Something interesting that occurs to me, especially among Gen Z, is that a lot of us are still living with our parents. Hardly any of us have the ability to move out and strike out on our own as previous generations used to. I wonder if that is going to cause us, or future generations who may find themselves in similar situations when they turn 18, to live/work/identify with our families more. Like in the middle ages.
The logical conclusion of pushing time forward with technology artificially is that we'll snap back into the middle ages *culturally* and I mean that in a very LITERAL way.
That would be a very practical response to it, but at the end of the day staying forever with your parents is still widely considered the most loser thing you can possibly do. So it will likely be resisted immensely and only possibly happen if it gets to the point where it is so bad that a majority of people are forced into it by poverty.
I think it will become normalized eventually, at least until a certain age. Certainly, a lot of people will only own a home if they inherit it when they are 40-60. What will probably happen is married couples who have middle class parents will inherit their property and accumulate more wealth, while those who have poor parents will continue to rent until they die. The result will be a greater divide between rich and poor, which never ends well. Its possible things will balance themselves out, but a lot of the natural balancing that happens over time has been disrupted by short-term government policy. They create a problem, propose a "fix" which makes another problem pop up years later, which they then "try" to "fix" again. Made their friends and them a lot of money, but they doomed later generations.
One could say the decline of the Ottomans led to the Islamic Dark Age that continues now. They just get better force multipliers than other dark ages..
The amount of bots in your comment section is insane... I remember just a few years ago when YT bots looked like large youtubers and would say stuff like "Clink my link for free x!" but now they're just having back and forth conversations about something that has nothing to do with the video, and repeating themselves like a broken record. It's clear that they're trying to promote a product or some unknown politician. It's upsetting and it makes me only hate RUclips more. Great video btw Rudyard.
Are you using adblock? I am, and i have not noticed the problem of multi-agent a.i. driven comment threads, which is entirely possible and likely given a.i.
@@MCArt25 Oh. Yeah, I expect many of them are rarty incels but they are better than redditors. That's a low bar admittedly, however I do think they can and will improve as human beings instead of wallowing in self-pity and eternal (purported) victimhood.
Work, work, work, work, living in cycles, living in cycles, do what ancestor did, do what ancestor did, do what ancestor did. That's how I explain asians.
@@johncracker5217 Well, it depends. Inheritance isn't inherently based, but what the inheritance in question is. You could be a civilization doing thing over and over again at keeping your state a monolith and eternal but when that thing is just... being monolithic I guess you would have to live it to tell and say if you like it or don't like it, I don't know for certain as I am not one of them. I think Ancient Egypt was a cool example of inherited basedness and Europe before degeneracy.
Your cohost doesn’t usually add much to these videos. It could be nice if he read the relevant Wikipedia page beforehand and prepared some questions or something like that.
Thanks for continuing updates I'd rather trade the stock market as it's more profitable. I make an average of $34,500 per week even though I barely trade myself.
Piont of correction ,western Europe didn’t become the most advanced nations in the world untill after 1750AD .They picked up from 1000AD to 13000AD,then went into decline due to political instability, plague ,crop failures ,extreme weather conditions&high population. They did a recovery between 1500AD to 1750 AD.After that ,they surpassed the old world (eastern civilizations).For more information read the book"After Timurlane ".
He's picking a date just after the Sack of Baghdad and two centuries after the decline of the Buddhist kingdoms in India. It's less that high middle ages northwestern Eurasia was killing it then and more that a lot of other civilizations had hit a low point.
The divergence long predated 1750. You're right that Europe's economy contracted in aggregate terms in the 14th & 15th centuries, but that doesn't equate to a decline in more important per capita output, which probably rose through a more favourable resource/population balance, laying the basis for subsequent growth. The 17th century saw another contraction - this time possibly accompanied by stagnation in per capita output - but that only lasted about 40 years, longer if you were Polish or Dutch and facing later destructive wars. Europe's lead (initially narrow but by 1700 already substantial) probably dates back paradoxically to the late medieval period of population decline, if not to the end of the Southern Song (whose famed prosperity presumably dictated the uploader's choice of date, 1250 being invoked as a time when Europe wasn't in the lead rather than when it was). For more information, I recommend studying population and agricultural output which still accounted for most of the economy and occupied nearly 3/4 of the labour force, but by 1500 already a slightly smaller share than in the rest of the world, at least in the north-west: there's really no alternative.
Absolutely love the show, but just for fun, imagine every time Rudyard (the guy with the deep, insightful rants) cuts to Dave, Dave's in the middle of something totally unexpected-like making out with an imaginary partner, sipping a cocktail in a bubble bath, or playing chess with himself! It'd be like an SNL skit, just adding a little spice to the already fantastic dynamic. Keep up the great work, guys! 😂
My Junior year APUSH teacher was a blessing because of this, my school mostly glossed over the Middle Ages even at the AP level but I remember when I asked him specifically what his favorite era of history was and why he responded that it was “The Middle Ages because of its under appreciated contribution to society and the sheer resilience of the people”. He was a young guy too, there are still educators out there that are well versed in ALL history and they’re a true blessing
I imagine there is one specific time where a bird first takes to the sky, where as each time before they've come down to the ground. I choose to believe that humanity is now existing in that split second before the wings spread out, and it feels like you are falling, but in reality you are about to soar. The probability isn't as low as you would think. It's not even a long shot bet.
I believe so as well. We will have terabytes of data showing why the current form of governing just makes no sense, centralized slow moving beaucracies that are incentivized to steal from the treasury and represent corporate interests over their voters. My next guess is we will repeat history where nation states become a thing of the past and the merchant class being looked down upon. A lot like the fall of Rome except were going to recover quickly with our current technology.
@@Meow-gp5nk There is a lot to be optimistic about actually... AI, Robotics, and just general understanding among the population of how the media works...
@@Chris-es3wf not by definition. Start from the first principle that there are more good people than bad people and you'll see that just like any other tool invented in human history, these will also be a net positive for humanity.
