Please also make a video of what cities looked like in the Byzantine Empire in the 7th century or even how does look like ex byzantine cities in umayyad caliphate in 7th century.
I'm trying to make reskin mods for Age of Empires 2, in the campaign set in late antiquity up to the Viking Age. And your videos have been a godsend! Now I know for the Tours historical battle, I need to have the Franks of Tours in a very Roman looking set, not a timber, not huts. I've been trying to figure out what Roman Foederati settlements looked like, and while I don't have good idea what they looked like before the crossing of the Rhine, as the Romans wouldn't give up control of the cities, I know what they'd look like as the Barbarians began to carve up Gaul and Spain! So you have my thanks! I am wondering if insulae were ever built in cities other than Constantinople and Rome? I'd figure given the dangers of barbarian raids and bacaudae uprisings from the Crisis, urbanization would increase as a hedge against rural despoiling in the second and third tier cities of the empire in Europe. But I can't seem to find an answer. But thank you! I enjoy your work!
It is interesting to note that, in Britain, some roman remains are still above ground, like in Colchester where parts of the Roman wall are still intact. However, in London, Roman remains are 17 feet below current ground level. This can mean only one thing. There was a very large flood event that buried the old city of London, and the subsequent rebuilding was on top of this mud and clay. The Tower of London, which was built on ground 17 feet higher than the Roman remains, 400 years after the collapse of the Roman Empire, is now over 1,000 years old, but shows no sign of having sunk at all. The most likely cause of the "sinking of London" would be earthquake induced liquefaction, where the clay beneath turns to liquid and everything sinks into it.
Most of the Germanic Tribal leaders, tried to keep the old Roman infrastructure working. The trouble was money and resources to do so. Without the power and wealth of the central power of Rome, it was nearly impossible to do.
most importantly missing were: 1. know how; and 2. materials. The breakdown of the safety of trade routes made the. movement of skilled people and materials nearly impossible
There is no reason to think wealth came from Rome. On the contrary, taxation not going through Rome should have yielded better results when kept local.
@@Leo_ofRedKeep Wealth may not have literally came from Rome, but Rome did provide a world that made civilization of that scale feasible. Without Rome, there is no where near the same local wealth. There is no such thing as a developed society that exists in a vacuum.
@@Afronautsays Exactly In the city of Sevilla, where I used to live, there is and old ruin of a temple with massive monolithic columns made of Egyptian granite, something that always amazed me. To think something like that could have been transported from such a far away province to Spain
Thanks! When I took history courses back in the day when I was in college, I was told that the reason the term, "Dark Ages," came about was the result of the Viking raids which destroyed the plundered churches where all the records were kept. It was the clergy who were literate and kept the records in the churches. Hence, when the churches burned the records burned and all the information about that time burned. As a result, the term, "Dark Ages," because there is no information or very little about the time. Excellent video.
Thanks a lot for your kind donation and for the excellent comment. Indeed, the aim of the video was to show, that Europe plunged "into darkness" later than most would believe. It started probably with the Viking raids, and so the period from 800AD-950AD was probably quite "dark" as compared to 600-700 AD, when basically it was still a post-Roman era in which Europe was in. Very fascinating time period.
I’m obsessed with your channel! I’m a history major now; and in my Medieval studies class, our teacher assigned us to read this amazing book called “The world of Late antiquity” by Peter Brown and make an essay about it. Absolutely fascinating book and topic! We medievalists have to understand the Late Antiquity in order to comprehend the beginning of the medieval world. Highly recommended book! Thank you for your videos!
I am actually reading that book myself! Highly fascinating with a closer look on the cultural and sosial aspect of late antiquity. Did you finish it by noe?
Awesome that you used Cologne as an example. I live here 🙂 But sadly there is not much Roman nor Medieval left, and the local mayors successively ignore it in favour of brutalism/modernism. The city has many treasures and nice areas, but half of it looks like a bathroom.
Du hast das Praetorium, die Umgebung des Römisch-Germanischen Museums mit dem Rest Römerstraße, den Römerturm und das alte Baptisterium in der Nähe des Doms. Viel mehr ist tatsächlich nicht übriggeblieben. Aber immer noch besser als das D-Dorf!
Modernism/brutalism is a crime against humanity. There are many groups that support historic/traditional architecture and urban planning that you could look into. Also looks like there are other history fanatics from cologn here. You guys should organize. I am very jealous that you are able to live in a city with so much history. Good luck!
Imagine living in the shadows of a technologically superior fallen civilization. Seeing all those buildings, roads etc., using them all your life and not even knowing how they were made. Nowadays we take technological progression for granted but it can take a 180° turn very quick.
Post-roman kingdoms were just as advanced as the romans. They didn't magically go back to the stone ages. They still built bridges, walls, aqueducts, trading halls, roads and palaces. They just were less organized, depending on their own economical support
In my country an old Roman military hospital that was set by St. Erasmus during the Gothic-Roman wars at the Balkans in the late 3rd century was operating in one form or another until the late 15th century. At one point during the 9th c. it served as a medical school with 3.000 students. It was closed down by the Ottomans.
The further removed we are from a specific time, the more time blends together. Fifty years feels long to us because we can live and experience it, but we struggle to comprehend the effect of 100, 200, or 500 years. As a result, it all blends together, and it means that we imagine the collapse of Rome, for instance, being sudden, when in fact the collapse of the state happened in many ways gradually as society became less centralized over many decades, and the "loss" of Roman culture and civilization (or rather transformation) happened even more gradually. Rather than cataclysmic destruction, people over many hundreds of years stopped maintaining to Roman works, did not re-copy papyri often enough, etc., and so by the time of Petrarch, it certainly looked like much had suddenly been "lost." When in reality it was an 800 year period of slow decline and transition; indeed, one so slow that most people didn't even realize it.
@@usgusdus1215The 500s were pretty dark with the plagues and famines but that’s really due to natural factors. The population fell so much that there were not longer enough people in Europe to populate all the cities, and that, rather than some civilisational collapse and human brutality, seems to have been largely responsible for the abandonment of European cities. With notable exceptions such as Cologne!
@@usgusdus1215 Well some knowledge were lost since they couldn't, after some times, maintain properly some roman infrastructures. Plus many institution including those of intelectual formation were lost, while the trade routes collapsed. Calling it a "dark age" may be exagerrated, but the decline is still real.
Excellent as usual. One small irony is that two cities of late Roman Britain that continued to have some organised life within their walls for a substantial time after the Romans departed are now minor villages. Wroxeter, Roman Virconium which became Cair Urnarc or Cair Guricon, capital of the Wreocensæte is now a small village, now not even important enough to have its own parish; Silchester or Roman Calleva (where an ogham stone of a hitherto unknown Irish warlord Tebicatos, was found) is farmland in the shape of the old city with the village nearby. A few churches around using substantial elements of Roman material, including the foundation of a bath, Wroxeter's St Andrew's parish church is one example from these pair. St Augustine encountered some Christians in the early 600s using their old churches since Roman times, honouring saints like a SS Julius and Aaron, martyred in Caerlon. Britain's post Roman collapse was possibly the exception that proves the rule, but there were thin threads of continuity.
Hello Isaac, thanks a lot, and an excellent comment also as usual. Very interesting, I didn't know about Wroxester and Silchester. Truly, fascinating stories. But yes, it is really ironic that the cities that continued since Roman times, are now very small and unimportant cities. But that speaks volumes about what happened with urbanism after the Anglo Saxon invasions.
Most of the ruins of Wroxeter were built after the Romans had left. The style of buildings changed - wood was used much more than stone - but the city definitely expanded in the 5th and 6th centuries. There are also plenty of remains of British pottery made in the 5th and 6th centuries. Admittedly, the quality wasn't as good, but it was still an important industry. Silchester is a very good example of people staying on after the legions had gone. Tin mining was still a very important industry in Cornwall, so trading with Constantinople continued.
In the 1980’s I lived in Formia, a bit north of Naples. A two-lane road ran by my villa which ran between Gaeta and Naples. I few miles south of my home the modern road swerved east and the old road - the Appian Way - emerged and went into the ancient town of Minturno. Old Roman remains were everywhere.
Thanks. So a Dupontius for your work. As a LEGIO II AVG reenactor, I appreciate your post. I looked at coins issues by 800 AD by the Franks, very Roman looking silver coin in Latin and Emperor dressed as a Roman with oak Leaves… Imperator.
Hello and thank you for the kind donation, I really appreciate it :) Fascinating with the coin. Yes, it's impressive how much that time still resembled the Roman Empire in every way, everybody wanted to continue the Empire. Legio II AVG reenactor, very cool !!! :)
The killer for any older building is the roof. Once it goes water and more importantly ice/ snow destroys the walls after the foundation has been compromised. But it would appear that on the mainland the roofs were maintained. In England in the Old Anglo Saxon Chronicles the ruins at Bath were stated as being built by Giants. Civilization had definitely fallen. The Mainland was different. Of course, the Church was critical in preserving writing and learning beyond the grind of the agrarian life.
Looking at Trade Jugs found at sites… especially in Britain… you see Trade peaked at 200 AD then slowly faded … fading… then a surge of building (in wood) and foreign trade picked up around 525 (king Arthur’s time)… then faded to very low from 575 to about 800 when Trade picked up. Trade in 770 was dramatically picking up with Charlemagne empire (747 to 814) then the Vikings showed up and caused chaos and breakdown of kingdoms. Things did not started to rebuild until 980 onwards.
Many towns went into decline even in Roman times. The Swiss city of Avenches had whole districts abandoned and possibly lived in by Bacaudae and deserters. As Christianity advanced, the towns reconfigured around new churches, such as in Tours. In some instances towns abandoned outer suburbs and lived within old walls. Some walls were already in ruins. Sidonius in a letter tells how the walls of Claremont were falling down. New walls, such as those of Le Mans, were being built and with fancy contrast stonework. The multi author book The City in Late Antiquity is very helpful, particularly Jill Harries’ chapter on Gaul, which I’ve poached from. Is wood worse than stone? Making buildings from stone is incredibly resource intensive and involves a lot of meshwork. Wooden buildings are faster to build and easier to remodel. You might also consider the attitude of Christianity towards this life, and its transient nature, might make people value stone buildings less. As for the pots, Robin Fleming suggests that they had plenty of ceramics from the Roman period and the chance to import and little incentive to make their own.
