@Skyhawk Apodaca Think what you want, the fact of the matter is that Britain is not hated in the majority of it's former colonial possessions. Britain is actually a very popular country, which would be strange given how recent it's empire was if it really was the most despised in history.
Fun fact, Britain was the only Roman province that had a rebellion for every single year it was part of the Roman Empire. That's 300 years of constant war.
Most of those weren't by actual Britons but the local governors of the province lol. You see the conquest of Britannia led to a unique situation. The legions and governors there were thousands of miles away from Italy and seperated by the sea. This meant that Britannia was given a large number of legions and the Roman navy to fend for itself. Any governor who was stationed there for a long time eventually would have the brilliant idea of taking the Britonic legions, some local reinforcements and either just march on to Rome to take the throne or he'd declare himself independent. Even Constantine the Great himself did the same.
@@zippyparakeet1074 That probably played a part, but wasn't the whole picture. Britain was also the least Romanised province in the Empire with local indigenous leaders left in charge for the most part. It was kind of like Romes version of the Wild West. Not to mention, though there were Legions in Britain, they probably weren't British Legions because the Romans were smart and didn't base native soldiers in their own lands to avoid any chance of fuelling an insurrection.
Baldrick The dung spreader but it doesn’t represent the people of that time... therefore it being incorrect history, therefore people noticed it and commented on it
@@tomwilkinson7879 Yeah, I just think people don’t have to ridicule the video and those who made it. But you’re right, they could have gotten a better person for the role.
@rodittis Don't judge a book by its cover. Anyone can be a formidable fighter, if the person has been training, knowing how to fight, going into battles, and in war.
Which is hilarious when you realise that when these people talk about how scary the "brits" were there actually referring to the og British the celts. And the people who are bragging about how scary they were are English also known as Anglo-Saxons who weren't even on the island at the time. Idk why it just rubs me the wrong way ik it's not that deep
@@danielcarthy9250 oh shut up ! No nation is of pure breed we are all a mixture one way or another. We have been as we are for almost a thousand years so laugh that off happy boy !
@@danielcarthy9250 Britons. British. You're being kind of petty. Celts still exist today amongst the population. Plus its pride in the reputation of the island still, its nice to think of it as a place that's taken seriously.
@@JoeVington, seen it many times, but the worst was on a navex at Leek. Marching on a baring was literally sending a man forward to the limit of sight, having them move left or right into the baring, then catching up, at times only 8 paces.
The Romans weren’t scared of “Britain” (otherwise they wouldn’t have occupied all of England). They were scared of Scotland, and only Scotland. Thus Hadrian’s Wall.
They did actually go into Scotland a second wall was built it’s the highlands they wouldn’t go into probably due to a united front from the tribes/clans as the usual divide and conquer wouldn’t work plus a lack of any resources worth going north for .
They were all Celtic tribes who inhabited the island of Britain, there was no notion of "England" or Scotland". Are we really trying to point score by ignoring historical facts?
@@medievalhistoryhub completely agree. Im currently writing a book on my theory on how i think the tribes could have retaken the island from rome. And possibly what britain might look like if the tribes had united, leaving no cause to form England, Wales or Scotland.
Not only did Scotland not exist (it found its genesis through the Romans in the building of Hadrian and Antonine's walls) but new evidence suggests that the walls were at least partially built to facilitate trade and impose taxes more efficiently. This would suggest that the Romans had far more control over the celts than previously thought. Furthermore, there was little in Scotland to be desired. The Roman empire stretched across the whole of Western and Southern Europe, North Africa and Western Middle east. Why would you waste men and resources taking a barren land when you were facing very real threats from the Germans and Persians, whose lands actually held wealth (especially the middle east, which was of such economic importance that Constantinople became the new capital of the Empire).
Tolkien had alot of inspiration from the native welsh the english didnt arrive in Britain until the saxon invasion the elvish language from lotr is based on welsh
This was never about how scary the natives were, it's a story about how mystery and fear of the unknown leads humans to fill the void with their own imagination and dread. The real bravery was that the Romans crossed their forces despite the superstitions of their soldiers, not because there was an absence of them.
nah, the video is just bad... It forgets to tell you that the Romans already invaded and defeated Britons 100 years before Claudius... Caesar did it... fearing Britons made no sense
@@eduardgherasim2896 Caesar was repelled by the Britons and fled back to Gaul, which had already been softened up by Roman scheming. On every occasion that they came, the Romans brought other Celtic tribespeople with them who know the local customs and terrain, and this is what truly allowed them to overcome their fear.
Jeez, still butthurt because they were conquered by the most formidable empire that ever ruled over Europe 2k years ago. This is even more pathetic than Asterix. Those cel... anglos.. mmhhh.. dane... whatever, are really rancorous.
