What I've always found Fascinating about the roman empire is that it's not Like the Empire of Alexander or Attila the Hun, which grew very large very quickly but collapsed as soon as their founders died. Over time Rome went from a small Etruscan-influenced city-state into a republic that beat Carthage, and then became a vast empire. And although many people say that the roman Empire lasted for a thousand years, in fact it lasted for ~2000 years, since it's eastern half still called themselves the roman empire up until the fall of constantinople in 1453. The romans weren't the great inventors we used to think they were, but rather the great evolvers. Gradually adopting the inventions of others and perfecting them. First they adopted the scutum from their neighbours, then they adopted the mail armor and helmets of the celts, then the gladius of hispania, the inventions and arts of the greeks, and they perfected them all. They were a really fascinating people, adopting useful things and unifying peoples, which is precisely what other cultures of the time avoided.
To add to what you said. They adopted and evolved the Spanish gladius and Spanish pilum for themselves also. They did invent Lorica Segmentata armor themselves though.
Holy pasta of perdition, you're right. I just read this comment and it made me think about... Tamriel. The Elder Scrolls. The Imperials are stated as being the best at getting along with the other races, hence their ability to unify them without bloody conquest. And... I just realized, from reading your comment here, just how much of that Bethesda derived from history. Not just the basic appearance, but the whole "adopt and unify" thing.
12:42 The boss of the shield (Umbo) is not meant to protect your hand, even though it may appear obvious. Its sole purpose is to make shield more maneuverable when you get your hand "inside" the shield and get a better grip with shallower handle. It is reinforced because it would be a real bummer if the "Umbo" became detached during a battle.
the byzantines obviously were Roman and should also count as that so yes they did last that long. and no they didn't just become non Roman because they changed there way of doing things
@12:50, The reinforcement is all around the shield because if you are in combat and the top part takes a lot of damage and now the attacks can come through, you flip it over and use the bottom part because it has less damage, so the shield has no top or bottom part.
When I'd heard how the legionaries held their shields I was surprised but ok how hard could it be? Well very hard actually, I started to pretend to hold one, moving it around and fighting a screeching screaming drunk barbarian and it began to make sense but it wasn't something that just "came to me" naturally, I can see why you'd want your guys to have LOTS of training where they reacted automatically to what the German line was trying to do. Imagine holding a big shield, walking forward to the cadance, throwing pilum, then charging with your mates and smashing into the barbarians then forming up into their lines at that point...training and automatic discipline must have been very important, after all the empire spent a lot of money on you and don't want their property wasted by doing stupid barbarian type maneuvers that would get them killed. Smart soldiers were winning soldiers as long as they had the training to back them up I guess.
You give a lot of useful information in this tutorial. I always wanted to know how the shield was used and you answered that question. Thanks for sharing this.
I higly appriciated your effort to do researches and your serious attitude toward historical subject. Your presentation have detoxicated my brain from film and game. Once again, thank you
Well first of all many thanks to you. I really like the channel, specially the roman theme. Not much stuff of such quality is available on TH-cam. Keep up the good work. I actually have a clarification about the shield. Or rather about the picture on the shield. I've read Stephen Dando-Collins - Legions of Rome. And he discusses this most famous logo we always see on roman shields as depicted in pop-culture - wings and lightning bolts. He says that in fact the use of wings on the regimental logo was almost unique to praetorian guard. And these troops were not supposed to be present on a regular battlefield. The reason why this emblem of wings and lightning bolts got so popular nowadays is because this logo is depicted on legionary shields on Trajan's column. And the reason it is depicted there is because the column was made in Rome by greek artists who had no idea about roman army and legionary emblems. They were told to depict battles and legionaries and they used what soldiers were available as their models which happened to be praetorians stationed in Rome. So while this logo of wings and lightning bolts is historically accurate for certain praetorian cohorts it would be much better to depict legionary shields with more common emblems. For example a bull would be appropriate for most legions drafted in Spain and a boar would be common for legions from Gaul. I am no historian myself and if anyone can correct me here - please do that. But I'm sort of tired of seeing the same wings and bolts everywhere anybody wants to depict a legionary when there was a whole bunch of other cool logos.
Nice video. I am still excited to see that many illustrations of roman legionaires still come from the legendary book of Peter Connolly, "The Roman Army". which I own since my childhood days in the seventies. Furthermore I had to laugh when you showed the illustrations with german annotations..
My understanding is that the Scutum was also used as a counter attacking offensive weapon: punching the boss into the face of an enemy in the press to gain distance to execute a gladiator strike or a line rotation, for example. Also the metal lining at the bottom of the shield could be used against the feet and shins of an enemy if opportunity presented. Similarly an enemy that had been felled but was still very much alive could be dispatched by dropping the bottom of the shield onto their throat as the line rolled over the enemy front. It was a nasty piece of kit.
Hi Metatron, nice video. Just thought I'd mention that you can improve your English slightly by dropping the S from "informations". "Information" doesn't get pluralised in English because it is a mass noun that treats any quantity as a single unit rather than a number of discreet measured units. If you feel the need to use a plural "data" is the pluralised form of "datum" and can in most cases be used as a synonym for "information". It can be pluralised because it is a count noun that refers to discreet units of information, just like "fact" and "facts".
+lancer D Hey there, thank you very much. In Theory I know that rule, but I always end up forgetting it when I am in front of a camera. Thank you for reminding me, I will keep it in mind next time ;)
Metatron No worries, I know English is hard, and yours is really, really good. The only errors you make are very tiny things like that that don't prevent you from being understood at all, they just act as a clue that you aren't a native speaker. Your English is more than good enough, and I normally wouldn't think it was worth mentioning, but I figured that as a linguist you'd probably be interested in stuff like that, so don't worry about it too much, just keep making awesome videos.
Are there any kind of organizations, associations, etc. that keep these old Roman legion traditions alive to this day? For instance, Sweden's line infantry during the 1600s and 1700s have become legendary as well, the Carolean Army, or Karolinska hären in Swedish, and there are associations that keep the Caroleans alive; we have, for example, sällskapet Smålands Karoliner, that display formations, battle tactics, musket fire, etc. Then we have schools in Japan, that still offer traditional training offered to the Samurai and Ninja - but how about the legendary Roman army?
Bent shields are harder to turn for the enemy too. A flat surface can be jabbed with a spear near the edge of the shield, pivoting it and exposing the user
What dyes did they use? Red, gold and blue could be almost as expensive as purple, depending on the source and quality. PS: I would never want to use such a cumbersome shield unless I was besieging a position with a crossbow... this shows how fit they must have been.
yes i immediately thought the same when i imagined to lift 10 kgs with only your shoulder strenght. I do some home workout and i use 10 kgs only for about 20 or 30 repetitions.
the Creative Assembly machinimas Me too LOL. I can't imagine keeping it in position and moving around for 30min while someone keeps hitting or kicking it.
the Creative Assembly machinimas Or imagine the late middle age doing an obstacle course in full armor (stairs, above small walls, over hills, puddles of mud, laying down and getting up again and THEN do sparring). I am pretty sure it was done, just as some training weapons were heavier than the actual weapons to achieve intensive training.
The average Roman soldier was 170cm, I was wondering what your height was as being significantly taller would make the shield less protective and more difficult to wield.
Please bring more about the 3-4 different periods of Rome (I include the Byzantine empire). At school I only learned of the Imperum Romanum and have only very little idea about what was before or after.
