"Emperor" Sponsian: Historical Person or BBC clickbait?
Vložit
- čas přidán 25. 11. 2022
- Join our Discord: / discord
Original paper: journals.plos.org/plosone/art...
BBC report: • Gold coin proves 'fake...
Music:
Mozart - Clemency of Titus
Imperator: Soundtrack - Dawn of Destiny
Imperator: Soundtrack - Tyrrenum
Impossible to forget that time Sponsian charged alone against the Dacians while shouting "IT'S SPONSIANING TIME!!!". Truly one of the Roman Emperors in history 😎💪
I remember when Sponsian started Sponsianing the entire Dacian tribe. Truly one of the moments of history.
then he Sponsianed all over the place!
That was about a century before my time, but I remember an old shepherd from Pamphylia who knew an old merchant from Moesia who's great great grandfather served under Sponsianus. He apparently was a bit of a prankster and promised his troops a raise in return they would name him an emperor, when it looked like he was about to lose, they killed him. Every story has a happy end, I assume.
i think you meant… its sponsin time 🏴☠️
Bravo Caesar!
How dare they? Sponsian singlehandedly defeated a horde of a million gepids with nothing but a wooden spoon
Have you been listening to those Egyptians again.
Sponsian single handedly stopped the Mongols' expansion into Europe in the battle of Suceava with the support of the Voivoidat of Moldavia
People today see living under a rock is cool now. Sponsiani have literally reformed the Roman Empire and proclaimed himself "Sponsiani Augusti Caesari" yesterday, I'm going to join the Legions.
Imagine trying to become Roman emperor but no one remembers you
Sponsianus, probably
How many people remember that rebel Caesar Carausius in Brittain in the 3rd century ?
@@optimusprinceps3526 me
kinda like a US president that no one remembers like Grover Cleveland or Warren Harding
@@strangevials1161
Hey!
Those guys are pretty well remembered.
Maybe Benjamin Harrison?
"Imperator" meant supreme commander of the army. The word for emperor was Augustus. So that guy never claimed to be an emperor.
Very plausible that he existed at some point during the crises of the third century.
Most likely as an usurper as only The Augustus and the Caesar was allowed to have their face on a coin.
And it seems that they have proved that the coins are around 2000 years old.
He probably won a small skirmish and started to mint a few coins and was like “Yeah I’ve won the war! We all gonna get to Rome by the next Saturnalia, so might as well mint some coins”
And then he lost in some small campaign and all the chronicles got lost somehow.
Like that British Caesar ?
@@optimusprinceps3526 do you know his name?
@@TheLordRichard Carausius
He probably didn’t even have to lose a battle. Just look at the usurper Pacatian and others during Philip the Arabs reign, who were almost all killed by their own revolting troops causing the usurpation attempts to fizzle out almost as soon as they began.
@@optimusprinceps3526 thank you.
He wouldnt be the only emperor known only by coinage, like Silbannacus.
Buddy of mine met Silbannacus
Now we need to know if Sponsian was a Chad, Wojak, or virgin.
I wish I were still a virgin.
Wojak for sure, he didn’t go for the emperor spot but he also wasn’t Odaenathus tier.
wojak, it's the best he could hope for with how much we know about him
I mean he could be a chad irl but for his historical accomplishments he would definitely be more potrayed as a Wojak.
Unbiased history reference?
Can't wait for the new Total War Rome 2 Sponsian faction
I think as you mention couldn’t get supplies / coins from Rome and Sponsian had to declare himself emperor to try to protect the province of Dacia. I don’t think Sponsian was interesting in title of emperor, just defending Dacia.
What about that rebel Caesar Carausius in Brittain in the 3rd century ?
@@optimusprinceps3526 I only realized he existed yesterday with Eastern Roman History’s video on the tetrarchy. From what I know about him, I don’t think he relinquished his own power.
AVE IMPERATOR SPONSIAN!
IMPERATOR SPONGESIAN SQUAREPANTS
As an artist myself, I’d definitely mint coins in my name if the province was suddenly abandoned
That's a missed opportunity to Rickroll people.
The more accurate hypotesis sounds more interesting than the clickbait video.
Even if he was an emperor, the fact that he's forgotten would mean he's one of those emperors who lived 2 months and then were executed, while the idea of him being a commander who tried to maintain troops and order in a region during a crisis sounds more interesting.
Perhaps he didn't declare himself roman emperor perhaps he declared himself a sort of regional leader like Palmyrena and Postumus but we don't really know about him
@@Haasthimself you mean Odenathus?