My boy, Rudyard I think your ideas are pretty tight, you have perspective for days. Reign in the tangents. You need your “interviewer” to act as a “straight” player who doesn’t know anything. Get someone to probe and unlayer For you, and then trust your nuance and perspective to come out there. Cause right now it’s running the show and it’s a hot mess. That being said, I love your perspective and think you’re under rated. You just need to condition and get some reps in with honing that shit in.
Rudyard. Great work, but I am little disappointed because you didn’t mention Slavs at all. Largest European group of people who mainly developed in dark ages and had real impact on history of that time in history . So I gently ask you to do a separate episode about Slavic civilisation, like you did about vikings please.
That could be an interesting video, but there is no Slavic civilization. The Slavs weren’t advanced enough to make their own civilization in time and so different Slavs got folded into different civilizations.
Good points about late Roman stagnation and European advance in the "high Middle Ages", but let down by the long-discredited description of the the 5th-10th centuries as a "Dark Age", a term that fell out of serious historical usage about half a century ago (and never really extended to the Carolingian period in European historiography anyway). From the perspective of historical progress, the first half of the Middle Ages is very much a time of reconfiguration, recovery and tentative advance, evidenced in the rise of increasingly ambitious polities and in the growth of agricultural output and population (and monetisation, trade and towns) from the 7th century onward: talk of decline or stagnation until 1000 is about as misguided as it gets. The claim that western Europe "barely had coinage" in the 8th-10th centuries is absurd, as any viking could tell you. Silver and copper-alloy coin (the stuff that's actually of use in the everyday economy) had been in short supply in the 5th-7th centuries, but that was a legacy of Rome's damaging 4th-century shift to gold. The pricier but unhelpful metal remained privileged in the days of Merovingian "grand commerce", but a viable silver coinage was already emerging from 680 modelled on Frisian and English sceattas and later on the Frankish denier. The Roman Empire's disintegration wasn't about wealthy city-dwellers running off into "the middle of nowhere" to escape a supposedly crushing 5% tax rate (higher in the outer provinces anyway): on the contrary, the Empire in its more useful days had presided over development in its subject territories that itself generated centrifugal tendencies. Wealthy Romans didn't become tribal chieftains: the chieftains became wealthy Romans who no longer needed Rome and had the good sense to put the long moribund western Empire out of its misery. The characterisation of ancient Greek and Roman civilisation as not being intrinsically European or the source of modern western institutions is one with which I heartily concur: both were Mediterranean rather than Continental in their culture and economic aspirations, and the Mediterranean wasn't going to be the future. Europe as a cultural and socio-economic enity indeed dates from the Middle Ages, but it starts with Rome's downfall, not the emergence centuries later of political expressions like parliaments. The description of the Roman economy as "socialist" is however laughable: tax doesn't make you socialist, and 18th-century England had a far higher tax rate (though its north American colonies didn't) and a more effective oligarchic government than Rome did. Nor was medieval Europe a cauldron of individualism, old clan loyalties instead giving way to ties of church, village or gild. The uploader really needs to get out more, and read some proper books (especially on the early medieval economy) by serious European scholars (Wickham's at least a start) rather than fretting over faddish product by authors out to promote their latest pet theory.
There was a massive volcanic eruption which caused a little ice age and was followed by a very deadly plague. The economic decline wasn't just because of Justinian and would have happened regardless.
The point about the fusing of Germanic warrior ideals and the southern Christian church is exemplified in the apx 800-850CE texts called the "Heliand", in which monks and missionaries retell the gospels in Old Saxon to the Saxons resisting Charlemagne. The Christians juxtaposition Odinic imagery into the gospels calling Jesus terms like "audfrumo alomahtig" or "almighty spear wielding advancer" and "sigidrohten" or "victory-lord". Not only are they depicting Jesus as a warlord, but they describe the apostles as if they were his retinue of champions bedecked in jewels and fine weaponry. Not very christian at all. Same thing in Beowulf, where Germanic heathen cultural ideals ooze in every verse, but the monk composing it just makes sure to insert the Judaic god. In other words, if you couldnt make folks true believers, slap a cross on it. Even early on in the conversion of Anglo Saxon England, Christ was just another god in the pantheon for a while. And Anglo Saxon king lists like Textus Roffensis feature pedigrees of English rulers tracing all the way back to Woden exist up until the 12th century. Christianity had to twist and bend itself in order to claim any sortve victory over the northern heathen world. Great vid!
There was a Comet that devastated Britain right around 560 AD (and a volcano went off in 535 AD somewhere in the tropics). That was what made the Anglo Saxon replacement so thorough in the eastern part of the Island. There were years of famine, drought, and disease in Europe and the world after that.
No, there wasn’t a comet that devastated anything. Comets, asteroids DO NOT hit the earth that’s a lie. I suggest you check out Vibes of the Cosmos, he will set you str8.
Please add a subtle sound whenever you put a map (or any picture) on the screen. That way I know to look at the screen when I'm only listening. I don't want to miss anything.
Diocletian didn't just do inflation management and overbearing taxation. He also laid the groundwork for the future landed nobility and peasant class by restricting social mobility and personal freedoms. This may have been effective, at least in the 30 or so years afterwards, but after a century of high taxation and no social mobility, people were maiming themselves to avoid fighting for the Empire as it fell.
@@MCArt25 Uncle Miltie believed that massive monetary stimulus could have prevented the Great Depression. I have absolutely no love lost for his economics.
I remember reading a credible science magazine years ago where they said that the moving of nations in Europe in this period was actually caused by a volcanic eruption in Iceland sometime in the 6th century if I remember correctly, that caused a massive decrease in the temperature in Europe for a few years and a ton of people died of diseases and hunger because of that, and it got so cold it forced the peoples from the north migrate to the south. It could be wrong, but I found it so interesting I remembered it for like 10 years for some reason, so I thought I'd share it.
Rudyard, you enlightened chad, you opened my eyes to considering something I never thought I'd be reconsidering in this video: nature vs nurture. It really is a false dichotomy, isn't it? I'm going to think about this for a while.