I feel like the historical record doesn’t agree with this at all. The Roman army was highly professional and very experienced. They had fought Celts before I’m Gaul and crushed them. They had been fighting the Germans on and off for sometime; the Germans had actually managed to give the Romans some stinging defeats and yet the Legions weren’t terrified of them. Furthermore, the Britons won almost NO major battles against the Romans until Boudicca’s revolt and even that was eventually crushed. Smithsonian also seems to forget that many British tribes actually sided with Romans against their fellow Britons. So much for a common foe. Deeply disappointed, Smithsonian....
The term Celts and gauls was used to describe many different types of tribes in different geographical areas. Sort of a catch all term like barbarians or immigrants.
@@bigjohn697791 thats because they arguably were the same. The people of Gaul (France), Britain and Ireland were all Celts, with the exception of a handful of tribes.
@@julianhermanubis6800 Still made them bow to Romans, at least on paper... The reality was that they were so poor and decentralized it was a huge waste of resources to keep them under control for absolutely no benefits... People forget that even Gaul was actually a black hole in the Roman budget (who are you gonna tax when they can barely grow enough food to survive in that climate and with such low population density)... Pretty much most of the revenue came from Egypt and the East of the Empire (from the civilized areas with cities, trade and industry), and partially from the Spanish sliver mines. That is also why Rome never expanded across the Rhine permanently.. Even England, once they did for the mineral reserves, was not really worth it considering they had to keep quite a big, costly garrison (unlike Gaul, in winter they could not really send troops accross the channel so it was logistic nightmare)... and then it backfired because it gave the Governors too much power (having too many legions) which led to a few of them declaring themselves Emperors and crossing into Europe trying to take the crown... Constantine The Great for example actually managed to do it.
Boudicca wasn’t English she was Celtic. The people we know as “English” didn’t show up in Briton till after the Romans left. The Anglo-Saxons were German tribes that migrated to Britain in the 5th century
Haha the English? The people at this time were more Welsh than English. Also, the 'people of this island' put up enough of a fight to stop the Romans conquering the northern third. Also remember the first two attempts failed...
They weren't wrong. Probably the most resource draining conquest in the history of the empire. A lot of Scottish historians maintain they never had significant control of the north.
In the battle of Watling Street, 10,000 Roman legionaires defeated 230,000 Britannic warriors, having ca. 800 men lost of their own, whereas Boudica's army lost est. 80,000 warriors. Roman legionaires had no reason to be scared of the Britannic tribes. The Romans had an overwhelming military superiority.
What happened at Camulodunum deserves special mention as it was not simply a battle, but a systematic slaughter of every Roman who lived there. The rage of the occupied Britons is hard to overestimate. The wound that had been festering among the British tribes at the rough handling of the indigenous people was finally cauterised with the systematic butchering of every Roman in Camulodunum... Camulodunum was no different to any other Roman occupied town at that time. *With the indigenous peoples being taxed to pay for their own servitude, the occupation was universally despised*
Romans were not scared of the British Isles, they were just not very interested in them. Not particularly rich in natural resources, very far from the centre of the Empire and costly to maintain even with the Antonine and Hadrian's walls in place. Being assigned there for a Roman prefect was a sign of disfavour and waning political clout.
Sure, that's why Britain was one of the most heavily militarised zones in the whole Empire. The Romans kept a disproportionate amount of their army in Britain just to waste money. If it wasn't worth it then the Romans would have abandoned Britain like they did northern Scotland. They first invaded Caledonia around 80, fought some great battle apparently and then left. They had a go at invading Caledonia a couple more times before giving up for good in 210. Give the reasons you like but for the Caledonians they held off Roman attempts at occupation for 130 years before the Romans found something more pressing to do.
@@damionkeeling3103 Except Britain wasnt one of the most heavily militarised zones in the empire, so your argument has a flawed basis... Aside from the southern coastal areas, it was a backwater.
as far as I know the british isles had silver mines. Most people ignore also the fact that romans copied many things from the british. The roman spatha for example was basically a celtic longsword. Just like the gladius was copied from iberian swords and the helmet with cheek protection was copied from the celts as well.
I like these videos but they always end without telling the whole story. They should be a little longer. As for the sacred food, eaten in little bits, that made them endure almost anything, it was probably a naturally occurring narcotic. That is often the case with many ancient warrior tribes. They took the "magic" because it made them fearless.
@@entropy5431 Yeah they did, the Kirkburn burial dates somewhere from 250 - 160 bc, that's at least 100 years before Caesar invaded and at least 200 years before the Claudian invasion. It includes a chainmail shirt.
