Call it a "Dark Age" from 400 or so to 900 or so in In Britannia, Germania, and Gallia—the provinces of Britannia Inferior, Britannia Superior, Germania Inferior, Germania Inferior, Belgica...
I believe a case can be made that the Gothic successors to the emperors, and the people living under their rule, didn’t experience the “Fall of Rome” as a “thing,” mostly because it happened gradually over many decades. Theodoric was kind of a Gothic Western Roman Emperor. The laws and traditions were all still Roman, with pointy Gothic edges. There’s a sense in which, by trying to “restore” the empire, Justinian delivered the ultimate fatal blow to the West, reducing what was left of Rome to ruins. I certainly agree, as does archeology, that what we think of as the fall of the Western Empire was accompanied by a steep and persistent decline in every aspect of the quality of life for most people. The Dark Ages is the right name for it.
This episode has certainly revised my opinion of Gabrielle and Perry. I had hitherto read them as good-natured historians consciously adopting a hyperbolic position to attract attention to their history and deflate a few popular myths along the way. Now it seems to have adopted them.
It seems like "Rome didn't fall, and if it did fall it was a good thing" has become a left-wing coded position. I'm not entirely sure why or how this is.
Seems to be one of those moments where the reality betrays the theory. Roughly paraphrased, "It's hard to say exactly when Rome fell, so we can certainly make the claim that it never fell at all," because nobody can agree when it fell. Lack of consensus because of how low value a specific date/event is and how the subjective timing fits other human constructed narratives leaves an opening for bad faith arguments that ignore that Rome did in fact fall.
I agree with Sam. Not only did Rome fall, but its hardest fall was to a supposed 'Roman' emperor in Justinian's Gothic Wars. Those battles left a depopulated Italy in ruins. But Brad's point about Augustine is interesting. too. Rome the city lasted until the 6th century, but Rome the western empire blew up once the Vandals cut the flow of taxes from Africa to the capital - or so Chris Wickham has argued.
Another pair of lefty morons whose work won't be read past a couple hundred people who will forget they ever read it and who the two morons were in five years. It's the way the "organized" American far left has worked for 100+ years. And why they will never get within shouting distance of taking power over an outhouse.
Gabrielle: I'd write a comment on his SubStack and lean into being a fan of technological progress, literacy, maintenance of infrastructure for long distance trade, etc.
I fear providing a link to their Substack will increase their traffic and reward in ignorant outrage. As someone else has noted, "Don't feed the trolls."
I believe a case can be made that the Gothic successors to the emperors, and the people living under their rule, didn’t experience the “Fall of Rome” as a “thing,” mostly because it happened gradually over many decades. Theodoric was kind of a Gothic Western Roman Emperor. The laws and traditions were all still Roman, with pointy Gothic edges. There’s a sense in which, by trying to “restore” the empire, Justinian delivered the ultimate fatal blow to the West, reducing what was left of Rome to ruins. I certainly agree, as does archeology, that what we think of as the fall of the Western Empire was accompanied by a steep and persistent decline in every aspect of the quality of life for most people. The Dark Ages is the right name for it.
This episode has certainly revised my opinion of Gabrielle and Perry. I had hitherto read them as good-natured historians consciously adopting a hyperbolic position to attract attention to their history and deflate a few popular myths along the way. Now it seems to have adopted them.
"Rules for contrarians: don't whine!"
It seems like "Rome didn't fall, and if it did fall it was a good thing" has become a left-wing coded position. I'm not entirely sure why or how this is.
Seems to be one of those moments where the reality betrays the theory. Roughly paraphrased, "It's hard to say exactly when Rome fell, so we can certainly make the claim that it never fell at all," because nobody can agree when it fell. Lack of consensus because of how low value a specific date/event is and how the subjective timing fits other human constructed narratives leaves an opening for bad faith arguments that ignore that Rome did in fact fall.
I agree with Sam. Not only did Rome fall, but its hardest fall was to a supposed 'Roman' emperor in Justinian's Gothic Wars. Those battles left a depopulated Italy in ruins. But Brad's point about Augustine is interesting. too. Rome the city lasted until the 6th century, but Rome the western empire blew up once the Vandals cut the flow of taxes from Africa to the capital - or so Chris Wickham has argued.
Another pair of lefty morons whose work won't be read past a couple hundred people who will forget they ever read it and who the two morons were in five years. It's the way the "organized" American far left has worked for 100+ years. And why they will never get within shouting distance of taking power over an outhouse.
Brad, remember the First Law of the Internet. Do … not … feed … the … trolls.
"for the last person to call himself “Cæsar” only laid aside his crown in 1948."
OK, I'll bite: Who was that?
Gabrielle: I'd write a comment on his SubStack and lean into being a fan of technological progress, literacy, maintenance of infrastructure for long distance trade, etc.
I fear providing a link to their Substack will increase their traffic and reward in ignorant outrage. As someone else has noted, "Don't feed the trolls."