@@THEScottCampbell Academic research clearly indicates that millions died as a consequence of the Germans taking over the administration of these areas.
Rome wasn't built outta stone from the beginning. It took centuries to reach the level of coordination and entrepreneurial development needed for such undertakings. So, it wasn't the Christians', or whatever Christian-derived culture followed that made them build using wood, it's just that wood was closer, lighter, and didn't require neither specialists, nor a colony somewhere several hundred kilometers away, protected by legionaires, where stone could be quarried out of. The Romans knew just as anyone else on the World back then, or today, that no one is forever, and they, just like many today, believed there was an afterlife of sorts. So in that regard, wood was there simply because it was cheaper, and it was what they had at hand 🙂Cheers.
@@hansvonmannschaft9062 If you look at the early Roman houses, typified by the cremation urns they made of iron as replicas of their own houses, they were basic one roomed roundhouses, much as you see in other Iron Age cultures. They maintained the supposed house of Romulus (casa romuli) as a reminder of how far they’d come. Actually there were four huts claiming to be the one Romulus had lived in, and nobody knew which was the real one. But Rome was largely destroyed by the Gauls, and the wooden city was lost. They then built in brick, but the civil wars of the late republic caused a lot of damage. It was Augustus who claimed in his Res Gestae that ‘I found Rome brick and left it marble’. This takes a lot of cash to build and maintain. If a stone or brick house falls on your head, you might die, but if a wooden one falls down, you may well live to rebuild it. I’m afraid there are many early medieval comments about the vanity of building in stone except to glorify god. Why build for a long time when the return of the saviour to lead you to glory is expected any time?
@@Joanna-il2ur Well, yours' a rich, beautiful comment, and if one considers how much it says in relation to the amount of characters used, it could even be called succint. I tried to say resemblant things, but from a businessman point of view. I agree that things changed. But also noticed a pivotal difference though: Your scholar-backed phrase regarding "the vanity of building in stone", well that's true. I believe we'd end up agreeing that the Church knew how much more expensive stonework was, hence, well... they kept it for themselves and their safety. In my original comment, where I tried to be succint, something that as you can see, I often fail at, I wanted to say that the tenets of the Christian faith got nothing to do with what you're going to build your house with, so I found it hard to merge with the concept of using other materials instead. But after reading your reply, and placing myself in the feet of those who wrote the rules, then well yes, it makes perfect sense now. Have a great day!
Apparently, one of the reasons England fell more into disarray than some of continental Europe, could be explained by the events of 536 AD. Obviously, there are many researchers trying to figure out what happened then, but if the theory is correct that an Islandic vulcano dropped the world into at least 18 months of winter, then that would explain, why England may have been more exposed than let's say Spain, because both geographic proximity, as well as the impact of a massive temperature drop during summer, would have hurt the islands more than the more southerly Spain, or even a city like Cologne and Trier, that may have had enough access to Roman trade routes and water ways to transport food towards a starving population. England would have been cut off, in comparison. If the temperature drop lasted multiple seasons, entire populations could have been wiped out on the islands, and decay in English cities could have naturally occurred. 100 years later, this would have been empty and overgrown ruins. Now this does not answer the question how and where the Angle-Saxons rode out the volcanic eruption times, but that is a different question all together. Given that we have reports about 536 from places as far away as China, there are still many unanswered questions. Not everything adds up yet. But some things can be explained this way. If you google 536 AD and science . org, one can find a start to a popular article about this research field that includes many different disciplines and tbh more questions than answers. Just a possibility.
My wife is from the Rheinland-Pfalz, we met while I was stationed there 30 years ago. The Palatinate is filled with Roman structures and then there are the vineyards. She speaks a dialect from the Bronze Age. Her ancestors were Pagan and the entire area was constantly at war.
I don't know if you often hear this word, but I consider this video really inspiring. You can see in it the basis from which many fantasy series begin. One theme in many of those series is the superior civilization which came before.
And thank your for your kind donation :) Yes, that disconnect came later, over many more centuries, but then we need to delve deep into the middle ages, which I might do one day :)
Quite an impressive piece of work!JI I'm French and was once an archaeologist by training. I'm also a historical role-playing game designer. Your depiction of the High Middle Ages (what we call, wrongly even for the British Isles, the Dark Ages) is accessible to all, clear and precise, with relevant examples and well-founded illustrations. If only more French people spoke English, I'd be happy to use your work to introduce the era to French-speaking role-playing gamers ready to plunge into a historical adventure at the heart of Merovingian Europe...
I'm British - and I disagree, even the best anglo-saxon pottery was worse than then the best Roman pottery. The country went into complete decline following the Roman withdrawal. There's an argument to be made that us Brits didn't take to the cities, thus weren't as Romanised and fell back more quickly into tribalism which meant that when the Anglo-Saxons did arrive they found nothing to take over but some abandoned cities and warring tribes. Or that's what some more recent historians I have read implied.
While it is absolutely true that the pottery of the high and middle Saxon periods in England is, in some ways, rather crude (although very functional) and that the housing pattern changed (but did not revert to its pre-Roman state, however, since houses were square rather than round) nevertheless, the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms of the 7th and 8th centuries were renowned for the refinement of their metalwork, from gold to steel, for their glassware, which, though rare, was no less exquisite, and also for the quality of their dog breeds, which were sold throughout Europe. As for the integration of the Romano-British population with the Germanic Saxons, Angles and Jutes, I suggest you take a look at the recently discovered ladder settlements, which highlight the great cultural mix of the period, as well as the archaeological evidence of the existence of a large trade as far afield as Constantinople, Cordoba and Kiev (before the influence of the Danes). In France too, a number of cities were simply abandoned between the 3rd and 5th centuries and rebuilt nearby on sites that could be defended militarily, rather than on the plains. Many of the French towns that today bear the postfix "bour" are in fact "buhrs" based on the same model as those built in England between the 7th and 9th centuries.
The center of Rome was still basically intact in 650 when the city had a population of 90000. Some of the forums were in sad shape and in the surrounding area residential districts were in decay.
what a great looking map at the start of the video. I like that you had Rhomania instead of Byzantines. First time I've seen someone use the term on a map.
Practially all of the images shown in this video are not historically correct even the slightest way. They are AI generated impressions. This should NOT be shown to kids in schools. But yeah this kind of gives away you’re probably American. No clue about history and ignorant to the bone.
Do you think that this ignorance and the fall of educations level is casual?? In so many different countries, at the sane time? From Australia to Germany, Cabada to Spain, from France to......
@@AallthewaytoZ2We still don't know the exact methods they used. Researchers have concluded that they may have used some kind of nanotechnology to create these amazing effects of colour changing glass. (See the Lycurgus cup.) And don't even mention Roman concrete.
We know how Roman Concrete was made- the impure mix containing limestone particles from nearby quarries. This meant that whenever water seeped into cracks in the concrete the lime would react and fill it.@@deathdeathington
The city of Augsburg a city founded by Augstus (though a small settlement was already there), had an aquiduct in the 1000s built by the natives which was huge for the time.
Beautiful work master! In fact, in the nowadays spanish city of Toledo (Toletum), are still in use several roman bridges. Even the cars and lorries are passing through them two thousend years after!! That is awesome!!! Saludos!
Interestingly, recently there has been more archaeological evidence suggesting a recovery in post-Roman Britain, for example, a new mosaic in the late fifth or early sixth century and new buildings in the style of a Roman market etc in a still inhabited city and other building work. The Vergilius Romanus codex may also have been written in Britain. There are reports of a king in Germania allowing fleeing German speakers to settle in, I think, Thurungia. Then, something happened in about 550AD again causing large scale movement of people.
well,maybe the reverse happenned during the germanic invasion of britain,british refugees skiddadle to othere celtic lands,like this one en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britonia and they did it again after the norman invasion in 1066
On the Danube frontline most cities east of Bavaria collapsed totally. One big city, Carnuntum in eastern Austria with an estimated peak population of about 50.000 individuals (impressive in those days) even never recovered and disappeared forever.
Infinitely fascinating! I’m not an academic historian but history as a whole has always interested and intrigued me. Thank you for sharing your high quality content! 😊🇮🇹🇨🇦
A good example for the continuous use the roman road network is the Hohe- or Elisabethenstraße between Mogontiacum (Mainz) and Nida (Frankfurt-Heddernheim) which until today is visible, part of the modern road network and to a good part constitutes the routing of today's A66 motorway.
Thanks. This is exactly what I wanted to know about the "Fall of Rome". I always suspected that the remains after 476 AD did not just crumble in Europe.
strangely this made me remember former soviet union after soviet collapse like lots of buildings were abandoned foctorys shut down and lots of science projects canceled and in lots of places there was wars crimes and bloodshed
The Franks had no capital. The court traveled through the empire. There were many places called "Pfalz" (or "Kaiserpfalz"), which were run by a nobleman and which served as "royal motels". Aachen, Metz, Reims, Worms, Speyer, to name a few - there were hundreds ! And most of them if not all were former Roman cities. Which is a mis-nomer, since most places had been inhabitated long before the Romans arrived. Aachen became his favourite "Pfalz" in his later years, when rheumatism plagued him. It was also pretty close to his familiy roots in Belgium. Yes, the baths were more or less intact, though not on the same level as in Bath/UK. Nothing left today. Nevertheless, the hot sulfuric springs "worked" - and still do ! It was also the place where the first major building program north of the Alps happened. The "Aachener Dom" (the cathedral) initially was a "Pfalzkapelle" (chapel of the "Pfalz"), sponsored by Karl.
Yes, I thought that too. It doesn't seem logical to have a monumental beautiful church built and them not settle there. Maybe Charlemagne was busy with the military keeping his kingdom in order.
Some of the people of the 700s SAVED many records from the ancient time. Not the majority by any chance, but enough that we still maintained a "connection". Thanks to Alcuin!
An amazing vid as always. It reminds us that we're not far away from living in the shadows of a technologically superior fallen civilization before us. As Dan Carlin used to say on his podcast, it's akin to severing a civilization from its proverbial internet connection.
