🎁 The full list of perks we offer to our patrons: www.patreon.com/Maiorianus

This is a criminally underrated channel

"Last I heard, the weather there has not improved since Roman times..." 😅

Your voice is great for history lesson. Inquisitive and suspense making.

As a Celtic inhabitant of the British Isles with a love of Roman history, I can confirm that the weather here continues to be shit. Caesar had the right of it when he described the place as perpetually cloudy and wet. Until the summer of course, when it becomes Australia for random periods of time, which is especially horrid as we're not used to that kind of torture.

If only I had seen how serious the crossing was...

The most IRONIC part about this though is for the rest of history European countries would build palaces, make art, name themselves, and build languages ALL based on the Romans. To this day, their presence is honored & championed in museums, movies. History has a sense of humor haha.

Rip Aetius, Stilicho, and Majorianus 😔

The subtle background music is poignant and perfect!

Hey, Kings&Generals recently had a VERY informative video on the Feudal system, starting with the Coloni and emperor Diokletian, in effect making the Coloni into slaves. By the way, during the migration period lots of simple village castles were raised all over South-Eastern Norway as well, so even barbarians feared the invading barbarians flying from the Huns. Very nice video :-)

Fascinating, insightful, informed perspective of the momentous decline of the Roman Empire.

As I said before, if Rome was united it could have easily defeated the invaders. But also, the problem of a lack of new recruits in the west needed to be fixed. I think they needed to find a way to instill the military virtues of old into the population or at least offer a desirable reward like guaranteed rights that elevate them above pseudo-serfs.

The parallels to today are uncanny for anyone paying attention. What I find interesting is inability of history buffs to fully appreciate their own historic circumstances, even when they've seen this film before.

This reminds me of what is happening today in Europe with these massive immigration flows which we cannot handle.

Another ! Fantastico. Grazie. You’re the best

"therefore it really was where the fate of the world was decided on those cold winter days of 406 AD" thinking about those words really shows how fickle history is,the future of an entire empire was sealed because of an exceptionaly cold winter

Another fantastic video! Say didn't the Bagaudae resist the germanic invaders quite vigorously. I remember originally reading about them from Brayan Ward- Perkins' monograph, where other than an anti roman rebel they were also given as an example of native resistance.

Love seeing these late empire videos! Looking forward to your video on why Rome couldn't maintain Roman soldiers!

I'm excited for the video delving deeper into the loss of martial vigour of the italic romans.

But let us not forget that Odoacer and Theodoric after him maintained Roman law and traditions and that the Senate still convened under them. There is a science fiction story entitled "Lest Darkness Fall" which depicts a 20th Century archeologist being sent back to around AD 500 by a lightning strike and who somehow wins Belisarius to the side of the Goths thereby preventing the Gothic wars and maintaining the integrity of the Romano-Gothic State. In this alternative reality, darkness does not fall.

Truly fine documentaries on an often forgotten period. Keep up the great work!

Tremendous research and imagery. Thanks for the hard work. Made my day!

70 years is a life of almost 3 human generations. That's a quite long time. Thank you for another great and interesting video. But I think it's impossible to blame one event or battle for the collapse of a huge empire. Empires fall due to many reasons, it's never a single event.

I just discovered your channel and checked out this video; very impressive! I'm now a subscriber.

Great show - fascinating period of history.

great video, which I just happened to find in the recommendation! good luck!

410 AD Thanks Alaric. Before departing for Rome he destroyed Grecee

13:18 Lmao so true! As always, a fantastic and very informative video, friend. Thankyou so much for all your hard work, it truly paid off.