Question! Ok, on those leather tassles (for lack of a better word) hanging over the groin & waist; are the studs acting as rivets for a metal backing behind the leather or are they simply there as decorative weights to keep the strips hanging neatly? I have always wondered about this. Never having examined historical armor first hand, i nevertheless tend to think that in what is often portrayed as "studded leather" the "studs" must be serving as rivets for metal plates behind the outer, visible layer. Because of themselves, such studs are completely useless as armor, & just add more weight with no functionality.
Salve! congratulations for your channel! i see your videos always! only one thing, the rays in the legionary scutum are an error, the rays are from the pretorian scutum, but the trajan column was made by craftsman greeks, and the model for the column was the pretorian scutum, for this reason, in the trajan column appear the rays, but in reality, the scutum didnt have rays. I follow you from Spain jeje
Metatron 10 cm thick (at 8:16)? Are you sure? Just the material or does that include the curvature (measured from the top middle)? It just seems immensely thick and that would make it very heavy.
I have double checked that mesurement and I have read it on a relieble article but I will see if I can see other refering to it, like university professors and such. I ment the thicknes of all the layers but you have to consider it's not just wood, it's three layers of wood, one of linen and one of leather plus painting. Also I have to double check they didn't mean the part which includes the metal, or even the umbo I'll let you know.
Metatron I did a bit of research myself and the thickest I could find was 16 mm, with a range from 12 to those 16. I'm not disputing your sources or your knowledge of the subject but I did take out my measuring tape and it really seems humongous! Anyway, great video as always, dude!
HeavyMetalDude26 ok thank you very interesting ^^ No it's good you tell me that because it helpm me double and triple check sources and learn more :3 As I always say " for all you learn from me I learn twice as much from you guys in the comments :D"
Hi, I would like clarification on the composition of Roman shields: were they composed of several layers of wood glued to increase resistance (and if so in what way?) or for cost reasons?
Good video, but I am skeptical on a couple of things. I find the scutum I made is much more controllable with a strap for the upper forum parallel to the grip. I can still check and hit with it, and the top won't flap around. I haven't been able to find source period artwork showing the inside of the shield or showing somebody being hit in the face with one with the arm outstretched like I have seen some modern actors use. The closest thing I found was one gladiator with a smaller shield lifting it up, but the shield still went over his upper arm and he might have used it un an uppercut with the bottom rim. If you know of any source period artwork that contradicts me on this, I would love to see it. Also, being curved the way it was and being held at the side of the body allows good function of the sword arm particularly for slashing. Despite Vegetius' claims Roman legionares strictly stabbed, he is not necessarily 100% reliable, I think there are accounts of legionaries slashing at the unarmored back legs. The shield gives good facilitation of that movement. Just thought it would be fun for discussion
u have to know that in a battle with people in formation u cant move so freely to slash and when there is a shield wall in front of u i cant see how can you slash when the shield of the other person is covering him pretty well showing off only his knees and the head with the neck back in the days the most unprotected places of someone are knees neck and little lower under the stomach area if you know what i mean these places were the most unprotected with armor places so there is no point of slashing hitting the armor and doing no damage just making your mates feel unprotected from all the moves you are doing in a 1 on 1 fight there is bigger chance of slashing and still in a formation ....i dont think so
Ivan Petrov That's just it, a Roman Legion wasn't meant to go face to face, they were about maximizing speed in formation to outflank. They were not as jam-packed together like a phalanx or a shield/spear wall in general was. They might not be far enough apart for huge slashes, they probably did have to go face to face fighting and I'm sure their were times stabbing would be a very good thing. But you have to look at each phase of the Roman Republic or Empire at it's own time and be analytical of all the evidence, not taking anyone's word for it. The only surviving rectangular roman shield is narrower and more curved, almost identical in geometry to Trajan's column, and they are holding it completely differently.
Ivan Petrov I will correct myself on the grip, sort of. In earlier mentioned surviving antique, The piece of wood that is pegged in to the shield as a grip has the sides where it is pegged narrower then the actual grip. The grip is at/inside the threshold of where the wood of the shield would have been if it were not removed. I did this to my shield and it tilts the weight of the top of the shield towards me with the weight consistently on my shoulder as apposed to my arm and wrist and gives me a very comfortable placement on the body as they do in Trajan's column.
Why did this kind of shield fall out of favor? I mean, we mostly see it used by roman legionnaires. Was it because of the complicated production and the use in disciplined battle formations?
Q. Is it possible, that they stabbed towards the enemy who was directly attacking the man to your right? I read that this tactic was later tried by the English troops, using bayonets against the Scots, in an attempt to get around their shields.
Mate, at the end, you hold the shield with supinus grip (Palms away), which is cumbersome if you want to lift it up. But, would the Roman soldiers had use a prone grip (Palms in) when engaging in combat?
Can anyone explain where the Imperial style decoration (red with simplistic yellow symbols, that almost all modern replicas use) comes from? The only surviving rectangular scutum that I can find (Duro Europos), is much more intricately decorated with multicoloured spiral patterns and detailed animal / angel images. How do we know the simplistic style was the norm?
A very interesting channel with lots and lots of good information for historical buffs like me! Cudos to the Metatron! The one thing I do reflect though regarding the comments is how much they discuss how a 1v1 combat situation would be with a roman soldier when the armour and weapons were made for melee or regular army battle. The equipment reflects on the nature of fighting side by side with your cohort, not Hollywood-style mano a mano after marching up to the enemy in nice orderly formations. Doesn't matter if they met Gallic, Brittanic or Germanic warriors. The problem with the warrior culture was that they propagated the heroism of the single warrior, not the group. The training and mindset were to get as much honor as possible on the battlefield for yourself(and, in the long run, your tribe/clan/insert equivalent here). Romans did away with that(not the first, but one of the most successful) and worked to have discipline, the chain of order and act as one as the prime mindset for the single roman soldier. Consequently, a single roman soldier didn't have much chance against a warrior or gladiator, who both trained 1v1 combat, but put him in a cohort, and properly led, he would stand victorious by the end of the day, come melee or battle.
Im feeling curious about the way they hold the shield, the way you show in the video is quite efficient for marching, but for actual fighting it wont be easier to carry it whit your palm turn up? I find that way easier to lift the weight and make movements, of course I dont have any historical base to say this, is just speculation.
Don’t u think u should hold it the other way up?? Have we got any engravings of them holding the shield that way up? I’m sure I’ve seen one somewhere of it being held palm up, it’s so much stronger
Also, what is your opinion on shield effectiveness - was the Republican scutum’s shape more effective than the Imperial scutum’s shape? Looking at Deepeeka scutums ,the Imperial scutum is substantially lighter - 5.5Kg - than the Republican form at 8Kg +.
For those of you who dont understand German: "Hälfte des" in the graphic at around 10:30 means "half of","spätes" means "late", "Jhd.v.Chr" means "century before Christ" and "Jhd.n.Chr" means "century after Christ"
I have an interesting thought on shield woods. Sort of like the katana using harder and softer steels. You'd have a harder wood in the front to provide better defense, softer wood in the rear for shock absorption. Just my thought on design.
+Vizzlemeister A similar concept was implemented by the Romans, not so much by mixing different kinds of wood but differenciating the thickness of the wood as to diminish the overall weight by thickening the wood only in the centre of the shield, similarly to what armourers in the middleages did with plate
Personally I much prefer their ovular and concave designs, of the Republic. I'm not as big a big fan of the big rectangular Imperial one, but I have to admit it works very well for personal protection, especially against missiles. The bent shape helps with a number of things, actually, to whoever asked. It does help absorb recoil. It also allows the user to fit *closer in* the shield! If you hold it closer to you, it actually curves around both sides of you to some degree. It also does help to glance off blows, as any rounded surface would. This was abandoned in their very late empire, of course. Not entirely sure why.