I love this channel, I have always been a massive Rome nerd. But always hated the late empire because I found it so depressing, I preferred reading about the glory years. But this channel has opened my eyes. It is incredibly fascinating. Also I don't think I have ever had a chnl that disproved so many preconceived notions. Especially on a subject I thought I knew so much about...great job!!!
Thank you for creating extremely interesting videos all the time. I always watch your videos to distract me when I'm going through it. Wish I could help you out more than just subscribing, but thank you for all your hard work.
I don't know if this is mentioned in any other comment, but a fascinating place one can clearly see the footprint of history is the city of Nimes in France---Nimes, in a matter of just a hundred years, went from a still bustling center to a tiny contracted Medieval town, which was mainly the original amphitheater which the dwindling remaining population fortified and huddled inside for generations
Great work!!! ❤️ Some little additions from a cologne nerd 😂: the ripuarian frankish kings prefered to reside in the intact capitolium, not the praetoritum (but which was used by majors later on). There have been used pagan romano celtic temples until the vikings, what a christian preacher complained in a letter to the pope after he wanted to burn them and was kicked out (literally) by the people from cologne-many of them christians aswell. Pagan temples were not reused after the vikings, surviving got churches as the pagans were made responsable for the viking "plaque". Latin was spoken >50 percent until the 9 hundreds (rural dialects in the eifel until 14th) and unfortunately slavery was legal until charlemagne who freed all christians (then all converted to be a free). In the archbishoptry of cologne (whole region exept city from 12th century) latin stayed the official language until conquest of napoleon. And after WWII they found statues of the godess Isis in some of a church's walls (most churches are old roman temples-not all got completly destroyed by the vikings, but yes-all civillian buildings for sure sadly.) Cheers🍻
Amazing info! Thank you! I can tell you care about your city and its history and heritage. I have seen there are others from cologne here who feel the same. I am very jealous of the historic place you guys live in. I am glad to see there are many here who respect it. It would be cool if you guys could get together, it is always important to organize to protect your community from globalism. You guys could do good work preserving the history and culture of your city and region. Advocate for traditional architecture. Etc...
Possibly in the confused belief by later Christians that the Isis statues represented the Virgin. The is at least one medieval English church with a Roman era statue of Demeter set in the wall for this reason.
@@acampbell8614 nono, the were hiding those statues from destruction inside the walls when the temples got churches, not accidentally but carefully walled up. Knowing the local mentality and assuming it was the same back then i think they thought lets see if this christianity works out and if not we could go back to isis 😂. They very likely were never used by the christian community but hiden by the pagans before leaving the temple as far as the article i read was telling.
You totally got me at the beginning. I thought: no that's wrong, everything being said is wrong! AAAH! Oh, there we go.... Exactly! Thank you for the fun ride!
One of the top channels on RUclips, the music, the subject matter… always sets me down a rabbit hole of late antiquity a fascinating and dire period that affects us to this day. Cheers and thank you! I might have to boot up RTW barbarian invasion !
For my town, Ariccia, near Rome, this wasn't the case at all. It was left deserted for centuries and was repopulated only in the 17th century, by bringing in people from Tuscany. And that was the case for Rome itself, wich saw a big decline in population only to be repopulated again by the Chigi who brought in people from Tuscany, wich caused a drastic change in the dialect spoken in the city, wich before was very similar to neapolitan, and later shifted toward tuscan. And in much of central Italy during tye middle ages a lot of small towns were built on high hills (altitudes between 300 and 800mt) and completely fortified, making them look like big castles with another smaller castle inside. Maybe i'm not getting the dates right, and this craze for fortified towns in central Italy happened well after 700 AD.
Lisbon (Felicitas Iulia Olisipo, or just Olisipo) is another example of continuation. The oldest part of the city (Alfama) was built on top of Roman Ruins. Archeologists also re-discovered an amphitheater dedicated to Nero in this area.
In Pliska Bulgaria during the 700s there was central heating like that of the romans in the rulers palace which shows that roman technology was never forgoten
And of course it goes without saying Constantinople was the new Rome when Constantine moved and created the Eastern Empire capital in Old Buzantium? And called it Constantinople.
Very interesting about post-imperial continuities. An interesting contrast/companion to your videos about changes/evolution within the Empire across the centuries.
The 880s fire and the wooden buildings following seems entire par for the course with these sorts of things. Cities such as London and San Francisco were going to install grand street plans and restore more permanent structures in the wake of fires, but the people needed somewhere to live and just built spontaneously, often in SF's case with wooden cabins. Presumably that's why the kingdoms at the time failed to really preserve the old Roman architecture, and the wood framed buildings took hold instead.
There is a mission in San Antionio that had a dome build in or close to 1731. It finally collapsed in or near the 1970.s and was rebuilt by the national park service. so the domes in midieval Europe probably lasted a little over 200 years then collapsed. So here we taking 800 ad so most domes have collapsed if made like the Spanish built the mission church domes with wood covered in stucco or tile mostly.
This is an excellent example of why historical and archeological research must always continue. This is especially true with all the new technological tools available to study the past. Otherwise a former idea of "the dark ages" would be the accepted truth without any real basis.
Keeping old buildings operational and holding markets in decayed town centers show a slightly higher cultural level in the immediate post-Roman era than thought under the term "Dark Ages," agreed, but meager surpluses and constant instability prevented any progress and often assured ongoing decline for various reasons (climate change, barbarian invasion, pandemics). So, yes, a more nuanced era, but still one of undeniable decline.
If they'd been building impressive libraries and universities, I would agree that "Dark Age" is a misnomer. They were preserving what they could and try to get by. Why is anyone surprised that life goes on as best it can? There is a reason they called the Renaissance as such: it was indeed a rebirth of knowledge and the possibility for higher civilization.
" meager surpluses and constant instability prevented any progress" On social or biological level? It was nightmare for cultural evolution and huge blessing in disguise for selection in favor in higher IQ. This (plus weeding out gene poll through execution of nastiest 1%-2% men every generation) lead to subsequent boom of culture.
I recommend people interested in the subject to look into Augsburg. It was founded by the Romans, and was arguably the most important city in Europe during the Middle Ages even though it’s not spoken of a lot anymore because it’s not a large city anymore (outside of religious circles)They were extremely rich and modern for their times. Something like Dubai. They had built water pumps that pumped clean water throughout the city, sewage systems, and amazing architecture that wasn’t comparable to anything in the time, and most of it still exists today. You still have Roman influence everywhere you look, yet see the riches they acquired in the Middle Ages. That money is still there today. It’s fascinating. Some important figures that were there in its existence. Augustus, Hadrian, Tiberius, Marcus Aurelius, the Maximilians, Barbarossa, Charles V. The list goes on. If you ever go to Germany, it’s a must see.
Buildings and infrastructure may remain intact, but institutions such as military, police, law, schools and currency are equally important. Could a merchant travel between cities safely? Was trade based on coinage or barter? If someone was robbed or murdered was there justice? Could you communicate in a neighboring city or did they speak a different language? Historians are revising the whole concept of a "dark age" in Europe, rightfully so, but civilization definitely declined in the era. Well done! I hope your channel gets more subs, it deserves it.
Civilization declined in the west. The west had a dark age. However, in eastern Europe and the middle east, civilization lived on and most roman institutions resumed well into the 7th century
@@THEScottCampbell 7th century in the middle east because of muslim conquests. and because after muslim conquest, Rome abolishes the old roman provincial institutions in favor of the thematic system, and latin is no longer an official language of the empire
Good points. Larger cities depended on a large scale governmental system to keep (for example) the aqueducts running & sewage disposal maintained. And ofcourse a system to import enough products from agricultural areas to feed it's population .So we ended up with smaller self contained communities.
0:11 At the same time, the Roman Empire led by glittering Constantinople was reaching great heights. Everything was glittering, and bright,…certainly not the dark ages. You have been lied too.
It was an informative and wonderful introduction of certain cities Roman empire traditions, constructed buildings were Standed....thank you for sharing
So happy my algorithm presented this video to me. I love ANCIENT ITALIAN HISTORY. I’ve been to Italy, and studied Latin in both high school and college. I attribute my high level of reading comprehension and critical thinking skills to my 2 1/2 years of studying Latin. I went on to study Italian (one year), German (3 years ), and French (1 year). I even went on to study a computer language (C++). I would never have learned to love languages and history had it not been for that Latin I class I was placed in by mistake in my first year of high school. I will now probably look for another Latin class - I now want to study the Language again. Thank you so much for this historical update.
The picture seems to be a bit rosy... In Gaul, many cities "shrank" with the early invasions (250 and 275 AD), and probably pendemics and economic difficulties and, starting from the early 4th century, Rome ordered the main cities to be fortified, with typically remparts being built using stones and architectural elements salvaged from the buildings of the High empire. Entire neighbourhoods were abandonned and used as stone quarries. In south-west Gaul, part of the elites chose to live in their rural estates, hence the number of vast, lavish countryside villas evidenced by archeology.
Roman Londonium was abandoned and left to decay and then taken apart, by Anglo Saxon invaders after the eighth century, to build their stone buildings, but small pieces of Roman London have been found, a temple floor and pieces of the walls. This was also done elsewhere later on by the Normans, who used the foundations of a Roman temple, rebuilt after Boddicca burned the original down, to build Colchester castle. In the area of Hasting and Rye in Sussex, stone from Roman buildings including a fort, were incorporated into local Norman buildings and even later medieval buildings, feature Roman stones, repurposed from the ruined Norman buildings. Roman Londonium is where The City of London is today, which was a financial district started during in medieval times. Roman roads in Britain remained in use as trackways, which can in some places still be walked on. I once walked on part of Stane Street in southern England. I think though that most Roman architecture in the British Isles fell in to disuse, not because of indifference, but because it was architecture from a Mediterranean culture and unsuitable for a maratime climate, so became unstable, whereas Western Europe has a continental climate, which treated the fabric of those buildings better. I think that, because modernist architecture also a continental import, has also decayed badly in the British climate, even though it was built in the in last century.
The German carnival tradition that is most prominent along the Rhine is a continuation of the Roman Saturnalia festival. Very notably, carnival has never really been a thing in Northeastern Germany. (Which had never been Romanized at any point.)
