tadejtomic1943 asks, "Hi Murray, what was the army composition. How many men did it have. Was that the first time the Macedonian Phalanx operated and fought in Italy?What was Alexander Molossus' ultimate goal in Italy? Thanks!" Murray goes on a deep dive to discover the answers.

Join us on Patreon patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast

James from California has taken the time to write a fan letter to Ancient Warfare Answers! This is much appreciated! Murray muses over James' letter (which was into response to the die is cast but, as always, leads down much more widespread paths.

Join us on Patreon patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast

The Marian reforms are said to have transformed the Roman army from a citizen militia into a more professional fighting force, reshaping how Rome made war.

In this episode, the Ancient Warfare Magazine team discuss the Marian reforms, what they actually were, and how far their impact has been understood or misunderstood.

Join us on Patreon patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast

John has been watching the trailer for the 2026 film 'The Odyssey', starring Matt Damon as Odysseus, and something does not sit right. The Trojan War is usually dated to the thirteenth or twelfth century BC, a period associated with Mycenaean or Achaean warfare and distinctive equipment, such as boar-tusk and horned helmets. This is the world shown in archaeological reconstructions and classic works such as Peter Connolly's The Ancient Greece of Odysseus.

Yet in film and illustration, the warriors of Homer's epics are almost always dressed in the armour of much later centuries. Corinthian and Chalcidian helmets recur frequently, even though these types do not appear until hundreds of years after the traditional date of the Trojan War. The Odyssey trailer continues this trend, showing both Corinthian and open-faced Chalcidian helmets among Odysseus' men.

So how did this confusion of periods become so entrenched in modern depictions of Homeric warfare? Why do artists and filmmakers consistently reach for the armour of Classical Greece rather than the material culture of the Late Bronze Age? Murray unpacks how this visual tradition developed and why it has proved so hard to shift.

Join us on Patreon patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast

Peter got in touch with some thoughtful feedback and a set of big questions about the Battle of Arausio in 105 BC. A long-time reader of Ancient Warfare and a regular podcast listener, Peter has been debating Arausio with a wargaming friend and wanted Murray's take on a few key issues. Was Arausio a failure of Roman arms, or a failure of Roman politics that ended in catastrophe? If Caepio and Mallius had cooperated, could the battle have been won, or was defeat inevitable? And how capable were the Cimbrian commanders, and are they underestimated because our sources are Roman? Murray tackles all of this in a substantial episode of Ancient Warfare Answers.

Join us on Patreon patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast

Responding to a recent episode of the main Ancient Warfare podcast, Eric writes in to ask about the purpose of the crest on helmets worn by ancient Greek and Roman soldiers.

Join us on Patreon patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast

Bronze helmets, greaves, armour, and bronze-faced shields make for an impressive army, but who fought in all that kit, next to whom, and how?

In the latest episode of the Ancient Warfare Magazine Podcast, the team discusses issue 106 of the magazine, Greece in the late Archaic period.

Join us on Patreon patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast

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