Why Romans Refused To Use Archers | 13:27
Ancient Romans | 1.42K subscribers | 40,725 views | September 23, 2026Because the Roman refusal to use archers wasn't a weakness in their system -- it was the foundation of it.
YouTube transcript reformatted at textformatter.ai *may* follow.
Bkmk
Probably a cost benefit analysis.
Without even viewing; a combat archer is a specialized role, requiring long training, and tactical placement and protection from… well just about any other unit.
Lots of trade offs. Also swords don’t run out of ammunition.
So you mean hollywood lied to us?
THE very 1st scene in Gladiator showed hundreds of archers.....you can’t trust anybody these days. SMH
Someone forgot to tell the people who filmed the Russell Crowe movie Gladiator (2000)!
The Roman Army was definitely using archers against the Germans in the opening battle scene.
Because there was more money to be made by mass-producing gladii.
Swords were manufactured by the Military Industrial Complex...
If the English longbow is any guide, it takes longer to train a bowman and the unit he belongs to proficiency in battle than it does to train up a legionnaire to use the sword, the shield, the pilum, and helmet in battle.
That sort of training builds confidence and cohesion in a team. And the rigors of marching and camp-building build his stamina for the battles ahead when he must march, endure slings and arrows, and fight hand-to-hand with the slingers and shooters at the place of decision.
No artillery, huh?
Perhaps the plumbata filled that niche?
The main force being multiplied was always the heavy armored infantry.
This is news to me. I wasn’t explicitly aware that the Roman military did not employ massed archery formations in warfare.
That said, I am reasonably certain that had the Roman military chosen to employ archers en masse up to including mounted archers, they would have been highly proficient. I have no doubt that Roman military archers would be highly trained and very capable. The Romans excelled in whatever skills they required their troops to master.
The bottom line is that massed archery formations apparently were not needed for Rome to win battle after battle. The Roman defeat at Carrhae cited in the video is the exception that proves the rule, demonstrating how pathetically rare enemy archers were able to defeat Roman armies.
Necessity is the mother of invention. There was no necessity for Roman armies to feature massed archery in their military strategy. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.