A colleague of mine is from Naples. His family home is on a Roman street,pavement is the same since the Romans laid down the street a couple thousand years ago. The reason why is the Romans used granite stones,not bricks,not asphalt not some other form of cheap pavement. These roads were more costly and labor intensive to build,but once they were built,that was it. No buckling,no potholes,no nothing. Built to last.
Well that's interesting. Btw: How do you think the Byzantines build their buildings like the Haiga Sophia w/Elmer's glue? They had cement right? Or or use the Athenian method of building the Parthenon? Sanding the Stones so fine they didn't need any cementing which they didn't have at the time so they may do. Sanding everything down so the two separate marbles would look like one. Don't you think the Eastern Romans the byzantines had that knowledge of cementing the obviously took from the Romans. I'm surprised during the time when the Eastern Roman Empire was collapsing from the plague, constant ottoman invasions so many architects, masons, artists artists, philosophers and doctors and medical personnel were fleeting to west. Hence jump-starting the Renaissance. Without the Muslim invasions the Renaissance would have sparked much later probably what do you think folks.. and that also could be one main reason explorers like Columbus were seeking to go across the Atlantic to avoid running into the Muslim pirates that controlled the Eastern Mediterranean.. that sort of makes sense to me what do you think?
Thank you for this video. I note that you talk mainly about modern France and Spain - and you have talked about the city of Rome before. What would have been the condition of regional cities in central and northern Italy after the Gothic war and the Lombard invasion?
They didn't have the institution, trade network, economy that permitted to buy the services of skilled people knowing the infrastructures (if there were any one left), transport the ressources... The fact is that with the collapse of the roman empire, many institution (some unpopular), were abandonned, such as those which forced fortunate people to go in assembly while paying heavy taxes (which were funding a state perceived as inneficient, not capable of stoping raids and slaughtering itself in civil wars)
Yeah, "they lived in Roman houses", but couldn't build houses like Romans did - that's why IT WAS Dark Ages: ability to do a lot of things that was fairly standard for Romans disappeared not to re-emerge for few centuries
Today we think it cool to modify an oast house or live in a barn conversion. In Cambridge Ceres House near the train station used to be Spillers dog biscuit factory, while in Ipswich they turned the Churchmans cigarette factory into flats. Might future generations think we lived in squalor? I saw one the other day which used an old school and another which was carved out or a disused church, and several converted from stables. Are we in decline? Few would think so.
@@Joanna-il2ur Unlike those post-roman people (in regards to roman buildings) we can build more of those buildings you mentioned. We've got the technology and the resources to do so. That's quite a big difference in ability
Who said they couldn't? You really think most romans lived in fancy villas? No. They lived in mud huts through out most of the empire no different than from the early medieval period. The fancy places were urban centers like Rome, Carthage and the whole east. Nothing really changed. Only that taxes go lowered since the roman yoke came off. Being subject to a brutal empire of conquest wasn't all sunshine.
Fascinating, and informative. You make some cogent points, and I’ve come to the conclusion that the fall of the Western Empire was a very gradual process.
*nod* Collapse normally *is* a gradual process, not a zombie apocalypse thing. The major exception is when a civilization suddenly encounters another expansionist civilization with higher military technology, as when the Aztecs and the Spaniards met.
Yes, but difficult to pin point because it seems the plague would rotate throughout Europe and effect different populations at different times. @@topologyrob
To be fair the Romans brought what we think of as civilization to most of Europe, people were living in large advanced tribes before that. So even though the central structures collapsed they were essentially further along then they were before, and what was considered "the light of civilization" probably wasn't the same to the tribes who came before
The telling of the first Minute and 10 seconds sounds to me like a state of western civilization that is righ ahead of us; I have too often felt the "flames od enlightenment" being dimmed down in the last say twenty to thirty years.
When the grain shipments from North Africa stopped, no one was feeding Rome or the other cities of Italy. With no food, people scattered anywhere they could find food. England was not invaded. Germanic arrivals melded into the native population. Over several generations, they became one people.
Before the withdrawal of Rome from Northern Europe, there was a protracted period of inclusion of Germanic peoples into the Roman Armys. The soldiers when retired often received property in the Northern regions and would retire there. It is believed that most of these soldiers, once settled, along with many of the wealthy stayed in the areas after Rome withdrew from the region, having taken on the region as their new home (along with having a substantial stake in the area.) So withdrawal of Rome marked a transitional period. Remember also that the Roman settlements only made up a small portion of the area in Northern Europe. These Roman settlements varied from cities to outposts and also varied in how close they were to a true Roman settlement back on the Italian peninsula. At the same time, the vast majority of the area was populated with tribes (mostly Germanic) who had grown from something more akin to American Indians to growing into proper Kingdoms over the centuries. Rome's influence while in the area had an effect on this growth into true kingdoms but they were still on a trajectory. With Rome pulling out, these kingdoms were the de facto highest level of civilization with some outliers in settlements that retained some amount of previously Roman citizens. There was no "Dark Ages" technically. There was a drop in the highly Romanized areas in northern Europe, but Europe on the whole remained on an upper trajectory to more and more complex kingdoms. Back on the Italian peninsula, the empire did break up, but when they did, they broke up into city states which have no relation to the image people have of the "dark ages." It is true they had a protracted period of hardships in many of these areas, much warfare between the city states and some plagues which also effected them so yes there was an impact on civilization in these areas, but even still, there was innovation and growth among all of that. The renaissance was an acceleration of this, not something that popped out of nowhere. A good coverage of this period of the Italian peninsula can be seen here: www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/italians-before-italy-conflict-and-competition-in-the-mediterranean.html Also, the series "The Borgias" has a pretty good depiction of this time period (a bit into it.) Between the Great Courses and the series, one can get an interesting perspective on the times, at least as far as our current knowledge of it goes. As for the Northern European area at this time, The Great Courses have a number of courses including a series that cover the early, mid and late middle ages (a more proper historical reference to the time period than the totally improper "dark ages.)
I should add that I really appreciate channels like this which further the discussion on these topics. They (i.e. this channel and quality ones like it) expand upon previously available resources and breath life into the history. Thank you Maiorianus for your time and efforts. :)
🤗 Join our Patreon community: www.patreon.com/Maiorianus
Sebastian Tarih kanalın çok güzel yanlız benim ingilizcem yok Türkçe altyazılı yapabilir misiniz mümkün mü
Please also make a video of what cities looked like in the Byzantine Empire in the 7th century or even how does look like ex byzantine cities in umayyad caliphate in 7th century.
Shame there's no DNA OR archaeological evidence of this so called total population replacement in Britain
I'm trying to make reskin mods for Age of Empires 2, in the campaign set in late antiquity up to the Viking Age. And your videos have been a godsend! Now I know for the Tours historical battle, I need to have the Franks of Tours in a very Roman looking set, not a timber, not huts. I've been trying to figure out what Roman Foederati settlements looked like, and while I don't have good idea what they looked like before the crossing of the Rhine, as the Romans wouldn't give up control of the cities, I know what they'd look like as the Barbarians began to carve up Gaul and Spain! So you have my thanks!
I am wondering if insulae were ever built in cities other than Constantinople and Rome? I'd figure given the dangers of barbarian raids and bacaudae uprisings from the Crisis, urbanization would increase as a hedge against rural despoiling in the second and third tier cities of the empire in Europe. But I can't seem to find an answer.
But thank you! I enjoy your work!
It is interesting to note that, in Britain, some roman remains are still above ground, like in Colchester where parts of the Roman wall are still intact. However, in London, Roman remains are 17 feet below current ground level. This can mean only one thing. There was a very large flood event that buried the old city of London, and the subsequent rebuilding was on top of this mud and clay. The Tower of London, which was built on ground 17 feet higher than the Roman remains, 400 years after the collapse of the Roman Empire, is now over 1,000 years old, but shows no sign of having sunk at all. The most likely cause of the "sinking of London" would be earthquake induced liquefaction, where the clay beneath turns to liquid and everything sinks into it.
Most of the Germanic Tribal leaders, tried to keep the old Roman infrastructure working. The trouble was money and resources to do so. Without the power and wealth of the central power of Rome, it was nearly impossible to do.
so their intrusion resulted in decline of infrastracture
most importantly missing were: 1. know how; and 2. materials. The breakdown of the safety of trade routes made the. movement of skilled people and materials nearly impossible
There is no reason to think wealth came from Rome. On the contrary, taxation not going through Rome should have yielded better results when kept local.
@@Leo_ofRedKeep Wealth may not have literally came from Rome, but Rome did provide a world that made civilization of that scale feasible. Without Rome, there is no where near the same local wealth. There is no such thing as a developed society that exists in a vacuum.
@@Afronautsays Exactly
In the city of Sevilla, where I used to live, there is and old ruin of a temple with massive monolithic columns made of Egyptian granite, something that always amazed me. To think something like that could have been transported from such a far away province to Spain
Thanks! When I took history courses back in the day when I was in college, I was told that the reason the term, "Dark Ages," came about was the result of the Viking raids which destroyed the plundered churches where all the records were kept. It was the clergy who were literate and kept the records in the churches. Hence, when the churches burned the records burned and all the information about that time burned. As a result, the term, "Dark Ages," because there is no information or very little about the time. Excellent video.
Thanks a lot for your kind donation and for the excellent comment. Indeed, the aim of the video was to show, that Europe plunged "into darkness" later than most would believe. It started probably with the Viking raids, and so the period from 800AD-950AD was probably quite "dark" as compared to 600-700 AD, when basically it was still a post-Roman era in which Europe was in. Very fascinating time period.
I’m obsessed with your channel! I’m a history major now; and in my Medieval studies class, our teacher assigned us to read this amazing book called “The world of Late antiquity” by Peter Brown and make an essay about it. Absolutely fascinating book and topic! We medievalists have to understand the Late Antiquity in order to comprehend the beginning of the medieval world. Highly recommended book!
Thank you for your videos!
You shouldnt be he has a lot of anti christian and anti medieval biases plus he always begs for money
I recommend you the works of Averil Cameron, she has two books about Late Antiquity
@@flamboyante._ Thank you for your recommendation!! I’ll be checking her work.
