Hi everyone and welcome to another episode of ancient warfare answers with me, Murray, your weekly fix of ancient warfare related stuff.

Answering questions, hopefully sent in by you, the listener, viewer, slash Patreon,

interested person who's just come across us on their

algorithm.

I've got a couple of questions today.

Well, I'll do one at a time.

But, of course, you can ask us a question, and you can back us on Patreon.

Just go to Patreon forward slash ancient warfare podcast.

You can back us at the level of Optio, Legionary, in order, Legionary, Optio or Centurion,

and even get a copy of the magazine digitally with Optio or in print with Centurion.

And of course, you can ask us a question in the comments, comments on YouTube, send us an email.

One of the questions that I'll be looking at today said they would

have sent a telegram if they could. Oh, glorious. Anyway, first the question is from Chris. My question,

more Roman soldiers were killed in civil wars against other Roman soldiers than any other adversary.

Why was it so easy for usurpers to convince their soldiers to fight against

their brethren? And why didn't emperors try to change whatever facilitated this kind of

behavior? Right. So, firstly, all sorts of issues and lots of history to get through in 10 minutes.

Gosh, we'll see how we go. The first thing is, I think, that the idea of finding against brethren alters in the history of the Roman Empire, that there's

probably a barochialism and a area-specific loyalty that comes about through legions being

centered in particular places, whether it be

legionary camps or even provinces, that they become attached to those. And so when local loyalties

are appealed to, those legions are willing to rebel because they don't identify with other areas of the Roman

...