How are shells and propellant loaded into warships' magazines? There pretty-obviously isn't room to put them in the same way they come out, but any sort of separate loading hatches or whatnot would introduce a weak spot which it seems we'd've heard about.
Are you sure that it wasn't the Kamchatka that time slipped and confused Cleopatra and got her running? They thought the phantom torpedo boats following the Kamchatka was more of Octavian's ships and fled right?
Octavian: “alright so what role will I be responsible in the battle?” Agrippa: “Literally, lay right here…and do NOTHING.” Octavian: “….are you sure? I will be…” Agrippa: “Do us BOTH a favor, and lay here and do NOTHINGGGG.”
Absolutely! Octavian had political and administrative nous, but wasn't much of a general. If he hadn't been Caesar's legal heir, I think it unlikely he would have amounted to much. Lucky for Rome that he had excellent help!
@@esmenhamaire6398 He was still a nephew of Caesar and the son of a Praetor from wealthy and (moderately) influential Gens. His life story proves that he had immense ambition and would have certainly made a name for himself even if he had a more conventional career. While he may not have been a military genius like his best friend or adopted father, he showed throughout his career that he was personally brave and of satisfactory skill in command. His real talent was in picking legates, much like Caesar. Like many of Romes greatest generals like Caesar, Scipio Africanus, and Sulla, he found a trusted friend and legate in Agrippa, who was able to execute his plans both loyally and competently, and who would not try and compete for the spotlight or step on each others toes.
@@esmenhamaire6398 Uhm, you're aware that Octavian has in various land battles showed both tactical sense and personal bravery during some charges? Which in an era where you were a good general if you could herd people and occasionally sense the right moment to charge, is quite adequate.
While sickly he wasn't too bad of a soldier but his gifts were administrative and political. Several historians have remarked that Octavian may have been the greatest statesman who ever lived. In fairness without Agrippa he may never have gotten to show much of that. His close relationship to Caesar would have doomed him by association.
"especially Agrippa, who was an excellent admiral" Mr Drachinifel though I know not whom you are I appreciate your words and herby name you as "Friend of Rome" Salwe
The victory monument overlooking the location of the battle is a monumental wall into which were set bronze rams cut off the ships of Antony's fleet. Nautical archaeologist/historian William Murray did the original attempt to correlate the cuttings to the size of vessels involved. That was years ago & interesting research back then. He has a couple TH-cam lectures and assorted articles available online as well. Worth watching/listening to for those who want a deep dive.
This week's -rum- posca rations is brought to us by the Drachinifel Brotherhood of Histriographers. The brotherhood only use the finest of historical sources. *_True Roman rations for true Romans_*
Salt water can extinguish fire like any other water. However, the Natrium in the salt gives fire a bright yellow-orange color. This might make it seem as if the flames suddenly burn more vigorously, especially when using only small amounts of water (even trace amounts of Natrium suffice for this effect).
They built a replica trireme galley in Greece and allow tourists to row it around from time to time. There are videos on TH-cam showing the galley making way. Crazy. It does look like a bird flying. Those ships fly through the water. It is almost hypnotic to see. Really beautiful design. On a side note there is a female archeologist from the Dominican Republic hot on the trail of Antony and Cleopatra's tomb. There is a documentary online about her. She might actually be on the right track. This tomb might be found soon.
Galleys were slightly bigger that triremes. They were an evolution of the design. The Olympias, that's the name of the trireme replica, looks more like something you would find in the battle of Salamis than something you would see fighting at Actium.
Fun with Romans! Lots of omens! The owl was good, but as others have already commented, you really can't top the 85-foot 2 headed snake in Etruria. Seriously, a clear account distilled from a wide variety of sources. Well done.
I first heard of the Battle of Actium when I was about 10, watching "I, Claudius" with my parents. I tried looking it up but sources were irritatingly vague and contradictory. Thank you for applying your keen mind to it and sharing your knowledge.
@@ManiusCuriusDenatus i would have to check my library or gugel. The difference between Rome and Carthargo was the Roman selfestimation as a territorial power. Carthago was a centre of merchants like Venice or the Hanse. Without territorial background there is no chance to survive.
@@laisphinto6372 255 before 0, Sicily Strait at Kamarina, 384 ships (a hundred prizes), loss of around 100k men. There is no comparable catasprophe except the Mongolian Invasionfleet for Japan, the same fate, the Japanese called it Kamikaze, divine storm, around 70k men lost.
Honestly this just makes me want to watch the naval battle from Ben Hur again, not the most accurate portrayal of history but damn does it motivate you when you're on the rowing machine!
What I really don’t get is why people assume rowers were slave. They were not, they were trained, paid and professional bulky dudes who’s profession was rowing. Think about it would you leave your life in the hands of some hungry, meek, skinny and ungrateful slaves?
Considering how much you have published from your trip to the US, I am impressed that you have time for this! Thank you, this is very interesting to me.
Thank you, Drach, it's nice to hear the conflicting records about the battle pulled together into such a plausible account by someone who actually knows their stuff about naval warfare!
Do you know Historia Civilis? I highly recommend his videos, they aren't naval centred but very in depth and they cover this whole period, his next episode is probably going to be on this very battle.
I don’t have any big questions I just want to say how much I love your channel. I’ve always been ignorant of naval matters in historical warfare and I feel that the focus is almost always on land warfare. It’s awesome to get the detailed look into naval matters that you present.
