Historians were pretty sure of the timeline of decline in Roman Britain until 2017. In that year an amazing discovery was made that re-wrote the history books for the 5th century in post-Roman Britain. Until this discovery, historians were certain that British life had declined and reverted to something more tribal during and after the Saxon Advent. However, a mosaic was discovered at Chedworth Roman villa in the modern day county of Gloucestershire. That mosaic has been positively dated to being laid around the mid 5th century, and certainly after 424 AD, and probably as late as 450 - 480 AD. That strongly suggests that Chedworth was occupied by a wealthy individual who was living a Roman lifestyle, and that artisans still existed who could manufacture and lay a mosaic floor. That further suggests that other artisans and tradesmen existed, but more importantly, it indicates that some form of Romano-British administration existed, along with a military force. That would tie-in with the famous Romano-British victory at the Battle of Badon around 500 AD, which held back the Saxon advance in the west for at least fifty years.
...in which a Sarmatian named Art killed like, 900 guys. Killed them to death, if I remember correctly. All seriousness aside, that is indeed an intriguing and cool tie-in.
I just saw a video on this! It makes sense. The Romans were in Britain for three and a half centuries. I can't believe that the whole of the civilization just went 'back' to what it was before.
I don't really understand what people thought was the case before... pretty sure nobody seriously imagined a sudden, complete and total withdrawal of all Roman culture and administration and cessation of any and all armed struggle in 411 AD 🤷🏻♂️😆 that wouldn't make any sense. I don't really recall the narrative being previously different or changing after 2017... indeed I remember lots of talk of battles and a receding Roman culture eventually ending with the last Roman administration in Wales. from 2017 there was simply a solid example of what everyone already figured was the case.
I was working in Gloucester area off and on for two years during the pandemic and my hotel was a short walk from the ruins of a Roman villa. Was pretty amazing that stuff like that was all over the place. An old structure in the Rocky Mountain region where I live is around a hundred years old. The depth and variety of history in the UK is pretty mesmerizing.
I find it fascinating that Magnus Maximus appears in Welsh chronicles and histories and is said to have had a family connection to the very earliest Welsh kings.
There also seems to be a distant memory of Caratacus, which is even more impressive - although it's hard to be sure since the name also occurs for different people in Ireland (whence McCarthys) so it's not obvious whether it was just a popular name in aristocratic circles, or even was a popular name because of his fame.
@@KevDaly I think in any time of fear , after invasion, people hear and spread stories about people who stand against the invaders, Caratacus had 10 years raiding, attacking and escaping, before cartimandau drugged his wine and handed him over to the Romans. He was a real person, he had coins minted bearing his name. He fled his homeland verulamium and went to Wales, Wales remained predominantly Welsh ( ancient briton , whatever ) throughout history . I think the stories about Caratacus survive because of that. During times of fear worry, which it would have been 10 years after the Roman's invaded, people create and spread stories about anyone who stands against the outsiders. Just like the britons created king Arthur during the early Saxon years, and every region had a version of Robin hood, a Saxon standing against the Norman invaders.
Professor Paxton is the best. Her history of England from King Arthur to the Tudor conquest and 1066: The Year that Changed Everything are outstanding.
@@kevwhufc8640 There were oral traditions about a King Arthur figure going back to the Dark Ages. Gildas, Bede and other monks wrote about this figure going back to the fifth century. I’m not talking about Malory and the later French stories. Also, your 12th century date is irrelevant because the course goes until the Tudor conquest in 1485. Henry named his eldest son Arthur for a reason - to establish legitimacy as part of the Arthurian tradition. Maybe be a tad less condescending next time.
@@7harrylime I think it was around the late the 9th century the name Arthur was used, or something similar like Ambrose or artorius, but he's a composite figure at best, if not completely mythical.
This was fantastic, and so well written and orated. The mention of "Pre-Fab" mosaics kind of cracked me up, it's funny to think of things of the ancient world that way, but as you said, a really interesting indication of the stratification of society. Thanks so much!
I loved this presentation. All too often, presentations are like television programmes. In this case, the presenter/lecturer is highly literate and knowledgeable.
It’s confusing to me why Caesar’s expeditions to the island are often downplayed. He established the foundation on which the province was built by forming patronage relationships in the southeast where Rome ultimately gained its foothold with the assistance of local chieftains.
I think it's largely because everyone there went back to business as usual after he left. They were accustomed to strong leaders imposing tribute and exercising sway for as long as their power lasted - the general model of war in Britain was the old one: you kill some people, you take their stuff, and you go home, maybe with some slaves or hostages. That's largely what Caesar did. It was only under Claudius that a permanent Roman presence was established - the majority of the island was very clearly under new management, and the freedom of the Britons was ended.
I absolutely agree. The vast majority of mentions of Caeser in regards to Britain are how he was run out on his initial attempt. His actual contribution is mainly overlooked.
Maybe he did. I think it more likely that those links were formed in the intervening 100 years. All of Gaul was placed under Roman dominion and it was Gaul who was the major trading partner with Britain. So increasingly Romanised Gauls were influencing the south-eastern tribes of Britain. British nobility would have visited their counterparts in Gaul and seen the new villas, new administrative centres and the sheer quantity of goods available and desired it for themselves. If Caesar hadn't finalised the conquest of Gaul then it's unlikely his short campaign in Britain would have borne any real ties between the two.