I've over time started to wonder if the first major turn in fortunes for Rome was when the Republic failed to reform and adjust to its new far larger scale. Once the Republic fell, the potential for infighting got substantially worse with the many weakening effects that generates over time. Of course that alone was far from enough to end the Roman Empire, as could be seen in how long it lasted afterwards. But it does kind of feel like the original vigor it originally had started to decline after that. The ability to generate wealth and raise armies became less good, the leadership less talented. Unsurprising perhaps when some armies are lost in civil wars and a to talented a leader is now a threat to the leadership, rather then some one to be celebrated. Just one of many issue slowly weakening the state till it could no longer sufficiently respond to disasters hitting it I guess.

A high-quality TV series on that very topic would be so interesting. I'm sure there would be popularity for it as it has virtually never been presented. Most productions on the Roman Empire have never gone past the 3rd century AD. Maybe based on Gibbons' classic series?

Wonderful video! And funny (i.e reports that Britain's weather has not changed.) The problem, however, is that cascading events following 406 AD also preceded 406 AD.

I love your videos, keep it up.

Excellent, fascinating, intelligent analysis. You really should write a book.

Bravo!

Its like, like crossing the Rio Grande in real time. FJB. 🤠

surpreme as always amico romano ∆

Love 🏹🛡⚔️🏛 this channel so badly Narrations is superrrrr too 👌

Yo, Maiorianus. Wann kommt dein Video zum Verfall des Forum Romanum?

Very depressing. Especially realizing had the Romans themselves been more united internally and not under honorius, they would've overcome the the post-406 situation. Agreed with your last point about the fall of the west sealing the fall of the east. As a byzantist and someone from the area that was Phoenice Maratima, I have often lamented Yarmouk 636 and the fall of our lands to the barbarians. However had the west still been around, even a temporary loss of Syria would've easily been recovered. The ERE after the West fell was just playing defensive most of the time, surrounded by hostile foes on all sides. Amazing they lasted 1000 years.

Makes you long for the days of Aurelian who would have swiftly and brutally silenced all these threats.

Of the 340,000 estimated invaders, perhaps half were relatively benign, occupying land that was mostly abandoned. But others were quite destructive, as the Alemanni systematically massacred Romans and destroyed their cities along the west bank of the Rhine and the Vandals, Alans and Sueves reportedly destroyed most traces of civilization in Hispania which reverted to its bronze age state. Archeologists are still discovering thousands of skulls with blunt trauma damage in the areas devastated by the Alemanni from the third to the fifth century.

There is a great historical novel by Wallace Breem titled “The Eagle in the Snow”.about this topic.Please read it.

I blame Ricimer.. nature knew how evil he would become and the Rhine froze in fear/hate... a million curses upon his unholy name.

GREAT summary. What a mess for Rome. Sad

The statement that the events of 406 decided the fate of Europe contradicts your other state that the fall of western Roman empire was _not_ set in stone.

Ironically Captivating History published the video "How Did the Roman Republic Start?" today :-)

I watched all of this presentation .

Surely Adrianople was at least as significant a turning point as the crossing of the Rhine by the Germanic peoples. Adrianople wasn't just about Valens making some bad calls as a commander. The legion, the basic military system Rome had used up to that point, was shown to be defective. After that, the Romans paid barbarians to fight for them.

Bedankt

I think the fall of the roman empire had many factors, the germanic tribes alone would never have been a problem. The constant civil wars, plagues, lack of a solid economy, there were years of inflaction, and the roman state had to create more money leading to devaluation of the coins, lack of true roman recruits, lack of diplomatic action with the barbarians, constant shift in power, and many more factors led to the end of the empire. and 70 years in those days were like 200 years on our lives, the average life on those days were 30/40 years old. If the empire didn't had that many civil wars or economic problems they could easly had dealt with the germanic invasions, it was not a new event this massive migrations, Marcus Aurelius reign was almost the entire time defending the germanic borders, so it was nothing new, maybe now the germanic tribes were more united and better equipped yeah maybe, but this massive migrations had women, children, old people, waggons etc, it was not a military invasion, most of the time was just entire tribes migrating fleeing from other tribes or the huns.If the empire had a solid union and organized troops it would be easy to stop the invasions, the roman empire had milions of people. I tried many times to understand the diference and the major turning point between the times of Germanicus invading and destroying the germanic tribes and the germanic invasions in 406 AD, i think the christianity had some blame, it made the people soft, less wealing to die and fight, its a big difference having a God of War and having Christ telling that you should love your neibor as yourself (don't miss read me i think christianity was very important for society envolve, i am just justifing the fall of Rome), those two diferent types of religions, one that said that you go to hades if you die fighting other saying you go to a paradise if you dont kill, they are antagonist religions, its like the viking with valhala, and Thor and Odin that gives people reason to become warriors. So my 3 main reasons for the fall of Rome are: -Constant civil wars -Diferent religion (more pacifist) -Economic problems (lack of a economic structure, industry, very slave dependent)