I'm actually learning Roman blacksmithing for an project I'm working on (project name :5th legion) and I'm actually making the shield and sword right now
Hey Metatron, do you know where I can find a Roman Scutum replica for sale? Most of my collection are from Museum Replicas, and they for some baffling reason, sell only a "Wooden Oval Roman Shield" that doesnt have the Iconic look and style Im looking for.
Is there any way you could look more deeply into the combat style of legionnaires? Personally I'm beginning to have problems with the way we portray combat with the gladius and the scutum. For the size of the scutum and the way it is carried with a central boss, I just can't imagine that these shields were purely defensive. I'm sure you've seen the viking shield combat as proposed by Roland Warzecha, his approach being that the large round shield is the main weapon for forcing an opening in the enemy's guard, while your sword or axe exploits the opening. Surely the design of the scutum is not ideal for a passive, defensive role as is the greek hoplon? I know that the scutum's design can be traced back to Rome's Gallic or Iberian neighbours, who are said to have been very aggressive in combat. It just doesn't really make sense to me that the Roman's took the arms and armour of their barbarian neighbours and then presumably fought in these dense shield-walls hoplite style.
Could it be held with the wrist facing up as well (and would there be any circumstances under which you might want to)? And also... writing their names on the inside of the shield makes me think "Biggest dogs tags ever".
+TheHelleri It could be held that way too, the question is "would you want to?" I would say it depends, for example even during Testudo you would hold the shield in a completely differen way so depending on the situation I would say the grip could be held in a variety of ways for sure
I was thinking that it might be good to hold it the other way if one needed to hoist the shield over there head (arched arrow fire, things being flung from the top of a fortification?). Or if you needed to beat the kind of retreat the requires actually turning around and also need to cover your back side? Something to play around with and see how it feels? Something else I am wondering (but this would take at least one other person to figure out likely) is if it could be used as a field litter carrier.
Could a Roman army have defeated a medieval army, like say Charlemagne, the Vikings, the Normans, up until the Hundred Years War? i thought Roman history was technically almost 2000 years, if from those factual people Romulus/Remus and the shewolf until the Byzantine defeat to the Ottomans?
+coalikesdesi I would say absolutely not, in the middleages they had better armour, and better cavalry but then again there are so many points to make that I think you have just inspired a full video xD
+coalikesdesi As a rule of thumb later armies always win over their predecessors even if they appear to be less equipped. Most important factors for victory are, training, supply, ease of maintenance, tactical leadership, and least but not last clear strategic objective that coincides with a viable political solution. Superior equipment doesn't cut the mustard as long as the inferior side has something functional.
The difficulty with answering that question is first determining exactly which type of Roman army showed up to the battle with theoretical enemy from the dark or Middle Ages. I’d say that without any real innovation that a Roman Army of the late republic or early empire would have no problems whatsoever in dispatching a Viking, Saxon or Norman army of equivalent size. However by the high Middle Ages technology of armour and the sophistication of cavalry had evolved significantly. Then even a Scipio or Caesar would be in real trouble if he turned up with 4 legions of that age supported by Numidian or Gallic-Germanic Calvary of that era. However, that simply ignores the underpinning Roman philosophy of warfare - namely a preparedness to adopt from your enemies everything that is accessible, useful and perhaps better than what you currently have. The true genius of Rome over that 1200 year span (or at least a good proportion of it) was that they were great adopters and adapters. A close study of the aftermath of the epic Roman defeats demonstrates that within a decade that the Roman military had learnt from the various disasters, adapted the useful parts from their enemies, transformed their Ramy or navy and came back to annihilate their enemy. Furthermore, by the middle republic Rome had already started a process of contracting out various ancillary functions to auxiliary allies and mercenaries: most notably cavalry, but also various ranged weapons units such as Cretan archers, Beleriac slingers, various skirmishers, mobile horse Calvary-infantry units like the Ubii and Batavians etc. The first things theoretical Caesar or Scipio would have noticed once they stepped out of the TARDIS with their legionary army and into the Middle Ages was the armour and advances in ranged weaponry. Immediately they would have hired Welsh Bowmen instead of Cretans and would have entered into negotiations with the various Dukes and other Lords that were ‘the enemy of my enemy’ to provide the Cavalry. At a stroke most of the difficulties that Metatron has highlighted have been addressed. While the armour and weapons of the heavy infantry of the legions was not of the same standard as those of the Middle Ages, but the armour and weaponry of the Middle Ages was not without its own problems. Essentially mobility had been sacrificed for protection. This provided particularly troublesome at battles like Agincourt. In fact I reckon that the Roman Caligula - even though it offered zero protection - would have been far superior to the footwear worn on that sodden and muddy field. Replacing the Scutum with a smaller Steel shield of similar design and weight (say 10-12kg of steel plate, curved in the Roman fashion but only 70-80cm high as a weight saving) in combination with the addition of a grieve on the shin of the left leg and a segmented steel sleeve on the right arm would have afforded the legionary the right amount of protection without compromising mobility and union cohesion. Swapping out the gladius for a similar sized weapon that could scone the enemies helmet, but also with a spike at the end to thrust into the visor slit would complete the deal. A legion armed and armoured thus would seriously fuck up a similar sized Middle Ages army I reckon.
Is the size of the shild compared to the legionaries correct? The scutum was about 120-130cm, the common man was about 150cm. So the scutum covered almost the complete man (leaving 15cm up and down). In reenactment today, this should be adjusted, as the lorica is adjusted for obvious reasons.
Because "Regnum" and "Imperium" are neutral names. On the contrary, "Res publica" is a feminine name. The adjective follows its name: if feminine "Romana", if neutral "Romanum", if masculine "Romanus". For ex. : I'm a roman citizen = Ego civis romanus sum. Another ex.: Roma (feminine) aeterna! (Aeterna, not "aeternum" nor "aeternus"). Bye.
I decided to get a55 gallon oil drum and cut it half, cut the top and bottom off of one put it in the middle of the other bend the tops over, and cut 2 moon shaped slats in the middle rolle them inwards for the handle, put a boss on it and rivet the edges...it should cost around 40 bucks and wiegh around 26lbs and virtualy indestructible to melee combat including arrows...other things could be done as well like soaking it in some form of adhesive and then putting linen all around it that's red...should be nice ill send pics when im done
Salvē, Metatron. I am looking to create a group of Roman Legionaries in Australia. I cannot find anything about how to make a Scutum, only cardboard or other low quality designs for use in LARP. I have followed you for a while and in fact you're the reason I wanted to do this. I was hoping you would be able to make a video on the process of making an Imperium Romanum era scutum. Thank you for taking the time to read this, if indeed you did. I look forward to hearing back from you.
@@captainsandwhich7469 I'm afraid I have not yet.. I have formed a group of Latin speaking Australians though :) and a few of us are also learning wood working to learn how the shields are made.
yes. some roman legionnaires got those segmented arm parts for their sword arms. i imagine they bought it with their own money though. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manica_(armguard)
According to some sources linden wood and poplar were the same wood with poplar being another name for linden and vice versa. You forget to mention the turtle (Testudo) formation if there were archers or slingers involved in the battles.