Thank you for this gallant attempt to reconcile the conflicting accounts of the battle into a sensible narrative from the perspective of a Naval historian. Well done. For myself, I cannot look at this battle without some measure of vengeful satisfaction, due to the devastating defeat inflicted upon Marc Antony. It was Marc Antony who, after seizing power with Octavian demanded the murder of the greatest of all Roman statesman of the late republic, Cicero. It was Cicero who rose from obscurity to become a consul despite not being born to a wealthy nor a politically well connected family dynasty. Cicero was an imperfect man, to be sure, and an ambitious one, but he did strive to preserve the republic through the use of his only assets, his intellect and his public speaking ability. He deserved much better than to be murdered on the orders of Marc Antony. For this crime, I always think of Marc Antony by that basest insult of my youth, he is a c**ksucker.
Agree, Cicero is one of my heroes from ancient times. His thoughtfulness, humanity and reasoning stood out in chaotic dangerous times. One of my grandchildren is named Marcus to celebrate the man. We also have Cicero's secretary, Tiro, to thank for the development of shorthand writing, including some say, the ampersand (&) in common use to this day.
This is the clearest summary of the battle that I have seen to date. Excellent research and use of diagrams, maps and archive materials. Superb piece of work.
If you want to know more about the later half of the 1st century BCE in Rome I recommend Historia Civilis, he has an extended video list about both the events as well as the way the roman republic operated at the time.
The Romans always regarded Octavian as a lucky "commander ", in that circumstances seemed to somehow benefit his efforts. As said earlier much of the surviving accounts were heavily edited to favour the imperial family, much like the Tudor reporting of the Wars of the Roses. So quite how much we can rely on the writings of Dio for accuracy I'm unsure, I think one thing is certain that Anthony's forces were "over-inflated", to make Octavian's victory look more impressive- the Roman writers have "form" in this regard but the inflation used is often variable. Regardless as to actual numbers I think the description here is a fair assessment. Nothing is said about the weather and given Octavian's almost legendary luck, this probably had an influence. So if we hypotheses that any wind no matter how light was blowing on to the shore, it would have restricted the movements of the heavier Antonian vessels and favoured Octavian's lighter ships with the skirmish battle plan presented. That alone may have been enough to turn the battle in Octavian's favour.
Octavian was a consumnate politician adept in being able to discern people to work for him,though not a military tactician he was able to select talented commanders but when coming to the matters of family and of the heart a poor decision maker,he was able to rule Rome for 40yrs as he represented stability and keeping any dissent under firm control made easier that most of the Aristocracy desired a stable government which Octavian firmly supplied.
Today luck is mostly considered as pure chance. (If I am lucky today, I may be unlucky tomorrow.) However, it is important to realize that for the Romans luck was not necessarily such a fickle thing. Being lucky (other famous examples are Sulla and Caesar himself! For both their luck was legendary. Sulla was called Felix e.g.) in the past meant you had a greater chance of being lucky in the future too. It was a sign of being favored by the gods, and there was a good chance that you would be favored by the gods in the future if you had been favored in the past. This way luck was not pure chance, but more like a character trade (like in lot of RPG games where you can increase luck for your character...) like the color of the hair. It was easier for a commander to attract new troops if he was famous for being lucky, because a potential new soldier believed that this commander would be lucky in the future too - which obviously is important for future battles...
I love the list of signs and portents Dio relates. It reminds me of the first few paragraphs of Cooks The Black Company. A list of portents (statues bleeding, an eagle being evicted, sacrificial victims escaping, images turned) followed by "But that happens every year. Fools can make an omen of anything in retrospect." Though I do wonder about the frequency of bleeding statues.
Sea battles are studied by professional Naval institutions for logistical, and strategic lessons. I remember giving a class in this, as an assignment, years ago. (1970's) The Romaans used lessons from sea battles with the Carthaginians in the Punic wars --are apparent.
That's super weird you uploaded this today for me, yesterday I was reading Dio's account of Actium and was thinking it would be interesting to be on this channel. And here it is.
I suggest some day you give us equal quality documentaries on the Byzantine-Arab naval battles of the 7-8th century! Everything for a drama is there, from the Last Stand where technology turns the tide to massive battles around/on Byzantine soil to a Siege of the great City of Constantinople itself. By the way, this was a messy battle, it's quite confusing what goes on in the centre. Keep up the good work Drach! Regards, Thomas
Octavian's secret weapon was Marcus Agrippa. I wish I had a friend as good as him, and wish I was as good of a friend.... Agrippa won the battles that made Octavian the first Roman Emperor. Not to take anything away from the young Caesar, he was brilliant.
When I hear 31 BC I still get shocked into realizing how late this battle happened and its quite long after Caesar's assassination. A lot happened in the 13 years between then and Actium but this was the end of that road the world would never be the same after
28:25 tidbit of information there. Roman galleys are always depicted with mast and sail but "themselves were without sails and prepared only for battle". I guess the mast would remain, but sail left ashore. Fire safety ? Room for the archers/artillery/corvus ?
I know Viking Longships can have the mast taken out of its socket and laid along the keel with its cross beams that hold the sail top. This is done in very bad weather and when laid up ashore for a period. Something similar is possible for these ships. If nothing else, its a whacking great leaver that could possibly be used to pull the ship over. Considering it is held aloft mostly with rope tension, removing it will also remove all those ropes that could get tangled up in things. Also sails doing what sails are meant to do, without it, the rowers are not fighting the wind if they are sailing into it, more 'free action in direction" for the commander to chose from.
And so is it stowed aboard or left ashore ? If ashore, given the fleet size how do you keep track of them ? Or are Roman Engineers (tm) so badass they standardized mast size ? Aaaarg answers only lead to more questions ^^
On triremes the mast and sail were left ashore before action, if possible. The Rhodians developed a pirate-hunting trireme with a half-bank on the upper deck, so that the mast could be lowered for action but used for cruising. Bigger galleys kept a small mast and sail for escape or emergency, but left the main gear ashore. These were very lightly-built ships.
