical weapons. D&D made Longsword a "one-handed weapon" and everyone became confused.
The Roman Empire was a military empire, meaning that its identity was derived from its army, when the Roman army was mostly Italic the Italic identity was dominant, and when the army became barbaric from the Balkans and Germans and influenced by the Persians, the Roman Empire also became dominated by the Balkan-Germanic character with a Persian touch which was more clear in the east
The gradual merging of the Romans and the Germanic folk over centuries created the super creative and dynamic Western world that we know today - something of which we should all be very proud.
@@daguroswaldson257 are you American ,are 'nt you ? In this case I understand your pedantic and disingenous comment which for european standards would be just hilarious. This is a history channel anyway, not a religious one, if you want to discuss about theology and christology there are plenty of channels much more suited for your main interersts. No need to troll our community with unrequested and stupid injunctions. I thank whom I want.
The Tropaeum Traiani in Dacia portrays most Roman legions as wearing chainmail and scale armor during Trajan's 2nd century AD conquest of Dacia. Chainmail was also worn by the Romans since the early-mid Republican era. So the Romans never really got rid of their old armors and simply increased the use of their older armors.
you got yourself a new subscriber! YT recommended this to me and im glad to find something less talked about. I'm interested In combining roman clothing and armor whith medieval ones, but the late roman aesthetic is just that, so I'm checking out the other 2 videos and after a quick look at your playlists I think I can learn quite a bit from this channel, since late rome is not something I know too well
The real question is why are we expecting the romans not to change their fashion in 400 years. We have stereotypical images of rome in our mind created by pop culture detached from reality. For example nobody considers the English from the 2000s to no longer be the same people because they dress and behave differently when compared to the people from the 1600s.
Your channel is amazing and one of a kind. It answers so many questions and explores things I've wondered about. Hope these $10 help out. Perhaps I can afford to do more when my paychecks start coming in. Gratias tibi!
The trajectory of the helmets is quite interesting. They went from single-piece with the classic "Imperial" type to segmented construction in the ridge and spangenhelm, which would remain pretty standard in Europe until the 9th or 10th century. It would certainly be much easier to construct a helmet from sections as opposed to forming from one sheet once the thickness passed a certain point, but I don't know what the typical characteristics of either type were in that regard. It might also be related to simple production efficiency; higher output with less required skill, and probably less scrap. Better to only lose a quarter or half of a helmet to mistake than a complete unit. I imagine something similar factored into the phasing out of segmented armor for mail and scale.
Also the classical Roman helmet is principally a Bronze design, while there are iron examples of it afaik. It is very typically for a new material, that at first old proven designs are used, before ones that work better with the new materials are develeoped.
Also just fashion changes over time. Wondering why Romans of the 4th century didn't wear the same things as Romans in the 1st century would be like wondering why Americans in the 21st century don't wear panniers and powdered wigs.
just donated 5$. never donated to a channel before but you and metetron are awesome but i only donated to you. hope you continue for a long time. thank you
It honestly would be kind of weird if they hadn't changed during those centuries. Just think about what people went around wearing in the 1700 hundreds compared to now. It's a long time, and I think it's pretty unimaginable not to change.
The initial Roman military success was in using tools and tactics different than the barbarians. I understand that outside influences changed the Roman equipment etc, but I wonder what benefit if any that it actually gave them in the field. I can tell you why early Imperial equipment had an advantage over the enemies of Rome, but I can't tell you what made late Roman weapons,armor, or tactics exceptional.
My understanding is that the earlier tactics was more infantry based. However, Roman adapted a more Calvary based military after seeing the success of the Huns and the Persians. A good infantry will almost always lose to a similar size Calvary force.
The interesting question, looking at how Roman people and culture changed as it expanded into central Europe, Asia, and Africa; but Rome probably started as a settlement was built on Palatine Hill, so how would Rome have imported culture from neighboring peoples (e.g. the Etruscans, Greeks, Latins, etc.) as they expanded into the neighboring territories?
For the Roman Army, there is one constant it's had over its history: Adoption of foreign influence and change. The Gladius has origins in Spain. Gallic influence in chainmail and helmet designs even during the Republic. The Romans once fought in Greek Phalanx style, fought their longtime rivals the Samnites with it. The Samnites fought in a looser style, beating the Romans numerous times. The Romans changed how their army fought once again and borrowed from the Samnite way of fighting. The Maniple was born. Fast forward and the Roman Army would also adopt the cataphract heavy cavalry they were encountering in the Middle East.
I wouldn't say that arms and armour were drastically different tbh; the Spatha and the older Gladius Hispaniensis were about the same length, the oval shields of the late empire were reminiscent of the oval Scuta of the Republican legions, the disappearance of the segmentata just meant mail was the primary armour as it was for the republic, and even the late roman spangenhelm type helmets aren't to dissimilar from the montefortino and coolus type helmets worn by the Republican legions. Throw-in the more widespread use of spears as in the days of the Manipular legions, it's arguable that Roman arms and armour took a circular course from the Early Republic through the Late Republic and Principate, back to where it started with the Dominate.
Have you ever wondered why early Americans look so different than modern Americans? WHY? What HAPPENED?! Time rolls on and fashions and armaments change. Duh.
Except early Romans were culturally and religiously different than later Romans. Unlike America which still has the same constitution. When Christianity took over, it was a slow decline of Latin Roman culture and people
Just compare how Europians looked in 1724 and how we look today. For commoners what we consider folkclothing today was normal clothing back then. For the elite we streight up consider men in sockpants with wigs to be ridiculous.
My understanding is the Eastern Roman Empire embraced certain cultural influences from different parts of the empire, like the _braccae_ of the Celts, Scythians, Sarmatians and Parthians were adopted by the Eastern Roman Empire, and soldiers began wearing pants essentially because, pants were more versatile for the purpose they were meant to serve, no different than Byzantium adopting cataphract armor from the east.
Presumably like every army 'somebody made a decision' and the uniform was changed. Civilian fashion often follows military when the troops start to wear their uniform about time and maybe at home because trousers are more comfortable than a short skirt. Military fashion will often take items from other armies including their enemies if they're deemed more practical and/or comfortable. Military uniform is also influenced by military doctrine and operational environments; a short tunic may be practical on the plains of Syria but when you're skirmishing in the woods trousers and a long spear are probably more practical.
