The battle which ended the Boudican Rebellion took place in Roman Britain in AD 60 or 61, and pitted an alliance of British peoples led by Boudica against a Roman army led by Gaius Suetonius Paulinus. Although heavily outnumbered, the Romans decisively defeated the allied tribes and inflicted heavy losses. Thank you for all the feedback guys, unfortunately as stated previously the games engine is very limited to what you can and cannot do, so we tried to make the video as entertaining but as accurate as possible... the battle itself is not completely historically accurate but again we tried to get as close to it as we could. Timestamps: 00:00 - Roman army Strategic Positioning 01:21 - Tribes of Britannia March and Boudicca's War Speech 02:51 - Chariots advance, skirmish begins 04:03 - Britannic, Iceni Tribes march on the Roman's 06:00 - Brutal Hand to Hand combat ensues 11:45 - The mass retreat begins 12:05 - Battle report according to the Roman Historian Tacitus 12:54 - End Credits Music by Farya Farji = ru-vid.com/show-UC2_JOhJf-VAQm5VRqjY40Rw Battle of Alesia 52BC =ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-pB-f08WrR3c.html
L'an.deux mille apocalypse nostrodamus protéger nos grande nations natalité et tout notre monde l'Occident Christianisme des empire nationaux frontières royaliste tout et proteger notre économie nationaux aussi face aux banque arabe criminel islamistes
You forgot that the Roman legions were equipped with scorpiones and ballista. The Romans would have decimated the advancing British charioteers or at least minimized their effectiveness from a distance. Additionally, the first or even 2nd wave of British infantry would have suffered the same fate as the Romans would have pummeled them relentlessly with their artillery.
You know the bloodshed was so brutal that it shook Nero. Not only were the Celtic tribes poorly armed and trained, they brought their families in large wagon trains to watch what they thought was going to be an easy victory. Instead, after the Romans routed them, many Celts got pinned against the same wagons and got slaughtered along side their families. The Romans spared no one.
@@trentbacker9562 previously. City of camulodonum was besieged and burnt to the ground. Most of the inhabitant are retired legionnare with most of its male population killed. Also Legio IX hispania that attempted to relieve the city got ambushed and slaughtered to a man. Except for its commander and cavalrymen. My guess the romans just exacting revenge on the celts.
Actually the battle did not begin like that way it's portrayed in this video. As the Celts began their charge towards the Roman lines, the Romans threw their pilums at the Celts. Most of the Celts carried shields, were so weighted down by the broken and bent pilums, they were rendered useless. Thus they had to discard their shields and fight without them. This left the Celts severely less protected and nothing to defend against the Romans gladius thrusts. The Celts up piled up in their tracks. This halted the Celts momentum, while the vast numbers behind them try to move forward from the weight of the Celtic onslaught. They had nowhere to go with the Romans in front and baggage carts behind them. More pilums thrown into the mass of Celts just made it worst. The Roman war machine also fought in a lines and rows, alternating their men every few minutes from the front row. The fighting soldier stops, returns to the rear of the line, allowing the next Roman behind him in the line, to advance and replace the front row to continue fighting. This kept the men from exhaustion, treat any wounds, while allowing the fresh men to maintain a steady fight and advancing the army forward. The Celts had no chance, and were wiped out entirely. I know this is a video game, but just thought if you have the option to display the battle more accurately, that's how it happened. The Romans set themselves up in a perfect location to fight with their smaller numbers, forcing the Celts to funnel into the Roman lines. Anyway, Cheers!
great video but not historically accurate. The Romans did not fight in open order, hand to hand, they fought close order, tightly packed thrusting around their shields with their short swords. they simply wouldn't have broken formation to 'charge'!!! fun video but if you'd set up the Romans halted and British in open order, you'd have got a more accurate representation.
Wanting to deepen even more, it must be said that the governor Pauline used an even more excellent technique. Since the Celts pushed the Roman line like madmen, he arranged for the line of legionaries not straight horizontally to the Celts but in the shape of a "saw". In this way the Celts who were pressing towards the Roman line with their fellow soldiers who were pressing behind them, found themselves trapped without even having the possibility to move and fight while they were mangled by the gladius of the legionaries.