I'd say the Fall of the Roman Empire started earlier than that. As soon as the capital was moved to the east that was the beginning of the end.

For an emperor, usurpers were more personally dangerous than barbarians; a successful usurper meant a dead emperor.

The reason for the fall of Rome is just one expression "a perfect storm" of different elements. The same happens in planes accidents

The Roman Empire was one of the GREATEST cultural civilizations our history has ever recorded. The events of 406 led almost directly to the great sacking of 410

I would say the Goth entry in the 370s was the event that started the ball rolling--but really, there were so m any events that could be considered the tipping point. That said, thank God the empire fell--while better in some ways from the "barbarians" it was worse in many others, and the lack of public support for its preservation (especially from the lowest, rural, classes) was one of the principal reasons for the fall.

Zap Branding: Stop killing each other and fight the barbarians, you cowards! What's your opinion on the Franks on this period? On one hand I have heard, multiple times, that the Frank foederati were some of the most loyal alies Rome had in this period. But not the non-foederati Franks were also part of the migrating germanic tribes so...

The narrator sounds like Peter Lorre.

👍👍👍

Damn son....

20:15 Reconstruction: * Constantine the Great confused with Constantius III, as winner * and with usurper Constantine III as coming from Britain * and ultimately Constantine with Artorius (the one killing a wife with the one sparing a wife) -> lead to Nennius claiming Arthur conquered Constantinople. When Tolkien was making an Arthuriad, he conspicuously was impatient with Nennius' boring and counterfactual claim.

The Roman Empire did survived and thrived to become a world wide empire through the Holy Roman Catholic Church. 😊

What’s crazy is this is literally happening in America as we speak. We have migrat caravans crossing into our country 7,000 at a time.

Today in the United States, along our southern border, people are coming into the country without any legal basis for doing so. For reasons that are not clear, the government is allowing them to come in and stay, again, without any legal basis. They are entering our cities and using resources paid for by American tax payers, many if whom live paycheck to paycheck. Why the border has not been closed is a mystery. We are at a very dangerous moment in our history. In addition, there is extreme disharmony and disunity among both our citizens and elected leaders fomented by grifters and sociopaths. Sadly, I see this once great nation going down, down, down at a time when real leadership is greatly needed worldwide. We have learned nothing from the past.

The "western portion of the empire " never fell . It was abandoned by its elite who went back to the eastern portion where they came from . Rome enslaved many Germanic tribes as well as committing genocide on them .

I was considering once that Egypt was the last holdout of the Macedonian-Hellenistic conquest that occurred during the time of Alexander the Great. Nearly 300 years later, in 31 BC, Egypt became a Roman province. Egypt had taken to using Roman mercenaries, just as the Persians had become lazy and relied on Greek mercenaries. So, it is no surprise that the Roman were relying on Germanic mercenaries, who'd ultimately be the vanguard of their downfall.

Eastern Roman Empire: Western Roman Empire!

Optimum!.

Agree

16:47 this is currently America's problem. The similarities of our country and its greedy leadership and Rome is incredible and scary. 😐 In the next 30-50 years the US could be in the same boat. Scary to think I could see this in my lifetime or my kids could. Mighty empires fall from ignorance, overconfidence and arrogance. Our military is having issues retaining members and an even harder time recruiting new ones.

