Centurion Trailer - In Cinemas July 30th

[OsaKaboom]

was that boudica?

[heavenlywolf151]

alright look there definatley were warrior women.even if only some. But realy who the fuck cares? this is youtube not a debate room for history.

[KAoSILLuZionZ1995]

never get descent roman movies anymore :( not since gladiator

[draistRomol]

its a trap hahaha

[TheLoyalOfficer]

Also - keep in mind that a lot of those Scythian graves may have been symbolic equipment of arms. That is to say that the woman was being equipped for self-defense in the afterlife, not that she was an actual warrior in a battle line.

Note also that most Scythians were horsemen, not infantry.

[ArcheoRexo]

@TheLoyalOfficer No such grave invertory is always connected with rank and social status. That how it is in human society since mezolit. But take it that i dont said that and use logic, why would they give a full armour coat lance, sword , arrows and bow to women if it was symbolic It costed a lot of money, that would be stupid, if it was symbolic they would use symbolic miniature of weapons. I know they were horse nomads, but i dont see a point in this remark.

[TheLoyalOfficer]

Do the math on women fighting heavily armored men AND facing the rigors of childbirth. Whole peoples, even more than we did lose, would have been wiped out. We NEVER would have made it to 6+ billion people with women fighting wars.

Plus, remember that some women are born infertile or lose their ability to have children after just one child. And almost no medicine.

This is all part of the gyno-American Hollywood PC nonsense. Total bullshit.

[ArcheoRexo]

@TheLoyalOfficer I do my math thank you. Women facing heavily armored men, and yu think they wore what? a loincloth. No they were armoured as well as men , even better becouse they were better than standard male fighters. I guess i would know that if you ever faced women in swordpractice. I want to once again point on scythians (and maybe even sarmatians), couse we have archaeological evidence of fighing women. About one fifth of warrior graves are the graves of women. Is that enough??

[TheLoyalOfficer]

@ArcheoRexo Have you ever actually WORN chainmail? I have - I bought a steel suit for a Halloween costume and it is HEAVY. You think some 115 lbs chick could handle a suit of mail? And who is training these hordes of women warriors? There is not a SINGLE picture of a woman in combat in ANY medieval or ancient manuscript or painting, just some passing references by Roman writers.

Insufficient evidence. Get your mind out of the Hollywood bullshit PC fog. Women did not fight historically.

[ArcheoRexo]

@TheLoyalOfficer Yes i wore, im in fact part time armourer. Secondly none 50 kg will not handle it but 80 kg would and with ease. I didnt say a hordes, the i would take it that women warriors were as common as female soldiers today. And training would provide her family like if was male. If we are going to medieval, there are depictions, mentions, even whole stories about female warriors. And i dislike Hollywood style of film as any other sane archeologist, but it doesnt change the facts.

[TheLoyalOfficer]

@ArcheoRexo There are no depictions at all about female warriors from this period. Leaders, queens - yes, but not infantry fighting in a battle line. As for a couple of horse archers - still probably not.

Remember also that ancient historians did not always write for accuracy. For example they may have claimed that there were women in the front lines to make the barbarians look weak or efeminate - worthy only of conquest. In reality, of course, there were none.

[ArcheoRexo]

@TheLoyalOfficer Sorry which period? (i guess we will still be in antiquity). Yes becouse what survived was a roman culture and their art, and they didnt like the idea of woman fighter. I never seen a depiction of etruscan kings of rome, does that mean that there were none? Yes they didnt alvays write acuratly. They have a taste for a making enemies of rome stronger, becouse the stronger the enemy was the greater the roman glory is. BTW: You tink that cavalry is somehow inferior to infantry?

[shnboy]

@vermin298 No shit.. einstein.

[robasci00]

@EdikShepherd Olga Kurylenko, Ukranian and yes, she's hot ...

[robasci00]

hot russian chicks in a roman battlefield, same crappy american movie

[EdikShepherd]

@robasci00 Actually watch the fucking movie and you wont think she's so hot. I actually couldn't wait to see her die through the whole thing. And it doesn't matter if she's Russian, she looks Northern European enough to play a Pict.

[Totalwar476]

was this movie good at all



[PRoachSupes]

awesome 

[TheLoyalOfficer]

Ugh warrior chicks...

How ahistorical and gay.

Do any of these morons read any history?

[TheWhoaDude]

@TheLoyalOfficer One word, Boudicca

[TheLoyalOfficer]

@TheWhoaDude She was a LEADER, not a combatant in the battle line.

The main battlefield for ancient women was CHILDBIRTH. It was a battle that took the lives of many mothers - probably 5-10%, even among the wealthy.

Women in the battle lines would mean one thing only: the extermination of the entire tribe/ethnic group. Too risky. That's why, HISTORICALLY, it was not done.