Yes Brtain is able to write the history because they were able to conquer a quarter of the world. As Churchill said, "history shall be kind to me, for i shall write it". History is written by the winners.
@@apokos8871 The losers of great wars and battles are usually killed so how can they write good things about themselves. Britain won most wars and so can write what they like and hide what they dont like.
@@bieituns in how many wars in history the losing side lost all their rulers and historians??? especially in modern (past 16th century) history. also, in pretty much every war there were neutral observers that wrote down what happened. even for your example, when Britain was the top dog, you seriously think we dont have writings from French, German and Russian historians? visit the site of any university, (not the one for PR, the one for students), go to the library options and check the list of suggested books. you will see writers from all over the place. i can even give you my university's suggested bibliography so you can check the sources
@@Peterblack12 Oh I'm sorry, I was referring to the island itself, not the nation which came much later; I probably should've just said modern-day Scotland to avoid confusion?
@@johnfraire6931 the British were Welsh. The original British. The Picts were a different tribe. They both were Celtic people, so biologically similar, but very different culturally. Had different language and customs than the Welsh or Brits.
Britain, at the time of the Roman Empire, was a cold, misty, wind-swept land that is much like the forests of Germania. While the Romans were able to beat these peoples on a pitched battlefield, this advantage evaporated when the locals figured out that they could ambush, surround, or in the case of this video, use psychological warfare against the Imperials. Roman soldiers dreaded being posted there as it was unlikely they would be able to survive their entire enlistment period. Even though Hadrian and Antoine built walls to "keep out" the Caledonians, Picts, Hibernians, and other peoples living north of these walls, they did little else than essentially trap themselves in with the Iceni, Brigantes, Dumnoni to name the most prominent tribes at the time of the Roman conquest. While on this side of the walls, the Romans, and eventually the Vikings, Saxons, and Normans managed to wipe out their languages; Irish, Welsh, Manx, Cornish and the Gaelic languages are a glimpse of what these people spoke. Britain is a nation with the most prominent "Celtic" cultures and it was their tenacity, strict adherence to their cultures, and surprising cultural and scientific innovations that ensures this culture remains.
How much of actual British culture is Celt though??? I mean most of the language is a combination of Anglo-Saxon (Germanic) Latin and French (Latin of origin brought by Normands who were Norse by blood but became French)... like how many words are actually of Celtic origin? what % of English? BTW trap themselves with Iceni? Looking at that wall the only thing north of it is Scotland, the cold, rainy, dark place where no Roman wanted to live anyway and a small part of the Isles. I would say the Romans had the biggest and most livable part of Britain and avoided overstretching.
@@eduardgherasim2896 Most of the modern celtic languages are, celtic languages were sadly never written down besides celtiberian in Iberia, however the celts there obviously got romanized.
It’s hilarious how the mid to late Romans feared the Britons when their ancestors went toe to toe with Carthaginian war elephants If Mars were watching he wouldn’t allow such a disgrace....
"Roman Soldiers Were Pretty Scared of Britain", but Julius Caesar conquered Britain for the Roman Empire, and then Rome ruled Britain for four centuries? OK...?
The romans weren't scared of the britains. They just got fed up from the locals only talking about their 'footie clubs' and the horrible food and weather.
The Romans controlled all of England so it didn't really make a difference if they feared them or not lol. Stop being salty in the comments. No country is perfect and neither are you Britain 🤣
Ik you're being sarcastic but those walls actually were for protection against the Britons (btw Scots hadn't spread from Ireland back then). They didn't see it as worthwhile to invade though.
Freeze the frame at 1:24. Unless I'm very much mistaken, this man used to purposely cut himself. Why do people do that? Often, it's partly because they hate themselves, are emotionless and can't 'feel' anything, and/or they are severely depressed. Now, please read the rest of the comments on this video with that important information that most have seemed to miss. Sometimes YT comments are genuinely hilarious and in good taste, and sporting. Not this time, in my opinion.
“Worst of all, they didn’t have the same gods” the romans and celts had very similar gods as they were both indoeuropeans but also Rome would adopted all of the gods of their enemies... we need to stop viewing religion through a monotheist point of view to understand
I would have loved to have been alive back then, don't get me wrong, it's still a beautiful island, but the chance to see it before industrialization and overpopulation.
2:38 "the Britons were skilled at warfare because they were in constant warfare with one another" that could be applicable to any population in that era
@AyeNaeBotherMate A ok so before, during and in the case they weren't conquered at all by Rome the many Gaulish, Iberian, Lusitanian, Numidian, Dacian, Illyrian and especially GERMANIC tribes without counting the numerous steppe populations werent all in a constant state of warfare? Ok cool story. Also there were constant and I mean constant generation spanning revolts that bled the Romans dryand that were arguably never put down completely so to say the Romans kept the peace inside their territory is a gross simplification, even italic tribes were still revolting in the early imperial days.
