Roman films

[Valentinian Victor]

I found this link by accident, not sure if any of these films are any good, but, maybe worth a look anyway.

http://wn.com/Constantine_I_of_the_Roman_Empire

[MrHenry]

great find mate!

[juvenus]

i had watched the entire series (i think it has 6 parts or so) a year ago.
though i'm not an expert i'd like to say that this particular part of the series (about Constantine) is probably the most accurate presentation of the late roman army ever! on the screen, of course.
just look at the variety of the helmets and shields.
and what a splendid insight in the variety of the armours. especially concerning the ongoing discussion about the armours in the other thread i think that everyone may be happy with this movie...there are such a cool looking dirty mails, some metal cuirasses and muscled cuirasses too....although i'm not sure that i saw any leather cuirass

and the entire roman army looks so authentic....which means dirty! no more those shiny polished fancy museum troops
and finally, they have a proper standard-the draco.

[Joar]

It's from the BBC documentary Ancient Rome - The rise and fall of an Empire, featuring six episodes about ancient Rome. It also features a very good episode about Alaric and the sack of Rome. I would also like to mention Heroes & Villains ( also BBC ) which contains a very well made episode about Atilla the Hun. If one disregards the fact that the Hun himself is portrayed by yet another Scottish/Irish ( I can never tell... ) actor, it's certainly worth a watch.

[Dragases]

It's from the BBC documentary Ancient Rome - The rise and fall of an Empire, featuring six episodes about ancient Rome. It also features a very good episode about Alaric and the sack of Rome.

That episode was magnificent. It made good use of the sources and represented Alaric superbly.

[juvenus]

yeah, so i was right about the six episodes. gonna look up for Heroes & Villains too.

[Joar]

Yes, it's very good. The other episodes are about Spartacus, Napoleon, Richard the Lionhearted, Tokugawa and Cortéz. Good stuff.

[juvenus]

sounds good, thanks for letting us know.

btw, the only thing i'm not sure about in this movie about Constantine is the weapon...both armies, every single infantryman was shown carrying a sword. i'm pretty much sure that hasta was the primary weapon of the late infantryman, according to the "History of Greek and Roman warfare" (Cambridge edition).

[wulfgar610]

I wonder if this guy got funding, looked promising.

[Valentinian Victor]

sounds good, thanks for letting us know.

btw, the only thing i'm not sure about in this movie about Constantine is the weapon...both armies, every single infantryman was shown carrying a sword. i'm pretty much sure that hasta was the primary weapon of the late infantryman, according to the "History of Greek and Roman warfare" (Cambridge edition).

It's difficult to know how the troops were armed during the Age of Constantine. Yes, they had a sword, but its just possible that they could have still been armed with pila and veruta as we are not sure when the switch to the Spiculum occured.

[juvenus]

It's difficult to know how the troops were armed during the Age of Constantine. Yes, they had a sword, but its just possible that they could have still been armed with pila and veruta as we are not sure when the switch to the Spiculum occured.

are u suggesting that thrusting spear as a prime weapon was introduced later? perhaps mid 4th c.?

no doubt, the troops of Constantine age had a sword. i wonder if they already started using a spear as a close melee weapon?

[Valentinian Victor]

are u suggesting that thrusting spear as a prime weapon was introduced later? perhaps mid 4th c.?

no doubt, the troops of Constantine age had a sword. i wonder if they already started using a spear as a close melee weapon?

I think the consensus is that it was during the reign of Diocletian that the Spiculum began to replace the pilum. A careful reading of Vegetius tells us that pilum use did not die out completely, it was rarely used he said, being in the main replaced by the Spiculum. He also said that the troops were then also armed with the veruta javelin and five martiobarbuli (darts). I find it odd that there is no specific mention of either plumbata or martiobarbuli in Ammianus, yet he does make reference to troops throwing Spiculum, Hasta, Veruta and Pilis (pilum).

[julianus heraclius]

are u suggesting that thrusting spear as a prime weapon was introduced later? perhaps mid 4th c.?

no doubt, the troops of Constantine age had a sword. i wonder if they already started using a spear as a close melee weapon?

If I may speculate here, and ask for comment; is it possible that what we have is the evolution of the legionary from being swordsmen primarily in the 3rd Century to becoming a spearman by the 4th Century. Not that spears weren't in use in the 3rd Century but that legionairies were taught to fight with swords in hand to hand combat whereas by the 4th Century the sword was only used when the spear broke.

Is this plausible and does it effect the type of training that a legionary would undertake?

PS: If this topic continues then I would suggest opening a new thread dedicated to this.