@@antoniomartellini3443 I was going to say what you said. That "saw" description is exactly how I've heard it described. I can only assume that the video graphics engine used couldn't reproduce that.
@@panderson9561 I think you are right in this case, but I assure you that I have seen it reproduced in other animations. However, the important thing, as I have already had the opportunity to write, is that these videos are not suited to making people understand the fighting techniques of the Romans. The Legionaries when they fought were always lined up and covered as if they were a single man, it was impossible to enter the formation, they did not jump and yell as you can see from the video, they were silent and motionless like statues and while still they beat the gladius on the edge of the shield (still today Police all over the world use this deployment for public order). Woe to them if they broke the formation, they were killed on the spot by the centurion. I keep pointing out these things because if people don't see exactly how the Romans fought they will never understand the reason for the greatness of the civilization that invented and shaped Western civilization.
The Roman gladius was a stabbing weapon, and very lethal. The longswords carried by the British necessitated each tribesman needing a lot of room around him to swing. The stabbing legionnaires needed less room, which means 2 or 3 could gang up on one guy, protecting each other and killing the guy who was outnumbered. Coupled with the rotation system letting fresh legionnaires to the front and allowing troops to rest before their turn came about, the superior armor and tactics of the Romans allowed them to beat the larger force.
Boudicca: Slighted Queen with no tactical experience, driven purely by revenge, who sent thousands of Britons to their deaths in a scenario that could have been avoided *Revered by the Elizabethans, Victorians and female supremacists because she’s female* Caratacus: Skilled British commander who annoyed and harassed the Romans for 9 years and was only stopped by the betrayal of an ‘ally’ *Is forgotten because he’s a bloke*
Except Boudicca isn’t remembered for just this battle is she? You missed the part where her army sacked Colchester and Londinium, and if it had one at Watling Street probably would have driven the Romans out of Britain. Your cringy incel framing unsurprisingly doesn’t hold up.
This was awesome. I think the only thing missing was the Roman tactical disposition - their line consisted of triangles that would break up the mass charge of the Britains and basically have them hacked and stabbed from two sides. It was pretty ingenious.
Thank you for pointing this out. I been looking into many of these videos on Roman, Greek and WWII battles and you are right, the legions were in triangles, wedges, which forced the massive Celtics' mass into killing zones. I am getting very tired seeing people put things out without proper studying.
"Don't ever, for any reason, do anything, to anyone, for any reason, ever, no matter what, no matter where, or who, or who you are with, or where you are going, or where you've been, ever, for any reason whatsoever." - Michael Scott - Boudica
Nothing pretty about war at any time,but in the ancient world, it was literally mano o mano - the brutality in this video probably only scratches the surface on just how bloody it was.
@@pzatotalwar I know, the Picts played unconventional night time hit and run warfare, and the prideful, dishonest Romans wrote false history claiming their soldiers were needed elsewhere in central Europe to fight Germanic peoples...
I love how TW and other historical map games have allowed amateur documentarians to flourish. My favorite current niche. This was amazing work in a unique medium.
Most history is often told by the victor. In this case, the loss of 400 Romans seems sus but Roman War machine is the reason why they were so successful.
@@weedwizard7906 Population of roman occupied Britain is estimated for around 4 million at the time (for comparison, England pop soon after the Norman conquest in XI century was merely 2 million), but it is notoriously hard to muster many warriors in those times, among the various tribes, not to mention for the uprising. Not to mention Roman and all ancient historians always overestimated the numbers, sometimes to a ridiculous extent. So Boudicca forces estimation was 100.000 to 230.000 with those first number being either closer to the truth or also exaggerated, with unknown but much lower part of them to be actually warriors - the presence of large amounts of spectators was mentioned by both sources - this is what Paulinus meant when he speaks about more women than men and about not looting just victory. Needless to say the number of death is also hugely exaggerated, something that Roman historians also did every single time.
@@weedwizard7906 I read from a history book that it was about 100,000 Iceni, which in those days, was a very large army. The question is, how many within this 100,000 were actually members of family of the fighting men such as women and children coming along to support the men.