Where is that information from that they've put their shield on the ground when being charged? I can hardly imagine that. The huge benefit of the roman heavy infantry was that the enemy got stuck against the shieldwall and then got stabbed with the gladius, right? So enemy would charge, run against the wall and get pressed against it from both sides, romans in front and their friendlies behind. A power contest of solid stance and pressing power, with the romans getting the upper hand because of their ability to still stab and slash with the shorter swords in the tight pressed situation. You would have the enemies face possibly just 10-20cm away from you with your shield in between. If they'd put their shields to the ground they would have been hardly covered on the upper body at all and also the enemy could have easily climbed/jumped over the wall or slashed from above at the either cowering or else uncovered legionaries.
Linguistic lessons: 1. The declensions cases, no matter how productive it is, is not the only way to generate words. There seems to be another way, where -um:-us is involved. Where -us usually is attached to new words to means a sort of derivative of the original, -um has the complementary opposite of being a sort of integral of the original. You know +m as the accusative case, but what is an accusative? You also know that +m is the aim of the sentence when cases are constructed properly, but what does it mean for -um? -um denotes the essence. You are reffering to something but you are actually pointing to the essence which is a conceptual thing rather than a physical thing. Regnum Romanum = does not exist because Romans don't like rex. So, we are talking about the essence of the old king of the current Romanus. We point to what makes the old king king and what makes the Romans Romans. Libera Res Publica Romana: The unoppressed public state of the Romans, did I forgot to mention that Romans do not like rex? Imperium Romanum: The imperium of the Romans. What is imperium? There is the empire which is a more physical, but still conceptual manifestation of this thing called imperium. However, the empire is not imperium. The original imperium is a sort of power granted by the senatus populusque of the Romans. We called Augustus emperor but in his native tongue during his time, he technically don't have a title. It is equally valid if we were to call him "the dude" in relation to his official handle "princeps" (the first gentleman).
So how thick was the scutum? As in the actual thickness of the shield front to back. I presume 10cm means something else as that would make the shield 3.9” front to back - thicker than the averge 6” x 9” Holy Bible...
I think they covered their shield with a leather cover apart of the weather protection to kill the shine and break the shape of it. where the enemy can't see.
if the enemy charges and you put the scutum on the ground to take a deffensive position behind it, you greatly reduce your total height. I mean, your head is super low, your torso is even lower. The upper edge of the shield is low, as well so how are you not super vulnerable against spears, f.e.? If a dude of average hieght stabs with his spear above your shield, depending on the angle, he can hit you anywhere from the waist up. Perhaps it is not a big issue, because you wear armour, but this low posture makes face stabs possible from a lot of different angles. If you hold your shield like at 15:52, and your enemy is not about 3 meter tall, his attacks above your shield have a much smaller target, and stabs into your face can come from fewer angles. With the shield not on the ground, even the counter attacks seem to be more effective to me. unfortunately, you don't name any resources where this "scutum on the ground" deffense is documented. Based on your videos, I am sure you have some and this type of deffense was really used, I just cannot see why and how it was effective thanx
The shield obviously gave the legionnaires survivability ...the arm was a shock absorber and if the momentum of the blow continued the 3-ply wood flexed too taking all the Weight of the blow away ....1 particular centurion called scaeva at dyraccium fighting for Pompey recorded his shield having over 100 marks on it after one particular battle ...most were sling shot marks but even so !!
I really enjoyed this video for that matter I enjoyed pretty much all of your videos that I've seen. I however I do have a question. Before there was TH-cam Google and the internet for that matter I tried to read as much as I could about moment history in library books. One thing I've told about the shield if that it was made with three layers of plywood. The other thing is I read that not all but some of the shields on the inside at the top had some kind of hook bracket. This allowed other Shiels to be stacked like shingles or scales. The Romans would test this by having soldiers form a ramp that a horse draw carriage ride up it. This was in and old book and the illustration we're not very detail. I remember visiting Rome as a teenager other than seeing the Coliseum I was not able to find any artifacts displayed anywhere. I was hoping to visit in museum displaying weapons and stuff. That did not happen and I was disappointed. Kind regards! Luigi
i think you got your mm crosed with cm 10cm would be 4 inch thick witch is the same as a standard 2x4 used in framing a wall i think if it was that thick you might have trouble picking it up
How long did it take the Romans to make this shield? I have a project to do and this is one of the questions that needs to be answered. It would be great if someone replied
What I've always found Fascinating about the roman empire is that it's not Like the Empire of Alexander or Attila the Hun, which grew very large very quickly but collapsed as soon as their founders died.
Over time Rome went from a small Etruscan-influenced city-state into a republic that beat Carthage, and then became a vast empire.
And although many people say that the roman Empire lasted for a thousand years, in fact it lasted for ~2000 years, since it's eastern half still called themselves the roman empire up until the fall of constantinople in 1453.
The romans weren't the great inventors we used to think they were, but rather the great evolvers. Gradually adopting the inventions of others and perfecting them.
First they adopted the scutum from their neighbours, then they adopted the mail armor and helmets of the celts, then the gladius of hispania, the inventions and arts of the greeks, and they perfected them all.
They were a really fascinating people, adopting useful things and unifying peoples, which is precisely what other cultures of the time avoided.
To add to what you said. They adopted and evolved the Spanish gladius and Spanish pilum for themselves also. They did invent Lorica Segmentata armor themselves though.
Holy pasta of perdition, you're right. I just read this comment and it made me think about... Tamriel. The Elder Scrolls. The Imperials are stated as being the best at getting along with the other races, hence their ability to unify them without bloody conquest. And... I just realized, from reading your comment here, just how much of that Bethesda derived from history. Not just the basic appearance, but the whole "adopt and unify" thing.
@@Archone666 I'm pretty sure all of the human empires were created through bloodshed, bro.
@@apalsnerg every nation we know today was created in war and blood.
It's not beautiful, but it's how the world works.
@@thesenate5913 While I agree with you, what the fuck does that have to do with The Elder Scrolls?
12:42 The boss of the shield (Umbo) is not meant to protect your hand, even though it may appear obvious. Its sole purpose is to make shield more maneuverable when you get your hand "inside" the shield and get a better grip with shallower handle. It is reinforced because it would be a real bummer if the "Umbo" became detached during a battle.
So now if the world goes to shit we can raid the nearest museums for weapons and fight like Romans.
Oliver Cromwell Did Nothing Wrong
I’m not muscled to handle it.
Even if the weapons still could.
Let’s go at ‘im with a pointed stick!
Oliver Cromwell Did Nothing Wrong so kind of like the legion from fallout new Vegas ?
@@thegardenofesim1174 Ballistic shield with a submachine gun would be more effective
Cromwell was great.
Apparently, you have no idea how long it takes to learn to use these tools.
If you count in the medieval era, Rome lasted for about 2200 years.
but we dont.
+Demon from the Mud We do but when we say roman history we usually talk about the ancient side of history.
So we don't.
also geographically
the byzantines obviously were Roman and should also count as that so yes they did last that long. and no they didn't just become non Roman because they changed there way of doing things
Oh i never knew the Roman Shields had horizontal grip!
Thanks alot bro and keep up the good work!
+Nr One Chilean Thank you for watching and I am glad I was helpful ^^
+Metatron isn't the roman shield too heavy to be held with on grip?
+Metatron Are you sure that the scutum was 10 kg? That's almost triple the weight of a viking period shield that has multiple layers of linen.
Saif Ali Khan they were trained
Weeeena quliao... Un compatriota tan lejos .
Success is great indicator of equipment practicality.
Am I the only one who noticed the elven sword from lord of the rings on the background?
No
You are the only one
I saw that too, massive fan of lord of the rings 😀 typical kiwi haha
@@thelonelyelite1 no I also noticed that
These videos are fantastic. The fact that he makes it a point to pronounce, not only in Ecclesiastical Latin, but in ancient Latin is fantastic.
