RIP Dovahhatty 😔😥

RIP Dovahhaty

@@bruhnou1348 of course we shall not forget him like Aurelian ❤️

​@@quisublimes9473did he die?

@@uchandrakanthkini5411 honestly, idk bro, he just vanished :/

That and maybe his extremely goofy death as well

For the most part Maxentius is merely an obstacle in Constantine’s way. An obstacle that was destroyed for Constantine to reach his own goals. That’s basically how history portrays him.

Constantine was the man. Maxentius sore dead loser

@@GiuseppePolitoSPQR It is very often overlooked that Maxentius, before falling into the Tiber, manages to cross the raging river on the back of his horse. This is a very difficult manoeuvre, borrowed from the Germanic Batavian cavalry, and was a specific technique of the Equites Singulares Augusti with whom Maxentius trained at Centum Cellae (see Michael Speidel's studies). When the horse manages to reach the opposite bank of the river, it slips in the muddy ground during the ascent, knocking Maxentius out of the saddle. More than stupid, I would say it is a very unfortunate death.

The victor of any war writes the history. History can be a touchy subject when it comes to politics. Especially the American civil war the history of the Confederacy made them to look like the bad guys but in truth they were not. There was still slave states in the north and the Confederacy was going to abolish slavery after the war anyway because there was no market for it anymore and they wanted to keep their allies Britain and France.

Stilicho, Aetius, Majorian… some sort of lasting Ostrogothic/Roman successor. All hope wasn’t lost with a Constantine victory.

@@ordinaryhuman2511 What a pagan fanboy...

It seems to me that this is too harsh a judgement and does not take into account what the sources say. Maximian's charisma in the takeover of Maxentius is often overestimated, the episode in 308 when Maximian tried to oust his son by having the army rise up against him, clearly shows that the army was with Maxentius. Maximian was forced to flee Rome to avoid being killed. Severus and Galerius bring 30,000 men each, and perhaps even more the other, to Rome and are both repulsed. Galerius is the conqueror of Ctesiphon, the capital of Persia, and fails to win. Even Lactantius says that Maxentius could have annihilated Galerius but does not (perhaps because he was his wife's father) and the Christian rhetorician reprimands him for this. When Maxentius defeats the strongest man in the Tetrarchy, Maximianus is in Gaul not at his side. He is at Constantine's side. The same Constantine who conspires and bribes Domitius Alexander to rebel in Africa (the African epigraphs show this with absolute clarity) and weaken Maxentius, but the rebellion lasts little more than a year, and Africa will be recaptured by the Praetorians led by Praetorians led by Senator Volusianus (here too we have a return of senators to leading armies from the time of Gallienus).

@@marcocecini you make good points. I wasn't trying to be to harsh. Maybe I should have worded it better

Certainly this is the view of Constantinian propaganda. More in-depth scientific studies are showing that Constantine, for his so-called revolutionary works, appropriated many of Maxentius' ideas, simply naming them after himself. The least History can do is to restore this truth and balance, which has been instrumentally and politically altered for 1700 years.

Cope

Hello, thanks a lot for your kind donation and for supporting Maiorianus, I really appreciate it very much. You Sir, are a true hero of the Roman Empire !

The comment is legitimate, but in this case we wanted to talk about "Last Romulus" for a specific reason. Not only because Maxentius himself was obsessed with the idea of ​​being a new Romulus for Rome, he will name his own son Romulus, will have his soldiers call him "Romulus", and will try to "refound" Rome on an urban planning level with a unprecedented in such a short period of time. Furthermore, the reforms of Constantine and his sons will change the foundations of the Roman State and its sacredness (i.e. the connection between politics and religion which is the basis of Roman society), therefore if it will undoubtedly continue to be the Roman Empire, in an equally evident way it will no longer be the pagan Roman Empire that was born in embryo with Romulus.

@@marcocecini it wasn't meant as a serious criticism of your work, or of labelling Maxentius the 'last Roman'. I was just making a joke. Interesting the way Maxentius framed himself though, I wasn't really aware of that.

Eastern influences not only contaminated the Late Roman Empire but touched Roman civilization since the time of the Scipios. You will remember the controversy between the latter and the traditionalist faction led by Cato the Censor. Over the centuries, a balance had been found between the more traditionalist demands of the Mos Maiorum and Orientalism, forging a new Hellenism with which Rome effectively became the heir of the universal Dream of Alexander the Great. What happens in the Late Empire is different: power passes into the hands of the generals, who are not used to sharing it with the Senate or others. That's why historians talk about "Dominated". The Emperors of the Dominated always sought absolute power with greater insistence, free from any bond that could limit their power, be it Rome and the Senate (the two things were inseparable) or religion. Christianity at a certain point is perceived, by virtue of its monotheism, as a religion more functional in promoting the idea of ​​an absolute power favored by God.