@@rockyaer1 perhaps
@@Haasthimself I mean that Odenathus was the one who stayed loyal to Rome while the queen Palmyra declared independence and invaded neighboring provinces which is not the same
@@rockyaer1 maybe
Yes I believe he was real guy. No I don't believe he was per se an Emperor or even an usurper. As you demonstrated he most likely took charge of things when the economy and military administration crumbled under the constant civil war and dealt with things until the Romans were told to leave Dacia. So maybe he was just a rich guy, or more likely a prominent (former) military leader who could must resources to maintain and semblance of administration. I find the name interesting Nicodemus Sponsianus, as it really links with what we now of Easter Roman onomastics at the time.
What about that rebel Caesar Carausius in Brittain ?
I'm an atheist. I don't believe you exist. I haven't seen you. That photo must be a random upload by a cat on a keyboard. No intention necessary. Evolve. Get with the times.
Nicodemus is a greek name so I do believe he was either a local or someone native to the balkans atleast.
Then why would he have coins minted of himself?
The truth is that actually "Aurelian" was a Romanian named Sponsian and after Gallienus died he and his 3000 Romanian friends took over the empire, but cause Romania is blessed by God Sponsian was merciful and spared every R*man, but R*mans later killed him and faked that he was actually named Aurelian and that he was R*man not Romanian. Then they abandoned Dacia and faked that "Aurelian" did it to make my theory have even less sense.
Sources:
-Trust me bro
-Voices in my head
-It was revealed in a dream to me
-God told me so after i drank Kykeon
source: unbiased history
Nah bro, Aurelian was a glorious albanian illyrian 💪🏻💪🏻🇦🇱🇦🇱
@@belisarius5953 his descendants still live in Surrel
It's true, the original Romans were native to Dacia and the Latin language is actually a dialect of Romenian. Romulus got that name because he was native from Romenia.
It's indeed possible that Sponsian was more or less in the same position Syagrius found himself in during his tenure in late 5th century Soissons, i.e. a local commander taking over in times of unrest...
I'm gonna have to go with you latter theory. It just makes the most sense to me. People wouldn't have wanted to move hundreds of miles to the south when Gallienus and Aurelian pulled out the troops, so the remaining people would find someone to lead them .
What about the rebel Caesar Carausius in Brittain in the 3rd century ?
@@optimusprinceps3526I guess I should ask "what about him?" His revolt was 10 years later. We're the people in Dacia supposed to guess that some nobody 800 miles away in Gaul might be a decent military leader in the future?
@@automaticmattywhack1470 My Wife is from Roumania, her parents were Diplomats, they escaped to the USA via Vienna, Austria, and the US Embassy during a conference, during the Reagan era. I know all about your Dacia, been to Constantia a few times. ✌️🌿😊🌿
@@automaticmattywhack1470
Plus Carausius is a pretty notable figure, attested by such later historians as Aurelius Victor, Eutropius, and Orosius, not to mention the Latin panegyrics.
He's very different from the utterly obscure Sponsian.
He may not be real, but he's my Sponsian ♥️
Sponsianbob Sponsianpants
It is very sad how utterly decadent the BBC is nowadays. I still fondly remember its amazing tv shows, like "I, Claudius", and its wonderful docu-series from Antiquity such as "Ancient Rome: The Rise and Fall of an Empire", "Heroes and Villains" or "Hannibal: Rome's worst Enemy", which were not only highly entertaining, but much more faithful to the historical facts than most Hollywood productions.Too bad they ended up ruining their reputation.
Those "docu-series" are awful.
@@MiguelDS5547 Why are they awful according to you?
The article on the BBC News website went into more depth about the story and gave a link to the PLoS article so that the readers could find out more. It is true that the BBC has declined in quality, but that is due to Government funding having been cut, so they just can't afford to do what they once did.
Fake and Revisionist history are all the rage nowadays with the Liberals
Can they still afford to pay you with this lack of funding
fascinating that a single coin can change our understanding of history so much
Or if it was in 3rd century crisis, amount of usurpers and warlords other than Gallic and Palmyrene Emperor.
Like I think Gallienus multiple campaigns against them.
Well I think there were usurpers and warlords during the third century crisis because imperial administration crumbled thus local governors and generals were forced to take in charge of their provinces during the time even if they had no desire to break away from the empire or a claim to it.