@12:50, The reinforcement is all around the shield because if you are in combat and the top part takes a lot of damage and now the attacks can come through, you flip it over and use the bottom part because it has less damage, so the shield has no top or bottom part.
When I'd heard how the legionaries held their shields I was surprised but ok how hard could it be? Well very hard actually, I started to pretend to hold one, moving it around and fighting a screeching screaming drunk barbarian and it began to make sense but it wasn't something that just "came to me" naturally, I can see why you'd want your guys to have LOTS of training where they reacted automatically to what the German line was trying to do. Imagine holding a big shield, walking forward to the cadance, throwing pilum, then charging with your mates and smashing into the barbarians then forming up into their lines at that point...training and automatic discipline must have been very important, after all the empire spent a lot of money on you and don't want their property wasted by doing stupid barbarian type maneuvers that would get them killed. Smart soldiers were winning soldiers as long as they had the training to back them up I guess.
Awesome latin at the beginning! I love the video!
+Lupyrius Thank you very much, I am glad you do :D
You give a lot of useful information in this tutorial. I always wanted to know how the shield was used and you answered that question. Thanks for sharing this.
Love your calm and logical demeanor!
I higly appriciated your effort to do researches and your serious attitude toward historical subject. Your presentation have detoxicated my brain from film and game. Once again, thank you
You deserve way more views.. Your channel is great. You make history entertaining. Thank you!
Well first of all many thanks to you. I really like the channel, specially the roman theme. Not much stuff of such quality is available on TH-cam. Keep up the good work.
I actually have a clarification about the shield. Or rather about the picture on the shield.
I've read Stephen Dando-Collins - Legions of Rome. And he discusses this most famous logo we always see on roman shields as depicted in pop-culture - wings and lightning bolts.
He says that in fact the use of wings on the regimental logo was almost unique to praetorian guard. And these troops were not supposed to be present on a regular battlefield. The reason why this emblem of wings and lightning bolts got so popular nowadays is because this logo is depicted on legionary shields on Trajan's column. And the reason it is depicted there is because the column was made in Rome by greek artists who had no idea about roman army and legionary emblems. They were told to depict battles and legionaries and they used what soldiers were available as their models which happened to be praetorians stationed in Rome.
So while this logo of wings and lightning bolts is historically accurate for certain praetorian cohorts it would be much better to depict legionary shields with more common emblems. For example a bull would be appropriate for most legions drafted in Spain and a boar would be common for legions from Gaul.
I am no historian myself and if anyone can correct me here - please do that. But I'm sort of tired of seeing the same wings and bolts everywhere anybody wants to depict a legionary when there was a whole bunch of other cool logos.
Nice video. I am still excited to see that many illustrations of roman legionaires still come from the legendary book of Peter Connolly, "The Roman Army". which I own since my childhood days in the seventies. Furthermore I had to laugh when you showed the illustrations with german annotations..
Once more a very informative and enjoyable video, I never get tired of your stuff!
another great vid man, can't wait for you the next.
+kevin rodriguez Thanks Kevin :D
Love your channel, mate. Much better than most history channels on tv.
+Ted Striker Well thank you very much for that kind sir ^^
Thanks for the measurements!
Going to make my own out of plywood, 2 or more layers.
Does anyone know what the curvature was?
+Eska Quassi i think he said 10 cm deep
I remember 17 cmif i remember good from polibius description
My question is, where did you get that armor In the background
Great vid, thank you.
Would love to see a vid of what is known of the markings on the shield. No one has done anything on that yet
My understanding is that the Scutum was also used as a counter attacking offensive weapon: punching the boss into the face of an enemy in the press to gain distance to execute a gladiator strike or a line rotation, for example. Also the metal lining at the bottom of the shield could be used against the feet and shins of an enemy if opportunity presented. Similarly an enemy that had been felled but was still very much alive could be dispatched by dropping the bottom of the shield onto their throat as the line rolled over the enemy front. It was a nasty piece of kit.
Hi Metatron, nice video. Just thought I'd mention that you can improve your English slightly by dropping the S from "informations". "Information" doesn't get pluralised in English because it is a mass noun that treats any quantity as a single unit rather than a number of discreet measured units. If you feel the need to use a plural "data" is the pluralised form of "datum" and can in most cases be used as a synonym for "information". It can be pluralised because it is a count noun that refers to discreet units of information, just like "fact" and "facts".
+lancer D Hey there, thank you very much. In Theory I know that rule, but I always end up forgetting it when I am in front of a camera. Thank you for reminding me, I will keep it in mind next time ;)
Metatron No worries, I know English is hard, and yours is really, really good. The only errors you make are very tiny things like that that don't prevent you from being understood at all, they just act as a clue that you aren't a native speaker. Your English is more than good enough, and I normally wouldn't think it was worth mentioning, but I figured that as a linguist you'd probably be interested in stuff like that, so don't worry about it too much, just keep making awesome videos.
lancer D ahah ok thank you so much I appreciate ^^
yes .. i enjoyed the free university lecture as well .....
Are there any kind of organizations, associations, etc. that keep these old Roman legion traditions alive to this day? For instance, Sweden's line infantry during the 1600s and 1700s have become legendary as well, the Carolean Army, or Karolinska hären in Swedish, and there are associations that keep the Caroleans alive; we have, for example, sällskapet Smålands Karoliner, that display formations, battle tactics, musket fire, etc.
Then we have schools in Japan, that still offer traditional training offered to the Samurai and Ninja - but how about the legendary Roman army?
You are seeing it. Metatron is an institution himself.
I like the use of the proper language. Well done sir.
Bent shields are harder to turn for the enemy too. A flat surface can be jabbed with a spear near the edge of the shield, pivoting it and exposing the user
like angling armor on a tank, more likely to richochet.
8:17 the width 10 cm ?!!!?? Propably 10mm maybe a small mistake
Keep up the work
What dyes did they use? Red, gold and blue could be almost as expensive as purple, depending on the source and quality.
PS: I would never want to use such a cumbersome shield unless I was besieging a position with a crossbow... this shows how fit they must have been.
yes i immediately thought the same when i imagined to lift 10 kgs with only your shoulder strenght. I do some home workout and i use 10 kgs only for about 20 or 30 repetitions.
+the Creative Assembly machinimas Yes they must have been very fit ^^
the Creative Assembly machinimas
Me too LOL. I can't imagine keeping it in position and moving around for 30min while someone keeps hitting or kicking it.
+edi you must be some kind of super trained Rambo to do that. They probably had necks and shoulders like bulls only to be able to use those shields.
the Creative Assembly machinimas
Or imagine the late middle age doing an obstacle course in full armor (stairs, above small walls, over hills, puddles of mud, laying down and getting up again and THEN do sparring). I am pretty sure it was done, just as some training weapons were heavier than the actual weapons to achieve intensive training.
The average Roman soldier was 170cm, I was wondering what your height was as being significantly taller would make the shield less protective and more difficult to wield.
+jaocheu I am 176cm so I am not too much taller than that I suppose ^^
Please bring more about the 3-4 different periods of Rome (I include the Byzantine empire). At school I only learned of the Imperum Romanum and have only very little idea about what was before or after.
+edi Ok I will :D Roman history is fascinating and all it's periods have so much to say ^^
AWESOME VIDEO!!! Thank you, my friend. Congrats from Brazil 🇧🇷👊🏼🥋
Question! Ok, on those leather tassles (for lack of a better word) hanging over the groin & waist; are the studs acting as rivets for a metal backing behind the leather or are they simply there as decorative weights to keep the strips hanging neatly? I have always wondered about this. Never having examined historical armor first hand, i nevertheless tend to think that in what is often portrayed as "studded leather" the "studs" must be serving as rivets for metal plates behind the outer, visible layer. Because of themselves, such studs are completely useless as armor, & just add more weight with no functionality.
