A Barbarian Center of Roman Culture | Vandal Africa
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 лип 2024
- The period around the fall of the Western Roman Empire has been a hotbed of opinions and debates tied to narratives of the rise and fall of civilizations. The fall of Rome is seen as the quintessential collapse of an empire, a clear and complete break from the past. But the reality is that Roman culture and civilization didn't just vanish. Some of those who are often seen as Rome's classic enemies, like the Germanic Vandals who took over North Africa, were some of Roman Culture's most enthusiastic promoters and preservers both before and after 476.
Follow me on Instagram: / studium.historiae
Recommendations for further reading:
-Conant, Jonathan. Staying Roman: conquest and identity in Africa and the Mediterranean, 439-700 (2012).
-Courtney, Edward. "Observations of the Latin Anthology." In Hermathena 129 (1980): 37-50.
-Hen, Yitzhak. Roman Barbarians: the royal court and culture in the early Medieval West (2007).
-Merrils, Andrew, Richard Miles. The Vandals (2010).
-Merrils, Andrew, ed. Vandals, Romans, and Berbers: new perspectives on late antique North Africa (2004).
-Rosenblum, Morris. Luxorius: a Latin Poet among the Vandals (1961, useful for translations of Luxorius, but keep in mind what I noted in the video if you go beyond that)
-Whelan, Robin. Being Christian in Vandal Africa: the politics of orthodoxy in the post-imperial west (2017).
All images used in this video are either my own, in the public domain, under fair use, or under creative commons (whence they shall be credited appropriately)
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
Outro music: Laid Back Guitars by Kevin MacLeod, CC BY-SA 4.0
incompetech.com/music/royalty-...
#medievalhistory #medieval #middleages #history #educational #antiquity #rome #africa #maghrib #tunisia #ancienthistory #romanempire #byzantineempire #vandals #africanhistory #carthage
This is simple logic: the "invading barbarians" wanted to partake of the richness of the Empire. Destroying the Empire would have been contrary to that desire.
The barbarians kicked in the door and the whole rotting structure came crashing down.
@@Harib_Al-Saq Rome began to decline centuries before the "barbarians" arrived. Roman culture continued for centuries after they arrived. North Africa remained Roman, regardless of the rulers, until the Muslims arrived.
Exactly, Roman culture would had endured centuries more if the arabs didn’t showed up. Even if Sassanid Persia conquered Carthage it would had kept Roman culture as the Zoroastrian Persian were not forcing their ways.
Quite ironic how germanic barbarians that were expected to be darkness of civilization continued the very culture of their foes. The germans were always very adaptable
Very interesting, you don't hear much of the northern Africa history.
Great Video! I really like the idea of pen+paper notes to explain concepts and I hope that continues on this channel. I also appreciate the artworks you've chosen to show us
A small request/criticism: For those of us not fully versed in history, it can be easy to lose context of *when* specific events or descriptors take place. If you could try to mention a time period/century more often - especially for such a long-spanning culture as Rome - I would find it easier to construct my own mental timeline of events. Thanks!
@@tasty8186 Noted, thanks for the feedback!
No amount of reading would have me condensing facts the way this channel does - clarifying so many things of which I am interested. I'm all over the place with history.
Thoroughly researched, as always, and most entertaining. Thank you.
Very interesting video! I think that continuation of Roman Culture is also true in Gothic Spain & Italy.
Great video! Scholarly, informative and entertaining. Thanks!
Your channel deserves more subs!!!!!!!!!
I think doing more videos on the migration period would be nice, your style is very interesting
I think a similar modern prejudice is the idea that Christianity caused the fall of the Roman Empire.
Are you aware where this idea stems from? Was there anyone who said it before Gibbon?
Great video as always.
I agree, that's something I'd like to talk about some day.
I couldn't tell you exactly who first promoted the idea, but it was certainly popular around Gibbon's time. In my last video where I tried to define the middle ages I mentioned that "dark age" stereotypes about the middle ages were used especially in the enlightenment by critics of the church to "prove" that it caused the downfall of civilization. Some were just critical of the church institution, while others were critical of religion in general. Protestants also started to take this on in order to blame Catholics for the fall.