When the Romans took to wearing pants, they preferred tight fitting leggings that showed off their muscles, as opposed to the baggy trousers worn by the Persians or Avars, etc. Are you saying these leggings are not in fact trousers?
@@histguy101 leggings are trousers because they have a crotch. Hooses don't have one, because hooses are long stockings, sewn together at the gluteal zone for convenience - to allow abandonment of stockings belts and suspension usage. Clothing is classified by its function and evolution, not forms like tightness or smth.
In one way it was a continuous process: the 'original' Roman equipment was copied from numerous peoples such as the gladius from Spain. They were very practical and used what worked. Not surprising that they repeated the process in the late Empire, even adopting a new religion. It might have been retro to see the armor of plates in the 4th century, but not as much as people think: armor being expensive, the old stuff would continue in use until junked, and few could afford to have the latest armor; enemy armor would be harvested from prisoners and the dead, etc. It is documented that Englishmen showed up for the English Civil War (17th Century) with weapons and armor from the Wars of the Roses, 150 years prior, so life cycles could be quite long.
"When and why citizens of american empire stopped wearing gigachad hats and suits and fall into wearing barbaric sandals and shorts prior to it's downfall under the onslaught of zoomer tribes" (c) history channel on Spacetube, 3024 AD
Even in the earlier eras (1st-3rd centuries), the soldiers of the Roman army were wearing fleece-lined boots and trousers when stationed in the colder parts of central and northern Europe.
Is like in our Western Civilization, our actual clothing style began in 1950-1960, before that all dressed with suit and tie, in diferent forms that began in 1800’s we don’t dress has the 1700’s fashion with wigs, trouaers to the knee, and ties made of lace
One thing to point out is that lorica hamata was the most used armour throught the roman period. Segmentata was used for a very small amount of time in comparision. So the sterotypical image of a roman legion all decked with segmentata isnt historically accurate at all. It would be mostly lorica hamata with some instances of segmentata.
I think the Romans have adopted the trousers (Braccae Celtica) since 100 BC because of their constant love and hate interactions with the Celts and Germanic peoples from the North like the Cimbrians and Arvernii. 2nd point, the Romans also quickly adopted anything from their neighbors as long as they saw it as comfortable, innovative, and above all very useful. 3rd, the Romans, since their encounters with the Scythians in Dacia, found the Scythian-style Lorica Squamata armor very effective against melee and missile attacks and far sturdier than the bulky Segmentata, hence adopting the Scythian-style Lorica Squamata.
It’s almost as though many people take for granted that there ought to have been a natural difference between the Early and Late Empire and ignore the intricacies of why things changed.
6:07 i'm confused about your statement here: lorica segmentata was actually much cheapier and easier to produce than chain mail. Chain mail had many favourable charateristics and were superior besides the high cost of production
The change from rectangular shields to round shields and from gladius to sparta suggest a change in formation tactics. Do we know anything about it? For example, was this intended because of new enemies or forced because of so many foreign soldiers in the later Roman army.
It was actually germans who adopted spathae from Romans. Roman infantry adopted spathae in the end of 2 century, Germans adopted spathae from Romans in the 3 century
@@paveltukeev4832 wasnt the sparta, a longer one hand sword, very well known with the Germans even BC? I am pretty sure the Germans who Julius Caesar fought during his campaings didnt use gladii.
@@juanzulu1318 no, Celts used spathae, Germans, according to Tacitus, used spears. All German spathae in archaeology appears in 3 century and there were either directly bought from Romans (Roman stamps on the blades) or were inspired by them.
@@paveltukeev4832 hmm, ok. But I would suggest that we should not assume that Germans didnt know the concept of a sword. If this premise is true what type did they use then? I would conclude that it was most probably a longer one like that of the celts rather than a short sword of the gladius type.
@@juanzulu1318 with low industrial base long swords are very expensive, available only to the German nobles, insignificant minority in comparison to common freeholders, having only shields, spears, javelins and knifes. And even nobility fought with spears in shieldwall, switching to swords only if spears or formation was broken
People often fail to appreciate the great sweep of time involved, as the Roman Empire was incredibly long lived. Take for instance the Province of Britannia. It was under Roman control for the best part of four centuries. For comparison, look at how the military dress and weapons of Oliver Cromwell's New Model Army compares to the Modern British Army. It is utterly and completely different. Roman dress and arms would have evolved in a similar way, albeit not quite as rapidly.
The late republican/early imperial iconic roman clothing and armour was the high point for me and I bet for many others as well. For Hollywood as well :D
The time scale is huge. I mean, look at a ww1 soldier and a modern one. And that is nothing compare to the Roman Empire's existence. Same for civilian fashion. Change happens slowly, mixing culture, different needs, fashion, etc... nothing is static.
🤗 Join our Patreon community: www.patreon.com/Maiorianus
Hi I am a fan of you and your channel and I wanted to ask if and when you will make a video about Jews in the late Roman Empire
I just subscribed with all notifications. Great channel. Keep it up. Thanks
The Tropaeum Traiani in Dacia portrays most Roman legions as wearing chainmail and scale armor during Trajan's 2nd century AD conquest of Dacia. Chainmail was also worn by the Romans since the early-mid Republican era. So the Romans never really got rid of their old armors and simply increased the use of their older armors.
I would also think that the amount of craftsmen with "barbarian background" (either free or slaves) was rising - through both migration and enslavement. As there was no standard blueprint, they simply produced what they knew and were comfortable with - thus increasing the amount of equipment of "barbarian" style.
Excellent observation. Yes, I agree, that certainly makes sense!
Im pretty sure the Romans did have the standard blueprints though. I thought the general change in the military dress was down to downsizing and cost cutting, The Empire could still affrod a huge ammount even at its lowest, but simpler. Easier to maintain gear was what they needed in a rapidly changing army. What's the point of giving Goths handmade Sementata armour if they're just going to abandon you, or not be your mercenaries in a year or so. Give them cheap and effective stuff.
@@lost6516
Mail is not cheap and i doubt scale was, buz AFAIK the segmentata never replaced mail really
Yeah individually it was costly, but it cleaned itself according to friends I have that acutally use it, and in general is alot more easy to maintain, cant say for certain for scale. Segmentata was a problem because it was complex. And when you're running a factory something that slows down the process becomes expensive. So while I think it was cheaper to produce. The time it took made it more expensive. Scale and Mail could be made en masse. It never fully replaced Mail, you're right there@@thodan467
@@lost6516Mercenaries came with their own equipment and fighting style. If you have to equip and train them on Roman equipment, they become auxillaries.