A solid B+ presentation, leaving room for further contemplating on the subject..... and making a basic perspective related study? 👍. And it's interesting.
The concept of the European "Dark Ages" is used mainly by English-speaking historians, because it reflects what happened in England between the evacuation of the Roman legions and the establishment of the first Christian Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. When you read French historians, they do not refer to the Dark Ages, in French histories you go from the Roman era straight into the Middle Ages.
I selfishly want one about the US westward expansion and the Wild West. Outlaws, gunslingers, the gold rush. I thinks it’s a fascinating part of our history with the stark contrast between the industrialization of the east and the almost barbaric west
The 'Dark Ages' are the most fascinating time in history for me. I started studying history as anyone would, by learning the things you mentioned; but when I got to the Renaissance I wanted to know the *why* of things. The shockingly small amount of primary sources definitely doesn't help, but there is material there for you to piece things together the best you can. The more inquisitive you are, the more interesting this type of historical period is.
Not a big deal but the finger pointing at the moon quote was to teach zen practitioners to not get too caught up in scriptures and teaching methods because these are the “finger pointing to the moon.” Instead experience the “moon” directly through direct experience of “no mind” or pure awareness and enlightenment usually through various forms of meditation. I suppose it could be applied to reading history but it was fundamentally “pointing” to a greater truth and state of being.
The greek roman relation ship is like the Germany US relationship for germany has the invention like greece had and the US adopts them and spread them in an bigger empire like the romans did
Dear Rudyard- may I ask what your opinion might be of Kenneth Clarke's "Civilisation" Episode One "The Skin of Our Teeth"? and Episode 2 "The Great Thaw"? I'm old- 64. Grew up on his series, as well as Bronowski's "The Ascent of Man" and James Burke's "Connections" and "The Day the Universe Changed" - what might you think of their observations on the "Dark Ages"?
I ‘be been waiting to get around to this video today. Similarly, I can say the same for the video I just watched from channel “The Desirable Truth.” Ironically, the next “suggested” auto play video was this one. 🤣
Let's go back to first principles. Rome was defeated militarily. Nothing else matters. Rome could have been Christian/pagan, poor, heavily taxed, completely stagnant, corrupt, had crumbling infrastructure, communist or whatever, and still survived. Rome had tens of millions of people and could have churned hundreds of thousands into the army like they had under Hannibal. Clearly this is what killed Rome not anything else. It's not how hard you hit, its how hard you are willing to get hit and still move forward. >There was nothing valuable to conquer in Germany so the Romans stopped expanding there. >The Roman army in the west stopped moving around and became more static. >Because it was static there was no plunder to be had and nobody wanted to join the army. >So the Romans hired barbarians and people who associated with barbarians because these tended to be more loyal in the case of bodyguards and closer to the frontier in the case of border guards. >The Roman army was turned into bodyguards for powerful men and border guards for the frontier. >Lacked the ability to get replacements from the bulk of their population down south. >Once they lost soldiers/the frontier where they got soldiers they had few ways of replacing those soldiers. >Relied on barbarian armies more and more until the emperors became puppets of said barbarians >Eventually the office of emperor was no longer needed for barbarian rulers and was terminated
You mention that English began in the Dark Ages. It did not. What was spoken by the Anglo Saxon tribes was essentially a form of Low German, which you wouldn’t understand, and had all sorts of rules that don’t exist in English like declensions (but do in other Germanic languages). English didn’t arise until after the Norman conquest of 1066, when a pidgin language arose so the conquered peasants could communicate with their Norman overlords. The mishmash that developed become the English language. That is why English is so different than any other Indo European language, is it’s a synthesis of Anglo-Saxon and early French.
"if you don't explain asians you don't understand humanity" this is true if we presume, as western liberalism does, a universal model of humanity. but what if there isn't? why should we presume others to have very similar experiences, views, attitudes, and goals to our own? We shouldn't! So why should we assume a universal model of the human, human development?
@@QuizmasterLaw look you might think that just because you give your opinions in a concise way you're not saying anything brash but really the implications of your statement are insulting, I'm just giving you the energy you want pal...
@@IbnRushd-mv3fp Can you string together coherent logically consistent sentences? Because google translate is failing you... Should I call for an ambulance?
The popular misconception of the "Dark" Ages largely arises from earlier academia not fully realising what they were researching or how the history of the ancient world progressed. Happily, today we have a much more complete understanding of this time period. It was not a 'dark' age at all in terms of disease,famine or ignorance. There was not a whole lot of knowledge loss!
Justinian would strongly object to you calling his empire (which included Italy) "Byzantine" and not "Roman." In fact, so do I. The official language of the Eastern Roman Empire was still Latin in Justinian's time (the 6th century, for those who don't know), and the Catholic and Orthodox churches had not yet split. They considered themselves Romans in every way. The fact that old Rome wasn't their capital is pretty much irrelevant. Constantinople was actually called "New Rome" by Constantine before his death and its subsequent naming after him. I would concede that the Eastern Roman Empire ceased to be Roman in all but name after either 1) Heraclius' replacement of Latin with Greek for the official language in the 7th century, or 2) the splitting of the Eastern Roman church from the Roman Catholics in 1054. I'm not sure which is more significant. I'm leaning towards the first, as language is probably the most important factor in defining a nation.
It should be also pointed out that Dark Age is a myth. And that is official position of historians! Originally term refereed only to lack of the records, but later was propagandized during Enlightenment. In reality Franks and Goths literally were roman and live among citizens of old Empire. French, Italian Spanish, Portuguese and Romanian literally are dialects of the Latin. Contrary to popular myth Byzantium (aka the Rome) did in fact recognized HRE as the West. In fact during at least high medieval, people did have higher developmental level then the Romans. Especially in zone of the agriculture. Only the high level administration and organization was struggling. Also in Late Medieval people already did use guns. Popular historical movies like to pretend that was not the case. Just check Kingdom Come 2 as example.