Isn't the source for much of what Caesar in Britain Caesar himself? Don't need to be a genius to figure out why historians don't put much stock in that.
@@cantbanme8971 that’s a ridiculous proposition that’s based on the conjecture of the modern historian. Having read the source materials I found hardly anything Caesar wrote propagandist by today’s standards. When his fleets were twice destroyed or scattered and he nearly ended up stranded in Britain, he wrote about it in matter of fact manner, as he did most things. He didn’t try to hide failure and he did not write in a way that displayed overt judgment or condemnation of the customs and practices of peoples he came in contact with. He observed.
This is the kind of great stuff I learned in university 30 years ago instead of the online nonsense that annoyed my kids and almost immediately decided to go into trades and sales instead. Really cool video.
@@alanbeaumont4848 like all good innovators the Romans took some things from the greeks / etruscans, and made them much better, But Romans did invent many things , too long to list , easier to Google everything.
If you enjoyed this, I strongly recommend one of Dr. Paxton's many lecture series from The Great Courses. Btw, Dr. Paxton is the daughter of folk singer-songwriter Tom Paxton.
Germans were here long before the Saxons. Many were settled here following their military service. At Romes height, Britain was seen as a fairly sedate posting. The reason for pulling back from the Antonine wall was because Galloway was difficult to hold down. The rugged and mostly forested region consumed a lot of Auxiliaries and proved an expensive and pointless undertaking.
Britain had the largest concentration of military in the Empire, how sedate could it have been? Or do you think the postings there were some kind of RnR, in the land of wind and rain.
Yeah I'm pretty sure I heard something once about the remains of a small shrine to Tiw being found along Hadrian's Wall in the 2nd or 3rd century, possibly from a Roman soldier of Germanic descent
Great presentation. Thorough but concise. She did a good job interweaving the economic, military & political. A less academic way of getting up to speed on this era would be to read Rosemary Sutcliff's trilogy starting with The Eagle of the Ninth. Technically, they are for "young adults" but this old adult enjoyed them and they seem to be pretty accurate historically. Thanks Doc!
I suspect that many Romano British soldiers did not leave Britain when the orders came to do this . They had families here , and these went back generations . Roots , in other words . Whatever legends built up around resistance to Saxons probably have their sources here . In A.D.410 , the depleted garrisons of Britain were removed to defend Rome ... I bet some stayed here ...
Only the retired soldiers (common soldiers couldn't have a recognized marriage until then), but that core of veterans would have made it easier to train up a local army.
Many of them were Garrison Auxiliaries, who would not have joined the main legions when Constantine III invaded Gaul, no doubt they were employed by the remaining local administrators to provide defense against raiders, etc, sometimes involving land grants and alliances involving marriage contracts with the existing ruling families.
An excellent discussion and perhaps we can learn some things that apply to weakening empires today. I was in York Minster's basement, among the Roman foundations and thinking of how Constantine was proclaimed emperor here when the voices of an practicing choir floated down through the ceiling. Now that is history! But there has been unproven speculation about Arthur as a Roman officer remaining after the collapse, which is at least an interesting idea. Camelot may never have existed, but at least the dream of a better world lived on.
The Phoenicians first came into contact with the Cornish with the expedition led by Himlico 450bce the Cornish traded the tin and were considered adept at its production into ingots. It is should be remembered the Phoenicians were also Carthaginians . Successfully hiding the source for a long time.Strabo considered the Cornish to be civilized due to long contact with the Mediterranean. Rome would have traded for tin, no Roman tin works are known in cornwall. Cornwall was known to still be trading tin after the fall of Roman Britain.
Watling street goes right through my city, although its still called WS it is a Saxon name we don't know what the Romans called it,, just giving some extra info ,all for free :)
The evidence of decline I find most striking is the various caches of silver plate that have been dug up from the late Roman period. These would have been buried by the locals, who evidently never had an opportunity to come back and retrieve them.
I think its amazing that we know as much as we do. We are talking about centuries and centuries of war, neglect of records and all of the other bad things that came about with the collapse of a major civilization. The fact that we have records at all is astonishing... mind you, Im aware that not all of these records are the originals and that we have had to fill in the blanks because there are gaps and contradictions... but we still have enough to piece together timelines and pretty good details in some cases. We even have names and details of their lives. Lots more entertaining to me than fiction.
Not many British stayed behind in post-imperial India. Why the comparison? Empires are there to prioritise wealth extraction rather then settle the land (where there is already a large population). When the legions left, they took many young British men with theme to fight in pointless wars on the continent. It is unlikely that the British would have missed their oppressors.
It was not, when the Romans left, the Romans did not stay because they knew that they would attack other tribes and they were in the lands as foreigners.