@@Kevin_Kennelly "Your monitor capsizes. The crew manage to escape into the water...half of them survive, the sharks get the rest." "*Sharks?* We're on the **Missippippi** outside Memphis, hundreds of miles from the sea!!" "*Sigh*. Fine. The monster catfish and giant crawdads get the rest."
@@chooseyouhandle Had to scapegoat someone for his own lack of planning. Anthony is overrated as a general. A competent field commander, but he always needed someone like Caesar to tell him what to do and plan on the strategy level. In all seriousness, he had his supplies lost, no significant successes and an army to compensate for their troubles. Attacking Armenia probably was the only way out he could think of. At least his soldiers were given something for sacking.
6,939 that were not propelled by oars. That used mechanization instead of muscle power. That had probably 1/5 the crew, or less, of a similar sized Roman ship (up to the size limit of a Roman ships, of course). That had refrigeration for food. That had better means of coordination than yelling. 600 ships of that age was a massive number.
Thank you very much I thoroughly enjoyed your video. Since junior high school I've come across Actium here and there and until your video I really hadn't understood the mechanics of the battle. Of course I realize that there's no way to know For sure
Don't you Believe It Buster they had a extra-large bow and arrow along-with catapults that launch napalm like fireballs to set the enemy ships ablaze and to knock-off the oars that propelled the enemy craft Good old muscle-power and which who was their Achilles ha-ha heel they would be removing their oars inboard and they had collide smashing the other triemies oars rendering them without propulsion and the extremely nasty results with the galleys slaves which who was killed by the other biremes's colliding with their oppos ing galleys The collision on the side which who where the slaves propelled the galley which who was gruesomely squashed to pulp or transfixed by wooden splinters and drowned when they sunk finally Not very pretty is it?
If the fires on those ships were caused by naphthalene or some other petro-fuel then throwing water on it would indeed be a bad idea. You need a chemical extinguisher for that.
Actium is an interesting battle. The defeat of Anthony's forces is some kind of heroic story, but the staging operations of Octavian are the real genius of the whole campaign. His ability to raise, train, and deploy an army and a naval force, then sustain both for a longish campaign is the real story here.
One huge reason that Octavian won this war was because he did dirty dealings with Mark Antony. Antony agreed to trade 100 ships to Ocatavian for an army. Antony sent his 100 ships and then Octavian refused to send Antony the agreed upon Army.
I’ve just watch HC video on this batte, and find it’s funny how Antony got and I.O.U for the exchange😂 If Antony managed to get his hand on Octavian, he would definitely strangled him then and there.
A number of things should be remembered here as highly relevant to this battle. The first thing is that Marcus Antonius had inherited many of Julius Caesar's veteran legions. However, by the time of the Battle of Actium, most of them were dead. Antonius had conducted an invasion of Parthia 37-36 BC and it had gone very badly. Out of an invasion force of more than 100,000 Antonius had managed to lose as many as 80,000 of them from starvation and disease. His retreat from Parthia much resembled Napoleon's retreat from Moscow in 1812. Actium was barely five years later in 31 BC. So Antonius had a fairly large force but it was missing thousands of veterans dead in Parthia. This was a green, inexperienced army most of which were not Roman but Greek mercenaries. Worse, Octavian's army had had a couple of major successes in exterminating Sextus Pompeius and Marcus Lepidus. Soi they would likely have been feeling confident in themselves and their leadership. Second, Antonius had severe supply problems. His only source of supply was Egypt because he was blockaded in the Ambracian gulf. Greece was mostly hostile to him and a lousy place to feed a large army and fleet from in any case. Octavian had ready access to supply across the Adriatic relatively close at hand from Brundisium. And from Italy he could secure all manner of naval stores relatively readily, where Antonius could not. Third, Octavian's forces had relatively ample food supply after he and Agrippa had crushed Sextus Pompeius and later Marcus Lepidus. Being blockaded, Antonius' forces were under nearly a year of food shortages before the naval battle. Fourth, Antonius and Cleopatra were an alliance. Theirs was not a unified command under a naval expert, whereas Octavian's forces were under the direction of Marcus Agrippa, Octavian's best friend and brilliant soldier and engineer. So with all of these things in Octavian's favour, it's hardly surprising that the battle went badly for Antonius and Cleopatra.
These ancient seabattles are nothing but pub brawls, up to and including all the two-headed snakes, broken statuary and nobody knowing who was was there and what color's tuesday. The day some chap sorted it all out and instituted the proper, uncluttered "line-of-battle" was a great victory for civilized man over hooliganism.
When you read Plutarch on Marcus Antonius in 'Lives' you find amazing descriptions of the "wiles of Cleopatra". 'Beautiful yet not the most', 'past her prime'. Did not matter. She had an effect on men and had Anthony trained like a dog. Octavia was a good wife; one could hardly ask for better. But she finally had enough and turned to her brother for redress.
Ten banks of oars is probably a mistranslation. There’s no way such a ship could work. I’d be interested to hear more about naval combat of the era. Did Carthage really ever stand a chance?
I believe the modern scholarship suggests a 'ten' or a 'twenty' probably still only had 3-4 banks of oars but each row had 10/12/20 rowers spread between them, so the oars and the ships would've been larger and more powerful.
@@Drachinifel Would it have been possible to shorten the inboard part of an oar by having rowers who pushed opposite those who pulled? It might allow a narrower hull and permit stouter oars.
Depending on how rich Antony was feeling at the moment, it's vaguely conceivable that there was a boat or two with ten banks of oars, but it certainly would have been remarked upon at length, and in particular would have been roundly mocked for it's utter impracticality and ostentatiousness, since one way or another (density of seating and oars, or weight due to length of the oars) you'd never be able to _use_ all of those banks.
@@absalomdraconis Not really, 10 banks would mostly be unworkable. Even 3-5 rows required immense teaining for the rowers (no slaves rowing at the time, in fact using slaves and/or convicts wasn"t really practiced untill guns made rowing proficiency less of an issiue due to ramming no longer being primary tactics)
@@Drachinifel Ancient galleys were rated by the number of men in a 'room' - a vertical slice through all the banks. Three banks was the maximum, and you can't get more than 5 men along an oar (so maximum 10 if 5 are pushing and 5 pulling). The biggest known ship was a '40-er': a catamaran built by one of the Ptolemies, which was a showpiece vessel. Quinqueremes were the most usual, with a few 8s or 10s for weight.
@@absalomdraconis Shark feeding frenzy ! Modern sea battles with it's many explosions would probably scare away sharks but in ancient sea battles .. no explosions .. would probably attract many sharks.
Off topic, but any chance of an episode focusing on Wireless Telegraphy/ Radio: equipment, tactics, countermeasures etc.? Being an amateur radio operator myself, I dare say we hams would be keenly interested in such an effort. 73 de KI7GIE
"Metaphysical struggle", well, at this time period and general area, everything was a metaphysical struggle. Having a war was seen as a way to see which side's gods were stronger, particularly when both sides claimed their gods had given them the same patch of land.
Pinned post for Q&A :)
Can you cover the development of submarines before the world wars?
So when is our long awaited Nelson and Carriers of WW2 series?
@@timothytan4257 soon (tm)
How are shells and propellant loaded into warships' magazines? There pretty-obviously isn't room to put them in the same way they come out, but any sort of separate loading hatches or whatnot would introduce a weak spot which it seems we'd've heard about.
What are the pros and cons of a galley type ship vs a normal sailing vessel of the period
Some historians have alleged that Antony’s defeat was actually due to faulty fire pots issued to him by the Egyptian Bureau of Ordinance.
Are you sure that it wasn't the Kamchatka that time slipped and confused Cleopatra and got her running? They thought the phantom torpedo boats following the Kamchatka was more of Octavian's ships and fled right?
HA!
😂 Top notch comment Trench Gun
Mk. 14 Fire Pots
@@preselectlee3192 Who knew that those darn magnetic exploders would not work on ships of wood and bronze?
Octavian: “alright so what role will I be responsible in the battle?”
Agrippa: “Literally, lay right here…and do NOTHING.”
Octavian: “….are you sure? I will be…”
Agrippa: “Do us BOTH a favor, and lay here and do NOTHINGGGG.”
Absolutely! Octavian had political and administrative nous, but wasn't much of a general. If he hadn't been Caesar's legal heir, I think it unlikely he would have amounted to much. Lucky for Rome that he had excellent help!
@@esmenhamaire6398 He was still a nephew of Caesar and the son of a Praetor from wealthy and (moderately) influential Gens. His life story proves that he had immense ambition and would have certainly made a name for himself even if he had a more conventional career. While he may not have been a military genius like his best friend or adopted father, he showed throughout his career that he was personally brave and of satisfactory skill in command. His real talent was in picking legates, much like Caesar. Like many of Romes greatest generals like Caesar, Scipio Africanus, and Sulla, he found a trusted friend and legate in Agrippa, who was able to execute his plans both loyally and competently, and who would not try and compete for the spotlight or step on each others toes.
@@esmenhamaire6398
Uhm, you're aware that Octavian has in various land battles showed both tactical sense and personal bravery during some charges?
Which in an era where you were a good general if you could herd people and occasionally sense the right moment to charge, is quite adequate.
While sickly he wasn't too bad of a soldier but his gifts were administrative and political.
Several historians have remarked that Octavian may have been the greatest statesman who ever lived.
In fairness without Agrippa he may never have gotten to show much of that. His close relationship to Caesar would have doomed him by association.
“Octavian! Stay in that cockpit.”
"especially Agrippa, who was an excellent admiral"
Mr Drachinifel though I know not whom you are I appreciate your words and herby name you as "Friend of Rome"
Salwe
The victory monument overlooking the location of the battle is a monumental wall into which were set bronze rams cut off the ships of Antony's fleet. Nautical archaeologist/historian William Murray did the original attempt to correlate the cuttings to the size of vessels involved. That was years ago & interesting research back then. He has a couple TH-cam lectures and assorted articles available online as well. Worth watching/listening to for those who want a deep dive.
Correct! I have seen pictures of this!
On the stone wall, you can clearly see, where the ship's Rams were mounted.
Thanks for the tip, off to watch!
I am surprised Cassius Dio Didn't add the statement, " She turned me into a newt! I got better".
This week's -rum- posca rations is brought to us by the Drachinifel Brotherhood of Histriographers. The brotherhood only use the finest of historical sources.
*_True Roman rations for true Romans_*
Thank you for this!
Thank you fellow man of Culture, thank you
Have we found the slave stolen or absconded yet?
Thank you, Mr. Tapling!
Loving the nod to the 'Town Crier' from HBO's Rome ;)
Salt water can extinguish fire like any other water. However, the Natrium in the salt gives fire a bright yellow-orange color. This might make it seem as if the flames suddenly burn more vigorously, especially when using only small amounts of water (even trace amounts of Natrium suffice for this effect).
If they were using pitch then it's essentially throwing water onto an oil fire which would explain the results reported.
They built a replica trireme galley in Greece and allow tourists to row it around from time to time. There are videos on TH-cam showing the galley making way. Crazy. It does look like a bird flying. Those ships fly through the water. It is almost hypnotic to see. Really beautiful design.
On a side note there is a female archeologist from the Dominican Republic hot on the trail of Antony and Cleopatra's tomb. There is a documentary online about her. She might actually be on the right track. This tomb might be found soon.