As an example, Ceasar made use of both Gallic auxillaries/foederati and Germanic mercenaries. (admittedly, his foederati also came in their own equipment).
I'm not sure if chain mail is really cheaper than lorica segmentata. A few plates and some leather or thousands of tiny rings. My guess is that chain mail requires much more labor to produce.
It's also quite unlikely that the barbarians had much armor to begin with; so donating them some armor/weaponry was more of a honorable gift than strategic logistics.
I've seen concept art of what Rome would look like if the Empire still existed today, but I always find myself nit-picking certain details like people still wearing togas or tunics, neon lights and signs referencing only famous Roman themes like "Anthony & Cleopatra's bar & grill", "Cicero's Department store" or "Caesar's car wash" etc. I just find it a little too contrived and obvious. If the Empire had lasted up to the 21st century, some things would stay the same, such as seeing "SPQR" drain covers in the modern city of Rome but most aspects of the Roman Empire would have changed drastically over that time.
That Rome would have probably been pretty similar to how modern China looks today. It would need to be highly centralized and probably still authoritarian to keep cohesion but still very different from to its aesthetics of its imperial days. Nor would the world have had Orthodox, Western and Islamic successor civilizations.
Exactly this. Romans who lived during the Punic Wars would have very little in common with Romans who lived under Diocletian or Constantine. It gets more removed every century from that norm.
I have written such an alternate history scenario in which the Western Roman Empire could be saved by an alliance of some old families under a guy I named Silvianus Torquatus Maximianus who was successful when his predecessor Maiorianus failed.
Fast forward through history and all its crisis:
Rome managed to become a super power again and rules the most parts of the Mediterranean sea as well as provinces like Honcong, Goa, Florida, Arizona, California, Pacifica and Africa Australis Romanum. It is a member of the NATO but isn't very active in that alliance. They care more about their own alliance with former provinces in form of the Foederatium Romanum which functions as a mixture between the British Commonwealth and the European Union plus the NATO.
My main objective was when I started that project in the mid 1990s to figure out how a Roman Empire with at least partially the ancient mind set would react to modern crisis like climate change, terrorism, the two world wars of the 20th century, what such Romans would think about the Nazi regime in Germany and of course about all the stupidity from the political fringes from the right AND the left.
I wrote about 180 pages of the alternate history and about 480 pages of the detailed world building of the Roman Empire in its present day state with its 93 provinces, a territory of a bit more than nine million square kilometers without the Antarctica territory and its 725 million inhabitants from a dozen major and hundreds of mid-sized to smaller nationalities.
Here are some characteristics of my alternate Rome:
- Like in real Italy Italian became the dominant language but the Romans remained Romans. Latin in its ecclesiastical form is still used at the emperors court, in the western Church and in the military as well as in some highly traditionalist aristocratic families.
- After the reconquest of the eastern parts formerly part of the Eastern Roman empire from the Ottomans, the Hellenic Romans retuned back to the now only Roman Empire again and retained their status as full Roman citizen. A Gaius Ovidius Severus, a Roberto Francesco Lodola, a Dmitris Theofilis Maggidis are fully equally Romans.
- In the old aristocratic families, the old Latin names still are dominating like from the Gens Severi which could be saved by the Gens Iuliana when the then Iulian Pater Familias managed to save Geta from the murder attempt by Caracalla.
- In 2010, the Romans finalized the reconquest of some lost Eastern Roman parts after the war with Turkey after a conflict between Octavius Secundus and then Turkish prime minister Recep Erdogan escalated. They took back Constantinopolis, Trapezunt and some other areas.
- When Imperator Caesar Octavius Secundus ascended to the throne in 1981 CE when he was 25 years old, he as a fan of the classical pronunciation of Latin ordered the court to revert to this pronunciation.
- In October 2021 after the most severe phase of the Corona Pandemics Octavius Secundus announced that he intends to resign from his position as the emperor on October 2036 making room for his son. In October 2036, Octavius Secundus will be 80.5 years old.
- Most cities retained or got back the old ancient names when Rome reconquewred the Mediterranean sea again from the 15th century CE onward.
- The military still uses the Legions, Cohorts, Manipels, Centurae as military units.
- The service uniform looks like the real history Italian ones but there are no Carabinieri, their duties are executed by the Pretorians who wear an uniform like the ones from the real world Carabinieris when paroling the streets.
- In their military parades (pompa militare) they wear historical uniforms too like the lorica segmentata, the lorica squamata, the one used in the 16th century which looks like from Spain which never existed in my alternate history.
- The Roman military organized the whole Earth into 13 military provinces even if they are outside of the empire like with the US-American military organization. Each of those military regions is commandeered by a Magister Militare, the newest of these military regions is the military province of Eastern Europe as a reaction to the Russian war of aggression against the Ukraine which is highly supported by Rome.
- They wear modern 21st century style fashion made by the fashion labels Armani, Iulianus Fashion Corporatus.
- Like with the real world Italians they love to dress sharply and very well, --> Bella figura.
- The two dominant religions are the western Catholic church with about 30 % followers and the Cultus Deorum, the older religion with about 30.5 % followers. The eastern Hellenic church has about 11 % followers and the remaining 28.5 % are divided among other resurfaced ancient religions as well as other Christian fractions plus some Jewish Romans and a tiny Muslim Roman community.
- Aside of the ancient cuisine still available in some specialized restaurants, modern Romans have a cuisine which strongly resembles the real Italian, so, they have pizza and pasta, picata, saltim-bocca, insalata mista, etc. "Luigi e Claudio Pizzeria" or "Hernando & Stefanos American BBQ" can be found.
- To show that they belong to an almost three millennia old country, many Roman companies uses old Latin for their names.
- They have modern cars like from Masserati or Severus Autocurrus Corporatus (which switches to electric cars) or Dmitri-Mobile S.a.r.L. or Taurinorum-Mobile INC.
- Of course they have a modern computer industry like that from the company Severus Electronica Corporatus which is the Roman Empires equivalent of the US-American Apple Inc.