The word "Wales" is a foreign expression. The Romans left Cymru, our name for Wales then, our name for Wales now. Greek mariner Pithaeus in the 4th century BC said that the natives called their island Pritaen, We still do,, we call it Prydain, or Brtain to you. Not bad after 2500 years. The Britons are still here.@@nicholasjones7312
I don’t know who this woman is but I’m sure you would have made / are a great teacher. Only con - as an American you need to polish up on your pronunciation of British towns. It’s not easy I know 😂😂
I found her mostly unbiased. I say that because we should be aware of our biases and you shouldn't expect to win all the time. Keep JB on the ballot. Go Blue!
I'm not very far into this, but already a little sceptical. In terms of the Boudicca uprising I have never heard the attack on Londinium referred to without mention of the attack and burning of the Roman Castrum of Camulodunum (Colchester) that preceeded it and kicked things off. It's like looking for causes of WWII and not mentioning Poland.
Don't know if I'd say amazing. She talks about Christianity that came there. That's misleading. Christianity wasn't, hasn't ever been one religion, one belief. In the 3rd and 4th century the Christian church was divided. Hence the reason why Constantine called the council of nicea in 325ce. Constantine was baptized by eusebius of nicomedia a western church Christian who didn't believe in the nicene creed. So was Constantine the 2nd. So was the first king of Rome. Infact non nicene creed, non trinitarians ruled Rome until around 590 ce. So who were those Christians? It matters. She wrong for not saying which she knows. That makes her a liar. Screw her narrative. Peace and agap'e
Incredible to think that late Iron Age (pre-Roman) relative agricultural productivity in Britain did not reach the same level again until 1900! The British Celts definitely knew how to farm ;)
There was NO England it was in the 10th century when the Kingdom of England was formed ie 600 years later after the Romans left in the 4th century! The Picts were the fiercest tribe in the 1st to 5th century, they even raided down south into days England after the Romans left Hadrian's Wall, the Picts merged with the Scots to form Scotland in the 9th century.
It's refreshing to see an American explain our history in such a well researched and respectable manner. Rather than getting their knowledge from hollywood movies or some book they read as a child. I mean she hasn't even brought up the argument for aliens helping the Romans.
Shows the state of US Education, when a notional US History Professor isn't even aware of the difference between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Great Britain, Ireland, Hibernia, Scotland, Wales, Isle of Man, or England, let alone when they were incorporated. Suspect someone couldn't name more than a half dozen US states, let alone identify when the US was established, despite many a UK an US primary school attempting to pass the knowledge on. As do numerous forums, videos, and web sites. 😢
Absolute rubbish. There was no England at this time. When the Romans left they left behind the native Britons who’d been there before and during their occupation. The Anglo Saxons would not come for another hundred years.
I understand as soon as the soldiers on Hadrians Wall departed the Picts attacked, and ransacked todays Northern England and may even have gone as far south as London? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End_of_Roman_rule_in_Britain
Great video, the decline of the Roman Empire had such a profound impact in Europe. England is not of course part of Europe, but lies in the region. That’s a fascinating time., It would be great to see a new movie made about life in this dark scary uncertain time.
just use common sense. after 400 years don't you think Romans and Britons became one ethnic group? I think the majority of the Romano-British remained on the island.
Yeah. That's the frequent misstatement. The Romans left Briton. Richard Burton, Richard Harris, and Peter O'Toole were called British luminaries until they were picked up after a bar fight. Then they became "two Micks and a Welshman." 😅
She shows just how important it is to establish and keep at least a basic level of craftsmen and manufacturing knowledge so a country can maintain a comfortable civilised lifestyle, when foreign trade dries up. At a time when the whole of Europe is in flux, keeping our manufacturing processes must be fought for
The title does not imply that England was a nation in Roman times. She is relating the history of the part of Britain now known as England. Everybody understands that perfectly well.
So where Ma"am, do the Vikings fit into this? The English language with all its ingredients could be described as a dog's dinner. Or Lapskaus, the Norwegian word for a stew with a bit of everything in it. Could we simplify it as saying that English is a Germanic Language with a Romanic overlay? There is Old Romanic, from the Romans, but from centuries later then Modern Romanic, modern Romanic brought over by the Norman's. There was the time when the elite of England spoke French. There are many words in English which are directly from the Norsemen. .. and a few more in Northern England and Scotland. eg. the Scottish word for child: bairn Norwegian: barn. port & starboard - starboard comes from styrebord, 'steering board' = rudder, which was always installed at the stern on the right hand side of the keel on Viking ships. (port is romanic)
Vikings came some 300 years later as I am sure you are well aware of. On a side not, starboard in Dutch is stuurbord and in German it’s steurbord. Both words mean steering side as you mentioned. There are many such words. Hosen = trousers or pants in German Hose = silk stockings and flexible piping for water in English Hoos = a twister or small tornado in Dutch. In all 3 cases it describes a flexible cilinder-like object. Then there is shirt/skirt, water/wotter/water/wasser.
Bairn is not Scottish in origin but of old English and was brought to Scotland by the Angles who settled the lowlands of Scotland. Bairn is still used by many in the very north of England particularly Northumbria, Northumbria once stretch as far as Edinburgh and itself of Angle origin. The Scots language is derived from old English, ironically the Scots language and the Scottish accent today would be more similar to how the English spoke back in those days than they do now.