Yeah, the guy just glazed Classical civilization for the first half and didn't really address any points in Rudyard's argument. Most of the comments on the podcast were ad hominem against Rudyard, so you know he was doing something right (case in point below)
When you said the people were fleeing the central authority and organically pledge alligence to the nearest richest, meanest dude. Was that a catalyst for all the political instability and civil wars on the late empire? Also, were diocletians reforms a way to stifle human capital flight?
Another great video Rudyard. I love this stuff. The dark ages are a perfect lesson in conquest, culture, religion, power, politicing. Just look at the Norman conquests, foreigners conquering diverse cultures, in the late dark ages. Or the forming of the "Norman" identity in the first place. It is a shame it's not really taught in schools. Keep up the great work buddy!
Lol, no, the earliest known use of the term "Catholic Church" was in a letter written around 107 AD by St. Ignatius of Antioch to Christians in Smyrna. The term absolutely did not develop over centuries in Europe.
there was no dark ages , it was a term used by an Italian poet who complained about the quality in literature of his time, after that historians started to use it, Rome fell and that created chaos however Rome was NOT all of Europe , there were many discoveries in the middle ages in Europe and lots of art and architecture , you are an American and it may be difficult for you to understand Europe was more that the Roman Empire , and modern day Europe is more than Paris, London and Rome , I would suggest you visited some museums in Europe and learn about the middle ages, many Kingdoms was founded during that time also
If the earth were seeded with dna, there would be some sort of harvest at some point? or could it be like a science fair experiment for a 4th dimensional highschooler, if not dna might be like a mold or nuisance thing that pops up on its own.
The interviewer popping up 20 minutes in just to give the thumbs up and say keep going. These 2 have some great unintentional comedy.
I honestly wonder what the point of the interviewer even is.
I think they do it like this to help Rudyard speak live. He is very bad to doing so so this could work as training.
He could do just fine without the other guy. He contributes nothing to any of these.
All episodes are like this. He's not an interviewer. More of a moderator.
@@Carl2988carl , moderator 🤣. What is he moderating? I hope Rudyard isn't paying him. He's a complete sandbag.
Something interesting that occurs to me, especially among Gen Z, is that a lot of us are still living with our parents. Hardly any of us have the ability to move out and strike out on our own as previous generations used to. I wonder if that is going to cause us, or future generations who may find themselves in similar situations when they turn 18, to live/work/identify with our families more. Like in the middle ages.
You just stumbled on the TL;DR of the channel 😂
The logical conclusion of pushing time forward with technology artificially is that we'll snap back into the middle ages *culturally* and I mean that in a very LITERAL way.
@@IbnRushd-mv3fp I agree
That would be a very practical response to it, but at the end of the day staying forever with your parents is still widely considered the most loser thing you can possibly do. So it will likely be resisted immensely and only possibly happen if it gets to the point where it is so bad that a majority of people are forced into it by poverty.
I think it will become normalized eventually, at least until a certain age. Certainly, a lot of people will only own a home if they inherit it when they are 40-60. What will probably happen is married couples who have middle class parents will inherit their property and accumulate more wealth, while those who have poor parents will continue to rent until they die. The result will be a greater divide between rich and poor, which never ends well.
Its possible things will balance themselves out, but a lot of the natural balancing that happens over time has been disrupted by short-term government policy. They create a problem, propose a "fix" which makes another problem pop up years later, which they then "try" to "fix" again. Made their friends and them a lot of money, but they doomed later generations.
"people larping as Rome"
< stares at the capitol... >
LOL, I guess what they say is true "all political movements are larping until they're not"
my ancestors :)
One could say the decline of the Ottomans led to the Islamic Dark Age that continues now. They just get better force multipliers than other dark ages..
nice
Yea, saying that Islam recovered from the dark age quickly in the 400s doesn’t make sense, considering that it didn’t exist until what, the 600s?
@@kkquikB1 Yeah. Not really sure where he was getting that from. Someone should message him and point that out. Who volunteers?
The amount of bots in your comment section is insane... I remember just a few years ago when YT bots looked like large youtubers and would say stuff like "Clink my link for free x!" but now they're just having back and forth conversations about something that has nothing to do with the video, and repeating themselves like a broken record. It's clear that they're trying to promote a product or some unknown politician. It's upsetting and it makes me only hate RUclips more. Great video btw Rudyard.
@ajax3017 I'm canceling you 🤖
Are you using adblock? I am, and i have not noticed the problem of multi-agent a.i. driven comment threads, which is entirely possible and likely given a.i.
That's just his regular audience. They really do sound like that.
@@MCArt25 Oh. Yeah, I expect many of them are rarty incels but they are better than redditors. That's a low bar admittedly, however I do think they can and will improve as human beings instead of wallowing in self-pity and eternal (purported) victimhood.
@@QuizmasterLaw you love that mearsheimer propaganda
no introduction, nothing, just randomly asks bro if he’s got any questions 20 min in. 😂😂😂
18:56 no, I just - keep going
To be fair, Rudyard’s lecture doesn’t mix well with a back-and-forth interview style
“If you can’t explain Asians, you don’t understand humanity.”
-Rudy
I cosign this
Work, work, work, work, living in cycles, living in cycles, do what ancestor did, do what ancestor did, do what ancestor did.
That's how I explain asians.
@@KARKATELCESARENVIADODESA-pv4yd so based? Like inherited basedness?
@@johncracker5217 Well, it depends. Inheritance isn't inherently based, but what the inheritance in question is. You could be a civilization doing thing over and over again at keeping your state a monolith and eternal but when that thing is just... being monolithic I guess you would have to live it to tell and say if you like it or don't like it, I don't know for certain as I am not one of them. I think Ancient Egypt was a cool example of inherited basedness and Europe before degeneracy.
@@KARKATELCESARENVIADODESA-pv4yd so inherently inherited traits are substantial heuristics when analyzing politics formal?
@@KARKATELCESARENVIADODESA-pv4yd based???