- The Romans have their own social media networks like EgoVideoSum (a UA-cam like video hosting platform) or ArsPhotographica (a kind of a more sophisticated Instagram).
- The cities looks like real world Italian cities mixed with some elements from New York City. The newly found city of Leptis Magna Creek east of the older mega city of Leptis Magna has a Dubai style of architecture mixed with some more traditionalist ones.
- In Rome itself due to the 6th century Gothic Wars never happened in my scenario all ancient buildings, the temples, the basilicae, the Circus MAximus, the old imperial Fori are fully intact since empoeror Silvianus Torquatus Maximianus ordered the full restoration of all old temples. He even gave an imperial order that the old religion needs to be tolerated.
- Currently, the Roman Empire has three space stations in the Earths orbit, the PAX-ROMANA (the civilian states operated one), the PARADISO DELLE STELLE (a privately operated by the Solaris Corporatus Nuovo) and ARES-VNVS, the military space station. In the night sky, you could see them as three points arranged as the corners of an even triangle.
- The empire even has a permanently manned moon base.
- On April 2024 they start their permanent Mars settlement program when the launch window for an interplanetary flight to Mars is good enough.
More realistic would be those Instant Payday Loan shark shops called "Justin-Time Solidi - Trust us, He's the G"
@@michaelstaengl1349 I love alternate history, but it doesn't really make sense to have major deep time changes and have other modern events largely unchanged. You're not going to get a Third Reich when the First Reich was an attempt to revive the empire that in your scenario didn't fall in the first place, for instance. I do like the idea of exploring how a modern Roman (or Byzantine) state would look in the modern world, either after a history of constant independence or one more like China where you had periods of foreign conquest that resulted in the absorption or expulsion of the conquerors.
I do like the theme of mixing classical and modern cultural elements, exploring what would survive (or be revived, the way some elements of classical architecture came back between the renaissance and 19th century) and what would be replaced permanently.
Another big factor was that cavalry got much more important during the crysis of the third century. Before, infantry was much more important.
Fun fact: Already during the reign of Diocletian, Roman soldiers looked like the armies of the early middle ages. Only experts can distinguish between the cavalry of Charlemagne and the cavalry of Diocletian, for most people they look the same.
Now that is interesting.
AFAIK the Romans were not using the stirrups, whereas the Charlemagne cavalry did - that is a pretty significant difference.
@@matejbabjak9678 As far as I know, stirrups became more and more common in the third and fourth century. It's a prerequisite for an efficient cavalry soldier with a spear/ lance.
Without it, you have troubles staying on your horse when you hit an enemy. At least from what I have read, this topic is still debated as far as I know...
@@babelhuber3449 Nah, the Avars brought stirrups to the West in the late 500s.
"Only experts can distinguish between the cavalry of Charlemagne and the cavalry of Diocletian, for most people they look the same"...thats absolute nonsense.Infantry continued to be most important part of Roman army long after diocletian and Roman soldiers of that time look medieval to you just because you are used to see just one version of the Roman army-that most commonblyx depicted and imitated cliché of 1-early 2nd centtury.
Reenactor here. I’ve re-enacted both late antique and early antique and I can tell you with certainty late antiquity is far more aesthetic and comfortable. There’s a reason we started to wear pants!
Those late Roman clothes look a lot more comfortable.
I could also imagine them starting to wear trousers simply because the climate became colder. So they started adopting the warmer clothing style from Germanic tribes in the colder north.
I would guess that the end of the Roman warm period has something to do with it.
weather is one reason(for civilians mostly), but for military, Romans learned how to fight on horseback, and pants are kind of a horseback necessity.
@@holeeshi9959not really, but considering how many germans that enlisted in the late roman army. Which they used pants all the time.... it very easy to say they adopted it from germans....
A pretty common idea but certainly wrong.They wore pants anywhere-including in very hot regions.It was mainly a thing of fashion and practicality.
@@paprskomet Or maybe to save money. Seems their border troops limitanie is poorly equipped due to budget cuts or corruption....
One of the secrets of the Romans was a willingness to copy the best ideas of their enemies.
Mighty knights
@@عليياسر-ف4ن9ك You mean Cataphracts. Rome learned of them from Carrhae the hard way.
@@TheNEOverse correct
The secret to their downfall?
@@karlscher5170 They would have fallen by the time they copied the fucking Greek phalanx then.
Since the late 1st century AD.
You can see that same kind of changes in Chinese history. For example the Chinese military equipment from the early Ming Dynasty were inherited from the Tang and Song Dynasty with a bit of Middle Eastern influences due to the previous Mongol Conquest, however in the late Ming Dynasty, European equipment were widely replicated with modifications and adopted such as German Gothic Plate Cuirass, English Royal Arsenal 42 pounder Culverin cannons and Swedish Matchlock muskets. The Chinese in the late Ming Dynasty era even adopted early linear tactics maximize the potential of European firearms.
Also, the Chinese clothing from Early Ming Dynasty era look similar to the Late Song Dynasty era, but these gradually look different during the Late Ming Dynasty.
I think Middle Eastern armour in the Middle Ages (Mongol Conquest period) was also influenced by Northern China. The Mongols brought over the Jin/Juchen style armour to the Middle East. Mamelukes in Egypt had similar armour styles to the Mongols they were fighting.
I dont know how many people can think, that a roman from 20 AD looked the same as a roman from 400 AD. Of course clothes change during the history. It would be the same as saying people from 1600 AD had the same clothes as we now.
What are you trying to say? That my codpiece has gone out of style?
A chillier climate seems to have been noted for the time. That did not help agricultural surpluses which had to support a military which was longer seizing great volumes of loot in Persia and Carthage.
That was also certainly a factor, although I doubt that it was ever really warm in northern Britannia and Gallia :) But yes, climate certainly also must have had some sort of influence, possibly explaining the higher prevalence of trousers. Although I have the suspicion that the cultural influence played a greater role.
Also likely spurred the southward Germanic migrations.
I have wore flip flops and shorts on snowy days , I get lazy and don’t wanna get all dress up of only going for a few minutes 😮😢
In all fairness, English Colonists from the year 1674 would not be able to recognize the clothing Americans wear in 2024 either.
Yes, but there were way more drastic changes in everything between the 1600s and the 2000s than between 100s and the 500s
@HungaryMatee The industrial revolution changed it a great deal as we started to mass produce clothing in textile mills.