I am actually reading that book myself! Highly fascinating with a closer look on the cultural and sosial aspect of late antiquity. Did you finish it by noe?
Awesome that you used Cologne as an example. I live here 🙂 But sadly there is not much Roman nor Medieval left, and the local mayors successively ignore it in favour of brutalism/modernism. The city has many treasures and nice areas, but half of it looks like a bathroom.
The world wars didn't do Cologne any favors either.
Du hast das Praetorium, die Umgebung des Römisch-Germanischen Museums mit dem Rest Römerstraße, den Römerturm und das alte Baptisterium in der Nähe des Doms. Viel mehr ist tatsächlich nicht übriggeblieben. Aber immer noch besser als das D-Dorf!
Neglect of your history is not your mayor's only crime, though it doesn't surprise
At least it’s a nice smelling bathroom? 😂😊
Modernism/brutalism is a crime against humanity. There are many groups that support historic/traditional architecture and urban planning that you could look into. Also looks like there are other history fanatics from cologn here. You guys should organize. I am very jealous that you are able to live in a city with so much history. Good luck!
Imagine living in the shadows of a technologically superior fallen civilization. Seeing all those buildings, roads etc., using them all your life and not even knowing how they were made. Nowadays we take technological progression for granted but it can take a 180° turn very quick.
Post-roman kingdoms were just as advanced as the romans. They didn't magically go back to the stone ages. They still built bridges, walls, aqueducts, trading halls, roads and palaces. They just were less organized, depending on their own economical support
Funnily enough, I'm replaying Fallout 4 right now!
We are
You're on a romaboo channel, they care more for "fallen" narratives rather then genuine history@@usgusdus1215
@@usgusdus1215 Not everywhere. And certainly not in Britain.
In my country an old Roman military hospital that was set by St. Erasmus during the Gothic-Roman wars at the Balkans in the late 3rd century was operating in one form or another until the late 15th century. At one point during the 9th c. it served as a medical school with 3.000 students. It was closed down by the Ottomans.
The further removed we are from a specific time, the more time blends together. Fifty years feels long to us because we can live and experience it, but we struggle to comprehend the effect of 100, 200, or 500 years. As a result, it all blends together, and it means that we imagine the collapse of Rome, for instance, being sudden, when in fact the collapse of the state happened in many ways gradually as society became less centralized over many decades, and the "loss" of Roman culture and civilization (or rather transformation) happened even more gradually. Rather than cataclysmic destruction, people over many hundreds of years stopped maintaining to Roman works, did not re-copy papyri often enough, etc., and so by the time of Petrarch, it certainly looked like much had suddenly been "lost." When in reality it was an 800 year period of slow decline and transition; indeed, one so slow that most people didn't even realize it.
exactly, thanks for pointing it out. The "Dark Ages" aren't actually dark
@@usgusdus1215The 500s were pretty dark with the plagues and famines but that’s really due to natural factors. The population fell so much that there were not longer enough people in Europe to populate all the cities, and that, rather than some civilisational collapse and human brutality, seems to have been largely responsible for the abandonment of European cities. With notable exceptions such as Cologne!
@@dertery8724 I'm talking about ignorance and loss of knowledge. Plagues have been always part of history
@@usgusdus1215 Well some knowledge were lost since they couldn't, after some times, maintain properly some roman infrastructures. Plus many institution including those of intelectual formation were lost, while the trade routes collapsed.
Calling it a "dark age" may be exagerrated, but the decline is still real.
To think that someone can still see Roman structures that were built 2000 years ago is really incredible.
Excellent as usual.
One small irony is that two cities of late Roman Britain that continued to have some organised life within their walls for a substantial time after the Romans departed are now minor villages. Wroxeter, Roman Virconium which became Cair Urnarc or Cair Guricon, capital of the Wreocensæte is now a small village, now not even important enough to have its own parish; Silchester or Roman Calleva (where an ogham stone of a hitherto unknown Irish warlord Tebicatos, was found) is farmland in the shape of the old city with the village nearby. A few churches around using substantial elements of Roman material, including the foundation of a bath, Wroxeter's St Andrew's parish church is one example from these pair. St Augustine encountered some Christians in the early 600s using their old churches since Roman times, honouring saints like a SS Julius and Aaron, martyred in Caerlon. Britain's post Roman collapse was possibly the exception that proves the rule, but there were thin threads of continuity.
Hello Isaac, thanks a lot, and an excellent comment also as usual. Very interesting, I didn't know about Wroxester and Silchester. Truly, fascinating stories. But yes, it is really ironic that the cities that continued since Roman times, are now very small and unimportant cities. But that speaks volumes about what happened with urbanism after the Anglo Saxon invasions.
Most of the ruins of Wroxeter were built after the Romans had left. The style of buildings changed - wood was used much more than stone - but the city definitely expanded in the 5th and 6th centuries. There are also plenty of remains of British pottery made in the 5th and 6th centuries. Admittedly, the quality wasn't as good, but it was still an important industry. Silchester is a very good example of people staying on after the legions had gone. Tin mining was still a very important industry in Cornwall, so trading with Constantinople continued.
And a surge of wood rebuilding in 525.. probably King Arthur’s (or others) building projects… then started to break down again by 575
Almanlarla İngilizler arasındaki ilginç fark.Nereden geldiğini anlamak keyifli.😅
In the 1980’s I lived in Formia, a bit north of Naples. A two-lane road ran by my villa which ran between Gaeta and Naples. I few miles south of my home the modern road swerved east and the old road - the Appian Way - emerged and went into the ancient town of Minturno. Old Roman remains were everywhere.
Thanks. So a Dupontius for your work. As a LEGIO II AVG reenactor, I appreciate your post. I looked at coins issues by 800 AD by the Franks, very Roman looking silver coin in Latin and Emperor dressed as a Roman with oak Leaves… Imperator.
Hello and thank you for the kind donation, I really appreciate it :)
Fascinating with the coin. Yes, it's impressive how much that time still resembled the Roman Empire in every way, everybody wanted to continue the Empire. Legio II AVG reenactor, very cool !!! :)
The killer for any older building is the roof. Once it goes water and more importantly ice/ snow destroys the walls after the foundation has been compromised. But it would appear that on the mainland the roofs were maintained. In England in the Old Anglo Saxon Chronicles the ruins at Bath were stated as being built by Giants. Civilization had definitely fallen. The Mainland was different. Of course, the Church was critical in preserving writing and learning beyond the grind of the agrarian life.
Looking at Trade Jugs found at sites… especially in Britain… you see Trade peaked at 200 AD then slowly faded … fading… then a surge of building (in wood) and foreign trade picked up around 525 (king Arthur’s time)… then faded to very low from 575 to about 800 when Trade picked up. Trade in 770 was dramatically picking up with Charlemagne empire (747 to 814) then the Vikings showed up and caused chaos and breakdown of kingdoms. Things did not started to rebuild until 980 onwards.
Many towns went into decline even in Roman times. The Swiss city of Avenches had whole districts abandoned and possibly lived in by Bacaudae and deserters. As Christianity advanced, the towns reconfigured around new churches, such as in Tours. In some instances towns abandoned outer suburbs and lived within old walls. Some walls were already in ruins. Sidonius in a letter tells how the walls of Claremont were falling down. New walls, such as those of Le Mans, were being built and with fancy contrast stonework. The multi author book The City in Late Antiquity is very helpful, particularly Jill Harries’ chapter on Gaul, which I’ve poached from.
Is wood worse than stone? Making buildings from stone is incredibly resource intensive and involves a lot of meshwork. Wooden buildings are faster to build and easier to remodel. You might also consider the attitude of Christianity towards this life, and its transient nature, might make people value stone buildings less.
As for the pots, Robin Fleming suggests that they had plenty of ceramics from the Roman period and the chance to import and little incentive to make their own.
❤❤❤💯💯💯👍👍👍
@@THEScottCampbell Academic research clearly indicates that millions died as a consequence of the Germans taking over the administration of these areas.
Rome wasn't built outta stone from the beginning. It took centuries to reach the level of coordination and entrepreneurial development needed for such undertakings. So, it wasn't the Christians', or whatever Christian-derived culture followed that made them build using wood, it's just that wood was closer, lighter, and didn't require neither specialists, nor a colony somewhere several hundred kilometers away, protected by legionaires, where stone could be quarried out of.
The Romans knew just as anyone else on the World back then, or today, that no one is forever, and they, just like many today, believed there was an afterlife of sorts. So in that regard, wood was there simply because it was cheaper, and it was what they had at hand 🙂Cheers.
@@hansvonmannschaft9062 If you look at the early Roman houses, typified by the cremation urns they made of iron as replicas of their own houses, they were basic one roomed roundhouses, much as you see in other Iron Age cultures. They maintained the supposed house of Romulus (casa romuli) as a reminder of how far they’d come. Actually there were four huts claiming to be the one Romulus had lived in, and nobody knew which was the real one. But Rome was largely destroyed by the Gauls, and the wooden city was lost. They then built in brick, but the civil wars of the late republic caused a lot of damage. It was Augustus who claimed in his Res Gestae that ‘I found Rome brick and left it marble’.
This takes a lot of cash to build and maintain. If a stone or brick house falls on your head, you might die, but if a wooden one falls down, you may well live to rebuild it.
I’m afraid there are many early medieval comments about the vanity of building in stone except to glorify god. Why build for a long time when the return of the saviour to lead you to glory is expected any time?
@@Joanna-il2ur Well, yours' a rich, beautiful comment, and if one considers how much it says in relation to the amount of characters used, it could even be called succint. I tried to say resemblant things, but from a businessman point of view. I agree that things changed. But also noticed a pivotal difference though: Your scholar-backed phrase regarding "the vanity of building in stone", well that's true. I believe we'd end up agreeing that the Church knew how much more expensive stonework was, hence, well... they kept it for themselves and their safety.
In my original comment, where I tried to be succint, something that as you can see, I often fail at, I wanted to say that the tenets of the Christian faith got nothing to do with what you're going to build your house with, so I found it hard to merge with the concept of using other materials instead. But after reading your reply, and placing myself in the feet of those who wrote the rules, then well yes, it makes perfect sense now. Have a great day!