[ArcheoRexo]

@TheLoyalOfficer I m sorry. Your estimation is correct BUT, it not true. In some cultures it was normal, or better to say not rare for women to fight in the first line. Celts were one of them, even roman authors mention celtic women fighting, and give them more credit then their male counterparts, Even in the later tradicion i post la tene cultures shows us mastor of arms as grizzled women warriors. And scythians, well women cant be married or be with man until she killed in the battle.

[TheLoyalOfficer]

@Arch Nonsense.These were rare exceptions.Tribes/nations that lost their women on the battle line were faced with genetic extermination, only to be ameliorated by the kidnapping of other women, which was frowned upon since they were not of their ethnic group. You say "Celts" - that was an ENORMOUS race of different peoples stretching from Gibraltar to Poland. And no, the women did not fight.

CHILDBIRTH was their battlefield - and, as I said, a very deadly one. Fighting battles as well? ABSURD

[ArcheoRexo]

@TheLoyalOfficer Well i know you mean by enormous we are talking about celts but, they were a Culture not race, keep that in mind. Yes their culture stretched far and wide, but one main chracteristc is same warrior society,if you held a position you must be able to defend it with your sword. And we know there were women chiefs and queens. Now about the ancient sources to that Diodorus Siculus,Tacitus,Plutarchos,Amm­ianus Marcellinus, and celtic legends consernig CúChulainn.

[ArcheoRexo]

@TheLoyalOfficer As well there were women warriors among Gothic tribes, which we know becouse in emperors Aurelians triumph trere were some of them and it enshocked romans (yes no women warriors in rome). But at last, not least there are scythians women. By ancient sources they had fought together with men in battle and have to kill three enemies before he was seen worthy to give a child. They even performed mastectony on right to make their archery and sword skills better.

[TheLoyalOfficer]

@ArcheoRexo Masectomy? Ah, I see you are quoting the Amazon legend. See how myth blends into history? I suppose the next thing you will tell me is that Heracles killed them all in his Seven Trials? LOL.

Tacitus NEVER said that women fought in the battle line. And yes of course there were QUEENS - but they were leaders, they did not fight.

I will check your other writers - I am sure I will be proven right on them as well.

[ArcheoRexo]

@TheLoyalOfficer No im not qouting amazon legend, but Diodorus Siculus. One shuoldnt deny the evidence from ancient sources which are supported by archological finds. Secondly, according to Tacitus, Suetonius, the general who finally defeated Bouddicca, told his troops that "in their ranks there are more women than fighting men." Try the books as well but do it properly, best to read them im original so there will be no problem with shity translation.

[TheLoyalOfficer]

@ArcheoRexo Suetonius was making fun of the Britons - not being serious. Plus, that quote is from a speech that Tacitus put in his mouth, 50 years later.

Again, you have no evidence at all except for lame legends and your PC brainwashing. There were no warrior women of any significant numbers - at all. Queens, leaders, chiefs - yes. But not troops in the battle line.

You keep ignoring the REAL battlefield of women - CHILDBIRTH.

Stop being a PC retard.

[ArcheoRexo]

@TheLoyalOfficer There is no need to be rude just couse you are loosing an argument. I gave you plenty of good aruments to which you didnt even give a reply, but whatever. Right now im sitting in my chair at the department of classical archeology and im discusing with colegues of mine if thery is something that can bring you to the sences. Most of them are laughting on this argument couse you havent provided any evidence of your statement, just defending you ill syllogism.

[TheLoyalOfficer]

@ArcheoRexo I don't need to provide evidence - YOU DO.

There is NO EVIDENCE that Celtic women fought as infantry in battle lines. NONE. No depictions, paintings, or any other materials. Just some myths and legends which are just that - myths and legends. Roman writers who referenced that were MAKING FUN of their enemies, not speaking literally.

As to the graves of Scythians, how many have been uncovered and how many these "warrior women"? 5? 10? Hardly a huge sampling. Amazon myth.

[Flashaman1845]

@TheLoyalOfficer I agree there is no hard evidence of female warriors fighting in Celtic battle formations, but there is evidence of their close involvement on occasion. Tacitus tells us of the throng of Celtic women who taunted the Romans during the attack on the druidic stronghold of Anglesey. In myth Cu'Chulainn was said to have been trained by a female Pictish master of martial arts "Scathach" and later fought Aiofe another female warrior.

[TheLoyalOfficer]

@Flash Again, the biggest battlefield for ancient women was childbirth. It was just as deadly as the battlefield for the men. Tribes that exposed their women to the rigors of battle not only faced defeat (look at a jacked Saxon huscarl wearing 60 pounds of armor as an example of these fierce opponents) but also faced genetic annhiliation even if they won the battle!