Sebastian, I really admire, appreciate your passion for this strange, fascinating, yet oft overlooked historical subject. To me, the Fall of Rome & the French Revolution are the two most confusing historical events. Thank you for your efforts.
To be honest, I like Late Roman fashion and armor way better. Excellent job once again, Sebastian!
It was regressive
@@Beyonder1987 How so?
I would say the clothing present clear forward progress. With more elements, like trousers and long sleaves. Wider array of patterns and colors. Clearly more developed than a simple tunics. Also leather shoes which gave way to the sandals were pure improvement. Togas were ceremonial clothing - from the times when clothing was much simpler in construction.
Also the armor and weapons: Cavalry became much more developed in the later roman times. It was the common trend in Europe. As metallurgy progressed, swords became longer. Together with spears which became more of a focus, and shields became lighter as well - this was all done to adapt to this new more mobile and cavalry heavy combat.
A sticking point for a lot of people is lorica segmentata. But I would argue that it's over rated. And it was in fact chosen because it enables mass production and easy fitting , not because it would be superior compared to lorica squamata or hamata. And let's not forget that lorica hamata progressed as well compared to Republican times. It covered more body and was made of better steal on average.
So all this is why I would not call later Roman army regressive. But progressive if anything. Rome did not "fell" because it's army would be inadequate. It "fell" because of political reasons. Late Roman army was excellent. And later Byzantine army continued this trend. It had one of the best armies during the middle ages. However the gap between the Romans and other cultures and nations wasn't as wide. As for centuries Romanization took hold over much of Europe. And Germanic, Slavic and Middle eastern people have copied and used Roman technology. It was this technology that they used during the middle ages. Even the Roman language - Latin - was standard amongst them and served as a lingua franca during post roman period.
Same they're definitely the drippiest era of roman fashion.
I think it's more cyclical than regressive, to a point.
They went from spears and shields, to Gladius and larger shields with heavy armor, then longer swords and different shields, then back to spears and shields.
Cavalry was the catalyst for this cycle, I believe. First it was the phalanx that led to new tactics and strategies, then slowly it became all about how to employ and defend against cavalry.
Obviously there is way more involved than what I said, but you can probably see what I'm saying.
@@Member_zero the clasical Roman empire of Augustus era was a far bigger and professional army with a huge logistics. Christian Holy Roman empire was smaller, it had many mercenaries. The Armour was weaker. Nothing progressive, it was an empire that was destined to fail. This weakness allowed barbarians and others such as Persians to continue to get stronger over time. The Romans did influence later empires but it too was influenced by other that came before it such as Greeks. Thats just the way its been
The use of longer swords (Spatha) hints to different tactics and more loosend up infantry formations as well.
You need more space for movement for the individual soldier.
i would agree partially. But I dont think it has to do with fighting tactics going from tight to loosened formations. On the Contrary, when the roman empire started to employ wide spread cavalry units (and also faced foreign forces employing mostly cavalry) they had to transform their infantry from a shock infantry type (Pilum, Gladius) to a unit that can effectively repell horse charges. this was done by replacing the pilum with a longer spear. spears favor phalanx-like, tight formations. the sword (gladius) has lost its position as an integral part of infantry tactics i.e. throwing the pilum and then crash into the enemy formation with your gladius. Now you need a sword that is useful when shit hits the fan i.e. when your formation broke and you find yourself now in a chaotic melee.
That's flat out wrong and based on an already debunked myth that simply won't die away on the internet:
1-The first wrong assumption is legionaries supposedly using the spatha as primary weapon. Easily falsifiable when considering the the actual primary weapon they switched to was the SPEAR, which requires soldiers to actually form TIGHTER formations to maximize the surface area covered by spear tips, capitalizing on their quirk of not needing as much space as swords to be used.
The Spatha was relegated to being a side arm.
2-The second wrong assumption is that Principate Era legionaries fought in extremely tight formations and only used gladii to thrust. In the contrary, and we know thanks to several sources such as Polybius, Caesar and Vegetius, that legionaries needed at least three square feet of surface to properly fight. Legionary formations weren NOT slow moving box squares of shields with swords poking out, but dynamic and fast squares that could outmaneuver other infantry kinds and easily switch between projectiles and melee combat.
You cannot have legionaries throwing a pilum far away from the second+line, rotate with the rank behind or fighting if they're too tight.
3-The third wrong assumption is the Gladius not being used to cut, which we know from the descriptions of the Punic wars and experimental testing to be bollocks. Gladii could cut very well and was feared for it, ita mode of use being primarily in very tight swings.
Spatha, on the other hand, could very well be used to thrust, much like later medieval arming swords. Nothing suggests it was only used from wide swings.
4-Spear and shield combat was not a barbarian way of fighting. It was the way Greek Hoplites and the Republican Romans fought themselves before and after introducing the Gladius and Pilum being overall the most used heavy infantry configuration used in Antiquity by civilized peoples among Egyptians, Assyrians, Persians....etc.
5-Fighting barbarian raids implied also fighting horsemen, which moved way faster than infantry and were a major hazard for unescorted Roman infantry wielding only swords and javelins. Cavalry was increasingly more armored and sported bigger horses, which required Rome to upgrade its own way of fighting.
Other than the Spatha, the Romans also uses Axes and Maces to deal with increasingly heavily armoured opponents.
@@MrAlepedroza You could even go so far as saying the spear is the default melee arm of war throughout all history until the end of the pike and shot era.
They start to use more compact formations than before in fact.
it's amazing how much Romanian (and other Balkan nations) national wear was influenced by late Roman clothing.
ua-cam.com/video/emjF6iI5Wc0/v-deo.html If anybody has doubts!
I wondered about that myself, but if you tell the average person that they are going to look at you like you're crazy. To be honest there was definitely some Slavic and native Balkan influence as well though.
yup, that´s what crossed my mind 4 hours ago... I paused the video at min 13.32 and had to search for pictures (internet, books that I have, etc), as I had to be sure that my imagination is not playing wild. It doesn´t. And not only on menswear, but on woman´s also. It´s fascinating how some of the imbrodery follows almost the same rules. I could talk hours about it, but - don´t worry - I won´t, I´m not an expert and duty calls somewhere else :D And yes, one can see the influence all over the Balkans (plus the Slavic and Turkish influences, there are 1700+/- we are talking about). Ty for your comments!