Romans were notorious for their propagandas and exaggerating the strength of their enemies, that way it makes Roman victories seem more magnificent. In reality Caesar landed on the British isles and easily defeated all resistance without any calvary. He then left because it was such a miserable place.
According to some historiography, the Romans were frightened by the Celtiberians,the Gauls, the Germans, the Britons, the Parthians, the Dacians....and probably by the cats.
Not really, shield provides a good protection for allmost entire body (at front). Only piece of armor you actually need is helmet, since shield would not protect it without obstructing the user's vision.
Even worse: They were not like other barbarians, with barbaric weapons. These guys, whilst considered as such still, were pretty militarised. Their spearmen being the most notable.
So basically, they were afraid that they were everything that the Roman legions have already experienced? And in reality weren't? In all reality, Caesar fought worse in the Guals and other Germanic tribes.
Caesar. One man. Not Rome. That's why historians for century have aptly called that chronology in history as "Caesar in Gaul", not the entirety of the friggin Roman Empire. Rome was an extremely flawed endeavour, littered with brilliant minds.
@@sboloshis1188 The Romans never beat the Gauls. Saying that you need to separate Caesar and Rome is like saying the United States never be England in a war because it was Washington's victory. How can you separate two things that are one? How do you think the Romans felt when Hannibal of Carthage stormed Rome from the north with battle elephants?.... Lol.
King Arthur: How do you do, good lady? I am Arthur, king of the Britons. Whose castle is that?Peasant Woman: King of the who?King Arthur: The Britons.Peasant Woman: Who're the "Britons"?King Arthur: Well, we all are. We're all Britons, and I am your king.Peasant Woman: Didn't know we had a king. I thought we were an autonomous collective.Dennis: You're fooling yourself. We're living in a dictatorship! A self-perpetuating autocracy, in which the working classes...Peasant Woman: Oh, there you go, bringing class into it again.Dennis: Well, that's what it's all about! If only people would--King Arthur: Please, please, good people, I am in haste. Who lives in that castle?Peasant Woman: No one lives there.King Arthur: Then who is your lord?Peasant Woman: We don't have a lord.King Arthur: What?Dennis: I told you, we're an anarcho-syndicalist commune. We take it in turns to act as sort of executive officer for the week...King Arthur: Yes...Dennis: ...but all the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special bi-weekly meeting...King Arthur: Yes I see...Dennis: ...by a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs...King Arthur: Be quiet!Dennis: ...but by a two thirds majority in the case of more...King Arthur: Be quiet! I order you to be quiet!Peasant Woman: "Order", eh? Who does he think he is?King Arthur: I am your king.Peasant Woman: Well, I didn't vote for you.King Arthur: You don't vote for kings.Peasant Woman: Well, how'd you become king, then?
So this is why the pope had such a strong influence in europe, its because rome conquered most of it, converted to christianity. They were still under italian influence.
Well not truly cos they had to build walls to keep them away from Roman forts and also even when travelling between forts on their side of the wall they'd have to bring a small army with them cos they didn't manage to actually conquer the area and would constantly get attacked by nearby tribes. They needed a huge garrison to maintain a presence there and trade with the locals to establish friendly relationships.
Also they struggled to deal with the hit and run guerrilla tactics used by Britons, with chariots being a specialty. They basically conquered Britain in the same way the Americans conquered Vietnam or Afghanistan.
The rewriting of history here in this video. The people that lived on the island before the Italian/Romans settled there, committed human sacrifice, and were cannibals. The Romans detested these practices and defeated these native barbarians that attacked the Roman brick, cut stone, and mortar-built cities there, and they named the island Brittania. They settled there, and remained there under Roman rule for well over 400 years, building at least 42 cities there, including Londinium (London), and 2 giant walls, up north, with forts and soldiers there, to keep out the barbarians. Over time, the Romans civilized the natives and the modern people there now are decendents of the civilized Romans. The Western Roman Empire ended because millions died from malaria.
Roman soldiers we’re probably more fit. Better training and better food. They required them to train with heavier gear than they would normally use so they would be tougher in long marches and during battle.
I usually find all of these few minute clips on this channel to be interesting but found this one in particular to be over the top for some reason! Maybe it was my terrible American schooling but its fascinating to hear about people interacting that you wouldnt normally. I.e. romans - brits. I think of the parthenon for romans and late 1800s for the brits. Seems so distant from one another yet they actually interacted at one point or another
A) yeah this was a really weird video B) It'd be unwise to compare the Britain of today to the Britain the Romans found in the same way its unwise to compare the Romans of then to the Italians of today :)
