> According to the planner’s calculation, the journey would have taken 43 days to cover 1,500 Roman miles. To put that into a contemporary context: the same route by road today can be completed in 14 days (340 hours) on foot, or 16 hours by car (source in Spanish).
It would take 340 hours to walk, whether you do it today or in Roman times. Google maps is assuming you would walk for 24 hours a day, the planner is assuming you could walk for around 8.
Roman legions marched around 30 km/day [0], carrying their own supplies, food, weapons and armour, needing to spend time making and breaking camp each day.
Modern European pilgrims on the Camino de Santiago seem to do about 20 km/day [1] and it's considered tiring but accessible by average people, not serious hikers. They carry less of their supplies and do not need to fortify their camp against barbarians.
Roman soldiers were presumably fitter and better trained than the average Roman (though maybe not by much, since everyone worked manual jobs). Maybe that's enough to account for the difference.
i’ve walked the via francigena and the italian section has quite a few sections of ancient roman road. they’re admittedly not contiguous, and are worn more extensively now, so i don’t get the same overall experience of treading on the stones for kilometers as they would have.
i target 35km/day with a 40L pack and finish my segments within 6-7 hours. asphalt, dirt and grass, and hiking trails (rocks, roots, dirt, etc) are the most standard surfaces and, to be honest, they’re all exhausting in their own rights so a change in surface is always welcome.
i can’t imagine marching most of this with near double body weight and then having to make camp.
Probably better to compare "A random Italian" rather than "A random Westerner", the Americans and other car-focused cultures kind of drag down the average a bit too much otherwise.
I've walked for 8 hrs before, wearing modern sneakers on roads with vehicular traffic, and travelled about the same distance estimated by Google Maps. I'd estimate the Roman would like be able to travel in the same duration, barring other extenuating factors (like Caesar staging a revolt against the Senate and crossing with his legion right in front of your planned route), with worse shoes but more walk-friendly roads.
You start with that and then they will clamor for translations into vulgata, and before you know it we're all surrounded by bleeding christiani who don't know their Mars from their Mercurius...
I mean, technically it was built for "the management of general information about accelerators and experiments at CERN". The fact that it also supports a whole bunch of peoples' passion projects as well as a multi-trillion dollar commercial marketplace is just a bonus...
This part is clearly nonsense:
> According to the planner’s calculation, the journey would have taken 43 days to cover 1,500 Roman miles. To put that into a contemporary context: the same route by road today can be completed in 14 days (340 hours) on foot, or 16 hours by car (source in Spanish).
It would take 340 hours to walk, whether you do it today or in Roman times. Google maps is assuming you would walk for 24 hours a day, the planner is assuming you could walk for around 8.
Yes, distance is about the same. 1488Km in Google and 1075 Roman miles in Omnesviae [0], that is ~1590 Km.
[0] https://www.omnesviae.org/#OVPlace337_TPPlace1048
That said, as someone who has walked on cobblestone - a modern road in modern boots is different to an ancient road in ancient boots.
I'd bet money the 'real' travel times would differ.
> an ancient road in ancient boots
Boots? That's luxury! Sandals more likely...
Who'd walk the route more easily for 8h though? A random Western today or a random Roman then?
Roman legions marched around 30 km/day [0], carrying their own supplies, food, weapons and armour, needing to spend time making and breaking camp each day.
Modern European pilgrims on the Camino de Santiago seem to do about 20 km/day [1] and it's considered tiring but accessible by average people, not serious hikers. They carry less of their supplies and do not need to fortify their camp against barbarians.
Roman soldiers were presumably fitter and better trained than the average Roman (though maybe not by much, since everyone worked manual jobs). Maybe that's enough to account for the difference.
[0] https://www.quora.com/Did-Roman-legions-actually-march-20-mi...
[1] https://caminoways.com/how-many-days-does-it-take-to-walk-th...
i’ve walked the via francigena and the italian section has quite a few sections of ancient roman road. they’re admittedly not contiguous, and are worn more extensively now, so i don’t get the same overall experience of treading on the stones for kilometers as they would have.
i target 35km/day with a 40L pack and finish my segments within 6-7 hours. asphalt, dirt and grass, and hiking trails (rocks, roots, dirt, etc) are the most standard surfaces and, to be honest, they’re all exhausting in their own rights so a change in surface is always welcome.
i can’t imagine marching most of this with near double body weight and then having to make camp.
That's how they conquered all of their known world though, out of sheer bloody-mindedness.
> A random Western today or a random Roman then?
Probably better to compare "A random Italian" rather than "A random Westerner", the Americans and other car-focused cultures kind of drag down the average a bit too much otherwise.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c33y3151vydo - "Pizza, pasta, potatoes, protein - how Italian children became so overweight"
Industry fucked us too, dude.
Probably a random Roman. People used to walk a lot, often barefoot. The random modern Westerner would get blisters within the first week.
Probably the Westerner with better shoes, clothes, energy bars, hydration drinks, sunscreen etc.
The only caveat since you said "random" is obesity.
Eh, I'd say it's equal.
I've walked for 8 hrs before, wearing modern sneakers on roads with vehicular traffic, and travelled about the same distance estimated by Google Maps. I'd estimate the Roman would like be able to travel in the same duration, barring other extenuating factors (like Caesar staging a revolt against the Senate and crossing with his legion right in front of your planned route), with worse shoes but more walk-friendly roads.
Cobblestones aren't walk friendly.
> The tool is called OmnesViae (Omnesviae.org (source in Spanish))
I’m pretty sure the page is in Latin for me
A mobile-friendly interactive guide or tour mode could make the platform more engaging for students and history enthusiasts.
You start with that and then they will clamor for translations into vulgata, and before you know it we're all surrounded by bleeding christiani who don't know their Mars from their Mercurius...
Open source code on Codeberg and historical data combined into a functional map—this is the kind of passion project the web was built for.
I mean, technically it was built for "the management of general information about accelerators and experiments at CERN". The fact that it also supports a whole bunch of peoples' passion projects as well as a multi-trillion dollar commercial marketplace is just a bonus...
https://www.w3.org/History/1989/proposal.html
Not including having to wait three months in the winter before attempting to cross the alps.
Tabla Peutingeriana at Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabula_Peutingeriana