I find its fall quite epic fighting to the end with the Ottomans and its last emperor dying in battle.

@@robertozeladarodriguez5321 Byzantine history is even more depressing!!

@@Shimra8888 Yes, that part of the history of the Roman Empire is quite depressing, but just as interesting.

@@robertozeladarodriguez5321 why though I wonder? When the Han Dynasty fell and the Three Kingdoms Period began, it was an Age of Heroes in China. Where were the Roman heroes?

@@Shimra8888 If we look at medieval Roman history, there are epic moments such as when the Persians attacked Constantinople or the reconquests that took place, but unfortunately then followed civil wars or useless emperors and what destroyed everything was the fourth crusade, perhaps the empire would have continued.

Hi, Steve. Translation was made by Stefano Vittori, author of Medeae Daemones, an original tragedy that won an important prize. He writes in Latin as teacher and as poet. 😀 Now I am from my phone, but of you like tomorrow I can send you some link about.

It's true, but with other characters such as Nero, Domitian, Pompey the Great, and Mark Antony himself, historical criticism has been able to re-establish a balance between the defeated and the victor. Between Maxentius and Constantine no. It seems like you don't want to do it, it almost feels like committing a crime of treason. Shouldn't we ask ourselves why?

@@marcocecini Clearly this is not - quite - so. Constantine has been constantly 'dissed' in scholarly and popular rhetoric for over a century. True, Maxentius has been left out of the assessment - as a sidekick or a mere footnote; but not because Constantine is now made to outshine him. By hook and by crook, Constantine was the winner - in an all too Roman civil war; he got the garlands and the parades. Recalling Marius, Cataline, Mark Anthony, Vitellius, et al, and re-imagining their failures (for such is the record of the victor's history) has, however, long been a plaything of revisionism (good, bad, and not-so-nice). Mary Beard tended to be among the more popular of the re-writing experts, no doubt she still is, and a delight to read. ;o) Yey!

@@TheLeonhamm The academic publications that count are those of the last 50-70 years, and I struggle to find publications in which Constantine's work has been 'snubbed'. Really, I struggle, I can't think of any. However, if you have any to recommend, you are most welcome :)

@@marcocecini Some of the best work .. in reworking the Constantine Narrative .. comes from Timothy Barnes, e.g. 'Constantine: Dynasty, Religion and Power in the Later Roman Empire.' (Blackwell Ancient Lives) - and if still available: 'From Toleration to Repression: the Evolution of Constantine's Religious Policies.' (Scripta Classica .. maybe on-line, I think) - an older (more my era - 1960s-70s) journal article: Patrick Bruun. 'Portrait of a Conspirator. Constantine's Break with the Tetrarchy.' (Arctos .. don't ask me which yearly volume, pages, et al, I forget) And .. again I forget much of the details: Mark Vermes and others, 'Constantine's "Pagan Vision"' from a Routledge collection .. something like Constantine and Julian : Pagan and Christian .. something, something. Of course, there is also a lot of more or less popularising guff .. but that's the best I can offer - more or less from off the top of my head. I hope that helps. Have fun digging out the pre-1990's stuff. ;o)

@@TheLeonhamm Thank you for your time, I know these publications and appreciate them, I just wanted to say that they are not publications where the figure of Constantine is belittled, on the contrary. I am not aware of any modern historiography that belittles the image of Constantine, on the contrary that of Maxentius is constantly belittled. I think this is an undeniable fact :) I must admit, however, that I have not yet been able to read Patrick Bruun's work (the others I have read) and it seems very interesting, I will try to catch up soon. Thanks for the suggestion!

It is difficult to say, it depends on tastes and habits. It surely is a rich and epic story, with incredibile views of Rome. There are some samples on facebook and Istagram.

We are very sorry about It, unfortunately post Brexit bureaucracy can be really tricky for a micro business. Anyway, we started an Amazon profile and in the next months we will make the English version of the graphic novel available there.

That’s frustrating, but it’s awesome that I will still be able to get my hands on it, thank you, I just wish I could support you guys sooner!

lol agreed

I guess if you are an atheist or a neo-pagan, then yes. Constantine did not even make pagan warship illegal, he simply made Christian have the same rights and he found the fortress of Europe in the East (Constantinople), which defended the continent against many invasions from that side.