Incredible and so haunting. The ghosts of the Roman buildings
Apparently, one of the reasons England fell more into disarray than some of continental Europe, could be explained by the events of 536 AD. Obviously, there are many researchers trying to figure out what happened then, but if the theory is correct that an Islandic vulcano dropped the world into at least 18 months of winter, then that would explain, why England may have been more exposed than let's say Spain, because both geographic proximity, as well as the impact of a massive temperature drop during summer, would have hurt the islands more than the more southerly Spain, or even a city like Cologne and Trier, that may have had enough access to Roman trade routes and water ways to transport food towards a starving population. England would have been cut off, in comparison. If the temperature drop lasted multiple seasons, entire populations could have been wiped out on the islands, and decay in English cities could have naturally occurred. 100 years later, this would have been empty and overgrown ruins. Now this does not answer the question how and where the Angle-Saxons rode out the volcanic eruption times, but that is a different question all together. Given that we have reports about 536 from places as far away as China, there are still many unanswered questions. Not everything adds up yet. But some things can be explained this way.
If you google 536 AD and science . org, one can find a start to a popular article about this research field that includes many different disciplines and tbh more questions than answers.
Just a possibility.
England didn't exist till around 927
A minor semantics issue.@@benfisher1376
My wife is from the Rheinland-Pfalz, we met while I was stationed there 30 years ago. The Palatinate is filled with Roman structures and then there are the vineyards. She speaks a dialect from the Bronze Age. Her ancestors were Pagan and the entire area was constantly at war.
What is the name of the dialect? Is it Latin based? There is an area in East Switzerland that speaks the ancient "Romanish" language.
I don't know if you often hear this word, but I consider this video really inspiring. You can see in it the basis from which many fantasy series begin. One theme in many of those series is the superior civilization which came before.
Thanks! Lately I’ve been wondering about the disconnect between the West and the Holy Roman Franks.
And thank your for your kind donation :) Yes, that disconnect came later, over many more centuries, but then we need to delve deep into the middle ages, which I might do one day :)
Quite an impressive piece of work!JI I'm French and was once an archaeologist by training. I'm also a historical role-playing game designer. Your depiction of the High Middle Ages (what we call, wrongly even for the British Isles, the Dark Ages) is accessible to all, clear and precise, with relevant examples and well-founded illustrations. If only more French people spoke English, I'd be happy to use your work to introduce the era to French-speaking role-playing gamers ready to plunge into a historical adventure at the heart of Merovingian Europe...
I'm British - and I disagree, even the best anglo-saxon pottery was worse than then the best Roman pottery. The country went into complete decline following the Roman withdrawal. There's an argument to be made that us Brits didn't take to the cities, thus weren't as Romanised and fell back more quickly into tribalism which meant that when the Anglo-Saxons did arrive they found nothing to take over but some abandoned cities and warring tribes. Or that's what some more recent historians I have read implied.
While it is absolutely true that the pottery of the high and middle Saxon periods in England is, in some ways, rather crude (although very functional) and that the housing pattern changed (but did not revert to its pre-Roman state, however, since houses were square rather than round) nevertheless, the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms of the 7th and 8th centuries were renowned for the refinement of their metalwork, from gold to steel, for their glassware, which, though rare, was no less exquisite, and also for the quality of their dog breeds, which were sold throughout Europe. As for the integration of the Romano-British population with the Germanic Saxons, Angles and Jutes, I suggest you take a look at the recently discovered ladder settlements, which highlight the great cultural mix of the period, as well as the archaeological evidence of the existence of a large trade as far afield as Constantinople, Cordoba and Kiev (before the influence of the Danes). In France too, a number of cities were simply abandoned between the 3rd and 5th centuries and rebuilt nearby on sites that could be defended militarily, rather than on the plains. Many of the French towns that today bear the postfix "bour" are in fact "buhrs" based on the same model as those built in England between the 7th and 9th centuries.
@@stephanenephisechapuis7757 The genetic research clearly shows large scale population displacement in parts of the country.
Do you mean genetic displacement in England? It would be logical since the Anglo, Saxon and other invasions.@@AallthewaytoZ2
The cities had color, the monuments weren't white. Pantheon was decorated with paintings inside and outside.
The center of Rome was still basically intact in 650 when the city had a population of 90000. Some of the forums were in sad shape and in the surrounding area residential districts were in decay.
And who told you this ?
@@theemirofjaffa2266 You can conduct the research easily, there are lots of resources to confirm this.
what a great looking map at the start of the video. I like that you had Rhomania instead of Byzantines. First time I've seen someone use the term on a map.
Your channel is priceless. Let’s teach this in schools. Kids are so ignorant Not to mention grown ups
Let's not.
Practially all of the images shown in this video are not historically correct even the slightest way. They are AI generated impressions. This should NOT be shown to kids in schools. But yeah this kind of gives away you’re probably American. No clue about history and ignorant to the bone.
Do you think that this ignorance and the fall of educations level is casual??
In so many different countries, at the sane time?
From Australia to Germany, Cabada to Spain, from France to......
@@bideni408 it’s all planned to dumb down the populace for the NWO
so stop watching and get lost then@@tamaszlav
I have read and heard hints of this before but I had never seen it explained so well. Fantastic job and great video!
My favorite quote from u is “knowing how to make glass was complete unknown” *Marianous talking bout 500 AD Briton*
It's chilling and gives an insight into the scale of the collapse.
@@AallthewaytoZ2We still don't know the exact methods they used. Researchers have concluded that they may have used some kind of nanotechnology to create these amazing effects of colour changing glass. (See the Lycurgus cup.) And don't even mention Roman concrete.
We know how Roman Concrete was made- the impure mix containing limestone particles from nearby quarries. This meant that whenever water seeped into cracks in the concrete the lime would react and fill it.@@deathdeathington
False, glass beads were found in 600ad in britain, and advancements made in the 900s
@@nodruj8681 I'm referring to the century and a half after the Romans "officially" withdrew from Britain.
Almost 1 million. views 👍 Congratulations, so happy for you, it's my first time here, after your cosmic project
The city of Augsburg a city founded by Augstus (though a small settlement was already there), had an aquiduct in the 1000s built by the natives which was huge for the time.
Beautiful work master!
In fact, in the nowadays spanish city of Toledo (Toletum), are still in use several roman bridges. Even the cars and lorries are passing through them two thousend years after!! That is awesome!!!
Saludos!
Interestingly, recently there has been more archaeological evidence suggesting a recovery in post-Roman Britain, for example, a new mosaic in the late fifth or early sixth century and new buildings in the style of a Roman market etc in a still inhabited city and other building work.
The Vergilius Romanus codex may also have been written in Britain.
There are reports of a king in Germania allowing fleeing German speakers to settle in, I think, Thurungia.
Then, something happened in about 550AD again causing large scale movement of people.
well,maybe the reverse happenned during the germanic invasion of britain,british refugees skiddadle to othere celtic lands,like this one en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britonia and they did it again after the norman invasion in 1066
@@alonsorodriguez4502 Yes, about 1/3 of the invasion forces were from Eastern Brittany.
Literally the Age of Arthur.
Many of the legends could have some truth behind them
A watch of the video “After Rome, the war for Britain” should be very engaging!
@@dertery8724 The Plague of Justinian (bubonic plague) and, incredibly, an asteroid may have contributed to events.
On the Danube frontline most cities east of Bavaria collapsed totally. One big city, Carnuntum in eastern Austria with an estimated peak population of about 50.000 individuals (impressive in those days) even never recovered and disappeared forever.
Infinitely fascinating! I’m not an academic historian but history as a whole has always interested and intrigued me. Thank you for sharing your high quality content! 😊🇮🇹🇨🇦
A good example for the continuous use the roman road network is the Hohe- or Elisabethenstraße between Mogontiacum (Mainz) and Nida (Frankfurt-Heddernheim) which until today is visible, part of the modern road network and to a good part constitutes the routing of today's A66 motorway.
Thanks for linking names of modern day cities with the Roman names, so many of can understand the video better.
Thanks. This is exactly what I wanted to know about the "Fall of Rome". I always suspected that the remains after 476 AD did not just crumble in Europe.
strangely this made me remember former soviet union after soviet collapse like lots of buildings were abandoned foctorys shut down and lots of science projects canceled and in lots of places there was wars crimes and bloodshed
Fascinating stuff. Never really thought of these cities having looked as they would have then.
It’s a pitty more of the old buildings were not preserved. Look at how beautiful Rome is today.
Didnt Charlemagne select Aachen as his capital partly because of the Roman baths and structures where still functioning and in use.....?
The Franks had no capital. The court traveled through the empire. There were many places called "Pfalz" (or "Kaiserpfalz"), which were run by a nobleman and which served as "royal motels". Aachen, Metz, Reims, Worms, Speyer, to name a few - there were hundreds ! And most of them if not all were former Roman cities. Which is a mis-nomer, since most places had been inhabitated long before the Romans arrived.
Aachen became his favourite "Pfalz" in his later years, when rheumatism plagued him. It was also pretty close to his familiy roots in Belgium. Yes, the baths were more or less intact, though not on the same level as in Bath/UK. Nothing left today. Nevertheless, the hot sulfuric springs "worked" - and still do !
It was also the place where the first major building program north of the Alps happened. The "Aachener Dom" (the cathedral) initially was a "Pfalzkapelle" (chapel of the "Pfalz"), sponsored by Karl.
Yes, I thought that too. It doesn't seem logical to have a monumental beautiful church built and them not settle there. Maybe Charlemagne was busy with the military keeping his kingdom in order.
This is the only video that had a promotion/ad in it that I actually visited their website and bought a ring after watching youtube since 2006.
Some of the people of the 700s SAVED many records from the ancient time. Not the majority by any chance, but enough that we still maintained a "connection".
Thanks to Alcuin!
Certainly more then us today. Even though most were illiterate, we all know that one pushy, history nut in the family who tells us it all.
And thanks to the Irish monasteries. The monks saved, and copied, a lot of documents.
But 700 A.D is still ancient times.
And now we read on Kindle, books we don’t even own and can’t keep.
An amazing vid as always. It reminds us that we're not far away from living in the shadows of a technologically superior fallen civilization before us. As Dan Carlin used to say on his podcast, it's akin to severing a civilization from its proverbial internet connection.