Salve! congratulations for your channel! i see your videos always! only one thing, the rays in the legionary scutum are an error, the rays are from the pretorian scutum, but the trajan column was made by craftsman greeks, and the model for the column was the pretorian scutum, for this reason, in the trajan column appear the rays, but in reality, the scutum didnt have rays. I follow you from Spain jeje
:) this channel is great
+b33lze6u6 ahah thanks you so much :D
Metatron 10 cm thick (at 8:16)? Are you sure? Just the material or does that include the curvature (measured from the top middle)? It just seems immensely thick and that would make it very heavy.
I have double checked that mesurement and I have read it on a relieble article but I will see if I can see other refering to it, like university professors and such.
I ment the thicknes of all the layers but you have to consider it's not just wood, it's three layers of wood, one of linen and one of leather plus painting. Also I have to double check they didn't mean the part which includes the metal, or even the umbo I'll let you know.
Metatron I did a bit of research myself and the thickest I could find was 16 mm, with a range from 12 to those 16. I'm not disputing your sources or your knowledge of the subject but I did take out my measuring tape and it really seems humongous!
Anyway, great video as always, dude!
HeavyMetalDude26 ok thank you very interesting ^^ No it's good you tell me that because it helpm me double and triple check sources and learn more :3 As I always say " for all you learn from me I learn twice as much from you guys in the comments :D"
Wow! Always thought the grip was like the normal vertical grip you see in medieval shields......thankyou
So amazing that roman history is so well preserved.
With your hair down like that, I feel like Jesus is telling me about the Romans.
The alt timeline where Jesus lives on as a historian talking about his roman friend's shield.
Hi, I would like clarification on the composition of Roman shields: were they composed of several layers of wood glued to increase resistance (and if so in what way?) or for cost reasons?
Hi metatron, arte you italian? Cause your latin is pretty good, gotta admit it
Marco Bressan Yes, he is indeed.
He is
He is. From Sicily I guess...
He's like the archetype of a southern Mediterranean Italian.
Good video, but I am skeptical on a couple of things. I find the scutum I made is much more controllable with a strap for the upper forum parallel to the grip. I can still check and hit with it, and the top won't flap around. I haven't been able to find source period artwork showing the inside of the shield or showing somebody being hit in the face with one with the arm outstretched like I have seen some modern actors use. The closest thing I found was one gladiator with a smaller shield lifting it up, but the shield still went over his upper arm and he might have used it un an uppercut with the bottom rim. If you know of any source period artwork that contradicts me on this, I would love to see it. Also, being curved the way it was and being held at the side of the body allows good function of the sword arm particularly for slashing. Despite Vegetius' claims Roman legionares strictly stabbed, he is not necessarily 100% reliable, I think there are accounts of legionaries slashing at the unarmored back legs. The shield gives good facilitation of that movement. Just thought it would be fun for discussion
u have to know that in a battle with people in formation u cant move so freely to slash and when there is a shield wall in front of u i cant see how can you slash when the shield of the other person is covering him pretty well showing off only his knees and the head with the neck back in the days the most unprotected places of someone are knees neck and little lower under the stomach area if you know what i mean these places were the most unprotected with armor places so there is no point of slashing hitting the armor and doing no damage just making your mates feel unprotected from all the moves you are doing in a 1 on 1 fight there is bigger chance of slashing and still in a formation ....i dont think so
Ivan Petrov That's just it, a Roman Legion wasn't meant to go face to face, they were about maximizing speed in formation to outflank. They were not as jam-packed together like a phalanx or a shield/spear wall in general was. They might not be far enough apart for huge slashes, they probably did have to go face to face fighting and I'm sure their were times stabbing would be a very good thing. But you have to look at each phase of the Roman Republic or Empire at it's own time and be analytical of all the evidence, not taking anyone's word for it. The only surviving rectangular roman shield is narrower and more curved, almost identical in geometry to Trajan's column, and they are holding it completely differently.
Ivan Petrov I will correct myself on the grip, sort of. In earlier mentioned surviving antique, The piece of wood that is pegged in to the shield as a grip has the sides where it is pegged narrower then the actual grip. The grip is at/inside the threshold of where the wood of the shield would have been if it were not removed. I did this to my shield and it tilts the weight of the top of the shield towards me with the weight consistently on my shoulder as apposed to my arm and wrist and gives me a very comfortable placement on the body as they do in Trajan's column.
Why did the shield design change from being the classic large rectangular curved style to oval round style in the very late Roman empire period?
In surprised it didn't have a forearm strap. I figured a massive shield like that would have need of more leverage.
Why did this kind of shield fall out of favor? I mean, we mostly see it used by roman legionnaires. Was it because of the complicated production and the use in disciplined battle formations?
Q. Is it possible, that they stabbed towards the enemy who was directly attacking the man to your right? I read that this tactic was later tried by the English troops, using bayonets against the Scots, in an attempt to get around their shields.
Mate, at the end, you hold the shield with supinus grip (Palms away), which is cumbersome if you want to lift it up. But, would the Roman soldiers had use a prone grip (Palms in) when engaging in combat?
Can anyone explain where the Imperial style decoration (red with simplistic yellow symbols, that almost all modern replicas use) comes from? The only surviving rectangular scutum that I can find (Duro Europos), is much more intricately decorated with multicoloured spiral patterns and detailed animal / angel images. How do we know the simplistic style was the norm?
A very interesting channel with lots and lots of good information for historical buffs like me! Cudos to the Metatron!
The one thing I do reflect though regarding the comments is how much they discuss how a 1v1 combat situation would be with a roman soldier when the armour and weapons were made for melee or regular army battle. The equipment reflects on the nature of fighting side by side with your cohort, not Hollywood-style mano a mano after marching up to the enemy in nice orderly formations. Doesn't matter if they met Gallic, Brittanic or Germanic warriors. The problem with the warrior culture was that they propagated the heroism of the single warrior, not the group. The training and mindset were to get as much honor as possible on the battlefield for yourself(and, in the long run, your tribe/clan/insert equivalent here). Romans did away with that(not the first, but one of the most successful) and worked to have discipline, the chain of order and act as one as the prime mindset for the single roman soldier. Consequently, a single roman soldier didn't have much chance against a warrior or gladiator, who both trained 1v1 combat, but put him in a cohort, and properly led, he would stand victorious by the end of the day, come melee or battle.
How many cows and bulls had to give their all to supply all the leather for shoes ,boots , shield covers and tents , for the army ?
Im feeling curious about the way they hold the shield, the way you show in the video is quite efficient for marching, but for actual fighting it wont be easier to carry it whit your palm turn up? I find that way easier to lift the weight and make movements, of course I dont have any historical base to say this, is just speculation.
Is there a forum for this kind of gear?
How did the Roman soldiers move from the front line to the back line to rest during a battle, that is assuming they did? Do you know?
Don’t u think u should hold it the other way up??
Have we got any engravings of them holding the shield that way up?
I’m sure I’ve seen one somewhere of it being held palm up, it’s so much stronger
Also, what is your opinion on shield effectiveness - was the Republican scutum’s shape more effective than the Imperial scutum’s shape? Looking at Deepeeka scutums ,the Imperial scutum is substantially lighter - 5.5Kg - than the Republican form at 8Kg +.