I can't remember where I read it, and to be perfectly honest i may have made it up; but i think the crossing of the Rhine was the largest human migration event in written history

Those stupid Roman officers at the limes caused the Goths, admitted with official permission into the Empire, to eventually revolt and invade Roman territory. They were starved, abused and exploited. The Goths even had to sell a child into slavery just to get one dog to eat to keep the rest of the family from imminent starvation. (These Goths were not just warriors, they were whole families). Then, the Romans were astonished and outraged when the Goths fought back! I wouldn’t expect the desperate fathers and sons to do anything else, no man worth the name lets his dependents starve to death.

Spoiler: The Roman Empire has fallen since.

_"much less often were they friendly to each other in the 5th century AD"_ Tell that to Imre Nagy and Alexander Dubček. Tell that to the people who were sterilised by decision and physical action of doctors of medicine. Oh yeah, people were _even less_ friendly back then ... I have my doubts.

The beginning of the end was Stilicho gaining power and influence.

The later (post 300) Roman Empire also suffered the effects of a solar minimum similar to the 'little ice age' of the seventeenth century. That would mean no Rhine freezing over, and perhaps less Germanic migration.

Not sure if you get the Bagaudae issue well enough (should not trouble you, it's confusing and secondary interpretations often horrible and misleading). AFAIK the 5th century bagaudae happened almost simultaneously in what some sources call "Armorica" (land by the sea) but is actually Aquitaine, incl. the related Basques of North Iberia, and not the Lugdunense "Armorica", and also in Helvetia (but there they were crushed). There's been an interpretation floating around that the Bagaudae and the Suevi particularly became allied... but it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. The main data point is a narration of events in Turiasum (modern Tarazona) in which confusedly a bishop was killed while both bagaudae and Suevi troops were present. A proper reading shows clearly that the Suevi actually massacred the bagaudae rebels, although it's not clear who killed the bishop (nor it does matter). In general it's obvious that the barbarians became thugs for hire for the provincial Roman oligarchs and never had any interest in protecting or recruiting the peasants. The Aquitanian-Tarraconense bagaudae (Basque bagaudae, it's even likely that the word "bagauda" is Basque, something like "we stand", and related to modern Basque "guda" = rightful war) may well have been triggered by the settling of the Visigoths in Aquitaine by Rome, it's unclear but very likely, as Basques and Visigoths would remain bitter enemies at least until the establishment of the Duchy of Vasconia and Aquitaine after the Merovingian invasion of the early 7th century (and subsequent revolts). The Bagaudae did fight the Romans anyhow but they did so in Tarrraconensis, at the Ebro Valley, which is dotted of many mints and coin findings, a clear signal of payment to troops which has led to the theory of an "inner limes" around Caesaraugusta (Zaragoza), a major Roman base in Hispania since the Cantabrian Wars. Caesaraugusta was anyhow looted by the Bagaudae, we know that much. It is without doubt because of the success of the Bagaudae that the Basque People (language and non-Roman laws) survived: for more than 150 years the area between the Upper Ebro and the Garonne remained independent (with only occasional Visigothic incursions that we know of) it was some sort of "anarchy", of self-ruled communities that I imagine somewhat similar to the Old Swiss Confederation. This only ended (in part, there's a legal and linguistic legacy all the way till present day) with the Merovingian invasion in the 620s, creating more standard (pseudo-feudal) states like the Duchy of Vasconia first and the Kingdom of Pamplona/Navarre later (among other semi-autonomous states).

The Huns played the main role in the great invasions that contributed to the collapse of the Western Roman Empire.

Love your accent

Caesar crossing the rubicon. Sure it was also the end of the Roman Republic, but the Roman Empire was stillborn.