The Roman Senete still operated until 610 as the Senete of the Early kingdoms of Italy.
True, but the senate of 610 can’t be compared wit the senate 50 before Christ.
Greatest video on the Roman Empire that I have seen. Good work 👏
I love this channel, I have always been a massive Rome nerd. But always hated the late empire because I found it so depressing, I preferred reading about the glory years. But this channel has opened my eyes. It is incredibly fascinating. Also I don't think I have ever had a chnl that disproved so many preconceived notions. Especially on a subject I thought I knew so much about...great job!!!
Thank you for creating extremely interesting videos all the time. I always watch your videos to distract me when I'm going through it. Wish I could help you out more than just subscribing, but thank you for all your hard work.
In England people when driving people often refer to the very long straight old Roman roads as “Roman roads”-May the nova roma emerge
Beautifully presented and absorbing. A pleasure to watch as much as to hear.
You got me in the intro 😂 I was saying to myself but that’s not true. Great video, thank you for this 😊
Not sure it's the right niche but if anyone's interested in hard core Medieval urban history I strongly recommend Schwerpunkt
Thanks
And thank you for the kind donation, I really appreciate it :)
As always, gripping and educational. A rare combination! Thank-you.
I don't know if this is mentioned in any other comment, but a fascinating place one can clearly see the footprint of history is the city of Nimes in France---Nimes, in a matter of just a hundred years, went from a still bustling center to a tiny contracted Medieval town, which was mainly the original amphitheater which the dwindling remaining population fortified and huddled inside for generations
Great work!!! ❤️ Some little additions from a cologne nerd 😂: the ripuarian frankish kings prefered to reside in the intact capitolium, not the praetoritum (but which was used by majors later on). There have been used pagan romano celtic temples until the vikings, what a christian preacher complained in a letter to the pope after he wanted to burn them and was kicked out (literally) by the people from cologne-many of them christians aswell. Pagan temples were not reused after the vikings, surviving got churches as the pagans were made responsable for the viking "plaque". Latin was spoken >50 percent until the 9 hundreds (rural dialects in the eifel until 14th) and unfortunately slavery was legal until charlemagne who freed all christians (then all converted to be a free). In the archbishoptry of cologne (whole region exept city from 12th century) latin stayed the official language until conquest of napoleon. And after WWII they found statues of the godess Isis in some of a church's walls (most churches are old roman temples-not all got completly destroyed by the vikings, but yes-all civillian buildings for sure sadly.) Cheers🍻
Amazing info! Thank you! I can tell you care about your city and its history and heritage. I have seen there are others from cologne here who feel the same. I am very jealous of the historic place you guys live in. I am glad to see there are many here who respect it. It would be cool if you guys could get together, it is always important to organize to protect your community from globalism. You guys could do good work preserving the history and culture of your city and region. Advocate for traditional architecture. Etc...
Possibly in the confused belief by later Christians that the Isis statues represented the Virgin. The is at least one medieval English church with a Roman era statue of Demeter set in the wall for this reason.
@@acampbell8614 nono, the were hiding those statues from destruction inside the walls when the temples got churches, not accidentally but carefully walled up. Knowing the local mentality and assuming it was the same back then i think they thought lets see if this christianity works out and if not we could go back to isis 😂. They very likely were never used by the christian community but hiden by the pagans before leaving the temple as far as the article i read was telling.
You totally got me at the beginning. I thought: no that's wrong, everything being said is wrong! AAAH! Oh, there we go.... Exactly! Thank you for the fun ride!
One of the top channels on RUclips, the music, the subject matter… always sets me down a rabbit hole of late antiquity a fascinating and dire period that affects us to this day. Cheers and thank you! I might have to boot up RTW barbarian invasion !
For my town, Ariccia, near Rome, this wasn't the case at all. It was left deserted for centuries and was repopulated only in the 17th century, by bringing in people from Tuscany. And that was the case for Rome itself, wich saw a big decline in population only to be repopulated again by the Chigi who brought in people from Tuscany, wich caused a drastic change in the dialect spoken in the city, wich before was very similar to neapolitan, and later shifted toward tuscan. And in much of central Italy during tye middle ages a lot of small towns were built on high hills (altitudes between 300 and 800mt) and completely fortified, making them look like big castles with another smaller castle inside.
Maybe i'm not getting the dates right, and this craze for fortified towns in central Italy happened well after 700 AD.
Now maybe I understand why my mother's last name which is very rare and comes from Tuscany is found in Rome too
Lisbon (Felicitas Iulia Olisipo, or just Olisipo) is another example of continuation. The oldest part of the city (Alfama) was built on top of Roman Ruins. Archeologists also re-discovered an amphitheater dedicated to Nero in this area.
I am studying that area now. So interesting!
In Pliska Bulgaria during the 700s there was central heating like that of the romans in the rulers palace which shows that roman technology was never forgoten
Seeing themselves as successors of Rome explains names like the Holy Roman Empire and royal titles like Kaiser and Czar.
But remember that thought leaders in the Renaissance also saw themselves as successors to Rome.
And of course it goes without saying Constantinople was the new Rome when Constantine moved and created the Eastern Empire capital in Old Buzantium? And called it Constantinople.
@@georgeplagianos6487Actually Constantino called the city "New Rome". Only after his death people renamed it "Constantinople".
Post-Roman inhabitants of Britain found a wealth of fine walls, building stones and columns to haul away and snazz up their own houses.
Very interesting about post-imperial continuities. An interesting contrast/companion to your videos about changes/evolution within the Empire across the centuries.
The 880s fire and the wooden buildings following seems entire par for the course with these sorts of things. Cities such as London and San Francisco were going to install grand street plans and restore more permanent structures in the wake of fires, but the people needed somewhere to live and just built spontaneously, often in SF's case with wooden cabins. Presumably that's why the kingdoms at the time failed to really preserve the old Roman architecture, and the wood framed buildings took hold instead.
There is a mission in San Antionio that had a dome build in or close to 1731. It finally collapsed in or near the 1970.s and was rebuilt by the national park service. so the domes in midieval Europe probably lasted a little over 200 years then collapsed. So here we taking 800 ad so most domes have collapsed if made like the Spanish built the mission church domes with wood covered in stucco or tile mostly.
This is an excellent example of why historical and archeological research must always continue. This is especially true with all the new technological tools available to study the past. Otherwise a former idea of "the dark ages" would be the accepted truth without any real basis.
Keeping old buildings operational and holding markets in decayed town centers show a slightly higher cultural level in the immediate post-Roman era than thought under the term "Dark Ages," agreed, but meager surpluses and constant instability prevented any progress and often assured ongoing decline for various reasons (climate change, barbarian invasion, pandemics). So, yes, a more nuanced era, but still one of undeniable decline.
If they'd been building impressive libraries and universities, I would agree that "Dark Age" is a misnomer. They were preserving what they could and try to get by. Why is anyone surprised that life goes on as best it can?
There is a reason they called the Renaissance as such: it was indeed a rebirth of knowledge and the possibility for higher civilization.
" meager surpluses and constant instability prevented any progress" On social or biological level? It was nightmare for cultural evolution and huge blessing in disguise for selection in favor in higher IQ. This (plus weeding out gene poll through execution of nastiest 1%-2% men every generation) lead to subsequent boom of culture.
@@pirbird14doğudan gelen akınlar olmasa acaba o bilgileri ararlarmıydi?Hatırlamak isterlermiydi?Ortaçağ devam ederdi.
@@İeaüt567 Sorry, I don't understand your language.
@@pirbird14 Cidden önemli değil , canın sağolsun
I recommend people interested in the subject to look into Augsburg. It was founded by the Romans, and was arguably the most important city in Europe during the Middle Ages even though it’s not spoken of a lot anymore because it’s not a large city anymore (outside of religious circles)They were extremely rich and modern for their times. Something like Dubai. They had built water pumps that pumped clean water throughout the city, sewage systems, and amazing architecture that wasn’t comparable to anything in the time, and most of it still exists today. You still have Roman influence everywhere you look, yet see the riches they acquired in the Middle Ages. That money is still there today. It’s fascinating. Some important figures that were there in its existence. Augustus, Hadrian, Tiberius, Marcus Aurelius, the Maximilians, Barbarossa, Charles V. The list goes on. If you ever go to Germany, it’s a must see.
Buildings and infrastructure may remain intact, but institutions such as military, police, law, schools and currency are equally important. Could a merchant travel between cities safely? Was trade based on coinage or barter? If someone was robbed or murdered was there justice? Could you communicate in a neighboring city or did they speak a different language? Historians are revising the whole concept of a "dark age" in Europe, rightfully so, but civilization definitely declined in the era. Well done! I hope your channel gets more subs, it deserves it.
I think that’s true mostly for the three centuries after the Fall.
Newfound kingdoms trying to emulate Rome and struggling at it
Civilization declined in the west. The west had a dark age. However, in eastern Europe and the middle east, civilization lived on and most roman institutions resumed well into the 7th century
@@nazeem8680 Seventh Century??? Fifteenth Century.
@@THEScottCampbell 7th century in the middle east because of muslim conquests. and because after muslim conquest, Rome abolishes the old roman provincial institutions in favor of the thematic system, and latin is no longer an official language of the empire
Good points. Larger cities depended on a large scale governmental system to keep (for example) the aqueducts running & sewage disposal maintained. And ofcourse a system to import enough products from agricultural areas to feed it's population .So we ended up with smaller self contained communities.
So we’ll done ! Have you done video how the 536 mini ice age and following years of famine and disease of 540s affected Western Europe ?
0:11 At the same time, the Roman Empire led by glittering Constantinople was reaching great heights. Everything was glittering, and bright,…certainly not the dark ages. You have been lied too.
Congratulations your Channel is wonderful!❤ I’ll definitely visit your merch store!
It was an informative and wonderful introduction of certain cities Roman empire traditions, constructed buildings were Standed....thank you for sharing
thank you for your expressive and thoughtful narrative. you seem as if a good teacher.
Your channel is one of the greatest on all of RUclips.