Your cohost doesn’t usually add much to these videos. It could be nice if he read the relevant Wikipedia page beforehand and prepared some questions or something like that.
Almost like he doesn’t exist , I’d like to be the co host lol at least come up with questions or follow up.
They have a good thing going. I think they’re fine.
@@steve-e4q I don’t think it’s bad, just wish he asked more questions .
I really enjoy how you don't want to call early western Christians "catholics", but loves to call ancient Anatolia Turkey hahahaha
He has explained this. It’s just so most people know geographically where he’s talking about.
@@4TheWinQuinnHe actually admitted that he says Turkey to trigger people😂
Dude you fall for it every time he's trolling you
Because most people have no idea where or what Anatolia is
@@ltownvidzYes, and that’s too bad. It is Anatolia, or Asia Minor. No Turanian Mohammedan is gonna make me call it otherwise.
Thanks for continuing updates I'd rather trade the stock market as it's more profitable. I make an average of $34,500 per week even though I barely trade myself.
I'm favoured financially, Thank you Jesus $32,000 weekly profit regardless of how bad it gets on the economy.
How
..? Am a newbie in crypto investment, please can you guide me through on how you made profit?
Thanks to Mrs Linda .
She's a licensed broker here in the states
YES!!! That's exactly her name (Linda ) so many people have recommended highly about her and am just starting with her 😊 from Brisbane Australia🇦🇺
Piont of correction ,western Europe didn’t become the most advanced nations in the world untill after 1750AD .They picked up from 1000AD to 13000AD,then went into decline due to political instability, plague ,crop failures ,extreme weather conditions&high population. They did a recovery between 1500AD to 1750 AD.After that ,they surpassed the old world (eastern civilizations).For more information read the book"After Timurlane ".
Europe was far above the rest of the world in development by 1500 despite what non westerners want to believe
He's picking a date just after the Sack of Baghdad and two centuries after the decline of the Buddhist kingdoms in India.
It's less that high middle ages northwestern Eurasia was killing it then and more that a lot of other civilizations had hit a low point.
Actually I'm wrong he's 8 years before the Sack of Baghdad.
My brain thought it was 1237 for some reason.
The divergence long predated 1750. You're right that Europe's economy contracted in aggregate terms in the 14th & 15th centuries, but that doesn't equate to a decline in more important per capita output, which probably rose through a more favourable resource/population balance, laying the basis for subsequent growth. The 17th century saw another contraction - this time possibly accompanied by stagnation in per capita output - but that only lasted about 40 years, longer if you were Polish or Dutch and facing later destructive wars.
Europe's lead (initially narrow but by 1700 already substantial) probably dates back paradoxically to the late medieval period of population decline, if not to the end of the Southern Song (whose famed prosperity presumably dictated the uploader's choice of date, 1250 being invoked as a time when Europe wasn't in the lead rather than when it was). For more information, I recommend studying population and agricultural output which still accounted for most of the economy and occupied nearly 3/4 of the labour force, but by 1500 already a slightly smaller share than in the rest of the world, at least in the north-west: there's really no alternative.
@davepx1
The divergence really took off after 1750AD.The rest was a catch up.Why ?The industrial revolution
Absolutely love the show, but just for fun, imagine every time Rudyard (the guy with the deep, insightful rants) cuts to Dave, Dave's in the middle of something totally unexpected-like making out with an imaginary partner, sipping a cocktail in a bubble bath, or playing chess with himself! It'd be like an SNL skit, just adding a little spice to the already fantastic dynamic. Keep up the great work, guys! 😂
My Junior year APUSH teacher was a blessing because of this, my school mostly glossed over the Middle Ages even at the AP level but I remember when I asked him specifically what his favorite era of history was and why he responded that it was “The Middle Ages because of its under appreciated contribution to society and the sheer resilience of the people”. He was a young guy too, there are still educators out there that are well versed in ALL history and they’re a true blessing
I imagine there is one specific time where a bird first takes to the sky, where as each time before they've come down to the ground.
I choose to believe that humanity is now existing in that split second before the wings spread out, and it feels like you are falling, but in reality you are about to soar.
The probability isn't as low as you would think. It's not even a long shot bet.
I believe so as well. We will have terabytes of data showing why the current form of governing just makes no sense, centralized slow moving beaucracies that are incentivized to steal from the treasury and represent corporate interests over their voters. My next guess is we will repeat history where nation states become a thing of the past and the merchant class being looked down upon. A lot like the fall of Rome except were going to recover quickly with our current technology.
Everything indicates the opposite
@@Meow-gp5nk There is a lot to be optimistic about actually... AI, Robotics, and just general understanding among the population of how the media works...
@n8works all of which are tools that consolidate power in the hands of a select few authoritarians
@@Chris-es3wf not by definition. Start from the first principle that there are more good people than bad people and you'll see that just like any other tool invented in human history, these will also be a net positive for humanity.
My boy, Rudyard
I think your ideas are pretty tight, you have perspective for days.
Reign in the tangents. You need your “interviewer” to act as a “straight” player who doesn’t know anything. Get someone to probe and unlayer
For you, and then trust your nuance and perspective to come out there. Cause right now it’s running the show and it’s a hot mess.
That being said, I love your perspective and think you’re under rated. You just need to condition and get some reps in with honing that shit in.
Rudyard has too much historical knowledge. Seize him!!! 😂
Rudyard. Great work, but I am little disappointed because you didn’t mention Slavs at all. Largest European group of people who mainly developed in dark ages and had real impact on history of that time in history . So I gently ask you to do a separate episode about Slavic civilisation, like you did about vikings please.
That could be an interesting video, but there is no Slavic civilization. The Slavs weren’t advanced enough to make their own civilization in time and so different Slavs got folded into different civilizations.
@@Asdf-wf6en perhaps civilisation it’s not a best term. Let’s say „Rise of Slavs” ;)
Broke: Catholicism is bad because the crusades!
Woke: Catholicism is bad because my cousin is hot.