Interesting video, especially for some details like the specialized production of arms which was disrupted by the invasions, but I think that the invasion of 406 was not the main cause but a consequence of the main cause which was the demographic collapse. The fact that they hired so many barbarians in the army was a consequence of the demographic crisis. A problem that is present in all conflicts, also today.

Your English pronunciation has a Latin ring to it. May I inquire as to what your native language us?

❤

Angles, Saxons, Frisians and Jutes seemed to be fine with the English weather thou.

The event that drove the Roman empire to new heights was the same that sealed the western empire's eventual fate. Top heavy leadership leads to instability. A strong and wise leader may strengthen the empire during their rule, but over centuries of peaks and troughs from emperors that could be wise or total trainwrecks, collapse is expedited. Augustus set Rome on a path to burn hot and fast. It would have lasted far longer had it remained a republic. With 20/20 hindsight, we could say that had Marcus Aurelius been capable of eliminating the position of emperor at the end of his reign and reinvesting much of the power back into the senate, Rome would likely have continued to persist far longer. Ultimately, Rome never again was as simultaneously strong and stable as it was during the period of the "5 good emperors," and though temporary periods of partial recovery over the next couple centuries occurred it never again found that degree of strength nor stability. Therefore, the beginning of the end occurred far earlier than most claim. The death of Marcus Aurelius was the beginning of the end for Rome.

What people dont understand is that being Roman just didnt mean as much at this point. It was no longer a special status or a civilization to be envied. It was clearly past its golden age and the economic and military polices chosen to prop up the dying empire are what destroyed the image of invicibility it had upheld. A century of cultural admixture further reduced the identity of the Romans and gave its enemies the means and method to take over. Romans everywhere gave legitimacy to their barbarian counterparts simply by choosing to coexist instead of outright genocide, and of course being Christian was WAY more important than being Roman. The clergy deserves some blame for the fall of Rome, but at the same time they simply did to the Romans what thr Romans had done to everything else: subsumed institutions and practices that worked or were too widespread to stop, and centuries of interal bickering eroded the rest bit by bit until Rome was little more than an inheritance.

Isnt todays European Union with common economy, currency, external policy the legacy of Roman empire?

6:24 gratias ago *vobis, amici

All empires fall, the only thing that could have been changed is the timeline. Once the empire was divided military strategy could no longer be coordinated, and since the west was the poorer they were in a downward financial spiral. For example most of northern Britain was out of roman control in the late 300s.

The crossing of the Rhine began the end of the Roman Empire as we knew it. But it wasn't the reason. Military incompetence, corruption, bankruptcy, the insustainable nature of slave economics have all been bandied about. But my belief is that the one event that began the fall of Rome was not one but two - the Antonine Plague, and the Plague of Cyprian.

Maximinus thrax shouldn't kill Alexander severus... however, the army of the Battle of harzon was built by Alexander severus

I prefer British weather than Italian weather any day

It kinda looks like, that the roman empire was like today's russia against Ukraine, a giant state, but ineffective

Infighting most of all, which was partly because of a lack of clear transfer of power - it wasn't a birth right in the same sense of European monarchies, or a constitutionally secured process. That's why., since if this problem was solved they could have defeated the barbarians.

The empire was doom to die as soon as it began deciding to based their economy of slavery and conquered nation's treasures. Right at the start and Roman empire also didn't start falling in 406 AD.

I call him Dis-Honorius!

I would argue the gothic revolt in the 370 s this set up an independant state within the supposed borders of the empire.

These videos always get me emotional 😢. Even after 1500 years we still wish for Roma!

romans must had enough land to let them all in. what stingyness was that?

WRE lost for similiar reasons ere lost egypt and syria to arabsbecausse a set of border fortresses with persia were only defense byzatines had given geography of Levat and Egypt so when these places fell the fall of levnt and egypt was inevitable

A massive number of fight age people mostly men coming across a border with another nation, illegally, did them in. HMMMM?? Where have I heard this story recently??? Could it be the US SOUTHERN BORDER!!!!