@@thesnoopmeistersnoops5167 Googled it, although it might be the figure at the end of Roman period, or completely asspulled, you know how those articles are sometimes. Wiki says 2,8-3 million at the end of II century. Anyways, the lesser the population was, the more it reinforces my point that the numbers were crazily inflated.
"At night I can hear the screams Haunted by everything they took from me The nighmare in my blood Vow vegence when the day will come When they hear ny battle cry! Fire and wrath burning in my eye Kicked a queen to the floor And raised a warrior This is the rise of Boudicca!" - Karliene
@@rimshot2270 My welsh fore-bearers would likely differ, my germanic ancestors who arrived in Britain a few centuries later would probably agree with you.
@@TaliesinapCerridwen I have no problem with that. I'm sure you're right in both cases. I'm just tired of Romans being portrayed as bad guys in British and Commonwealth films.
Imagine trying your hardest and knowing everyone on your side is dying around you . And all the one on one's that we're at first start becoming two or maybe three on one. Knowing you were gunna get stabbed up bad! Pretty brutal
Tribes in those days typically took herbs and hallucinogens, so aside from adrenaline, and the rouse of warfare, they were probably amped up on some mind altering mushrooms
Nice video. I love Rome 2, really any Roman Empire game. Was a truly fascinating time in my opinion. Plus I just got back from visiting Rome for the first time. Was amazing to see the remnants from the old Empire still standing.
To be fair, Boudica has been blamed all these centuries for the failure. When in reality, she did her best to join several loosely, affiliated bands of people together into a fighting force. There was so much arguing among those different groups. It was very difficult for Boudica to get everybody together on that day, so yeah, she did her best, but of course she got blamed.
@@borninjordan7448 Ma la Britannia ha imparato tutto dalla dominazione Romana, il più grandioso e glorioso Impero della storia; Roma ha conquistato, dominato, costruito e CIVILIZZATO; ROMA AETERNA ET LUX MUNDI 🦅💪
Men didn't just stand still with their shields down when javelins and/or arrows were coming at them. They lifted their shields up to protect their face and torso. The men in the front would kneel so the projectiles couldn't hit their legs. The men behind them could stand because the angle the projectiles came in was high enough that their legs were reasonably protected by the men in front of them. The Roman shields were extra large, so they lost fewer men to projectile attacks. The hand to hand fighting scenes shows men piercing plate armor with swords. Plate armor was made to withstand piercing thrusts from swords.
The Emperor was so disturbed by the slaughter of tens of thousands he weighed abandoning Brittania entirely... that's fucking wild. Human history is so interesting. I wonder what would have happened if Rome had left Brittania so early in the Roman Imperial dominion, and if they ever would have gone back.
I`m a Briton and we truly got our Arses Kicked this day.I`ve read our Warriors were pushed hard up against the Roman lines,were unable to swing their weapons,whilst the Romans could use their razor sharp Gladius to stab and slash.Definitely shows that numbers cannot always defeat a well trained Army.
@@kevinyaucheekin1319 No,I`m Anglo-Saxon and live on the South Coast of UK.Just over 1 hour drive from London and 2 hour drive from Colchester where our Queen Boudica defeated the Romans.
If the Romans’ discipline and training was effective in warfare, then why did it fail against the Huns, Saxons, Franks, Lombards, Visigoths, and Vandals?
@@malgusvitiate7002 The Romans battle tactics were superb on the open field but no good in Forests etc as they were unable to make their formations.The Romans suffered their biggest defeats in Forests and when "hit and run" tactics were used.
It's far more likely the Celts numbers were gradually reduced by javelins, which were being thrown in massive numbers from behind the wall of shields. Eventually their numbers were reduced so significantly that the Romans could then engage them in direct fighting.
She made the terrible mistake of fighting them in a pitched battle and at a place of the Romans choosing if she had just carried on with hit and run attacks and a scorched earth strategy she'd have won
Non ils ont été vaincu par les anglo-saxons car ils s'en sont servis comme mercenaires pour se battre entre bretons et que les angles, saxons et jutes en ont profités pour se tailler des territoires.