@@stancalung5186 yeah but we keep on insisting on the clothing of the Dacians on the column. We're so narrow-minded sometimes..
@@splogy123 there are influencens too, to be honest, but not soooo many as one would love 😁😅
I've had this question in my head for years!!! Thank you so much!!!
I honestly like the late Roman ridge helmet a lot more than the older designs. It looks way more stylish, and with the crest attached it has 100% Roman vibe to it.
The clothing styles within the Roman Empire were diverse, reflecting the cultural influences and resources of different regions. In the eastern provinces, such as Syria, Egypt, and Anatolia, silk fabric played a prominent role in clothing. Silk, with its luxurious texture and vibrant colors, became a symbol of wealth and refinement. Silk garments, adorned with intricate patterns and embroidery, were favored by the elite. There were inumerous regional variations in clothing in the Roman Empire and this enhances our understanding of the rich cultural tapestry that existed in that nation.
Hard to take you seriously with that profile picture 😂
@@bobflemming100 okay "Bob" tell us how great Russia is
@@greyfells2829 I have no strong feelings about Russia one way or another..because I don’t believe the Msm narrative about them.
It’s hard to take someone serious who’s from Brazil and virtue signals for Ukraine..or Russia for that matter.
@@bobflemming100Hard to take seriously someone like you who value profile photo more that what he actually said.
The most massive change is the change from the Short Sword to the Spear as the primary weapon. The Short Sword as a primary weapon is unique in history, whereas the Spear and to a lesser extent the Pike was usual in European history.
Also eastern Rome had it's own fashion revolutions in XI centuries.
They wore varied clothes and hats unlike the frescoes, and comparable to colorful fashion of italy.
Remaining frescoes skew the clothing picture because they depict just the "suit and tie" of the medieval roman fashion.
I strongly recommend Schwerpunkt's Roman arms & armor and historical military units series on the topic.
Late roman clothes and armor are definitely my favorite.
I think the end of the Roman Warm Period may have had something to do with some of this.
Practicality and fashion is so much more likely.They wore it even in very hot regions.
The more i watch your videos, the more i love late roman history!! Thanks for your hard work Majorianus
It got cold
Romans: It's cold in the Middle East
Great storytelling, many thanks!
Another great topic. What I've always found surprising is that the ancient Greeks and Romans seemed not to have winter clothes. Yes, Greece and Italy are relatively warm, but they're not in the tropics. Besides, the Roman empire stretched far north. Yet, there is no evidence of the Romans wearing warm clothing. Or am I mistaken? It is only toward the end of the Roman empire that we start seeing warmer clothing. The Middle Ages, however, were the opposite. Judging by whatever visual evidence we have, medieval people dressed in very warm clothes even in the summer. Wealthier people wore fur and gloves year round.
They did have special clothing for warm comfort even in classical times.They knew(and used)large winter scarfs and gloves,cloaks a led wrappings and of course also extra tunics.
There was of course the famous Birrus Britannicus, a woolen garment which as the name suggests, originated in Britannia, and was well known across the Roman Empire.
Just a reminder that lions lived in Greece and that the Greeks had something to wear in ancient Greece
OMG, another very high quality video. The Republic and the early Empire are so imprinted in the brains of modern humans that we are/were completely unaware that something other than our highly romanticized fantasies even existed. Let's give all the credit to Hollywood, the seller of the stuff with which our dreams are made.
I would not consider lorica hamata to be a downgrade to the lorica segmentata: it is likely way easier to repair since if some leather straps and hooks fail, a big portion of your armour fails with it while replacing some rings to fill holes should be easy enough. Which provides better protection is very hard to „prove“ with static experiments.
In the end roman practicality won and the hamata prevailed.
Since yesterday I've been thinking about this and I've come to the conclusion that the Romans, while they were still united in a single people, never lost their identity, they just improved it, we can see this both in the clothes and in the military equipment of the late period, either through the Germanic influences that modified the aesthetics of the Empire in the fourth and fifth centuries as well as in the oriental influences that, added to the previous innovations, they have taken a greater leap in creativity, especially in the Constantinople imperial court.
And speaking of which, I feel that there is now a lack of a video detailing the evolution of fashion and military equipment in the eastern part of the empire from the time of Theodosius to the time of Justinian, basically showing how much the empire has been orientalizing itself over time.
Generally that's it, thank you so much for your content, Sebastian, may God bless you and see you next time!
Early Romans seeing Late Romans wearing pants and boots be like.... Absolutely barbaric
😂 I can picture that meme perfectly
Early Romans also wore boots.
Roman pants are more like leggings. Think Yoga pants
3:12 "Berkasovo" type helmets, named after the village of Berkasovo (~ Bear-cass-owo) in modern day Serbia (but at that time in the wider vicinity of Sirmium) where the famous early 4th century AD helmets were found.
Good show-Keepitup! The period from 253 to 285 and 285 to 518 is often overlooked!
The weather could also affect clothing changes
They wore it even in hot climate regions.
Spata isn't a "Longsword", Longsword is a category of a two handed or 1,5 handed (Bastard sword) medieval swords.
Spata is an ancestor of medieval "normal" one-handed swords (aka Arming swords).
Spata is long in a comparison to Xiphos or Gladius but it's not a "Longsword".
I blame Dungeons & Dragons for outright lying to people about historical weapons. D&D made Longsword a "one-handed weapon" and everyone became confused.
The Roman Empire was a military empire, meaning that its identity was derived from its army, when the Roman army was mostly Italic the Italic identity was dominant, and when the army became barbaric from the Balkans and Germans and influenced by the Persians, the Roman Empire also became dominated by the Balkan-Germanic character with a Persian touch which was more clear in the east
The gradual merging of the Romans and the Germanic folk over centuries created the super creative and dynamic Western world that we know today - something of which we should all be very proud.
Same as no one would recognize Americans outfits from 1776
Sebastian ,thank you for existing
You should thank God for that. He is his creator.
@@daguroswaldson257 are you American ,are 'nt you ? In this case I understand your pedantic and disingenous comment which for european standards would be just hilarious. This is a history channel anyway, not a religious one, if you want to discuss about theology and christology there are plenty of channels much more suited for your main interersts. No need to troll our community with unrequested and stupid injunctions. I thank whom I want.