/s
remove the "/s" 😏😼
I caught that Lord Miles reference ❤
Good points about late Roman stagnation and European advance in the "high Middle Ages", but let down by the long-discredited description of the the 5th-10th centuries as a "Dark Age", a term that fell out of serious historical usage about half a century ago (and never really extended to the Carolingian period in European historiography anyway).
From the perspective of historical progress, the first half of the Middle Ages is very much a time of reconfiguration, recovery and tentative advance, evidenced in the rise of increasingly ambitious polities and in the growth of agricultural output and population (and monetisation, trade and towns) from the 7th century onward: talk of decline or stagnation until 1000 is about as misguided as it gets.
The claim that western Europe "barely had coinage" in the 8th-10th centuries is absurd, as any viking could tell you. Silver and copper-alloy coin (the stuff that's actually of use in the everyday economy) had been in short supply in the 5th-7th centuries, but that was a legacy of Rome's damaging 4th-century shift to gold. The pricier but unhelpful metal remained privileged in the days of Merovingian "grand commerce", but a viable silver coinage was already emerging from 680 modelled on Frisian and English sceattas and later on the Frankish denier.
The Roman Empire's disintegration wasn't about wealthy city-dwellers running off into "the middle of nowhere" to escape a supposedly crushing 5% tax rate (higher in the outer provinces anyway): on the contrary, the Empire in its more useful days had presided over development in its subject territories that itself generated centrifugal tendencies. Wealthy Romans didn't become tribal chieftains: the chieftains became wealthy Romans who no longer needed Rome and had the good sense to put the long moribund western Empire out of its misery.
The characterisation of ancient Greek and Roman civilisation as not being intrinsically European or the source of modern western institutions is one with which I heartily concur: both were Mediterranean rather than Continental in their culture and economic aspirations, and the Mediterranean wasn't going to be the future. Europe as a cultural and socio-economic enity indeed dates from the Middle Ages, but it starts with Rome's downfall, not the emergence centuries later of political expressions like parliaments.
The description of the Roman economy as "socialist" is however laughable: tax doesn't make you socialist, and 18th-century England had a far higher tax rate (though its north American colonies didn't) and a more effective oligarchic government than Rome did. Nor was medieval Europe a cauldron of individualism, old clan loyalties instead giving way to ties of church, village or gild. The uploader really needs to get out more, and read some proper books (especially on the early medieval economy) by serious European scholars (Wickham's at least a start) rather than fretting over faddish product by authors out to promote their latest pet theory.
There was a massive volcanic eruption which caused a little ice age and was followed by a very deadly plague. The economic decline wasn't just because of Justinian and would have happened regardless.
Us : how about a video about Persian civilization
Ruddy: how about another video about the middle ages?
Let's hope to see a pre-achaemenid video and a view on the early beginings of Koroush I.
He (whatif) would be the first one to do it in whole youtube
Rap was never the most popular genre, and it never outsold rock during the 20th Century. Not even close.
The point about the fusing of Germanic warrior ideals and the southern Christian church is exemplified in the apx 800-850CE texts called the "Heliand", in which monks and missionaries retell the gospels in Old Saxon to the Saxons resisting Charlemagne.
The Christians juxtaposition Odinic imagery into the gospels calling Jesus terms like "audfrumo alomahtig" or "almighty spear wielding advancer" and "sigidrohten" or "victory-lord".
Not only are they depicting Jesus as a warlord, but they describe the apostles as if they were his retinue of champions bedecked in jewels and fine weaponry. Not very christian at all.
Same thing in Beowulf, where Germanic heathen cultural ideals ooze in every verse, but the monk composing it just makes sure to insert the Judaic god.
In other words, if you couldnt make folks true believers, slap a cross on it.
Even early on in the conversion of Anglo Saxon England, Christ was just another god in the pantheon for a while. And Anglo Saxon king lists like Textus Roffensis feature pedigrees of English rulers tracing all the way back to Woden exist up until the 12th century.
Christianity had to twist and bend itself in order to claim any sortve victory over the northern heathen world.
Great vid!
There was a Comet that devastated Britain right around 560 AD (and a volcano went off in 535 AD somewhere in the tropics). That was what made the Anglo Saxon replacement so thorough in the eastern part of the Island. There were years of famine, drought, and disease in Europe and the world after that.
No, there wasn’t a comet that devastated anything. Comets, asteroids DO NOT hit the earth that’s a lie. I suggest you check out Vibes of the Cosmos, he will set you str8.
8:59 people still seens to live the romans even with "revisionist history" since they were "gay".
Dark ages were actually pretty cool imo
My favorite era
Please add a subtle sound whenever you put a map (or any picture) on the screen. That way I know to look at the screen when I'm only listening. I don't want to miss anything.
Awesome vid, I was always intrigued by this era
The other guy is just set dressing at this point
14:30 Diocletian implementing wage and price controls didn’t help. Hopefully Kamala is taking notes.
Diocletian didn't just do inflation management and overbearing taxation. He also laid the groundwork for the future landed nobility and peasant class by restricting social mobility and personal freedoms. This may have been effective, at least in the 30 or so years afterwards, but after a century of high taxation and no social mobility, people were maiming themselves to avoid fighting for the Empire as it fell.
@@ZaKRo-bx7lp it ain’t gonna take 30 years for America
Better cancel Milton Friedman then.
@@MCArt25 Uncle Miltie believed that massive monetary stimulus could have prevented the Great Depression. I have absolutely no love lost for his economics.
@@terranceramirez4816 well he didn't care about your feelings
absolute banger. glory to the supreme concious human mind.
Listen to you on my podcast while I was on my walk and now the rest on RUclips great video.
If you could occasionally end a sentence with a period instead of just saying "and" it would make you 500% easier to listen to.
Bro, now I can't unsee this!!!!