But there were people blaming Christianity long before too. Augustine (who was from North Africa and died a few years before the Vandals arrived) wrote his famous "city of God" to counter the arguments of pagans who blamed the sack of Rome in 410 on the fact that the empire had abandoned their traditional religion. Augustine argued that Rome, being founded as a pagan institution, was never going to last eternally, precisely because of its pagan origin.
All that said, I'm pretty sure most historians today would be cautious about blaming Christianity for Rome's fall. A lot of the traditional causes linked to Christianity are hard to maintain these days (like the idea that it somehow caused the Roman army to be more reliant on barbarian mercenaries. In reality that reliance has been overblown, not to mention that most of these mercenaries were also Christians). Even if you can point out problems that emerged because of it, most historians these days are unlikely to attribute the fall to a single cause. Plus, the Eastern Empire lasted another 1000 years despite being Christian. I think its a case of correlation being mistaken for causation (due, likely, to bias).
I realise I just wrote a novel, but hey, I like talking about history!
@@studiumhistoriae Very interesting, thanks for the response. In my opinion the fact that Christianity conformed to classical Neo Platonism metaphysics demonstrates that it was not a breaking of Tradition but a continuation of it.
For those interested in Vandal history and travel, I highly reccommend visiting Morocco and going to Volubilis (1 hour outside Meknes). An amazingly preserved Vandal/Roman city heritage site. As a Peace Corp Volunteer based in Meknes I went every often and never ceased to be blown away!!!
North Africa used to be part of Europe.. which makes sense due to the proximity....
Aftergenerations of living within the empire and intermarringwith and joined by the roman populace, were they still barbarians or Roman's? Did rome fall because the Roman's conquered it?
Exhibit A. Someone has opened a store called "Valhalla." It's simply an ax throwing store. That's it. What a narrow representation of an entire culture. And it's not even decorated with an interesting theme. It's extremely utilitarian - no vision, no imagination, which the people who subscribed to the concept were very imaginative and visionary. They conquered the world and spread culture around the globe (albeit, in the form of Englishmen) Yet, generally history isn't obsessed over what Romans did to Carthage - burning it and massacring every man, woman and child. How barbaric!!
CE. Ironic that an historical channel does its own small part to erase history.
I sincerely doubt that people choosing to abandon AD will cause them to forget that Christianity is a thing. In all honesty, I use BC/AD in everyday scenarios, but I chose BCE/CE for this channel because it is more culturally neutral. I don't mind anchoring it to the Christian era (the birth of Jesus was an extremely significant moment in history) but Anno Domini is a statement of faith, and not everyone who talks about history is comfortable with that. For the record, CE was developed by Jewish historians in the 1800s who did not believe Jesus to be the "Christ" (Messiah) nor the Lord.
The reason it bothers me is because it is part of an increasing pattern of behavior we in Western Civilization have. We are pulling down statues of historical figures (not just Confederate ones either). We are rewriting history books to indoctrinate young people into hating themselves and their own civilization. To the extent that we even bother teaching Western Civilization anymore, it often a very biased and inaccurate version of it. One that emphasizes moral relatavism. I believe we in the West are committing cultural and civilizational suicide. We no longer feel patriotism for or defend our heritage. We no longer teach people that the Constitution of the United States is to be revered because it, and the People who hold it dear, are the main guarantors of our freedom and way of life. I don't object to BCE/CE on religious grounds. I object because, to me, it is one more small sign of of us just giving away this grand experiment that so many have fought and died to hand down to us.
@@mbavery1975the death of civilization occurs when you cling to out dated traditions and refuse to adapt to modern culture. Especially when you revere a bunch of slave owning frat boys who got pissed off about paying taxes.
Sorry, but your language too often implies a supposition, that I can't logically rely on to form a conclusion. You said Petronius MAY have been trying to break the betrothal, and that's somehow enough for you to reframe a two-weeks sack of Rome as mere political or dynastic intrigue?? Numerous boatloads of citizens carted off into slavery, gold, silver and anything of material value siezed, homes, temples, churches, property, artwork destroyed, and by some estimates, tens of thousands killed. For a full two weeks! The notion there MAY or MAY NOT have been a broken betrothal does absolutely nothing to persuade me that Gaiseric was anything but the ambitious, barbaric warlord as recorded by history: all too willing to use any justification to break treaties and pillage for profit whenever he saw opportunity. The sack in 455 shocked the Roman world, and for good reason.