Danke für Deine Arbeit!
Great video. Late roman drip is underrated
Fascinating history in this video. Also I very much like the format of your videos, they have just the right lenght to me.
It's not "early" legionary at 00:40, but imperial legionary. He would also look different from republican legionary in 220 BC for example.
Maiorianus, have you heard of compression? I think it would make your videos more pleasing to listen to :D
The Tropaeum Traiani in Dacia portrays most Roman legions as wearing chainmail and scale armor during Trajan's 2nd century AD conquest of Dacia. Chainmail was also worn by the Romans since the early-mid Republican era. So the Romans never really got rid of their old armors and simply increased the use of their older armors.
I really appreciate the fine visuals and art illustrating your vids.
you got yourself a new subscriber!
YT recommended this to me and im glad to find something less talked about.
I'm interested In combining roman clothing and armor whith medieval ones, but the late roman aesthetic is just that, so I'm checking out the other 2 videos and after a quick look at your playlists I think I can learn quite a bit from this channel, since late rome is not something I know too well
To be fair, our style of clothing has changed dramatically in the last 100 years alone too.
The real question is why are we expecting the romans not to change their fashion in 400 years. We have stereotypical images of rome in our mind created by pop culture detached from reality. For example nobody considers the English from the 2000s to no longer be the same people because they dress and behave differently when compared to the people from the 1600s.
I am reminded of Sakharov's thesis of "Convergence of the Systems."
Your channel is amazing and one of a kind. It answers so many questions and explores things I've wondered about. Hope these $10 help out. Perhaps I can afford to do more when my paychecks start coming in. Gratias tibi!
Thank you so much for your kind words and for your generous donation. Every single dollar helps, so thanks again
Literally wha I was thinking about recently and what got me curious. The video came just in the right time
The trajectory of the helmets is quite interesting. They went from single-piece with the classic "Imperial" type to segmented construction in the ridge and spangenhelm, which would remain pretty standard in Europe until the 9th or 10th century. It would certainly be much easier to construct a helmet from sections as opposed to forming from one sheet once the thickness passed a certain point, but I don't know what the typical characteristics of either type were in that regard. It might also be related to simple production efficiency; higher output with less required skill, and probably less scrap. Better to only lose a quarter or half of a helmet to mistake than a complete unit. I imagine something similar factored into the phasing out of segmented armor for mail and scale.
Also the classical Roman helmet is principally a Bronze design, while there are iron examples of it afaik. It is very typically for a new material, that at first old proven designs are used, before ones that work better with the new materials are develeoped.
Nice introduction and incredible historically comparable coverage between earlier and later of Roman looking.
Also just fashion changes over time. Wondering why Romans of the 4th century didn't wear the same things as Romans in the 1st century would be like wondering why Americans in the 21st century don't wear panniers and powdered wigs.
just donated 5$. never donated to a channel before but you and metetron are awesome but i only donated to you. hope you continue for a long time. thank you
This is a great presentation. I would love to see a motion picture of later Rome with proper attire. Thanks for giving us a look of this later period.
It honestly would be kind of weird if they hadn't changed during those centuries.
Just think about what people went around wearing in the 1700 hundreds compared to now. It's a long time, and I think it's pretty unimaginable not to change.
great topic
I'd like to know when did Italians drop the consonants on their last names.
The initial Roman military success was in using tools and tactics different than the barbarians. I understand that outside influences changed the Roman equipment etc, but I wonder what benefit if any that it actually gave them in the field. I can tell you why early Imperial equipment had an advantage over the enemies of Rome, but I can't tell you what made late Roman weapons,armor, or tactics exceptional.
My understanding is that the earlier tactics was more infantry based. However, Roman adapted a more Calvary based military after seeing the success of the Huns and the Persians. A good infantry will almost always lose to a similar size Calvary force.
The interesting question, looking at how Roman people and culture changed as it expanded into central Europe, Asia, and Africa; but Rome probably started as a settlement was built on Palatine Hill, so how would Rome have imported culture from neighboring peoples (e.g. the Etruscans, Greeks, Latins, etc.) as they expanded into the neighboring territories?
Romans: We love the cultures of the Greeks and the Middle East
Fashion time 😂
For the Roman Army, there is one constant it's had over its history: Adoption of foreign influence and change. The Gladius has origins in Spain. Gallic influence in chainmail and helmet designs even during the Republic. The Romans once fought in Greek Phalanx style, fought their longtime rivals the Samnites with it. The Samnites fought in a looser style, beating the Romans numerous times. The Romans changed how their army fought once again and borrowed from the Samnite way of fighting. The Maniple was born. Fast forward and the Roman Army would also adopt the cataphract heavy cavalry they were encountering in the Middle East.
I wouldn't say that arms and armour were drastically different tbh; the Spatha and the older Gladius Hispaniensis were about the same length, the oval shields of the late empire were reminiscent of the oval Scuta of the Republican legions, the disappearance of the segmentata just meant mail was the primary armour as it was for the republic, and even the late roman spangenhelm type helmets aren't to dissimilar from the montefortino and coolus type helmets worn by the Republican legions. Throw-in the more widespread use of spears as in the days of the Manipular legions, it's arguable that Roman arms and armour took a circular course from the Early Republic through the Late Republic and Principate, back to where it started with the Dominate.
Have you ever wondered why early Americans look so different than modern Americans? WHY? What HAPPENED?!
Time rolls on and fashions and armaments change. Duh.
Except early Romans were culturally and religiously different than later Romans. Unlike America which still has the same constitution. When Christianity took over, it was a slow decline of Latin Roman culture and people
@@Beyonder1987 America is different to what it used to be too lmao, wtf is this.
We change all the time, that is existence.
Just compare how Europians looked in 1724 and how we look today. For commoners what we consider folkclothing today was normal clothing back then. For the elite we streight up consider men in sockpants with wigs to be ridiculous.
I appreciate talking about Late Roman styles, but, has it always got to be the yellow dressed guy for everything? Are there no other examples around?
My understanding is the Eastern Roman Empire embraced certain cultural influences from different parts of the empire, like the _braccae_ of the Celts, Scythians, Sarmatians and Parthians were adopted by the Eastern Roman Empire, and soldiers began wearing pants essentially because, pants were more versatile for the purpose they were meant to serve, no different than Byzantium adopting cataphract armor from the east.