The ancients knew all of these things. Tacitus talks about women taunting and supporting, but not in the battle formations.

[ArcheoRexo]

@Flashaman1845 That what i told him. But he refuse to se it. I dont know what he wants. A depiction of celtic formation from 1 cent BCE with direct arrow pointing and saying this is woman warrior ???

[Flashaman1845]

@TheLoyalOfficer Some historians have also interpreted Adomnan's famous Law of the innocents as evidence of the involvement of women in Pictish tribal warbands. The law was drafted in the hope of protecting non-combatants in times of war, the elderly, women and the young. However some historians have seen within its provisions and the wording of the law what seems to be a request to ban females from engaging in warfare! Which to Adomnan would have been a most barbaric & non Christian practice.

[ArcheoRexo]

@TheLoyalOfficer How many women warrior graves ware uncovered. I ll tell you when the collegue of mine will end up his diploma work where he will have this as well. :) . Not huge sample ?? Do you even know about what you are talking? But whatever, large or not it is prove that they were warriors. And that s the point. If you think that something that is proven by physical evidence is MYTH than by that Jesus is just figure from fairytale.

[TheLoyalOfficer]

@ArcheoRexo No, it proves that the were QUEENS. Especially due to the small numbers of graves. Flimsy evidence.

Jesus has multiple accounts of his life and whatnot. Warrior women have very little - if any real evidence.

[ArcheoRexo]

@TheLoyalOfficer Queens? Really? Well take it that they were "queens". The onlzy chance how they could get that position was by proving themselves in battle. It basic struture for tribal society, leader must be able to continualy prove himself worthy. Multiple accounts for Jesus, but none from the time of his life, and most of them are contradictive even in base terms. :D As well as no depiction of that jew from his times. :D

[TheLoyalOfficer]

@ArcheoRexo Jesus has Josephus (Jew) and Tacitus, plus the Gospels, among others. Queens were queens by birth, or by marriage to kings. They did not have to fight to attain that status - unless, of course, you are watching PC crap ahistorical hollywood movies...

[unfukkkmee]

THE JESUS CHRIST WAS THE FIRST ANTI-semite.

@TheLoyalOfficer THE JOSEPUS WAS ROMAN WITH JEWISH RELIGION

[KoMDraegast]

@unfukkkmee

He was actually the Jewish commander at the siege of Jotopate and was captured by the Romans after they conquered the city from the rebelling Jews and helped the Romans at the Siege of Jerusalem by Titus in 67 AD. After Titus became emperor after his father Vespasian died he then served Rome until his death in 100 AD

[unfukkkmee]

@KoMDraegast I DONT CARE SHUT UP

[KoMDraegast]

@unfukkkmee STOP YELLING OR I SMACK A BABY.

[unfukkkmee]

@KoMDraegast FART MY BALLS

[Chantzehao]

@TheLoyalOfficer Movies don't sell without sex appeal nowadays. Directors/producers too lazy to actually put effort into the story/characters, so they go with what they know: tits.

[TheLoyalOfficer]

@Chantzehao Yeah, you're probably right.

Either that, or some cheesey re-make. Or sequel. Or crap from a comic.

How sad...

[antred11]

@TheLoyalOfficer Since when does history mean anything to Hollywood?

[antred11]

@antred11 ... or the movie industry in general.

[TheLoyalOfficer]

@antred11 Haha - fair enough. Point taken.

[vonstreckerz]

Admiral Ackbar is in this movie ?

[0XPROGamersX0]

yes but also the eagle was based on the book the eagle of the ninth by rosmary sutcliff

[TooJubeJM1]

This is a really excellent action film. Shame it hasn't been better publicised. The Eagle also has a similar story (loss of the Ninth Legion north of what was to be Hadrian's wall) but this is a better film in so many ways. The dvd has special feature on how it was made. If anyone has been to Hadrian's wall you feel pity for anyone ordered to be there as part of an army let alone having to fight Picts as well. "Even the land wants us dead"

[0XPROGamersX0]

@TooJubeJM1 the eagle is about the recovery of the ninth legions eagle, this is about the ambush of the ninth legion

[TooJubeJM1]

@0XPROGamersX0 yes you are right but the two films both owe their storyline to the same book The Last Legion about the loss of the Ninth Legion. They just have slightly different perspectives. My point was that there are two films close together in subject matter and made in the same year, but one (Centurion) is of a higher standard than the other (The Eagle). It appeared that The Eagle was patchy in quality particularly the ending.

[zzzzzzz114]

It's an ok movie. It's about some roman scumbags getting what they deserved

[antiscratchy]

this looks.... so shit

[Vermin298]

ITS A TRAP!

[HistoryLover1550]

I sooo want to see this one!