There is no old Latin in English because the English were not in Britain at the time of the Romans. Welsh is the only UK living language today where you can see a significant amount of very early Latin loanwords. This is because Welsh is basically modern Brittonic - the language that was spoken in Britain before, during and after the Roman occupation.
honest question everyone else ignores: "do you thing Boudicca was real or did Kaiser invent her so he could pent him self red and wear purple all week?"
The fall of Rome or even fall of its provice such as BRITANNIA is great tragedy and CATACLYSMIC event for Europe as it has brought fallen Roman provinces centuries back in development. No surprise that when Rome collapsed, western partof known world immediatelly entered PERIOD OF DARK AGES, we can see here why, it was greatest empire that ever existet. Why have you left ROME again Brittania ? Is it not cold and lonelly out there on the edge ?
This was good however I was left with the question what caused the economy to change and manufacturing to decline. I know she mentioned demand but it must be more than that for the impact it had
Contstant and persistent harassment of western European supply lines over the course of many decades made getting goods in and out of Britain not worth it.
There was no England when the Romans left. An inaccurate headline. Writing 'When the Spanish Conquistadors arrived in the United States of America' would be an equally silly headline for an article for that period in time as the USA didnt exist then. Sloppy writing.
She fails to mention that recent DNA evidence shows the extent of Germanic immigration was not as much as was traditionally thought. British DNA is still predominantly Celtic.
Yes, the approach is conventional. She talks about waves of immigrants but it took the English over a hundred years to take Bath and Gloucester from the British.
Historians were pretty sure of the timeline of decline in Roman Britain until 2017. In that year an amazing discovery was made that re-wrote the history books for the 5th century in post-Roman Britain. Until this discovery, historians were certain that British life had declined and reverted to something more tribal during and after the Saxon Advent. However, a mosaic was discovered at Chedworth Roman villa in the modern day county of Gloucestershire. That mosaic has been positively dated to being laid around the mid 5th century, and certainly after 424 AD, and probably as late as 450 - 480 AD. That strongly suggests that Chedworth was occupied by a wealthy individual who was living a Roman lifestyle, and that artisans still existed who could manufacture and lay a mosaic floor. That further suggests that other artisans and tradesmen existed, but more importantly, it indicates that some form of Romano-British administration existed, along with a military force. That would tie-in with the famous Romano-British victory at the Battle of Badon around 500 AD, which held back the Saxon advance in the west for at least fifty years.
That's fascinating! Thanks for sharing!
Historians are slow in catching up with the evidence info archaeologists discover.
...in which a Sarmatian named Art killed like, 900 guys. Killed them to death, if I remember correctly. All seriousness aside, that is indeed an intriguing and cool tie-in.
I just saw a video on this! It makes sense. The Romans were in Britain for three and a half centuries. I can't believe that the whole of the civilization just went 'back' to what it was before.
I don't really understand what people thought was the case before... pretty sure nobody seriously imagined a sudden, complete and total withdrawal of all Roman culture and administration and cessation of any and all armed struggle in 411 AD 🤷🏻♂️😆
that wouldn't make any sense.
I don't really recall the narrative being previously different or changing after 2017...
indeed I remember lots of talk of battles and a receding Roman culture eventually ending with the last Roman administration in Wales.
from 2017 there was simply a solid example of what everyone already figured was the case.
I was working in Gloucester area off and on for two years during the pandemic and my hotel was a short walk from the ruins of a Roman villa. Was pretty amazing that stuff like that was all over the place. An old structure in the Rocky Mountain region where I live is around a hundred years old. The depth and variety of history in the UK is pretty mesmerizing.
"Futuristic" stories about a devasted dystopian landscape are really just our vestigial memories of past civilization collapse.
I’ve watched all of this professor’s courses on Wondrium, I think she’s great.
Makes us happy to hear you are enjoying the courses!
I find it fascinating that Magnus Maximus appears in Welsh chronicles and histories and is said to have had a family connection to the very earliest Welsh kings.
There also seems to be a distant memory of Caratacus, which is even more impressive - although it's hard to be sure since the name also occurs for different people in Ireland (whence McCarthys) so it's not obvious whether it was just a popular name in aristocratic circles, or even was a popular name because of his fame.
@@KevDaly I think in any time of fear , after invasion, people hear and spread stories about people who stand against the invaders, Caratacus had 10 years raiding, attacking and escaping, before cartimandau drugged his wine and handed him over to the Romans.
He was a real person, he had coins minted bearing his name.
He fled his homeland verulamium and went to Wales,
Wales remained predominantly Welsh ( ancient briton , whatever ) throughout history .
I think the stories about Caratacus survive because of that.
During times of fear worry, which it would have been 10 years after the Roman's invaded, people create and spread stories about anyone who stands against the outsiders.
Just like the britons created king Arthur during the early Saxon years, and every region had a version of Robin hood, a Saxon standing against the Norman invaders.
Professor Paxton is the best. Her history of England from King Arthur to the Tudor conquest and 1066: The Year that Changed Everything are outstanding.
Arthur (if he existed) was 500 years before England.