@@powerist209 fair point, but usurpers are still important in history
In b4 this becomes a "Mandela Effect" type of thing where some people will "remember" learning about Sponsian the Great in history class.
Damn you probably have the best video on this topic right now. I didn't know the story went on even deeper. Thanks for going above and beyond in research man!
Check out historians craft. He just dropped a video yesterday
tszabocsaba.blogspot.com/2022/11/emperor-sponsianus-and-crisis-of-roman.html
I definitely lean towards Sponsian being a Crisis-era Usurper/Local Leader, given the dating of the other coins in the cache his coins were found. For lack of sources, the Third Century was definitely a possity of sources, with several emperors having several accounts of their deaths which cannot be verified, like how Gordian III either "died mysteriously" (Roman) or "died in battle" (Persian), so it's not a stretch that someone of that highly localised authority could go overlooked in the wider empire. As for only being pegged as Imperator, I look to the east for a really interesting prospect: Odenathus of Palmyra. When Gallienus gave his wink-and-nod approval of Odenathus' governing of the east, Odenathus was given the title Imperator in the traditional meaning of military commander, without the pagentry of titles like Augustus. Remember that at his nadir shortly after Edessa, Gallienus barely ruled Italy, there were usurpers beyond just the Gallic and Palmyrene empires, he just managed to deal with those ones. It's quite possible Sponsian is someone who fought off some raids, got proclaimed emperor as was the custom of Third Century legions, then struck a deal with Gallienus so the Emperor in Rome wouldn't have to play whack-a-mole across the Danube, when he had plenty going on on his own side.
That's speculation of course.
The name is intriguing, especially as it is so rare. Appears to be from the same Latin root as the English word "sponsor". Adjectival form of _sponsio_ "a solemn promise or engagement to some performance (in bargains, covenants, treaties, etc.); guarantee, security". Perhaps a name coined (ha ha) for the role as leader of the local legions?
Nicodemus Sponsian was a "decurion of chamber servants", implying that he was a slave or free servant. Though two centuries earlier, could this suggest that the name Sponsianus hinted at the promise between a master and their freedman? The Inscription was shared by Nicodemus and a freedman.
What about the rebel Caesar Carausius in Brittain, during the 3rd century, he too minted his own coinage
If he was a Dacian frontier commander in 244ish, it is very possible that coin was minted after the news got out that Gordian III was dead in Iraq but before the news that Philip was coming back to Rome to be confirmed as the new emperor, or even that he would be confirmed at all. These people did not have preordained lists of who was going to become emperor after one died suddenly. All Sponsian knew was that he had a mint, he had imperium, and soldiers needed paying. Not only do I think this coin is real, but offers some incredible specificity about the time and circumstances of its creation.
But then how do you explain the minting dilemma? The imperial mint of the region was still operational supposedly during the 240’s. Why not have the coins stamped?
@@damascus1111 They minted only bronze coins there, and if these were made a bit later in the 260, the mint was closed by then... In any case minting required special tools which might had been imported and no longer accessible anyway (because of the crisis).
Would be good if you talk about Silbannacus.
The moment I saw the news article about him, I knew you would make a video about it! Thank you Augustus
this is very intresting, he probably is a real person, and the story sounds very plausible, I doubt he had much impact, and probably mostly kept the province semi intact, but yea, he probably wasen't too important, but that's kinda unique to find this out
Sponsian the great sponsor of Dacia WAS Slayn by Netflicus Adapdtus
The greatest crossover of all time
Now back to today's sponsian Raidemus Shadowus Legendus
I think he was a likely usurper and probably was active during the chaos of the reigns of Valerian or Gallienus. It makes perfect sense. And there are usurpers we know about really only from their coinage, like the somewhat earlier Uranius Antoninus. It's already been mentioned that, during the Empire, only the portraits of emperors or claimants to the title would appear on coins. Otherwise, it seems more likely he would have gone with the older practice of depicting a god or goddess or some historical figure. The bungled inscriptions and, to me, incomprehensible reverse are because these coins were not being produced by a regular mint but by some ad hoc arrangement and were probably emergency money of some kind so produced in a quick and dirty way.
Addendum: I'd read Roadhouse's comments about how suspect this coin is, and agree with him on some of the points, e.g., the weight being off, the weird inscriptions, the mismatched reverse, and the fact it looks nothing like any barbaric radiate from the era. But, I still think this could be explained with my earlier comments about the production being done in a very irregular way in the midst of crisis and the province's becoming cut off from the Empire's monetary system suddenly. And there does appear to be evidence that the coin examined had actually circulated.