I remember reading a credible science magazine years ago where they said that the moving of nations in Europe in this period was actually caused by a volcanic eruption in Iceland sometime in the 6th century if I remember correctly, that caused a massive decrease in the temperature in Europe for a few years and a ton of people died of diseases and hunger because of that, and it got so cold it forced the peoples from the north migrate to the south. It could be wrong, but I found it so interesting I remembered it for like 10 years for some reason, so I thought I'd share it.
Do you just have a “host” because it’s hard for you to speak without an “audience”? No offense but your host doesn’t really do anything.
Rudyard, you enlightened chad, you opened my eyes to considering something I never thought I'd be reconsidering in this video: nature vs nurture. It really is a false dichotomy, isn't it? I'm going to think about this for a while.
A solid B+ presentation, leaving room for further contemplating on the subject..... and making a basic perspective related study? 👍. And it's interesting.
Saw your debate with gnostic informant so this video is nice to build on your arguments.
The concept of the European "Dark Ages" is used mainly by English-speaking historians, because it reflects what happened in England between the evacuation of the Roman legions and the establishment of the first Christian Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. When you read French historians, they do not refer to the Dark Ages, in French histories you go from the Roman era straight into the Middle Ages.
When will you do a video on Jewish civilisation
When he's finished reading his primary source on the subject, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
@@MCArt25I know you're being humorous, but we already got a sneak peak on his rise of christianity video and he's gonna take the opposite stance.
@@utarefson9 why did they call it a "forgery"? everything said in it happened in the last century.
I selfishly want one about the US westward expansion and the Wild West. Outlaws, gunslingers, the gold rush. I thinks it’s a fascinating part of our history with the stark contrast between the industrialization of the east and the almost barbaric west
The 'Dark Ages' are the most fascinating time in history for me. I started studying history as anyone would, by learning the things you mentioned; but when I got to the Renaissance I wanted to know the *why* of things. The shockingly small amount of primary sources definitely doesn't help, but there is material there for you to piece things together the best you can. The more inquisitive you are, the more interesting this type of historical period is.
Found your channel yesterday, you changed my world perspective as well🙂 Look forward to listen to the rest of your podcasts!
I wonder if the Basques are the original people from Europe before the Arians either wiped people out or bred with them.
Not a big deal but the finger pointing at the moon quote was to teach zen practitioners to not get too caught up in scriptures and teaching methods because these are the “finger pointing to the moon.” Instead experience the “moon” directly through direct experience of “no mind” or pure awareness and enlightenment usually through various forms of meditation. I suppose it could be applied to reading history but it was fundamentally “pointing” to a greater truth and state of being.
Can you make a video on berbers?
hi, Rudyard. Reach me out if you want a motion designer to make mini docs from your content!
The greek roman relation ship is like the Germany US relationship for germany has the invention like greece had and the US adopts them and spread them in an bigger empire like the romans did
Thank you for pumping these out rudyard. From one pennsylvania quaker to another.
Aww…. Thanks. Pa strong
@@WhatifAltHist 14 generations 💪🏻
@Bay2LeQue the newer ones with the most recent history
@Bay2LeQue you dont think the imperial aspect of japan caused it to be rife with lies and embellishments?
@Bay2LeQue because they were right and they know it
It's amazing how Rome sounds a lot like modern-day USA.
It should be pointed out that Slavs were known to Rome. Only the official contacts were established in 6'th century.
I'd love for you to talk about your dark age education.
Excellent. Thanks for this wonderful opportunity to learn. 😎
I love this series
I'd love to hear a video on the Cathars from you.
Dear Rudyard- may I ask what your opinion might be of Kenneth Clarke's "Civilisation" Episode One "The Skin of Our Teeth"? and Episode 2 "The Great Thaw"? I'm old- 64. Grew up on his series, as well as Bronowski's "The Ascent of Man" and James Burke's "Connections" and "The Day the Universe Changed" - what might you think of their observations on the "Dark Ages"?
I ‘be been waiting to get around to this video today. Similarly, I can say the same for the video I just watched from channel “The Desirable Truth.” Ironically, the next “suggested” auto play video was this one. 🤣
Content made with Gnostic Informant tears
Okay, yes that was the dude's name. Thank you. Couldn't remember. It was so awful. I can't even find it now.
Islam is what brought an end to the dark ages.
Specifically the Black Moors whose technical knowledge brought the Europeans out of the Dark Ages.
Let's go back to first principles. Rome was defeated militarily. Nothing else matters. Rome could have been Christian/pagan, poor, heavily taxed, completely stagnant, corrupt, had crumbling infrastructure, communist or whatever, and still survived. Rome had tens of millions of people and could have churned hundreds of thousands into the army like they had under Hannibal. Clearly this is what killed Rome not anything else. It's not how hard you hit, its how hard you are willing to get hit and still move forward.
>There was nothing valuable to conquer in Germany so the Romans stopped expanding there.
>The Roman army in the west stopped moving around and became more static.
>Because it was static there was no plunder to be had and nobody wanted to join the army.
>So the Romans hired barbarians and people who associated with barbarians because these tended to be more loyal in the case of bodyguards and closer to the frontier in the case of border guards.
>The Roman army was turned into bodyguards for powerful men and border guards for the frontier.
>Lacked the ability to get replacements from the bulk of their population down south.
>Once they lost soldiers/the frontier where they got soldiers they had few ways of replacing those soldiers.
>Relied on barbarian armies more and more until the emperors became puppets of said barbarians
>Eventually the office of emperor was no longer needed for barbarian rulers and was terminated
Mongols before and during Genghis Kahn be badass episode
You didn’t mention how plants were able to grow without light and photosynthesis. After all, it was dark.
about the time they started flinging dead bodies at each other it all went downhill.
You mention that English began in the Dark Ages. It did not. What was spoken by the Anglo Saxon tribes was essentially a form of Low German, which you wouldn’t understand, and had all sorts of rules that don’t exist in English like declensions (but do in other Germanic languages). English didn’t arise until after the Norman conquest of 1066, when a pidgin language arose so the conquered peasants could communicate with their Norman overlords. The mishmash that developed become the English language. That is why English is so different than any other Indo European language, is it’s a synthesis of Anglo-Saxon and early French.