@@garryowen8875 She teaches how the idea of Arthur influenced England’s national identity, not Arthur as an actual person.
@@kevwhufc8640 There were oral traditions about a King Arthur figure going back to the Dark Ages. Gildas, Bede and other monks wrote about this figure going back to the fifth century. I’m not talking about Malory and the later French stories. Also, your 12th century date is irrelevant because the course goes until the Tudor conquest in 1485. Henry named his eldest son Arthur for a reason - to establish legitimacy as part of the Arthurian tradition. Maybe be a tad less condescending next time.
@@7harrylime I think it was around the late the 9th century the name Arthur was used, or something similar like Ambrose or artorius, but he's a composite figure at best, if not completely mythical.
@@kevwhufc8640 I agree with that - he’s certainly a composite and very likely fictional.
If i'd had her as a professor, i'd probably would have become a history major. She amazing.
This was fantastic, and so well written and orated. The mention of "Pre-Fab" mosaics kind of cracked me up, it's funny to think of things of the ancient world that way, but as you said, a really interesting indication of the stratification of society. Thanks so much!
I'm sure you could order a mass-produced, stone statue or column, so why not a mosaic? 😊
I loved this presentation. All too often, presentations are like television programmes. In this case, the presenter/lecturer is highly literate and knowledgeable.
Well, almost. Bath is a city, not a town.
This was absolutely fantastic! What a true teacher!
Rome never left England
Rome left Britain but at the time they may have come back as they had before
It’s confusing to me why Caesar’s expeditions to the island are often downplayed. He established the foundation on which the province was built by forming patronage relationships in the southeast where Rome ultimately gained its foothold with the assistance of local chieftains.
I think it's largely because everyone there went back to business as usual after he left. They were accustomed to strong leaders imposing tribute and exercising sway for as long as their power lasted - the general model of war in Britain was the old one: you kill some people, you take their stuff, and you go home, maybe with some slaves or hostages. That's largely what Caesar did. It was only under Claudius that a permanent Roman presence was established - the majority of the island was very clearly under new management, and the freedom of the Britons was ended.
I absolutely agree. The vast majority of mentions of Caeser in regards to Britain are how he was run out on his initial attempt. His actual contribution is mainly overlooked.
Maybe he did. I think it more likely that those links were formed in the intervening 100 years. All of Gaul was placed under Roman dominion and it was Gaul who was the major trading partner with Britain. So increasingly Romanised Gauls were influencing the south-eastern tribes of Britain. British nobility would have visited their counterparts in Gaul and seen the new villas, new administrative centres and the sheer quantity of goods available and desired it for themselves. If Caesar hadn't finalised the conquest of Gaul then it's unlikely his short campaign in Britain would have borne any real ties between the two.
Isn't the source for much of what Caesar in Britain Caesar himself? Don't need to be a genius to figure out why historians don't put much stock in that.
@@cantbanme8971 that’s a ridiculous proposition that’s based on the conjecture of the modern historian. Having read the source materials I found hardly anything Caesar wrote propagandist by today’s standards. When his fleets were twice destroyed or scattered and he nearly ended up stranded in Britain, he wrote about it in matter of fact manner, as he did most things. He didn’t try to hide failure and he did not write in a way that displayed overt judgment or condemnation of the customs and practices of peoples he came in contact with. He observed.
This is the kind of great stuff I learned in university 30 years ago instead of the online nonsense that annoyed my kids and almost immediately decided to go into trades and sales instead. Really cool video.
At least there's more money to be made in trade and sales than any history job, ;)
@@kevwhufc8640 For sure. None of my boys want to go to college now. Trades are definitely where it's at because they're actually useful.
The title is something of a misnomer - The Romans didn't leave 'England' - but Britain.
I was wondering about that, too. The Angles , Saxons, etc came to Britain after Rome left.
It’s pretty awesome that they had prefab mosaics. Had never heard that before. It’s like having access to target art.
Lol, right?
It makes one wonder where Western Civilization would be now if Rome had never fallen. A Moon Base and a Martian Colony?
@@riorockers No, the Romans weren't innovative; they took their technology from the Greeks.
@@alanbeaumont4848 like all good innovators the Romans took some things from the greeks / etruscans, and made them much better,
But Romans did invent many things , too long to list , easier to Google everything.
Rome did not leave England! They left Britain!
If you enjoyed this, I strongly recommend one of Dr. Paxton's many lecture series from The Great Courses. Btw, Dr. Paxton is the daughter of folk singer-songwriter Tom Paxton.
Germans were here long before the Saxons. Many were settled here following their military service. At Romes height, Britain was seen as a fairly sedate posting. The reason for pulling back from the Antonine wall was because Galloway was difficult to hold down. The rugged and mostly forested region consumed a lot of Auxiliaries and proved an expensive and pointless undertaking.
Britain had the largest concentration of military in the Empire, how sedate could it have been? Or do you think the postings there were some kind of RnR, in the land of wind and rain.