Bro the scutum was only on average 3 kilograms
For those of you who dont understand German:
"Hälfte des" in the graphic at around 10:30 means "half of","spätes" means "late", "Jhd.v.Chr" means "century before Christ" and "Jhd.n.Chr" means "century after Christ"
awesome video. I wish I was as smart as these roman you tube lecture guys. tons of fun.
I have an interesting thought on shield woods. Sort of like the katana using harder and softer steels. You'd have a harder wood in the front to provide better defense, softer wood in the rear for shock absorption. Just my thought on design.
+Vizzlemeister A similar concept was implemented by the Romans, not so much by mixing different kinds of wood but differenciating the thickness of the wood as to diminish the overall weight by thickening the wood only in the centre of the shield, similarly to what armourers in the middleages did with plate
Personally I much prefer their ovular and concave designs, of the Republic. I'm not as big a big fan of the big rectangular Imperial one, but I have to admit it works very well for personal protection, especially against missiles.
The bent shape helps with a number of things, actually, to whoever asked. It does help absorb recoil. It also allows the user to fit *closer in* the shield! If you hold it closer to you, it actually curves around both sides of you to some degree. It also does help to glance off blows, as any rounded surface would. This was abandoned in their very late empire, of course. Not entirely sure why.
I'm actually learning Roman blacksmithing for an project I'm working on (project name :5th legion) and I'm actually making the shield and sword right now
Hey Metatron, do you know where I can find a Roman Scutum replica for sale? Most of my collection are from Museum Replicas, and they for some baffling reason, sell only a "Wooden Oval Roman Shield" that doesnt have the Iconic look and style Im looking for.
Is there any way you could look more deeply into the combat style of legionnaires? Personally I'm beginning to have problems with the way we portray combat with the gladius and the scutum. For the size of the scutum and the way it is carried with a central boss, I just can't imagine that these shields were purely defensive.
I'm sure you've seen the viking shield combat as proposed by Roland Warzecha, his approach being that the large round shield is the main weapon for forcing an opening in the enemy's guard, while your sword or axe exploits the opening. Surely the design of the scutum is not ideal for a passive, defensive role as is the greek hoplon? I know that the scutum's design can be traced back to Rome's Gallic or Iberian neighbours, who are said to have been very aggressive in combat. It just doesn't really make sense to me that the Roman's took the arms and armour of their barbarian neighbours and then presumably fought in these dense shield-walls hoplite style.
how heavy 10 cm thick shield would be?
Could it be held with the wrist facing up as well (and would there be any circumstances under which you might want to)? And also... writing their names on the inside of the shield makes me think "Biggest dogs tags ever".
+TheHelleri It could be held that way too, the question is "would you want to?" I would say it depends, for example even during Testudo you would hold the shield in a completely differen way so depending on the situation I would say the grip could be held in a variety of ways for sure
I was thinking that it might be good to hold it the other way if one needed to hoist the shield over there head (arched arrow fire, things being flung from the top of a fortification?). Or if you needed to beat the kind of retreat the requires actually turning around and also need to cover your back side? Something to play around with and see how it feels?
Something else I am wondering (but this would take at least one other person to figure out likely) is if it could be used as a field litter carrier.
+TheHelleri The shield weighs about 8 to 10 kg. It can be used as you say but probably would require both hands to keep it stable.
Could a Roman army have defeated a medieval army, like say Charlemagne, the Vikings, the Normans, up until the Hundred Years War?
i thought Roman history was technically almost 2000 years, if from those factual people Romulus/Remus and the shewolf until the Byzantine defeat to the Ottomans?
+coalikesdesi I would say absolutely not, in the middleages they had better armour, and better cavalry but then again there are so many points to make that I think you have just inspired a full video xD
+Metatron I do hope you make a video like that- it sounds like wonderfully inspired content.
+coalikesdesi As a rule of thumb later armies always win over their predecessors even if they appear to be less equipped. Most important factors for victory are, training, supply, ease of maintenance, tactical leadership, and least but not last clear strategic objective that coincides with a viable political solution. Superior equipment doesn't cut the mustard as long as the inferior side has something functional.
The difficulty with answering that question is first determining exactly which type of Roman army showed up to the battle with theoretical enemy from the dark or Middle Ages. I’d say that without any real innovation that a Roman Army of the late republic or early empire would have no problems whatsoever in dispatching a Viking, Saxon or Norman army of equivalent size. However by the high Middle Ages technology of armour and the sophistication of cavalry had evolved significantly. Then even a Scipio or Caesar would be in real trouble if he turned up with 4 legions of that age supported by Numidian or Gallic-Germanic Calvary of that era. However, that simply ignores the underpinning Roman philosophy of warfare - namely a preparedness to adopt from your enemies everything that is accessible, useful and perhaps better than what you currently have.
The true genius of Rome over that 1200 year span (or at least a good proportion of it) was that they were great adopters and adapters. A close study of the aftermath of the epic Roman defeats demonstrates that within a decade that the Roman military had learnt from the various disasters, adapted the useful parts from their enemies, transformed their Ramy or navy and came back to annihilate their enemy.
Furthermore, by the middle republic Rome had already started a process of contracting out various ancillary functions to auxiliary allies and mercenaries: most notably cavalry, but also various ranged weapons units such as Cretan archers, Beleriac slingers, various skirmishers, mobile horse Calvary-infantry units like the Ubii and Batavians etc.
The first things theoretical Caesar or Scipio would have noticed once they stepped out of the TARDIS with their legionary army and into the Middle Ages was the armour and advances in ranged weaponry. Immediately they would have hired Welsh Bowmen instead of Cretans and would have entered into negotiations with the various Dukes and other Lords that were ‘the enemy of my enemy’ to provide the Cavalry. At a stroke most of the difficulties that Metatron has highlighted have been addressed.
While the armour and weapons of the heavy infantry of the legions was not of the same standard as those of the Middle Ages, but the armour and weaponry of the Middle Ages was not without its own problems. Essentially mobility had been sacrificed for protection. This provided particularly troublesome at battles like Agincourt. In fact I reckon that the Roman Caligula - even though it offered zero protection - would have been far superior to the footwear worn on that sodden and muddy field. Replacing the Scutum with a smaller Steel shield of similar design and weight (say 10-12kg of steel plate, curved in the Roman fashion but only 70-80cm high as a weight saving) in combination with the addition of a grieve on the shin of the left leg and a segmented steel sleeve on the right arm would have afforded the legionary the right amount of protection without compromising mobility and union cohesion. Swapping out the gladius for a similar sized weapon that could scone the enemies helmet, but also with a spike at the end to thrust into the visor slit would complete the deal. A legion armed and armoured thus would seriously fuck up a similar sized Middle Ages army I reckon.
Is the size of the shild compared to the legionaries correct? The scutum was about 120-130cm, the common man was about 150cm. So the scutum covered almost the complete man (leaving 15cm up and down).
In reenactment today, this should be adjusted, as the lorica is adjusted for obvious reasons.
3:18 why does Regnum Romanum and Imperium Romanum end with Romanum but Libera res publica Romana ends with Romana?
Because "Regnum" and "Imperium" are neutral names. On the contrary, "Res publica" is a feminine name. The adjective follows its name: if feminine "Romana", if neutral "Romanum", if masculine "Romanus". For ex. : I'm a roman citizen = Ego civis romanus sum. Another ex.: Roma (feminine) aeterna! (Aeterna, not "aeternum" nor "aeternus"). Bye.
@@brunodemarco1573 ahh gotcha thanks
So for d&d 3.5e would the Scutum be a heavy steel shield or a tower shield or maybe a heavy wooden shield?