Heading to Britannia was a one way trip for the Saxons. If the locals thought otherwise, sucks to be then. Saxons were part of the movement of peoples migrating away from the likes of the Huns.
Latest archaeological evidence strongly suggests there was little conflict between the Celts and incoming Saxons. When the Romans left the east of Britain was pretty much empty. They have found very few skeletons of both Celts and Saxons bearing the hall marks of battle wounds. The majority of skeletons show no signs of battle. There is however evidence that trading took place between them.
The tragic thing about this was that the Iceni tribe were allies to Rome and helped them out. It was only when the King died that Boudicca his wife, assumed the Throne. The Roman Emperor wanted the King's possessions but only received half. It then went a bit pear-shaped! But it was utterly cruel and barbaric by the Roman generals to have raped Bourdicca and her two daughters. And because of their heinous acts, the peaceful Roman town of St Albans, made up of retired wealthy Romans, and undefended, was attacked and all were killed. She then marched onto London, but of course was stopped.
The Romans were wrong to behave in that way with Boudicca and her daughters. All the fault, however, was that coward of the procurator of the Emperor Nero who instead of waiting for the Pauline Governor to settle the matter, went directly to Boudicca to bully her. Suffice it to say that to the detriment of him he immediately fled to Rome to hide, abandoning his office. Of course he did not end well in Rome.
The order to despoil Boudicca & her daughters may not have come from on high but been maverick acts by lower local officials...& we all know about what politicians get up up to.
I read somewhere the Icini army tried to flee but ran into a mass of wagons brought to the battlefield. They were trapped and the slaughter was horrific.
Roman 1: "... Where are the Barbarians? I told you to round them up?" Roman 2: "They killed themselves." Roman 1: "What? How terrible. Why?" Roman 2: "They thought it would be preferable to being ruled by us." Roman 1: "Now why do you suppose they get that idea?" Roman 2: "Who could say? Perhaps the gods themselves do not know." Roman 1: "Oh well, guess I will have to harvest my own wheat fields. Carry my armor would you? I'll go with just my sweaty bloodsoaked tunic I had on under it."
I think people living in modern England can’t claim to be the successors of this tribe. There were mixes and invasions along the centuries by romans, germanic tribes, normans etc. Modern italians are a mix of those remaining romans and germanic tribes that mixed etc. So it doesn’t make much sense to say that Boudica had much to do with the people living in the British islands nowadays.
Not true. Modern DNA research has shown the opposite to be true. Just like in Spain, the DNA of North Africans can hardly be found, even though they were in Spain for hundreds of years. Caves in Germany where 10,000 year old bones were found, the descendants of the 10,000 year old people were found in the closest modern town.
@@angeloargentieri5605 … just remember, my Germanic ancestors dispatched an entire 3 legions (15,000 bully-boy Romans) at Teutoberg Forest in 9 AD !!! … Tioc Faidh Ar La !!!
@@rjwintl Non so perché parli solo di quello che ti fa più comodo della disfatta romana del 9 d.c a Teutoburgo, per mano di un vile traditore Arminio, invece non parli anche della vendetta di Idistaviso del 16 d c. da parte del grande condottiero Germanico , con la sconfitta dei germani e sottomissione definitiva del popolo germanico. Roma rimane sempre il più grande e glorioso impero della storia. Sai che se oggi puoi parlare questa lingua, scrivere con questo alfabeto, camminare su queste strade, vivere in queste città, affidarsi a norme giuridiche, avere acqua e riscaldamento in casa, è solo grazie ALLA GRANDE E DIVINA DEA ROMA . Sono state create oltre 200 città e il doppio dell'equatore in strade; è stato esportata filosofia, lingua, scritture, leggi e sono state create opere grandiose e monumenti maestosi, che oggi sono patrimonio dell'umanità UNESCO. Sono stati creati i diritti dell'uomo ed esportata ricchezza e commerci.....questa è CIVILIZZAZIONE, RINGRAZIA. In Germania sono state fondate tante città come: Augusta Treverorum, Mogontiacum, Colonia Agrippina , Augusta, Bonna ed altre, dove oggi puoi ammirare ancora le grandiose opere costruttive: strade, ponti, acquedotti ,anfiteatri, teatri, terme, templi , fori, opere d'arte straordinarie, sculture, statue, che si possono ammirare nei musei o anche all'aperto (come Porta Nigra, ponte Romano, Basilica (in Trier) e altri grandiosi monumenti in altre città). IL Limes Romano in Germania, che era il confine tra l'occidente civilizzata dai Romani e il mondo barbaro dall'altro lato , dove vivevano i selvaggi, anche parte dei tuoi antenati germanici; questo penso ti ricorda qualcosa, perciò studia bene la storia. La grandezza, la potenza, la magnificenza e la gloria di ROMA SEMPER AETERNA EST, ROMA INVICTA ET CAPUT MUNDI !!!