Yeah I'm pretty sure I heard something once about the remains of a small shrine to Tiw being found along Hadrian's Wall in the 2nd or 3rd century, possibly from a Roman soldier of Germanic descent
Great presentation. Thorough but concise. She did a good job interweaving the economic, military & political. A less academic way of getting up to speed on this era would be to read Rosemary Sutcliff's trilogy starting with The Eagle of the Ninth. Technically, they are for "young adults" but this old adult enjoyed them and they seem to be pretty accurate historically. Thanks Doc!
This is exceptionally engaging and clear on many levels, and I'm not even a native speaker.
Funny, here I was thinking that England didn't exist till four centuries or so after the legions left.
940 ad or sometime about then
It existed in Jutland as a tribal territory for at least 300 years before the Anglish came over to Britain.
@@neilog747 Yes, because that's exactly the same thing, lol. [Slow clap]
No Angles and Saxons so no English, but the Romano British territories were similar.
Thank you, sitting here at work in a warehouse in West London watching this film. Great work.
You're fired.
Do some work
"Futuristic" stories about a devasted dystopian landscape are really just our vestigial memories of past civilization collapse.
Looking at the map like this, I'm really assuming the Antonine Wall was built more to protect Rome's northern allies, than the border itself.
I suspect that many Romano British soldiers did not leave Britain when the orders came to do this . They had families here , and these went back generations . Roots , in other words . Whatever legends built up around resistance to Saxons probably have their sources here . In A.D.410 , the depleted garrisons of Britain were removed to defend Rome ... I bet some stayed here ...
Only the retired soldiers (common soldiers couldn't have a recognized marriage until then), but that core of veterans would have made it easier to train up a local army.
Many of them were Garrison Auxiliaries, who would not have joined the main legions when Constantine III invaded Gaul, no doubt they were employed by the remaining local administrators to provide defense against raiders, etc, sometimes involving land grants and alliances involving marriage contracts with the existing ruling families.
Who else was not expecting such a fantastic video when they clicked
Yes, I agree, I had mediocre expectations but was not disappointed!
It was trash 😂and not very accurate.
@@britishpatriot7386why was it trash and what was wrong with it?
Very factual
need something to fall asleep to 🤷
Nice to have something real unlike the History Channel with the big foot, aliens landing programs.
Well... the winners write the history “real” or not...
What's wrong with Bigfoot???
@@martingrey2231 Short of one foot I'd say 😆
@@altacalifornio5375 Didn't even know there was a war with the sasquatch and now you say they won it?
Rome never left
We truly have a LOT to thank the romans for. Amazing.
What did the romans ever do for us?
@@invtrk1046 The aqueduct?
FANTASTIC MADAM, YOU HAVE JUST TOOK US BACK TO SEVERAL HUNDRED YEARS. WORTHY OF WATCHING FROM CHENNAI, INDIA. THANKU MAM.
An excellent discussion and perhaps we can learn some things that apply to weakening empires today. I was in York Minster's basement, among the Roman foundations and thinking of how Constantine was proclaimed emperor here when the voices of an practicing choir floated down through the ceiling. Now that is history! But there has been unproven speculation about Arthur as a Roman officer remaining after the collapse, which is at least an interesting idea. Camelot may never have existed, but at least the dream of a better world lived on.
England was founded 450 years later ie 970 AD😂
Love this, a great lecture!
Excellent lecture. I loved the way professor Paxton gave a wholistic picture of how Britain evolved.
Holistic
Brittania (Cornwall) was an important source of tin (for making bronze); this trade continued long after the Romans left.
Belerion or Bolerium during the Roman occupation.
The Phoenicians first came into contact with the Cornish with the expedition led by Himlico 450bce the Cornish traded the tin and were considered adept at its production into ingots. It is should be remembered the Phoenicians were also Carthaginians . Successfully hiding the source for a long time.Strabo considered the Cornish to be civilized due to long contact with the Mediterranean.
Rome would have traded for tin, no Roman tin works are known in cornwall. Cornwall was known to still be trading tin after the fall of Roman Britain.
Watling street goes right through my city, although its still called WS it is a Saxon name we don't know what the Romans called it,,
just giving some extra info ,all for free :)
Well said and explained. Thank you.
The evidence of decline I find most striking is the various caches of silver plate that have been dug up from the late Roman period. These would have been buried by the locals, who evidently never had an opportunity to come back and retrieve them.
I think its amazing that we know as much as we do. We are talking about centuries and centuries of war, neglect of records and all of the other bad things that came about with the collapse of a major civilization. The fact that we have records at all is astonishing... mind you, Im aware that not all of these records are the originals and that we have had to fill in the blanks because there are gaps and contradictions... but we still have enough to piece together timelines and pretty good details in some cases. We even have names and details of their lives. Lots more entertaining to me than fiction.
Most interesting.The only thing I'd disagree with is that the attacks on England from all sides after the Romans left were "Coordinated".
1. Wonderfully excellent. 2. Highly informative. 3. Set playback speed to 1.25 or more, and it's enjoyable too!
This lady has a really great voice and great timing for teaching
This woman is awesome. I am fascinated by this topic!
Excellent in form and content.
Thank you, Ulrich!
How many Romans left Britain, and how many actually stayed?