How were they manufactured
this is an excellent video thanks for making it
Where did you purchse this shield?
What is difference between horisontal and vertical grip?
is that a toga, if so where did you get it
Suggest a good website to buy an Scutum? It is more for display than LARP.
Can you make a video talking about the Roman cavalry shield, like cetratus????
I decided to get a55 gallon oil drum and cut it half, cut the top and bottom off of one put it in the middle of the other bend the tops over, and cut 2 moon shaped slats in the middle rolle them inwards for the handle, put a boss on it and rivet the edges...it should cost around 40 bucks and wiegh around 26lbs and virtualy indestructible to melee combat including arrows...other things could be done as well like soaking it in some form of adhesive and then putting linen all around it that's red...should be nice ill send pics when im done
How would they put the curve in the shield?
Steam?
Salvē, Metatron. I am looking to create a group of Roman Legionaries in Australia. I cannot find anything about how to make a Scutum, only cardboard or other low quality designs for use in LARP. I have followed you for a while and in fact you're the reason I wanted to do this. I was hoping you would be able to make a video on the process of making an Imperium Romanum era scutum. Thank you for taking the time to read this, if indeed you did. I look forward to hearing back from you.
Did you find a way yet?
@@captainsandwhich7469 I'm afraid I have not yet.. I have formed a group of Latin speaking Australians though :) and a few of us are also learning wood working to learn how the shields are made.
@@serpentofares5635 Nice :)
@@serpentofares5635 how about online medieval stores?
@@captainsandwhich7469 mediaeval? Well Byzantium is pretty cool
I have a question for you metatron how did you get your scutum and so you know where i can get one
A Rome total war mod made me curious, did Rome ever have heavier troops that had an armored sword arm like the murmilo(?) gladiator class and grieves?
yes. some roman legionnaires got those segmented arm parts for their sword arms. i imagine they bought it with their own money though. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manica_(armguard)
how did they bend it?
I don't know if you know of Carl Sagan but your real good with your teaching.
According to some sources linden wood and poplar were the same wood with poplar being another name for linden and vice versa. You forget to mention the turtle (Testudo) formation if there were archers or slingers involved in the battles.
Where is that information from that they've put their shield on the ground when being charged? I can hardly imagine that.
The huge benefit of the roman heavy infantry was that the enemy got stuck against the shieldwall and then got stabbed with the gladius, right? So enemy would charge, run against the wall and get pressed against it from both sides, romans in front and their friendlies behind. A power contest of solid stance and pressing power, with the romans getting the upper hand because of their ability to still stab and slash with the shorter swords in the tight pressed situation. You would have the enemies face possibly just 10-20cm away from you with your shield in between.
If they'd put their shields to the ground they would have been hardly covered on the upper body at all and also the enemy could have easily climbed/jumped over the wall or slashed from above at the either cowering or else uncovered legionaries.
it seems they would have needed other handles and anchor points on the Scutum ... than just that one center handle ???
Linguistic lessons: 1. The declensions cases, no matter how productive it is, is not the only way to generate words. There seems to be another way, where -um:-us is involved. Where -us usually is attached to new words to means a sort of derivative of the original, -um has the complementary opposite of being a sort of integral of the original. You know +m as the accusative case, but what is an accusative? You also know that +m is the aim of the sentence when cases are constructed properly, but what does it mean for -um? -um denotes the essence. You are reffering to something but you are actually pointing to the essence which is a conceptual thing rather than a physical thing. Regnum Romanum = does not exist because Romans don't like rex. So, we are talking about the essence of the old king of the current Romanus. We point to what makes the old king king and what makes the Romans Romans.
Libera Res Publica Romana: The unoppressed public state of the Romans, did I forgot to mention that Romans do not like rex?
Imperium Romanum: The imperium of the Romans. What is imperium? There is the empire which is a more physical, but still conceptual manifestation of this thing called imperium. However, the empire is not imperium. The original imperium is a sort of power granted by the senatus populusque of the Romans.
We called Augustus emperor but in his native tongue during his time, he technically don't have a title. It is equally valid if we were to call him "the dude" in relation to his official handle "princeps" (the first gentleman).
I'm building a scutum myself, does anyone know where I can get the metal edge?
So how thick was the scutum? As in the actual thickness of the shield front to back. I presume 10cm means something else as that would make the shield 3.9” front to back - thicker than the averge 6” x 9” Holy Bible...
Around less than half an inch
Out of curiosity , where did you buy your Scutum?
Why did the later Romans get rid of this type shield and pilas?
+Tim Jordan I can only guess. Mobility purposes. Big pila turned into little plumbata. Larger shield got slightly smaller and lost it's concavity.
I think they covered their shield with a leather cover apart of the weather protection to kill the shine and break the shape of it. where the enemy can't see.
if the enemy charges and you put the scutum on the ground to take a deffensive position behind it, you greatly reduce your total height. I mean, your head is super low, your torso is even lower. The upper edge of the shield is low, as well so how are you not super vulnerable against spears, f.e.? If a dude of average hieght stabs with his spear above your shield, depending on the angle, he can hit you anywhere from the waist up. Perhaps it is not a big issue, because you wear armour, but this low posture makes face stabs possible from a lot of different angles.
If you hold your shield like at 15:52, and your enemy is not about 3 meter tall, his attacks above your shield have a much smaller target, and stabs into your face can come from fewer angles. With the shield not on the ground, even the counter attacks seem to be more effective to me.
unfortunately, you don't name any resources where this "scutum on the ground" deffense is documented. Based on your videos, I am sure you have some and this type of deffense was really used, I just cannot see why and how it was effective
thanx
The shield obviously gave the legionnaires survivability ...the arm was a shock absorber and if the momentum of the blow continued the 3-ply wood flexed too taking all the Weight of the blow away ....1 particular centurion called scaeva at dyraccium fighting for Pompey recorded his shield having over 100 marks on it after one particular battle ...most were sling shot marks but even so !!
I really enjoyed this video for that matter I enjoyed pretty much all of your videos that I've seen. I however I do have a question. Before there was TH-cam Google and the internet for that matter I tried to read as much as I could about moment history in library books. One thing I've told about the shield if that it was made with three layers of plywood. The other thing is I read that not all but some of the shields on the inside at the top had some kind of hook bracket. This allowed other Shiels to be stacked like shingles or scales. The Romans would test this by having soldiers form a ramp that a horse draw carriage ride up it.
This was in and old book and the illustration we're not very detail.
I remember visiting Rome as a teenager other than seeing the Coliseum I was not able to find any artifacts displayed anywhere. I was hoping to visit in museum displaying weapons and stuff. That did not happen and I was disappointed.
Kind regards!
Luigi
Why do you change my phone's login image?
I really enjoyed this video thanks.
i think you got your mm crosed with cm 10cm would be 4 inch thick witch is the same as a standard 2x4 used in framing a wall i think if it was that thick you might have trouble picking it up
What is that helmet ?
oh found an error in the beginning statement "Ave omnibus QUIBUS metatron...": it is "qui" not "quibus", since it is subject.
+the Creative Assembly machinimas che ne pensi di "quibi"?
Metatron non credo esista come parola...che significa?
+the Creative Assembly machinimas Chiedo allo zio di un mio amico (che è prof di latino) per conferma e ti faccio sapere :D
Metatron potrebbe essere una contrazione tardo imperiale (o magari alto medioevale?), ma che io sappia "quibi" non è nel latino di età classica.
How long did it take the Romans to make this shield? I have a project to do and this is one of the questions that needs to be answered. It would be great if someone replied