Erik Torenberg ended the Roman Empire.
A Video about mormons would be interesting
47:46 Possible History called out lol
"if you don't explain asians you don't understand humanity"
this is true if we presume, as western liberalism does, a universal model of humanity.
but what if there isn't? why should we presume others to have very similar experiences, views, attitudes, and goals to our own? We shouldn't! So why should we assume a universal model of the human, human development?
Have you measured their cranial circumference already, Adolf?
Because that's the natural consequence of collecting data and having basic respect dmbass
@@IbnRushd-mv3fp so, you want to lecture me about respect and simultaneously insult me?
Did you just have a stroke?
@@QuizmasterLaw look you might think that just because you give your opinions in a concise way you're not saying anything brash but really the implications of your statement are insulting, I'm just giving you the energy you want pal...
@@IbnRushd-mv3fp Can you string together coherent logically consistent sentences? Because google translate is failing you...
Should I call for an ambulance?
Ngl kinda sounds like he's saying Rome and Greece didn't do much for modern western civilization
Impressed by the voice coaching 👏
Yess! So based! Merovingians were peak civilization
The popular misconception of the "Dark" Ages largely arises from earlier academia not fully realising what they were researching or how the history of the ancient world progressed.
Happily, today we have a much more complete understanding of this time period. It was not a 'dark' age at all in terms of disease,famine or ignorance. There was not a whole lot of knowledge loss!
Damn is the channel dead I actually liked this iteration of it
Justinian would strongly object to you calling his empire (which included Italy) "Byzantine" and not "Roman." In fact, so do I. The official language of the Eastern Roman Empire was still Latin in Justinian's time (the 6th century, for those who don't know), and the Catholic and Orthodox churches had not yet split. They considered themselves Romans in every way. The fact that old Rome wasn't their capital is pretty much irrelevant. Constantinople was actually called "New Rome" by Constantine before his death and its subsequent naming after him.
I would concede that the Eastern Roman Empire ceased to be Roman in all but name after either 1) Heraclius' replacement of Latin with Greek for the official language in the 7th century, or 2) the splitting of the Eastern Roman church from the Roman Catholics in 1054. I'm not sure which is more significant. I'm leaning towards the first, as language is probably the most important factor in defining a nation.
It should be also pointed out that Dark Age is a myth. And that is official position of historians!
Originally term refereed only to lack of the records, but later was propagandized during Enlightenment. In reality Franks and Goths literally were roman and live among citizens of old Empire. French, Italian Spanish, Portuguese and Romanian literally are dialects of the Latin. Contrary to popular myth Byzantium (aka the Rome) did in fact recognized HRE as the West.
In fact during at least high medieval, people did have higher developmental level then the Romans. Especially in zone of the agriculture. Only the high level administration and organization was struggling. Also in Late Medieval people already did use guns. Popular historical movies like to pretend that was not the case. Just check Kingdom Come 2 as example.
The map needs to be polished for accuracy, a huge chunk of "vandal" land was actually held by the Laguatan tribe and others
I watched that absolutely CRINGE debate yesterday. Funny you post this today. You cooked that dude. Don't even remember his name
Yeah, the guy just glazed Classical civilization for the first half and didn't really address any points in Rudyard's argument. Most of the comments on the podcast were ad hominem against Rudyard, so you know he was doing something right
(case in point below)
lol Ruddie lost that debate. Lol
What debate?
Do Hellenistic Greece please!
I'd say it's hard to cover a subject he knows nothing about but whom am I kidding that's his primary MO.
Turkish civilization video pls
A fascinating group to be sure, even if we ridicule them nowadays.
I challenge you to do the entire history of the world
When you said the people were fleeing the central authority and organically pledge alligence to the nearest richest, meanest dude. Was that a catalyst for all the political instability and civil wars on the late empire? Also, were diocletians reforms a way to stifle human capital flight?
What if Jesus1,000 year reign on earth was from 500ad to 150ad and was the most peaceful time in history. Something fun to ponder on...
Wait - I know the voice, I recognise the face - I’m out
Will there be another dark age in the future? I want to know about it!
Another great video Rudyard. I love this stuff. The dark ages are a perfect lesson in conquest, culture, religion, power, politicing. Just look at the Norman conquests, foreigners conquering diverse cultures, in the late dark ages. Or the forming of the "Norman" identity in the first place. It is a shame it's not really taught in schools. Keep up the great work buddy!
I always chose the teutons in age of empires 2. But even on easy difficulty i always lost after i invaded russia.😊
Lol, no, the earliest known use of the term "Catholic Church" was in a letter written around 107 AD by St. Ignatius of Antioch to Christians in Smyrna. The term absolutely did not develop over centuries in Europe.
Man is not progressing- only technologizing
Do a video on the French Revolution!
there was no dark ages , it was a term used by an Italian poet who complained about the quality in literature of his time, after that historians started to use it, Rome fell and that created chaos however Rome was NOT all of Europe , there were many discoveries in the middle ages in Europe and lots of art and architecture , you are an American and it may be difficult for you to understand Europe was more that the Roman Empire , and modern day Europe is more than Paris, London and Rome , I would suggest you visited some museums in Europe and learn about the middle ages, many Kingdoms was founded during that time also
Firmly on the side of a king (or emperor) should not crown himself
Where in Perú did You go? Sounds like You ended up with some weird sect. Urban áreas are pretty much like others un the wéstern world
>advanced religious society
Uh oh the boomer professor is not going to like that one
“England lost writing” that is wrong😂. You should Get a job Rudyard.
If the earth were seeded with dna, there would be some sort of harvest at some point? or could it be like a science fair experiment for a 4th dimensional highschooler, if not dna might be like a mold or nuisance thing that pops up on its own.
Thank the Lord for Charles The Hammer
Zounds! I couldst not build a wonder!
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Where is the other guy? This is just worse! The dialogue was an integral part of the show and created a very relaxing atmosphere