Not many British stayed behind in post-imperial India. Why the comparison? Empires are there to prioritise wealth extraction rather then settle the land (where there is already a large population). When the legions left, they took many young British men with theme to fight in pointless wars on the continent. It is unlikely that the British would have missed their oppressors.
It was not, when the Romans left, the Romans did not stay because they knew that they would attack other tribes and they were in the lands as foreigners.
Thank you for this, it was a lot of good information.
Glad you enjoyed it!
When Rome left Briton the Irish and Scottish started pillaging, rap1ng, murdering and taking slaves. If you don't believe me ask ST Patrick.
I always find statements like ‘When Rome left England’ as England didn’t exist until hundreds of years later. I’ll watch it later.
Yeah, I agree; so the Romans didn’t leave Wales then?
@@nicholasjones7312 yma o hyd.
@@nicholasjones7312 anyway. You know what it’s about. Neither existed then.
The word "Wales" is a foreign expression. The Romans left Cymru, our name for Wales then, our name for Wales now. Greek mariner Pithaeus in the 4th century BC said that the natives called their island Pritaen, We still do,, we call it Prydain, or Brtain to you. Not bad after 2500 years. The Britons are still here.@@nicholasjones7312
@@nicholasjones7312 Funny you should say that. Look up Magnus Maximus.
I could see where this is going in our world
Thank you, great presentation.
This videos have some Great Courses Plus vibes, and are as much good. I miss TGC+ on UA-cam. 😔
Thank you. That was fascinating
I don’t know who this woman is but I’m sure you would have made / are a great teacher. Only con - as an American you need to polish up on your pronunciation of British towns. It’s not easy I know 😂😂
What a terrific video! ⚔🙏
I found her mostly unbiased. I say that because we should be aware of our biases and you shouldn't expect to win all the time. Keep JB on the ballot. Go Blue!
At least when Rome fled Britannia, they’d didn’t leave the equivalent of $4B worth of military hardware behind.
I'm not very far into this, but already a little sceptical. In terms of the Boudicca uprising I have never heard the attack on Londinium referred to without mention of the attack and burning of the Roman Castrum of Camulodunum (Colchester) that preceeded it and kicked things off.
It's like looking for causes of WWII and not mentioning Poland.
Well Colchester was still a 'New Town' not a long established city. Verulanium (St. Albans) got razed too, but it was also a minor town.
marvellously presented by Jennifer Paxton!
Amazing explain ❤️❤️❤️
Glad you think so!
Don't know if I'd say amazing. She talks about Christianity that came there. That's misleading. Christianity wasn't, hasn't ever been one religion, one belief. In the 3rd and 4th century the Christian church was divided. Hence the reason why Constantine called the council of nicea in 325ce. Constantine was baptized by eusebius of nicomedia a western church Christian who didn't believe in the nicene creed. So was Constantine the 2nd. So was the first king of Rome. Infact non nicene creed, non trinitarians ruled Rome until around 590 ce. So who were those Christians? It matters. She wrong for not saying which she knows. That makes her a liar. Screw her narrative.
Peace and agap'e
History presentation the way I like it.
The welsh are not germanic or irish
Cool video. I just realized I’m learning British history from an American.
Incredible to think that late Iron Age (pre-Roman) relative agricultural productivity in Britain did not reach the same level again until 1900! The British Celts definitely knew how to farm ;)
British agriculture predates the Celts
There was NO England it was in the 10th century when the Kingdom of England was formed ie 600 years later after the Romans left in the 4th century! The Picts were the fiercest tribe in the 1st to 5th century, they even raided down south into days England after the Romans left Hadrian's Wall, the Picts merged with the Scots to form Scotland in the 9th century.
It's refreshing to see an American explain our history in such a well researched and respectable manner. Rather than getting their knowledge from hollywood movies or some book they read as a child. I mean she hasn't even brought up the argument for aliens helping the Romans.
Shows the state of US Education, when a notional US History Professor isn't even aware of the difference between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Great Britain, Ireland, Hibernia, Scotland, Wales, Isle of Man, or England, let alone when they were incorporated. Suspect someone couldn't name more than a half dozen US states, let alone identify when the US was established, despite many a UK an US primary school attempting to pass the knowledge on. As do numerous forums, videos, and web sites. 😢
Rome left England in 410.
The Middle Ages began in 1066.
Absolute rubbish. There was no England at this time. When the Romans left they left behind the native Britons who’d been there before and during their occupation.
The Anglo Saxons would not come for another hundred years.
Brilliant video.
I understand as soon as the soldiers on Hadrians Wall departed the Picts attacked, and ransacked todays Northern England and may even have gone as far south as London? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End_of_Roman_rule_in_Britain
Great video, the decline of the Roman Empire had such a profound impact in Europe. England is not of course part of Europe, but lies in the region. That’s a fascinating time., It would be great to see a new movie made about life in this dark scary uncertain time.
Love her explanation
excellent video 📹
the people of Britain then knew that must unite through force and politics.
just use common sense. after 400 years don't you think Romans and Britons became one ethnic group? I think the majority of the Romano-British remained on the island.
Excellent lecture.