[juvenus]

If I may speculate here, and ask for comment; is it possible that what we have is the evolution of the legionary from being swordsmen primarily in the 3rd Century to becoming a spearman by the 4th Century. Not that spears weren't in use in the 3rd Century but that legionairies were taught to fight with swords in hand to hand combat whereas by the 4th Century the sword was only used when the spear broke.

Is this plausible and does it effect the type of training that a legionary would undertake?

PS: If this topic continues then I would suggest opening a new thread dedicated to this.

to a certain extent-yes. check VV's and mine correspondence on this.
although i wouldn't say their training changed a lot. the author of the file "Legions re-envisioned" (i suggest everyone to read it) says that Roman troops still trained and fought with a sword (Spatha). it's just that they primarily oriented towards a defensive posture and thus they used a shield-wall in the beginning of an engagement. the battle of Strasbourg is a fine example of this-the Romans clearly awaited for the barbarian onslaught. this battle along with the battle of Ad Salices and battle of Adrianople gives us a clue that Romans probably used the two lines formation on a regular basis. this makes sense cause a legion (and the armies on the whole) were smaller than during the early empire when they employed the fantastically effective triple lines or even quadruplex.

unfortunately, it's impossible to represent this in game. ideally, the romans would start a fight with throwing light spears/darts, then lock it up and use the heavier spears and finally employ the swords if needed.
it is, however, possible that in some cases they would throw all their spears and draw swords from the very beginning.

in effect, it's a bit complicated....too bad no Roman survived to tell us the details

@VV:
Phil Rance's file is already in the library. gonna read it too.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

I'll have to look it up. I live in america AND have cable so I don't get BBC and the history channel here only does stuff about pawn shops and rednecks.

[juvenus]

i see. but after reading Ammianus, especially the part called "The inroads of the Isaurians" where he describes Roman troops locking their shield and waiting for the barbarians to charge them, i've gotten the clear impression of Roman troops holding the shield-wall. it makes me believe that a spear was held as a primary weapon while a sword was pulled out only after the spear was broken and/or thrown.

iirc, Ammianus also says something about troops at Adrianople and their broken spears, right? it also indicates that Romans fought melee with the spears. i'm talking about this because, in that movie, all troops fight exclusively with swords. i question the accuracy of such a presentation.

[Valentinian Victor]

i see. but after reading Ammianus, especially the part called "The inroads of the Isaurians" where he describes Roman troops locking their shield and waiting for the barbarians to charge them, i've gotten the clear impression of Roman troops holding the shield-wall. it makes me believe that a spear was held as a primary weapon while a sword was pulled out only after the spear was broken and/or thrown.

iirc, Ammianus also says something about troops at Adrianople and their broken spears, right? it also indicates that Romans fought melee with the spears. i'm talking about this because, in that movie, all troops fight exclusively with swords. i question the accuracy of such a presentation.

Yes, the impression from both Ammianus and Julian is that they began to adopt a more shieldwall type fighting formation, called the 'fulcrum', do an internet search for Philip Rance's paper about this.

The reason why every film shows Romans and other ancient infantry with spears and then in close combat using swords is purely down to health and safety reasons. I believe several extra's were killed in battle scenes before the 1960's by being accidently run through by spears. Similarly, you will see that most cavalry have stirrups despite they being first introduced into the west during the 6th Century. This is again down to health and safety concerns, especially after the death of the actor Roy Kinneer.

[juvenus]

Yes, the impression from both Ammianus and Julian is that they began to adopt a more shieldwall type fighting formation, called the 'fulcrum', do an internet search for Philip Rance's paper about this.

The reason why every film shows Romans and other ancient infantry with spears and then in close combat using swords is purely down to health and safety reasons. I believe several extra's were killed in battle scenes before the 1960's by being accidently run through by spears. Similarly, you will see that most cavalry have stirrups despite they being first introduced into the west during the 6th Century. This is again down to health and safety concerns, especially after the death of the actor Roy Kinneer.

ah, thanks a lot VV for clarifying those things for me! i'm gonna look up for Rance too.
and that file we talked about, from the library thread, the "Legions re-envisioned" also concludes that LR infantry adopted the shield-wall as a primary formation (unless when they had to charge an enemy, for some reason) and thus also adopting a thrusting spear as a prime weapon cause a spear was significantly more useful when the soldiers locked their shields in a tight formation. even more, a sword is practically useless in such a formation cause one can't afford a space required for a proper slash, i.e. u can basically only thrust and in that case a spear with its longer range is ur weapon of choice.

[2Shy]

I found this link by accident, not sure if any of these films are any good, but, maybe worth a look anyway.

http://wn.com/Constantine_I_of_the_Roman_Empire

Great movie !

[Blatta Optima Maxima]

I think you can watch the full series of that BBC show on youtube. At least I did.