Why you limit it only on eastern half of the empire?All of that existed in the west too.
Very good video!
Presumably like every army 'somebody made a decision' and the uniform was changed. Civilian fashion often follows military when the troops start to wear their uniform about time and maybe at home because trousers are more comfortable than a short skirt. Military fashion will often take items from other armies including their enemies if they're deemed more practical and/or comfortable. Military uniform is also influenced by military doctrine and operational environments; a short tunic may be practical on the plains of Syria but when you're skirmishing in the woods trousers and a long spear are probably more practical.
WHY AND WHEN THE EUROPEAN PEOPLE START WEARING DIFFERENT CLOTHING? MAYBE BECAUSE IN ONE THOUSAND YEAR HAVE CHANGES????
Keep up the great work, i have learned so much from this channel
Sorry around 6:00, why was more slashing needed rather than thrusting in combat?
Small correction: on some images you show in the video, people wear hooses, not trousers. And hooses are an evolution of stockings, not pants.
When the Romans took to wearing pants, they preferred tight fitting leggings that showed off their muscles, as opposed to the baggy trousers worn by the Persians or Avars, etc. Are you saying these leggings are not in fact trousers?
@@histguy101 leggings are trousers because they have a crotch. Hooses don't have one, because hooses are long stockings, sewn together at the gluteal zone for convenience - to allow abandonment of stockings belts and suspension usage.
Clothing is classified by its function and evolution, not forms like tightness or smth.
In one way it was a continuous process: the 'original' Roman equipment was copied from numerous peoples such as the gladius from Spain. They were very practical and used what worked. Not surprising that they repeated the process in the late Empire, even adopting a new religion. It might have been retro to see the armor of plates in the 4th century, but not as much as people think: armor being expensive, the old stuff would continue in use until junked, and few could afford to have the latest armor; enemy armor would be harvested from prisoners and the dead, etc. It is documented that Englishmen showed up for the English Civil War (17th Century) with weapons and armor from the Wars of the Roses, 150 years prior, so life cycles could be quite long.
If the Roman Empire successfully banned trousers, will we still have trousers to wear in nowadays?
Do you think the drop in temperature that took place in the late Roman period may have also been a factor for the trousers, cape, etc?
"When and why citizens of american empire stopped wearing gigachad hats and suits and fall into wearing barbaric sandals and shorts prior to it's downfall under the onslaught of zoomer tribes" (c) history channel on Spacetube, 3024 AD
Excellent content as always
Even in the earlier eras (1st-3rd centuries), the soldiers of the Roman army were wearing fleece-lined boots and trousers when stationed in the colder parts of central and northern Europe.
Is like in our Western Civilization, our actual clothing style began in 1950-1960, before that all dressed with suit and tie, in diferent forms that began in 1800’s we don’t dress has the 1700’s fashion with wigs, trouaers to the knee, and ties made of lace
One thing to point out is that lorica hamata was the most used armour throught the roman period. Segmentata was used for a very small amount of time in comparision. So the sterotypical image of a roman legion all decked with segmentata isnt historically accurate at all. It would be mostly lorica hamata with some instances of segmentata.
i love maiorianus
I think the Romans have adopted the trousers (Braccae Celtica) since 100 BC because of their constant love and hate interactions with the Celts and Germanic peoples from the North like the Cimbrians and Arvernii.
2nd point, the Romans also quickly adopted anything from their neighbors as long as they saw it as comfortable, innovative, and above all very useful.
3rd, the Romans, since their encounters with the Scythians in Dacia, found the Scythian-style Lorica Squamata armor very effective against melee and missile attacks and far sturdier than the bulky Segmentata, hence adopting the Scythian-style Lorica Squamata.
It’s almost as though many people take for granted that there ought to have been a natural difference between the Early and Late Empire and ignore the intricacies of why things changed.
This is how imperials should dress in Elder Scrolls.
Great video and great storytelling dude!
Fascinating!
Would you ever consider doing a video on Emperor Phocas? He considered the most evil emperor in late Roman History.
6:07 i'm confused about your statement here: lorica segmentata was actually much cheapier and easier to produce than chain mail. Chain mail had many favourable charateristics and were superior besides the high cost of production
Interesting topic - thank you
The change from rectangular shields to round shields and from gladius to sparta suggest a change in formation tactics. Do we know anything about it? For example, was this intended because of new enemies or forced because of so many foreign soldiers in the later Roman army.
It was actually germans who adopted spathae from Romans. Roman infantry adopted spathae in the end of 2 century, Germans adopted spathae from Romans in the 3 century
@@paveltukeev4832 wasnt the sparta, a longer one hand sword, very well known with the Germans even BC? I am pretty sure the Germans who Julius Caesar fought during his campaings didnt use gladii.
@@juanzulu1318 no, Celts used spathae, Germans, according to Tacitus, used spears. All German spathae in archaeology appears in 3 century and there were either directly bought from Romans (Roman stamps on the blades) or were inspired by them.
@@paveltukeev4832 hmm, ok. But I would suggest that we should not assume that Germans didnt know the concept of a sword. If this premise is true what type did they use then? I would conclude that it was most probably a longer one like that of the celts rather than a short sword of the gladius type.
@@juanzulu1318 with low industrial base long swords are very expensive, available only to the German nobles, insignificant minority in comparison to common freeholders, having only shields, spears, javelins and knifes.
And even nobility fought with spears in shieldwall, switching to swords only if spears or formation was broken
Classic roman is top tier style
i learned a lot about the late Roman Empire through you
very interesting 👍
People often fail to appreciate the great sweep of time involved, as the Roman Empire was incredibly long lived. Take for instance the Province of Britannia. It was under Roman control for the best part of four centuries. For comparison, look at how the military dress and weapons of Oliver Cromwell's New Model Army compares to the Modern British Army. It is utterly and completely different. Roman dress and arms would have evolved in a similar way, albeit not quite as rapidly.
Very interesting.
Yes, I think so too :)
The late republican/early imperial iconic roman clothing and armour was the high point for me and I bet for many others as well. For Hollywood as well :D
The time scale is huge. I mean, look at a ww1 soldier and a modern one. And that is nothing compare to the Roman Empire's existence. Same for civilian fashion. Change happens slowly, mixing culture, different needs, fashion, etc... nothing is static.