Galleys were slightly bigger that triremes. They were an evolution of the design. The Olympias, that's the name of the trireme replica, looks more like something you would find in the battle of Salamis than something you would see fighting at Actium.
@@nickklavdianos5136 thanks!
@@joebombero1 you're welcome
They were the torpedo boats of their time; fast, deadly and incredibly good looking.
Olympias is quite magnificanet. Wretehed Covid shot down my rowing day😞
"Source? It came to me in a dream!"- Roman Historian, probably
Fun with Romans! Lots of omens! The owl was good, but as others have already commented, you really can't top the 85-foot 2 headed snake in Etruria.
Seriously, a clear account distilled from a wide variety of sources. Well done.
I saw one yesterday in central MO. I'm staying on the boat. Its a full moon.
It all sounds very much what an earth tremor could unleash, with things falling down and animals going potty.
Also it died by lightning??? Like what is even happening 🤣
I first heard of the Battle of Actium when I was about 10, watching "I, Claudius" with my parents. I tried looking it up but sources were irritatingly vague and contradictory. Thank you for applying your keen mind to it and sharing your knowledge.
It is astonishing how many ships and sailors were involved in these battles.
The biggest ship catastrophy ever happend, was the loss of an entire Roman fleet returning from Carthago in a storm. The Romans lost 100k men.
@@hajoos.8360 During the first Punic War correct? Amazing that they just rebuilt and re-manned another fleet after.
@@ManiusCuriusDenatus i would have to check my library or gugel. The difference between Rome and Carthargo was the Roman selfestimation as a territorial power. Carthago was a centre of merchants like Venice or the Hanse. Without territorial background there is no chance to survive.
they actually lost several invasion fleets
@@laisphinto6372 255 before 0, Sicily Strait at Kamarina, 384 ships (a hundred prizes), loss of around 100k men. There is no comparable catasprophe except the Mongolian Invasionfleet for Japan, the same fate, the Japanese called it Kamikaze, divine storm, around 70k men lost.
Honestly this just makes me want to watch the naval battle from Ben Hur again, not the most accurate portrayal of history but damn does it motivate you when you're on the rowing machine!
RAMMING SPEED!!! 😁
" .. RAMMING SPEED ! .." :D th-cam.com/video/AjmbgZ2wZvk/w-d-xo.html
@@robertbruce7686 We keep you alive to serve this ship, so row well... and live!
What I really don’t get is why people assume rowers were slave. They were not, they were trained, paid and professional bulky dudes who’s profession was rowing. Think about it would you leave your life in the hands of some hungry, meek, skinny and ungrateful slaves?
@@truekhmer7292 Galley slaves / convicts were defiantly a thing in later times.
Considering how much you have published from your trip to the US, I am impressed that you have time for this! Thank you, this is very interesting to me.
Thank you, Drach, it's nice to hear the conflicting records about the battle pulled together into such a plausible account by someone who actually knows their stuff about naval warfare!
Do you know Historia Civilis? I highly recommend his videos, they aren't naval centred but very in depth and they cover this whole period, his next episode is probably going to be on this very battle.
Yep, it was.
th-cam.com/video/t7Y-1qMKY_0/w-d-xo.html
thats just who i was thinking of when watching this video, fantastic channel
I don’t have any big questions I just want to say how much I love your channel. I’ve always been ignorant of naval matters in historical warfare and I feel that the focus is almost always on land warfare. It’s awesome to get the detailed look into naval matters that you present.
Thank you for this gallant attempt to reconcile the conflicting accounts of the battle into a sensible narrative from the perspective of a Naval historian. Well done.
For myself, I cannot look at this battle without some measure of vengeful satisfaction, due to the devastating defeat inflicted upon Marc Antony.
It was Marc Antony who, after seizing power with Octavian demanded the murder of the greatest of all Roman statesman of the late republic, Cicero.
It was Cicero who rose from obscurity to become a consul despite not being born to a wealthy nor a politically well connected family dynasty. Cicero was an imperfect man, to be sure, and an ambitious one, but he did strive to preserve the republic through the use of his only assets, his intellect and his public speaking ability. He deserved much better than to be murdered on the orders of Marc Antony.
For this crime, I always think of Marc Antony by that basest insult of my youth, he is a c**ksucker.
Agree, Cicero is one of my heroes from ancient times. His thoughtfulness, humanity and reasoning stood out in chaotic dangerous times. One of my grandchildren is named Marcus to celebrate the man.
We also have Cicero's secretary, Tiro, to thank for the development of shorthand writing, including some say, the ampersand (&) in common use to this day.
With Cicero died the Republic
This is the clearest summary of the battle that I have seen to date. Excellent research and use of diagrams, maps and archive materials. Superb piece of work.
Nicee. I have visited Actium and Nicopolis, the city Augustus built nearby to commemorate his victory. Very well maintained for an ancient city.
If you want to know more about the later half of the 1st century BCE in Rome I recommend Historia Civilis, he has an extended video list about both the events as well as the way the roman republic operated at the time.
Nice recommendation - thanks!
@@hughboyd2904 The video just went public today (12/17) and is fantastic.
The Romans always regarded Octavian as a lucky "commander ", in that circumstances seemed to somehow benefit his efforts. As said earlier much of the surviving accounts were heavily edited to favour the imperial family, much like the Tudor reporting of the Wars of the Roses. So quite how much we can rely on the writings of Dio for accuracy I'm unsure, I think one thing is certain that Anthony's forces were "over-inflated", to make Octavian's victory look more impressive- the Roman writers have "form" in this regard but the inflation used is often variable. Regardless as to actual numbers I think the description here is a fair assessment.