I have always found history of the middle ages both fascinating and hilarious.
Rome never left England. It left Britain.
Yeah. That's the frequent misstatement. The Romans left Briton. Richard Burton, Richard Harris, and Peter O'Toole were called British luminaries until they were picked up after a bar fight. Then they became "two Micks and a Welshman." 😅
Yawn. You must be fun at parties.
The Cornish tin mines shown early in the video are not from Roman times. A bit misleading to show them. They are more like 17-1800 time period.
Saxon Shore...sounds like a music group lol
Just Googled it...turns out it was actually the name of a band!
She shows just how important it is to establish and keep at least a basic level of craftsmen and manufacturing knowledge so a country can maintain a comfortable civilised lifestyle, when foreign trade dries up.
At a time when the whole of Europe is in flux, keeping our manufacturing processes must be fought for
Wrong title. England as a country didn't exist in Roman times.
The title does not imply that England was a nation in Roman times. She is relating the history of the part of Britain now known as England. Everybody understands that perfectly well.
@@GH-oi2jf Yes it does, when Rome left England is a clear statement
Excellent video
So where Ma"am, do the Vikings fit into this?
The English language with all its ingredients could be described as a dog's dinner. Or Lapskaus, the Norwegian word for a stew with a bit of everything in it. Could we simplify it as saying that English is a Germanic Language with a Romanic overlay?
There is Old Romanic, from the Romans, but from centuries later then Modern Romanic, modern Romanic brought over by the Norman's. There was the time when the elite of England spoke French.
There are many words in English which are directly from the Norsemen. .. and a few more in Northern England and Scotland.
eg. the Scottish word for child: bairn
Norwegian: barn.
port & starboard - starboard comes from styrebord, 'steering board' = rudder, which was always installed at the stern on the right hand side of the keel on Viking ships. (port is romanic)
Vikings came some 300 years later as I am sure you are well aware of. On a side not, starboard in Dutch is stuurbord and in German it’s steurbord. Both words mean steering side as you mentioned. There are many such words.
Hosen = trousers or pants in German
Hose = silk stockings and flexible piping for water in English
Hoos = a twister or small tornado in Dutch. In all 3 cases it describes a flexible cilinder-like object.
Then there is shirt/skirt, water/wotter/water/wasser.
Bairn is not Scottish in origin but of old English and was brought to Scotland by the Angles who settled the lowlands of Scotland.
Bairn is still used by many in the very north of England particularly Northumbria, Northumbria once stretch as far as Edinburgh and itself of Angle origin.
The Scots language is derived from old English, ironically the Scots language and the Scottish accent today would be more similar to how the English spoke back in those days than they do now.
@@dontgivamonkeyz Scots is our version of English- it has germanic and Dutch roots
There is no old Latin in English because the English were not in Britain at the time of the Romans.
Welsh is the only UK living language today where you can see a significant amount of very early Latin loanwords. This is because Welsh is basically modern Brittonic - the language that was spoken in Britain before, during and after the Roman occupation.
honest question everyone else ignores: "do you thing Boudicca was real or did Kaiser invent her so he could pent him self red and wear purple all week?"
How do historians know that less of something is being produced, or that there were less factories after a certain period?
The fall of Rome or even fall of its provice such as BRITANNIA is great tragedy and CATACLYSMIC event for Europe as it has brought fallen Roman provinces centuries back in development. No surprise that when Rome collapsed, western partof known world immediatelly entered PERIOD OF DARK AGES, we can see here why, it was greatest empire that ever existet. Why have you left ROME again Brittania ? Is it not cold and lonelly out there on the edge ?
Great stuff.
Great video
hate the grammarly ads.
"when Germans were landing" i m German. I was thinking of 1940 .. what have we done this time in the 500s..
Thanks for sharing 😊
This was good however I was left with the question what caused the economy to change and manufacturing to decline. I know she mentioned demand but it must be more than that for the impact it had
Contstant and persistent harassment of western European supply lines over the course of many decades made getting goods in and out of Britain not worth it.
German tribes conquering all western europe
Ecelent. May the history channel match your exelence.
There was no England when the Romans left. An inaccurate headline.
Writing 'When the Spanish Conquistadors arrived in the United States of America' would be an equally silly headline for an article for that period in time as the USA didnt exist then. Sloppy writing.
Not only was Gildas writing 100 years after the events, but he was also biased. It was doubtless a difficult time for some, not for all though.
Fantastic content 👏
We appreciate your feedback!
Starts at 23:46
Excellent video
An American came up with the truth.
Rome never left England, it left Britain. The English didn't arrive until 449.
😂TOTALL💹_ @MIKEE She_Will🅱️_#FEELIN_DA_BERN🇨🇭😉🇻🇮 🅰️BOOT_?BOO'DIE'KCIA AnyWay #MAAM🤨😱
She fails to mention that recent DNA evidence shows the extent of Germanic immigration was not as much as was traditionally thought. British DNA is still predominantly Celtic.
Their DNA evolved from Africa
Yes, the approach is conventional. She talks about waves of immigrants but it took the English over a hundred years to take Bath and Gloucester from the British.
When Rome left Britain, you mean.