@@rjwintl ....just remember your germanic ancestors, (prima che arrivassero i Romani, i tuoi antenati vivevano in capanne di paglia ed erano barbari) !!!
Very good video! Though you could further improve it by getting rid of the TTS voice, it takes you out of the feel that this is an actual documentary, which the music and production hint towards.
Contrary to the Japanese way of fighting battles, individual Roman soldiers stayed together to help one another finishing off adversaries. Another trick was that frontline soldiers were relieved with fresh troops continually. About the first three lines would retreats and be replaced with the fourth, fifth and sixth line. And so on. Such tactics made up the secrets of legionary strength. This meant that they would always do well against individualistic cultures like Gallic and German tribes and against undisciplined melees of fighters.
@@HGL-iq4qg The Greek phalanx was too rigid to activate "mutation". It is a purely Roman invention possible only in accordance with the modalities of deployment of the legions.
Roman front lines look a bit broken up in that melee and there are far too many shots of people being skewered right through the body by a gladius, or that reverse-grip-through-the-clavicle finishing move. There should be a nearly impenetrable shield wall and the gladii stabbing about a hand-width deep into the vitals, which was the Roman-trained way to inflict a lethal wound without risking losing the sword -- and the whole formation creeping slowly forward in a united mass. Also the subtitles should have had the bejabers edited out of them! Mind you, I have spent many, many hours playing M:TW and M2:TW and I'm more than happy to express my gratitude :)
But that's not the way the Legions fought. Where was the regular shifting of the front line, sidestepping to the rear, and the next Legionnaire stepping up? That kept an entirely fresh front line fighting.
This is spectacular and atmospheric but it has lots of contentious points. 1. Roman soldiers had to buy their own equipment and most would not be able to afford iron armour and they were likely wearing protection made from boiled leather. 2. The Romans probably took the impact of the first onslaught in their sawtooth formation. This gave them a huge advantage because the press of Britons from behind would so compress those in the front lines that they could not use their weapons. 3. Romans fought from behind their shields, intending to stab with the point only. This would be particularly effective given point 2 above. 3. As someone else has observed, the Romans would have used their javelins to thin out the front lines of Britons and force them to fight without their shields. 4. Again, as others have observed, the real slaughter happened when the fleeing Britons were blocked by their own wagons. 5. The total population of Britons would only be around 1M. How would Boadicea assemble such a huge army? The Romans tended to greatly exaggerate the numbers of their enemies.
Красавчик, брат! Ты очень атмосферно передал битву римлян с кельтами. Прекрасно и реалистично, как мне нравится. За огромное творчество большое тебе уважение и спасибо. Это уже работа специалиста. Никакой художественный фильм не сможет так передать массовость и кровавость тех битв. Только наше воображение со сценами из книг и Rome 2: Total war.
日本語の翻訳ありがとうございます。いつも観てます。とても面白いですね^ ^(You can understand the contents because it is translated into Japanese. Thank you. I'm always watching. Please continue to post interesting videos.)
Need to do one on all the battles Boudicca won against the Romans, this final war she was too confident and allowed herself to be pulled into a battle on Roman terms with little strategy...
