Ancient Warfare Podcast

Following an earlier episode in which Murray suggested that warfare was often conceived as frontal and honourable, Peter writes in with a response. He reflects on the idea that outflanking an opponent may once have been seen as poor form, even cowardly or lacking heroic virtue, and asks when outflanking became a tactical innovation deliberately employed in battle.

Join us on Patreon patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast

John asks whether there are historical examples of a formation being outflanked where the troops on the threatened flank turn to engage the attacker, while the main line remains engaged to the front, effectively fighting on two faces at once while maintaining cohesion.

Join us on Patreon patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast

Samuel asks about Athenian archers at the start of the Peloponnesian War. Thucydides lists significant numbers of them in 431 and it raises a series of questions. How were these archers equipped Were they citizens, metics or the famous Scythian archers Did they serve aboard triremes or mainly in garrisons Were they poorer citizens unable to afford hoplite equipment, or were they specialists and mercenaries.

Murray looks at what we know from the sources and archaeology about Athenian archers.

Join us on Patreon patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast

What counts as a true revolution in warfare? In this episode, the panel tackles the idea of sudden and radical change on the ancient battlefield. Rather than slow evolution, they ask which developments transformed how wars were fought almost overnight.

From the emergence of the phalanx and the impact of the trireme at sea, to the spread of cavalry, chariots, and new ways of organising troops, the discussion ranges across the ancient world. The panel also considers technological shifts, including the move from copper to bronze and later to iron, and whether these really changed warfare in a single moment or over longer periods.

Is there such a thing as an ancient equivalent to modern drone warfare, or are even the most dramatic changes the result of adaptation and learning? As ever, the panel bring different perspectives to a lively debate about what really counts as a revolution in warfare.

Join us on Patreon patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast

Alexis asks about the connection between the Roman military and gladiators. Why did the army build and use its own amphitheatres, like the one at Carnuntum, with others recently identified at Megiddo and possibly Carthage and Puteoli Another puzzle is why the army engaged with gladiators at all when civilian amphitheatres already existed.

Murray looks at what military amphitheatres were for in day to day army life. Were they training grounds, places of discipline, entertainment or demonstrations of Roman power He explores how common gladiator involvement with the army actually was, how units may have used them for morale or control, and what archaeology can tell us about life inside the frontier camps.

Join us on Patreon patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast

Ancient sources claim that pigs were sometimes used as weapons against war elephants. Murray examines the origins of this idea, whether it ever occurred, and the famous story associated with Antigonus II Gonatas at the siege of Megara. Did armies really set pigs on fire to panic war elephants? What evidence do we have for this practice? Was it a routine tactic, or does the story survive primarily because of a single account by Antigonus II Gonatas of the siege of Megara?

Murray examines the sources behind these claims, what ancient writers say about animals used against elephants, and the reliability of these accounts.

Join us on Patreon patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast

Listener question from TheSgruby: He asks, "How long were bronze helmets in use? Even after better materials appeared, they seem to have lasted a surprisingly long time as part of military equipment." Murray takes a look.

Join us on Patreon patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast

On 10 January 49 BC, Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon River, a decision that would trigger civil war and reshape the Roman world. But what did this moment really mean, and how inevitable was the conflict that followed?

In this episode of the Ancient Warfare Podcast, the team explore the political and military background to Caesar's fateful decision. We look at the breakdown of relations between Caesar and Pompey, the pressures within the Roman Republic, and why compromise ultimately failed. Was Caesar forced into action, or did he deliberately choose war?

The discussion goes beyond the famous phrase and the dramatic image of a single river crossing. We examine the military realities Caesar faced, the loyalties of his legions, Pompey's strategic position, and how contemporaries understood the step Caesar had taken. Finally, we consider how the crossing of the Rubicon has been remembered, mythologised, and misunderstood ever since.

Join us on Patreon patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast

Listener question from Andrew: While watching a video on the Second Persian Invasion, Andrew wondered why the Greeks didn't attack the Persian engineers as they built the massive pontoon bridge across the Hellespont. How was the bridge constructed and defended, and did the Greeks miss a real chance to destroy it? Murray explains.

Join us on Patreon patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast

Listener question from @klappspatenkamikaze: After commenting on an earlier episode about cloaks in combat, they added, "Now I want to know more about signalling 😃." Murray is happy to oblige.

Join us on Patreon patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast