Barbarians Rising

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

ORIGINAL: Orm

I suspect that The Roman Empire set back the industrial development in Europe by hundred of years. If not more. The barbarians were often more developed than the Romans in many areas but the one that counts: military.

Hi Orm. I've never heard this interpretation of history before. Where did you read this? [&:]

I can not say that I read it in a book. But Terry Jones made me think about it with his book and documentary. And then I watched a documentary about the Antikythera mechanism and that made me evaluate what I thought I knew.

Terry Jones' Barbarians: An Alternative Roman History

https://www.amazon.com/Terry-Jones-Barb ... erry+jones

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0905688/?ref_=nm_flmg_wr_4

[TulliusDetritus]

To Romans, non-Roman (and non-Greek) peoples were Barbarians. No exceptions. Well, Cato the Censor despised the Greeks too [:D]

The "barbarians" of our story though are specifically the ones across the Danube and Rhin [;)] The Cimbrian War (Marius) was the first bloody contact. When the Romans moved to Gaul and then the Danube (quite late) they definitely became neighbours. Starting with Cesar then. Not before. So that makes 500 years at most. The most used weapon against these barbarians was not military strength but gold, bribes. Go figure [:D]

Each time the Romans detected a strong tribe, they started funding weakest tribes and civil wars would inmediately follow. For once Hitler got this episode right: his famous rants about the always divided Germans. He was correctly describing the policy of the Romans aka Divide et Impera.

So the problem was not about stopping them, as Marius had done, but about keeping them weak and dispersed.

"5) Recent archaeological evidence suggests that the pre-Roman Celtic societies were linked with overland trade routes that spanned Eurasia. So this road network predates the Roman roads."

About your overland roads. I don't get it. Since the Neolithic times there was the famous Amber Route, from the Baltic to the Mediterranean. Does that prove they -along this route- were very developed? Of course not.

The barbarians never built something like the Roman Via. That is ridiculous. Not to mention that overland transport was ridiculously expensive. Pay attention to this data: it was cheaper to send goods by ship from one side of the Mediterranean to the other than sending them overland 40 km!

As for the industrial thing, it's pure speculation (to me in fact an aberration). We could say that the Chinese, Aztecs or Zulus might have started the first ones for that matter. After all, the Romans were not there to stop them from doing it. And?

[TulliusDetritus]

And anyways, this discussion cannot ignore the epic People's Front of Judea "What have the Romans ever done for us?" rant...

"... apart from, of course, the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health" [:D]

So what should be the People's Front of Barbarian Lands rant? I am all ears [;)]

[Jagdtiger14]

It would be helpful to describe what era (dates?) we are talking about here. Longboats (genesis at least going back to 190AD and probably earlier) were superior in construction and seaworthiness to Med ships. Art is a very subjective thing (cave art dating back 14,000 years discovered in Spain recently was very simplistic, but still very interesting if only because of its age), however 'barbarian' art using stone, wood, or precious metals was quite advanced. "Barbarians" did have and use astronomy...and that is a science...both for food, survival, and also to navigate and explore across an ocean. "Barbarians" wore pants/trousers[:)]

When you live (survive) in harsh elements, and all hands on deck concerning agriculture and fishing are required for survival, its kind of hard to be able to have large beautiful cities with baths.

And to be sure, the Romans stood on the shoulders of many civilizations before them...and we stand on their shoulders, and so on.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

a struggling empire into chaos, isolation and starvation. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.

The Western Roman Empire...at least from 383 "struggling"? That is quite the understatement. I hope you enjoy the show.

Rome's struggle was against invading barbarians, not your arbitrary dates.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

And anyways, this discussion cannot ignore the epic People's Front of Judea "What have the Romans ever done for us?" rant...

"... apart from, of course, the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health" [:D]

So what should be the People's Front of Barbarian Lands rant? I am all ears [;)]

Aside from wine, most barbarians weren't big on sanitation, education, etc.

[IntrepidMan]

Aside from wine, most barbarians weren't big on sanitation, education, etc.

Thats what makes them more civilized. They have respect for ignorance. [:D]

[Kuokkanen]

ORIGINAL: IntrepidMan

Aside from wine, most barbarians weren't big on sanitation, education, etc.

Thats what makes them more civilized. They have respect for ignorance. [:D]

If you say so...

[Jagdtiger14]

Rome's struggle was against invading barbarians, not your arbitrary dates.

Dates are meaningless in history. Good one!

[TulliusDetritus]

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14
It would be helpful to describe what era (dates?) we are talking about here.

And perhaps even better, we should define "developed". To most scholars -like Romans- it's all about urban (city state) and political life (the Republic but not the Rome of the emperors), rule of law, and the many arts (philosophy, grammar etc). A way of life that is and our direct ancestor.

Barbarian just means what the Romans meant by using this word. Simply those that did not follow this particular way of life.

[Jagdtiger14]

quote:ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14 It would be helpful to describe what era (dates?) we are talking about here. And perhaps even better, we should define "developed". To most scholars -like Romans- it's all about urban (city state) and political life (the Republic but not the Rome of the emperors), rule of law, and the many arts (philosophy, grammar etc). A way of life that is and our direct ancestor. Barbarian just means what the Romans meant by using this word. Simply those that did not follow this particular way of life.

Good points, and agree 100% with this.

[E]

"What have the Romans ever done for us?" - People's Front of Judea

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: E

"What have the Romans ever done for us?" - People's Front of Judea

warspite1

Brian: Excuse me. Are you the Judean People's Front?
Reg: **** off! 'Judean People's Front'. We're the People's Front of Judea! 'Judean People's Front'.
Francis: W*****s.

[TulliusDetritus]

Splitter!!

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

Rome's struggle was against invading barbarians, not your arbitrary dates.

Dates are meaningless in history. Good one!

Dates mark time; it's your interpretation of them that's in question.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

...
Barbarian just means what the Romans meant by using this word. Simply those that did not follow this particular way of life.

To the Greeks, a barbarian was a "babbler" who couldn't speak Greek. But to the Romans, it was someone living outside, especially north of, the Roman Empire.

From the Latin barbari -- a barbarous country.

[wings7]

This like taking a course in the history of the Roman Empire era...please don't stop! [:)]

[Jagdtiger14]

quote:ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14 quote:Rome's struggle was against invading barbarians, not your arbitrary dates. Dates are meaningless in history. Good one! Dates mark time; it's your interpretation of them that's in question.

Read up on Theodoric and tell me that was a dark age for Italy+, etc... It was much darker before and after him. That's a fact.

[wings7]

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

quote:ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14 quote:Rome's struggle was against invading barbarians, not your arbitrary dates. Dates are meaningless in history. Good one! Dates mark time; it's your interpretation of them that's in question.

Read up on Theodoric and tell me that was a dark age for Italy+, etc... It was much darker before and after him. That's a fact.

A reference for "Theodoric" would be helpful...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theoderic_the_Great

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

quote:ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14 quote:Rome's struggle was against invading barbarians, not your arbitrary dates. Dates are meaningless in history. Good one! Dates mark time; it's your interpretation of them that's in question.

Read up on Theodoric and tell me that was a dark age for Italy....

Theodoric is "one in a row."

Read up on all the barbarians that invaded Italy before Theodoric the Great, king of the Ostrogoths from 475 to 526. Which of them were like him?

In fact, The History Channel's "Barbarians Rising" doesn't even include Theodoric because it ends with Attila, ruler of the Huns from 434 until his death in March 453.

http://www.history.ca/barbarians-rising/bios/