There is only one known stone with reference to Boudicca or Buddug ( Victory) in Welsh and that is on Baiden Mountain above Tondu and Llangynwyd, the real stone being in the Margam stones museum, Bodvoc in Latin supposedly 6th Century but is on a Major Celtic Bronze and Iron Age Burial site. where there are a number of Roman five and at least Six Celtic Hillforts and many entrenchments, the writings were done many years after the actual Battle, many people in Wales over the Centuries have questioned the correctness of Watling street, noting that the Road from Colchester to West Wales was one of the first built, it is now the A48 with numerous Roman Forts and Towns along its length, also the Iceni were in what is now Eastern England ans were certainly knowing of so called Silurians of South and East Wales and know Gloucestershire in to Oxfordshire. These Celtic Tribes were known before Julius Caesar, Etruscan Greek and Egyptian Traders had visited the Island for Centuries before, Macedonians had used many of these Tribes with Alexander and many settled the area of Turkey now Anatolia but then Galatea with Ankara which is a Celtic name meaning Fortress its Capital, in Cymric Yn Caerau is a Fortress and there are many of them in Britain, also Gaer was another City and to this day is still known for its Celtic Burial Mounds, For Myself being a Celt I am always astonished how the History of what were Cymric people is twisted, Paulinus had lost a Legion in South Wales around the area between Margam and Bont Faen( Cowbridge ) , I have an opinion that Paulinus was given a makeover by Tacitus and there are also two other writers, one is not a Roman but an Iberian, they all make observations some Century or more later about a Battle but are widly different in the amounts of Dead, the Iberian Justinian wrote Six Centuries Later of the Iberian Roman Army that was Destroyed in the Cambriensis, which may well have been the 9th Legion but he mentions Camdulonum, Isca Silures and the Land of the Grey Rock on Ancient roads of Kings, my Ancestor was Sir Arthur Evans he wrote of this many times in Letters , even his time in Crete at Knossos he was still enthused by the Grey Rock of Justinian as he wrote, this book I believe is in the Vatican. He was a Monk who had travelled widly and visited Llancarfan and Llaniltyd Fawr amongst other places and knew the Cymric Language which he Called Brittania , the Term Welsh was not even thought about this time because it was a Germanic word, Gallois in France was the same Modern Wales is Galles Gales in Spain and Italy and Gallegas in Portugal, Galic in Croatia and Macedonia and the Danube Valley was also similar. The Cymric word for Ireland is Iwerddon, which it was known for Millenia before the Romans came and the people were Iweryn ( Old Welsh) 5th Century, Scotland was Alban and Caled Alban was a Pictish name and Caled Brythonic, but both spoke the same Brythonic Celtic, Picts were the same as the Pictones of Western France and Welcomed the Bretons when they arrived from Wales and Cornwall in the 4th 5th and 6th Centuries, Bretons spoke Cymric. ( Brythonic Celtic ). The Vatican hold many ancient manuscripts and writing from Greek and Roman Times, which they definitely should release and let the World see the Truth about those Tumultous times.
Well. They won and whooped the Romans, that you have to really dig to find because history is written by the victors. The Romans were saved by the traitors of the Germanic allemanic Templar tribes. Hard to find cuz those groups are still in charge today. It’s not a coincidence that hitler came out of germany
can only imagine the blood and guts everywhere the smell the sounds the sweet and blood mixed into a aweful scene that a simulation cant come close to producing thank God
Would love to have helped my Welsh forebears dispatch as many bully-boy ancient Romans as I could as an archer leading an archery contingent attacking the Roman flank !!!
They'd had a thorough ass-kicking from that very same Suetonius Paulinus already -- and what did the Welsh care about the fate of a bunch of Belgic tribesmen from about as far to the East as it was possible to be?
@@CaptainPedant … true … best thing about the ancient Romans battle tactics is that those same tactics were then learned , practiced and refined by the losing “barbarians” so that eventually the losers got better and began winning !!!
@@CaptainPedant What are you even talking about? Some bs that tribes in the east were not Celts? 😂 Bet you didn't know that the Celtic monarchy and tribal leaders internarried with many other tribes across all southern Britain. One of Cunabalin's (King of the Trinivante in Colchester) sons mother was a Queen of a northern Welsh tribe, the Ordevice. His name was Curradoc and its well documented by the Romans that after this battle he and his men spent the next ten years inflicting heavy losses on Romans, via ambush and run tactics. So there was far more cooperation and mutual respect among the British Celtic tribes than you believe. There was definitely no division between tribes that happen to live in modern Wales and the rest of Britain. That division came after the Romans left and Saxons arrived.