Nothing is said about the weather and given Octavian's almost legendary luck, this probably had an influence. So if we hypotheses that any wind no matter how light was blowing on to the shore, it would have restricted the movements of the heavier Antonian vessels and favoured Octavian's lighter ships with the skirmish battle plan presented. That alone may have been enough to turn the battle in Octavian's favour.
Octavian was a consumnate politician adept in being able to discern people to work for him,though not a military tactician he was able to select talented commanders but when coming to the matters of family and of the heart a poor decision maker,he was able to rule Rome for 40yrs as he represented stability and keeping any dissent under firm control made easier that most of the Aristocracy desired a stable government which Octavian firmly supplied.
He was lucky to have Agrippa. Of course that too was good judgement on his part.
well the"gods' favoured him and of course he played this up so it managed to become a self fulfilling prophecy
I love how the Romans would include women, children and old men in their tallies of enemy soldiers in an army
Today luck is mostly considered as pure chance. (If I am lucky today, I may be unlucky tomorrow.)
However, it is important to realize that for the Romans luck was not necessarily such a fickle thing.
Being lucky (other famous examples are Sulla and Caesar himself! For both their luck was legendary. Sulla was called Felix e.g.) in the past meant you had a greater chance of being lucky in the future too. It was a sign of being favored by the gods, and there was a good chance that you would be favored by the gods in the future if you had been favored in the past.
This way luck was not pure chance, but more like a character trade (like in lot of RPG games where you can increase luck for your character...) like the color of the hair.
It was easier for a commander to attract new troops if he was famous for being lucky, because a potential new soldier believed that this commander would be lucky in the future too - which obviously is important for future battles...
I sailed recently through the area where the battle took place on my way to the city of Nikopolis. A great experience
Did you see anybody being “mutilated by sea monsters”?
I love the list of signs and portents Dio relates. It reminds me of the first few paragraphs of Cooks The Black Company. A list of portents (statues bleeding, an eagle being evicted, sacrificial victims escaping, images turned) followed by "But that happens every year. Fools can make an omen of anything in retrospect."
Though I do wonder about the frequency of bleeding statues.
I have a copy of that book (The Black Company)! Never met anyone who had read it before.
This video is very much appreciated, given how many movies and TV shows are based on the events around this battle (I Claudius, Rome, etc.)
Sea battles are studied by professional Naval institutions for logistical, and strategic lessons. I remember giving a class in this, as an assignment, years ago. (1970's) The Romaans used lessons from sea battles with the Carthaginians in the Punic wars --are apparent.
That's super weird you uploaded this today for me, yesterday I was reading Dio's account of Actium and was thinking it would be interesting to be on this channel. And here it is.
What are the odds of that?!
You are giving me hope… maybe one day you will really cover the battle of cape ecnomus
I suggest some day you give us equal quality documentaries on the Byzantine-Arab naval battles of the 7-8th century! Everything for a drama is there, from the Last Stand where technology turns the tide to massive battles around/on Byzantine soil to a Siege of the great City of Constantinople itself.
By the way, this was a messy battle, it's quite confusing what goes on in the centre.
Keep up the good work Drach!
Regards,
Thomas
Second
Octavian's secret weapon was Marcus Agrippa. I wish I had a friend as good as him, and wish I was as good of a friend....
Agrippa won the battles that made Octavian the first Roman Emperor. Not to take anything away from the young Caesar, he was brilliant.
Wonderful ! Been there, saw the remains of the altar at the Temple and also the Rostra in Rome
19:21 - I'm tempted to add "...or because they were bored" to the list of reasons for all that skirmishing. 😉
How about a detailed breakdown of each of the different styles of ships used during this battle?? 🤔
supported
Nice presentation of what was probably just as confusing to the chroniclers of the time to describe as it is now.
We should all wish to be blessed with a friend as loyal and skilled as Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa.
Mark Anthony:
I’m too sexy for this ship
Too sexy for this ship
My love, Cleopatra is going to leave me stranded?
I'd love to see you do more content on ancient history and medieval naval history and into the age of sail; sort of a gap in my knowledge. Cool stuff!
Loved it Drach- coulda gone drama with Antony and Cleopatra in Alexandria- loved the graphics and the paintings
Thank you.
When I hear 31 BC I still get shocked into realizing how late this battle happened and its quite long after Caesar's assassination. A lot happened in the 13 years between then and Actium but this was the end of that road the world would never be the same after
Love the videos❤
Thanks for this great video.
Thank you, Drachinifel.
Thanks for doing this battle.
I always love learning about the bizarre antics of the (soon to be) emperor formerly known as Gaius Octavius got up to.
Agrippa to Octavian: Whatever you do, don't throw the chickens overboard, remember Drepana, didn't end well!
28:25 tidbit of information there. Roman galleys are always depicted with mast and sail but "themselves were without sails and prepared only for battle". I guess the mast would remain, but sail left ashore. Fire safety ? Room for the archers/artillery/corvus ?
I know Viking Longships can have the mast taken out of its socket and laid along the keel with its cross beams that hold the sail top. This is done in very bad weather and when laid up ashore for a period. Something similar is possible for these ships. If nothing else, its a whacking great leaver that could possibly be used to pull the ship over. Considering it is held aloft mostly with rope tension, removing it will also remove all those ropes that could get tangled up in things. Also sails doing what sails are meant to do, without it, the rowers are not fighting the wind if they are sailing into it, more 'free action in direction" for the commander to chose from.