So happy my algorithm presented this video to me. I love ANCIENT ITALIAN HISTORY. I’ve been to Italy, and studied Latin in both high school and college. I attribute my high level of reading comprehension and critical thinking skills to my 2 1/2 years of studying Latin. I went on to study Italian (one year), German (3 years ), and French (1 year). I even went on to study a computer language (C++).
I would never have learned to love languages and history had it not been for that Latin I class I was placed in by mistake in my first year of high school.
I will now probably look for another Latin class - I now want to study the Language again. Thank you so much for this historical update.
The picture seems to be a bit rosy... In Gaul, many cities "shrank" with the early invasions (250 and 275 AD), and probably pendemics and economic difficulties and, starting from the early 4th century, Rome ordered the main cities to be fortified, with typically remparts being built using stones and architectural elements salvaged from the buildings of the High empire. Entire neighbourhoods were abandonned and used as stone quarries. In south-west Gaul, part of the elites chose to live in their rural estates, hence the number of vast, lavish countryside villas evidenced by archeology.
That was really interesting and the visuals are terrific!
it’s so crazy how many of those cities existed for hundreds and hundreds of years with so much lore
Roman Londonium was abandoned and left to decay and then taken apart, by Anglo Saxon invaders after the eighth century, to build their stone buildings, but small pieces of Roman London have been found, a temple floor and pieces of the walls.
This was also done elsewhere later on by the Normans, who used the foundations of a Roman temple, rebuilt after Boddicca burned the original down, to build Colchester castle. In the area of Hasting and Rye in Sussex, stone from Roman buildings including a fort, were incorporated into local Norman buildings and even later medieval buildings, feature Roman stones, repurposed from the ruined Norman buildings.
Roman Londonium is where The City of London is today, which was a financial district started during in medieval times.
Roman roads in Britain remained in use as trackways, which can in some places still be walked on. I once walked on part of Stane Street in southern England.
I think though that most Roman architecture in the British Isles fell in to disuse, not because of indifference, but because it was architecture from a Mediterranean culture and unsuitable for a maratime climate, so became unstable, whereas Western Europe has a continental climate, which treated the fabric of those buildings better. I think that, because modernist architecture also a continental import, has also decayed badly in the British climate, even though it was built in the in last century.
Thanks!
And thank you for your kind donation, I really appreciate it :)
The German carnival tradition that is most prominent along the Rhine is a continuation of the Roman Saturnalia festival.
Very notably, carnival has never really been a thing in Northeastern Germany. (Which had never been Romanized at any point.)
Excellent walk through. Learned some things :)
Another great video, thank you. Been watching since the 2 the future days - love the Rome content too!
The city of Bath England was still in operation throughout the dark ages from 500 to 800AD.
That’s possibly one of the exceptions he mentioned
The Roman retreat from Britain was the first Brexit 😂
A colleague of mine is from Naples. His family home is on a Roman street,pavement is the same since the Romans laid down the street a couple thousand years ago. The reason why is the Romans used granite stones,not bricks,not asphalt not some other form of cheap pavement. These roads were more costly and labor intensive to build,but once they were built,that was it. No buckling,no potholes,no nothing. Built to last.
Also remember that the formula for concrete was lost for thousands of years! It wasn’t rediscovered until the 1800’s!
Well that's interesting. Btw: How do you think the Byzantines build their buildings like the Haiga Sophia w/Elmer's glue? They had cement right? Or or use the Athenian method of building the Parthenon? Sanding the Stones so fine they didn't need any cementing which they didn't have at the time so they may do. Sanding everything down so the two separate marbles would look like one. Don't you think the Eastern Romans the byzantines had that knowledge of cementing the obviously took from the Romans. I'm surprised during the time when the Eastern Roman Empire was collapsing from the plague, constant ottoman invasions so many architects, masons, artists artists, philosophers and doctors and medical personnel were fleeting to west. Hence jump-starting the Renaissance. Without the Muslim invasions the Renaissance would have sparked much later probably what do you think folks.. and that also could be one main reason explorers like Columbus were seeking to go across the Atlantic to avoid running into the Muslim pirates that controlled the Eastern Mediterranean.. that sort of makes sense to me what do you think?
Thank you for this video. I note that you talk mainly about modern France and Spain - and you have talked about the city of Rome before. What would have been the condition of regional cities in central and northern Italy after the Gothic war and the Lombard invasion?
I’m from Bonn, near cologne. The Roman influence is still very much alive, known and appreciated
Once these old cities actually collapsed, why the peoples of the times no longer have the means to rebuild them in the original Roman style?
They didn't want to
Because taxes went down and Rome was also financed heavily by robbing and pillaging their neighbors and selling them as slaves.
@@Whurlpuul Either that or they don't have the money to do so.
They didn't have the institution, trade network, economy that permitted to buy the services of skilled people knowing the infrastructures (if there were any one left), transport the ressources...
The fact is that with the collapse of the roman empire, many institution (some unpopular), were abandonned, such as those which forced fortunate people to go in assembly while paying heavy taxes (which were funding a state perceived as inneficient, not capable of stoping raids and slaughtering itself in civil wars)
Even stone buildings could not be built by the Anglo-Saxons. In the 8th century masons were brought from Italy.
really fascinating thanks. In the city of Bath, England, the ancient Roman baths still survive almost intact
Yeah, "they lived in Roman houses", but couldn't build houses like Romans did - that's why IT WAS Dark Ages: ability to do a lot of things that was fairly standard for Romans disappeared not to re-emerge for few centuries
Today we think it cool to modify an oast house or live in a barn conversion. In Cambridge Ceres House near the train station used to be Spillers dog biscuit factory, while in Ipswich they turned the Churchmans cigarette factory into flats. Might future generations think we lived in squalor? I saw one the other day which used an old school and another which was carved out or a disused church, and several converted from stables. Are we in decline? Few would think so.
@@Joanna-il2ur The majority lived in wooden huts covered in tatch
@@Joanna-il2ur Unlike those post-roman people (in regards to roman buildings) we can build more of those buildings you mentioned. We've got the technology and the resources to do so. That's quite a big difference in ability
Who said they couldn't? You really think most romans lived in fancy villas? No. They lived in mud huts through out most of the empire no different than from the early medieval period. The fancy places were urban centers like Rome, Carthage and the whole east. Nothing really changed. Only that taxes go lowered since the roman yoke came off. Being subject to a brutal empire of conquest wasn't all sunshine.
@@majungasaurusaaaa I would suggest you visit pompei for a glimpse into the classical world of antiquity or look at images of it.
Thanks
Fascinating, and informative. You make some cogent points, and I’ve come to the conclusion that the fall of the Western Empire was a very gradual process.
*nod* Collapse normally *is* a gradual process, not a zombie apocalypse thing. The major exception is when a civilization suddenly encounters another expansionist civilization with higher military technology, as when the Aztecs and the Spaniards met.
Yes, but I wish when he mentions "new writings" he would cite them. I would like to read more and know what the latest scholarship says.
@@MaureenLycaon Actually the main cause there was pathogens
Yes, but difficult to pin point because it seems the plague would rotate throughout Europe and effect different populations at different times. @@topologyrob
To be fair the Romans brought what we think of as civilization to most of Europe, people were living in large advanced tribes before that. So even though the central structures collapsed they were essentially further along then they were before, and what was considered "the light of civilization" probably wasn't the same to the tribes who came before
I absolutely love my Ancient European Ancestors History so rich long and deep history indeed 🤍💪🏻
Were still used? I think you mean "Are still used." I saw some Roman roads in the Schatsvald in Baden Wurtenburg.
The telling of the first Minute and 10 seconds sounds to me like a state of western civilization that is righ ahead of us; I have too often felt the "flames od enlightenment" being dimmed down in the last say twenty to thirty years.
Thanks for the info!
When the grain shipments from North Africa stopped, no one was feeding Rome or the other cities of Italy. With no food, people scattered anywhere they could find food.
England was not invaded. Germanic arrivals melded into the native population. Over several generations, they became one people.
Contemporary research suggests it is more complex than that. Genetic evidence suggests large scale population replacement in parts of the country.
Furthermore, the law codes, amongst other evidence, indicates it clearly was a series of invasions.
Before the withdrawal of Rome from Northern Europe, there was a protracted period of inclusion of Germanic peoples into the Roman Armys. The soldiers when retired often received property in the Northern regions and would retire there. It is believed that most of these soldiers, once settled, along with many of the wealthy stayed in the areas after Rome withdrew from the region, having taken on the region as their new home (along with having a substantial stake in the area.) So withdrawal of Rome marked a transitional period. Remember also that the Roman settlements only made up a small portion of the area in Northern Europe. These Roman settlements varied from cities to outposts and also varied in how close they were to a true Roman settlement back on the Italian peninsula. At the same time, the vast majority of the area was populated with tribes (mostly Germanic) who had grown from something more akin to American Indians to growing into proper Kingdoms over the centuries. Rome's influence while in the area had an effect on this growth into true kingdoms but they were still on a trajectory. With Rome pulling out, these kingdoms were the de facto highest level of civilization with some outliers in settlements that retained some amount of previously Roman citizens. There was no "Dark Ages" technically. There was a drop in the highly Romanized areas in northern Europe, but Europe on the whole remained on an upper trajectory to more and more complex kingdoms. Back on the Italian peninsula, the empire did break up, but when they did, they broke up into city states which have no relation to the image people have of the "dark ages." It is true they had a protracted period of hardships in many of these areas, much warfare between the city states and some plagues which also effected them so yes there was an impact on civilization in these areas, but even still, there was innovation and growth among all of that. The renaissance was an acceleration of this, not something that popped out of nowhere. A good coverage of this period of the Italian peninsula can be seen here: www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/italians-before-italy-conflict-and-competition-in-the-mediterranean.html Also, the series "The Borgias" has a pretty good depiction of this time period (a bit into it.) Between the Great Courses and the series, one can get an interesting perspective on the times, at least as far as our current knowledge of it goes. As for the Northern European area at this time, The Great Courses have a number of courses including a series that cover the early, mid and late middle ages (a more proper historical reference to the time period than the totally improper "dark ages.)
I should add that I really appreciate channels like this which further the discussion on these topics. They (i.e. this channel and quality ones like it) expand upon previously available resources and breath life into the history. Thank you Maiorianus for your time and efforts. :)