Incredible and amazing graphics. Men in these battles were tough warriors. To think some armies marched miles and miles for days then fought a battle. To fight just one man in a battle is very tiring, so imagine fighting man after man, so exhausting. Warriors who survived battle after battle must have been tough as stone.
I love Rome history and Rome wars, and this was very important war for Rome. Thank you for your videos man and please keep it up good work. You have definitely my support. P.S. please more and more historic wars.
The Romans fought in a series of phalanxes in this battle which meant the Celts did not hit a flat shield wall but were funneled into a series of kill zones. Brutal.
Everyone was probably lagging irl during the real battle lol Edit: did anyone else see 2 heads on a standard bearers thing? Kinda brutal tbh but they're tribespeople what can I expect?🤷♂️
Nope. They won. Whooped the legions. The traitor Germanic allemanic tribes saved the day. History is written by the victors. You have to dig unfortunately to find the TRUTH
Everything was great but the engagement…..romans engaged in a disciplined wedge formation which was the key to their overwhelming victory. The fight shown here is exactly how not to win a battle if you were a Roman. The Roman short sword is unsuited to such engagements and only good for the Hollywood screen.
Unfortunately we see the limitations of using this particular program to display the particulars of the actual fight. To see the engagement as it truly was would be awe inspiring. Imagine a giant saw slowly moving forward….Roman legions pushing the mass of constricted enemies and stabbing from behind their large shields with those short swords…..as the wounded men go down they are slowly trampled by the legion front line and then those soldiers in the second and third ranks finishing the job by stabbing down on the victims. It was like some giant grinding machine of humanity.
Amazing graphics and a good description of the battle-Boudicca's name repeatedly changed during the narrative-and the historian was Tacitus, not Takatus
...if I remember my high school Latin, which I took way way back in the last century, the Latin letter "c" is indeed pronounced as a "hard" letter, thus the pronounciation as "Takitus" would be correct...the same with the name "Caesar" which we were taught would be correctly pronouned as "KAI-sar" not "SEE-zar" as is most commonly heard today......jus' sayin' ....
Taciturn,said couse Boudicca,a great warrior woman,a Queen,fall down în batlle field with honour and blood.Was killed but not chainned back of waggon by romans to the Roman chariot,în slavery.hep,hep,hep huraaay for Boudicca the brave Queen.!Was not like Cleopatra of Aegipet,who kills by herselfs.,was a brave one and fight till to die. She prefers to fight with invaders,and has to chance a win,but they dont believe their Fortune.😮😮😮😮
Yep. And tanks. Powered by horses, fed on magic mushrooms. Firing hard potato 🥔 shells which stunned the Britons/celts/ladies, so they could be slaughtered by hand. It was tough times. Made WW1 look like a tea party. I know, cos my great great great (x64) grandad was there. He wrote a book about it. “Potatoes at dawn”. Which was a poor choice of title because the battle actually started at 4.30pm but we let him off because he spent a lot of time off his noodle on ‘shrooms. Anyhoo, the book is in my attic somewhere along with his collection of brooches. He got 3 in the end which is not bad for the time, as I say, times were tough
Paulinus arranged his army in a crescent formation to provide enfilading fire from archers. Also, with chariots, shoot one horse and the chariot ceases to exist as effective. Another account estimates Roman numbers as 20,000, (the Roman in charge in SW England refused to march his army North to support Paulinus and was subsequently recalled to Rome in disgrace) and British as 120,000.
The battle was fort near leicester where the fosse way from exeter and watling street cross.you are correct the roman govenor of sw britain stayed in exeter.The rest of the roman army were somewhere in north wales.
Be interesting to find the site and do an archaeological survey/dig. I was brought up in Suffolk, 50s, and told that Boudicca may have been buried between the villages of Garboldisham and Hopton, west of Diss.@@damionkeeling3103
Do you feel bad also for Native Americans, Australian Aborigens, Indians and Africans enslaved, exterminated and exploited by the British centuries later?