Some ships, especially smaller ones, could unship the whole mast to save weight and reduce fire risks :)
And so is it stowed aboard or left ashore ? If ashore, given the fleet size how do you keep track of them ? Or are Roman Engineers (tm) so badass they standardized mast size ? Aaaarg answers only lead to more questions ^^
On triremes the mast and sail were left ashore before action, if possible. The Rhodians developed a pirate-hunting trireme with a half-bank on the upper deck, so that the mast could be lowered for action but used for cruising. Bigger galleys kept a small mast and sail for escape or emergency, but left the main gear ashore. These were very lightly-built ships.
Alexis Jonesus "yeah the python was at least 80 feet long and had two heads..."
It was also gay
I remember when i was in the military like it was yesterday. 42 years ago. Now my husband is still in the military himself
32:03 "Mangled By Sea Monsters".
I'm adding that, as a table, to the rules of our Ancient Naval wargame.
Do NOT roll a 20. Death by tentacles.
@Fred Smith : You should also consider cramps as an example, simply because you probably won't have to time to tell the difference mid-battle.
@Fred Smith I've got sharks. My ACW Ironclads game plays like Robert Shaw's 'Indianapolis speech from Jaws'.
@@absalomdraconis So the rule would be "You must wait one half hour before going back in the water.'
@@Kevin_Kennelly "Your monitor capsizes. The crew manage to escape into the water...half of them survive, the sharks get the rest." "*Sharks?* We're on the **Missippippi** outside Memphis, hundreds of miles from the sea!!" "*Sigh*. Fine. The monster catfish and giant crawdads get the rest."
Something different!
Thanks
Excellent video
Anthony's star as a statesman and a general also was fading after his less than successful Parthian expedition.
It's dirty how he punished his loyal Armenian allies for his own failure
@@chooseyouhandle Had to scapegoat someone for his own lack of planning.
Anthony is overrated as a general. A competent field commander, but he always needed someone like Caesar to tell him what to do and plan on the strategy level.
In all seriousness, he had his supplies lost, no significant successes and an army to compensate for their troubles.
Attacking Armenia probably was the only way out he could think of. At least his soldiers were given something for sacking.
Bit of a bummer getting "devoured by sea monsters" after all that.
LOL!
I wonder how much hair Drach lost trying to figure this mess out? sm
200 vs 400 ships seems like a lot of ships but keep in mind in the D-Day Landing at Normandy the Allies had 6,939 vessels.
6,939 that were not propelled by oars. That used mechanization instead of muscle power. That had probably 1/5 the crew, or less, of a similar sized Roman ship (up to the size limit of a Roman ships, of course). That had refrigeration for food. That had better means of coordination than yelling.
600 ships of that age was a massive number.
Ancient fleets were huge. The Battle of Salamis involved 380 Greek ships vs. about 800 Persians.
Imagine being involved in a love triangle so toxic that people are still talking about it 2000 years later.😅
Including one guy dumping the other guy's sister and abandoning his own kids. It's like something you'd see on Jerry Springer.
Thank you very much I thoroughly enjoyed your video. Since junior high school I've come across Actium here and there and until your video I really hadn't understood the mechanics of the battle. Of course I realize that there's no way to know For sure
Historical evidence suggests that Octavian used 20mm Oerlikens on board his ships.
Extremely effective at warding off ill omened owls but near useless against heavily armoured sea monsters and the larger more modern warships.
@@brianallan2408 That's what the Imperial Roman Navy developed the 46cm Type 3 "Beehive" naval shell for
Dumb, and not funny.
Don't you Believe It Buster they had a extra-large bow and arrow along-with catapults that launch napalm like fireballs to set the enemy ships ablaze and to knock-off the oars that propelled the enemy craft Good old muscle-power and which who was their Achilles ha-ha heel they would be removing their oars inboard and they had collide smashing the other triemies oars rendering them without propulsion and the extremely nasty results with the galleys slaves which who was killed by the other biremes's colliding with their oppos ing galleys The collision on the side which who where the slaves propelled the galley which who was gruesomely squashed to pulp or transfixed by wooden splinters and drowned when they sunk finally Not very pretty is it?
@@chadthundercock5641 I like using beehive shells.
always enjoy your content and attention to detail. sometimes comical. this is the first sea battle I've seen are their more?👍👍💯
If the fires on those ships were caused by naphthalene or some other petro-fuel then throwing water on it would indeed be a bad idea. You need a chemical extinguisher for that.
Yeah, if it's pitch tar then it's an oil fire and adding water would be a bad idea. It would explain negative results reported.
Covering it with sand was usually the go-to method back then.
@9:41 the Romans still called it "Italy", or more specifically "Italia" in nominative case.
A lucky hit from a firepot on Octavian's ship would have changed history so much..
Could you do Lepanto next?
Yes, please!
Well i Love this
A fascinating review of an ancient battlefield at sea. Thank you.🎃
Actium is an interesting battle. The defeat of Anthony's forces is some kind of heroic story, but the staging operations of Octavian are the real genius of the whole campaign. His ability to raise, train, and deploy an army and a naval force, then sustain both for a longish campaign is the real story here.
Between this and Historia Civilis Agrippa sounds like the MVP.
Solid content
One huge reason that Octavian won this war was because he did dirty dealings with Mark Antony. Antony agreed to trade 100 ships to Ocatavian for an army. Antony sent his 100 ships and then Octavian refused to send Antony the agreed upon Army.
I’ve just watch HC video on this batte, and find it’s funny how Antony got and I.O.U for the exchange😂 If Antony managed to get his hand on Octavian, he would definitely strangled him then and there.
Thank you
A number of things should be remembered here as highly relevant to this battle. The first thing is that Marcus Antonius had inherited many of Julius Caesar's veteran legions. However, by the time of the Battle of Actium, most of them were dead. Antonius had conducted an invasion of Parthia 37-36 BC and it had gone very badly. Out of an invasion force of more than 100,000 Antonius had managed to lose as many as 80,000 of them from starvation and disease. His retreat from Parthia much resembled Napoleon's retreat from Moscow in 1812.