@@zaqwsx23 Yes I do. What happened was criminal. I don't agree with any of it. I don't think colonialism was right but that was at a time there was no international rules and no UN. Regardless, I'll always feel for the Aboriginals and Native Americans (Native American wars were not entirely the fault of British immigrant, look up the Jamestown massacre) As far as Indians and Africans go I'm horrified at some of the things we did but we also did some good there too. Like getting rid of women burning themselves alive at husband's funerals, building railways, schools, developing the Indian army, etc. Bottom line is I believe everyone has the right to their own land and country and I'm against almost all invasions (unless its necessary like Normandy) and forms of exploitation.
There's a detailed description of this battle along with its leadup and causes in George Shipway's Imperial Governor. Great read if you can still get it.
What I understood from various sources is that the Romans rotated the troops in order to keep up sustained fighting. Furthermore they were trained to stab with the Gladius from behind their shields instead of slashing/swinging. The gladius is designed as a stabbing weapon and a sneaky stab from behind the shield does not expose body parts of the soldier behind it and it is also more difficult to judge where the next thrust comes from. You can stab much quicker than you can swing so you can kill more people more quickly. Furthermore Romans would employ tactics such as sawtooth to entice the enemy to close and enhance the killing further. Continuous stabbing is however very tiring and after some time they need to be rotated by fresh troops and get some rest while being rotated back in again later. I guess no Roman soldier would prefer to take on enemy troops by himself as it would expose him from attacks on the sides. He would trust his comrades to back him up on the side while his arm is aching from the thrusting at the enemy. I would compare it to shield wall tactics… Sadly Total War does not model this in more detail. Only the front ranks are fighting and the ranks behind those are just standing idle. Furthermore the troops are swinging/slashing with their Gladiae and engaging in solo fights….. 😖 Furthermore, and you could have modelled that better, is you would expect the Romans to take the initiative, expert troops as they are, and close the distance to the enemy fast so they can throw a few Pila and then switch to their Gladiae. For them those barbarians are not worth their respect and they would trust their discipline, trust in their centurions and comrades, and in their training should get them victory. Even the speech of their general hints at this. At this battle the Romans would advance remorselessly until they reach the baggage train and continue their bloody work until ordered to stand down.
Yes, that's right, the Roman phalanx would rotate and rows at the back would gradually move forward until they were first in line to the action. It was communicated by the sounds of the horns as to when to rotate. I'm thinking that those behind are secretly hoping the enemy would have dispersed by the time it's their turn. And those at the front who got their worth of action and winning are just so pumped up, it's almost a disappointment they are rotated back!
Excellent summation of the battle. Amazing how these supposed history sites have Romans fighting like they were in the Coliseum. Does anyone read the account of this battle, truly. Apparently you did, and I commend you for your accurate description of the battle.
Too much of a melee. The Romans didnot fight like that. Keep in formation.! They switched front men fighting every 15 minutes or so. The Roman shuffle is like a stack formation. They were professional well trained soldiers. The Britons were not professionals and were not well equipped. I think the battle was in a narrower space where the large numbers of Britons could not get at the Romans nor flank them. Boudicca was not a very good general. Paulinus was.
@@WarAndHistory. It was still better than most and as long as the Romans beat those scurvy Britons,like a drum..... The series Rome shows the Roman shuffle, right at the beginning of ep.1 The somewhat underdone battle of Alesia. Formation, Formation. Pullo back in formation. A great series but short on the battle scenes.
It's a pity Boudican didn't learn from the Parthian defeat of Crassus Roman army with a sea of arrows fired with the composite bow which could punch through shields at the Battle of Carrhae 53 bc.
Roman soldiers were all self trained killers at close quarters, the Brits were very good at hand to hand as they had been warring with other tribes for years. But Roman were professional and been in the mass killing game for hundreds of years
The Iceni were not a Large Tribe the Largest Celtic British Tribes were in what is now Wales and Gloucestershire, Tacitus was rather Romantic with his writings.