Actium was barely five years later in 31 BC. So Antonius had a fairly large force but it was missing thousands of veterans dead in Parthia. This was a green, inexperienced army most of which were not Roman but Greek mercenaries. Worse, Octavian's army had had a couple of major successes in exterminating Sextus Pompeius and Marcus Lepidus. Soi they would likely have been feeling confident in themselves and their leadership.
Second, Antonius had severe supply problems. His only source of supply was Egypt because he was blockaded in the Ambracian gulf. Greece was mostly hostile to him and a lousy place to feed a large army and fleet from in any case. Octavian had ready access to supply across the Adriatic relatively close at hand from Brundisium. And from Italy he could secure all manner of naval stores relatively readily, where Antonius could not.
Third, Octavian's forces had relatively ample food supply after he and Agrippa had crushed Sextus Pompeius and later Marcus Lepidus. Being blockaded, Antonius' forces were under nearly a year of food shortages before the naval battle.
Fourth, Antonius and Cleopatra were an alliance. Theirs was not a unified command under a naval expert, whereas Octavian's forces were under the direction of Marcus Agrippa, Octavian's best friend and brilliant soldier and engineer.
So with all of these things in Octavian's favour, it's hardly surprising that the battle went badly for Antonius and Cleopatra.
I enjoyed this very much, thanks!
One of the coolest scenes in HBOs ROME when Octavian now know as Augustus Caesar addresses the senate and questions who will defy his rule.
That was excellent!!!
I wonder if throwing a little bit of water at burning pitch would cause it to spread, like how you are not supposed to use water on a grease fire?
Or some form of naphtha jelly.
The Egyptian breakout and ensuing charge to escape by Antony's forces seems reminiscent of the death ride at Jutland.
VERY GOOD THANK YOU.
Not the typical Drachinefel, but great!
These ancient seabattles are nothing but pub brawls, up to and including all the two-headed snakes, broken statuary and nobody knowing who was was there and what color's tuesday. The day some chap sorted it all out and instituted the proper, uncluttered "line-of-battle" was a great victory for civilized man over hooliganism.
"Ramming speed!"
- Ben Hur
17:34
But where was Biggus Dickus?
Now thats what you call a truthfully historical account, right there? Owls, two headed snakes, mobs riots?! Tik tok anyone?
When you read Plutarch on Marcus Antonius in 'Lives' you find amazing descriptions of the "wiles of Cleopatra". 'Beautiful yet not the most', 'past her prime'. Did not matter. She had an effect on men and had Anthony trained like a dog. Octavia was a good wife; one could hardly ask for better. But she finally had enough and turned to her brother for redress.
Great history lesson!
Ten banks of oars is probably a mistranslation. There’s no way such a ship could work. I’d be interested to hear more about naval combat of the era. Did Carthage really ever stand a chance?
I believe the modern scholarship suggests a 'ten' or a 'twenty' probably still only had 3-4 banks of oars but each row had 10/12/20 rowers spread between them, so the oars and the ships would've been larger and more powerful.
@@Drachinifel Would it have been possible to shorten the inboard part of an oar by having rowers who pushed opposite those who pulled?
It might allow a narrower hull and permit stouter oars.
Depending on how rich Antony was feeling at the moment, it's vaguely conceivable that there was a boat or two with ten banks of oars, but it certainly would have been remarked upon at length, and in particular would have been roundly mocked for it's utter impracticality and ostentatiousness, since one way or another (density of seating and oars, or weight due to length of the oars) you'd never be able to _use_ all of those banks.
@@absalomdraconis Not really, 10 banks would mostly be unworkable. Even 3-5 rows required immense teaining for the rowers (no slaves rowing at the time, in fact using slaves and/or convicts wasn"t really practiced untill guns made rowing proficiency less of an issiue due to ramming no longer being primary tactics)
@@Drachinifel Ancient galleys were rated by the number of men in a 'room' - a vertical slice through all the banks. Three banks was the maximum, and you can't get more than 5 men along an oar (so maximum 10 if 5 are pushing and 5 pulling). The biggest known ship was a '40-er': a catamaran built by one of the Ptolemies, which was a showpiece vessel. Quinqueremes were the most usual, with a few 8s or 10s for weight.
" .. attacked by sea monsters ..." yes, we all know what was happening .. :(
Sharks and/or muscle spasms, I would say.
@@absalomdraconis Shark feeding frenzy ! Modern sea battles with it's many explosions would probably scare away sharks but in ancient sea battles .. no explosions .. would probably attract many sharks.
thanks
The greatest land battle ever fought at sea.
Glorious
Something I read recently suggested that Antony got caught in 'Dead Water', preventing him from going anywhere
The presence of sea monsters must have greatly improved Octavian's advantage, IMhumbleO!🍻✌️🌏☮️
Off topic, but any chance of an episode focusing on Wireless Telegraphy/ Radio: equipment, tactics, countermeasures etc.?
Being an amateur radio operator myself, I dare say we hams would be keenly interested in such an effort.
73 de KI7GIE
aw yiss, spoilers for the next histora civilis video
It’s okay. Drach got permission from Tribune Aquila for it.
That fish ship would make a good looking aircraft carrier. Modern designers are so limited.
"Metaphysical struggle", well, at this time period and general area, everything was a metaphysical struggle. Having a war was seen as a way to see which side's gods were stronger, particularly when both sides claimed their gods had given them the same patch of land.
Swords and sandals and seawater!
I'm so sad "Admiral Beresford vs Second Pacific Squadron" hasn't win yet
It was a dead heat this month!
Is it possible for you one day do a guide on the USS Oklahoma?
Good Idea Senor Trotsky!