If the BBC told me it was Monday tomorrow, I would look at a calendar.
There's a Facebook page about Archaeology news I used to follow that also posted this twisted news. I let them know the info was inaccurate and they just warned me they would delete the comment if I did not changed it. They did and I commented again linking the article and quoting some lines. Deteled again and again untill they blocked me.
I don't know if it is because they don't speak English (few people can read English written scientific papers in Spain), or they did not want to admit they screwed up, or they just think they posses the truth and debate is not acceptable. In any case bad science communication.
Thank you. I was only aware of this in the first place because I had watched this video. Keep on the good work!
Thank you for your detailed hypothesis. I appreciate the attention as I also have not heard of this individual until it appeared in the news.
Thank you for this analysis. I always appreciate a well reasoned skeptical view.
in the 3rd century everyone wanted to be Emperor. its ironic that we lack more documentation about that period
I have a theory that Marcus Aurelius Marius of the Gallic Empire never existed. It was just a name to put on some coins during the interegnum.
After the army killed Postumus and sacked the city they were in, they chose to divvy up the spoils between them. To do this they minted fresh coins. None of them wanted to actually be emperor so they used a made up name and face.
The earliest reports say that he was killed in a street-brawl a couple of days later. That sounds like the sort of story the soldiers would concoct.
@@Me-yq1fl Historical records from this period are pretty rare and often biased. Do you have any specific records to share?
@@thumper8684 youre obviously wrong, but youre schizo theory is so funny I'm going to lie to people lmao
but seriously, Marcus Aurelius was a common name in the 3rd century. Is it more likely that *every soldier* in Gaul lied about an Emperor who was already dead, and no one caught on, or that some other guy died in a bar fight, and there really was a Gallic Emperor with the same name.
I mean, the theory of Rome losing direct control over Dacia and the stationed legions there needing to be paid in some form but with no direct connection to the central government. It doesn't sound unreasonable for the local generals to take power in their own hands to keep the system running. The Roman Empire was by this point starting to wobble in its stability.
I saw a vid on it yesterday and I believe it 100%. Everything checks out. The crisis of the third century, Dacia, the mines, the usurper, the forensic analysis, I’m convinced.
Good breakdown of the theories, thank you for sharing the evidence rather than just jumping to conclusions either way. As far as the question of existence, I think it's best to assume someone existed if there is some evidence they did (coins and inscriptions) and none that they didn't (ex. if the name did not match Latin naming patterns). Whether they ruled or not, and to what degree, is an interesting question. I think the local Imperator paying their troops is the most plausible theory.
I was about to wonder aloud "how do you lose an entire emperor?" but then I remember how much chaos that the 3rd and 4th century Western Empire endured and yeah, odds are some rando probably said he was emperor and got as far as minting some coins before he was probably smothered with a pillow by his horse or something.
Background music being from “La Clemenza di Tito “ is pretty classy
My immediate thought is if historians will find people who have taken their coins to penny press machines and wonder how many different forms of currency we had in our current day.
Thought this was going to be an elaborate joke that you were now sponsored lol
The historian from Historia Augusta comically lists thirty usurpers in trying to parallel the thirty tyrants of Athens
>school project
>make coin for emperor "Chaddus"
>send to the BBC
"ZoMg!! Emperor Chaddus' existence PROVED with FACTS and LOGIC!"
Sounds like he was not an Emperor but someone given Imperium - maybe a general or pro consul who held an area and made a mint to try and have local legitimacy or run that break away state. Or even they could be "commemorative".
2:28 barbarian coin imitations are underrated in my opinion
I saw this as well... and was like dafuq... i was hoping a history roman channel would do a review of this clip
I really like those memes about sponsian, spoons and sponsianing time
I have seen the almond shaped eye on known Eastern European fantasy coins of the 19thC.
Sponsian should be added to the list of Emperors like "Maxen", "Tetricus", and "Carausius"
Bro your videos are lit. xx
Audio could be a lot louder. Had to put on the CC to understand what you were saying.
I'm leaning towards everything they claimed on TV is nonsense.
Don't question experts, plebe. You need a PhD and peer reviewed papers before you are allowed to have an opinion. This is how I know creationists are wrong.
Mr Romaboo Ramblings, sir. Please turn up your recording volume by a bit. I have tried the maxed out volume on both laptop and mobile, but haven't gotten the desired result. My regards.
It’s kinda crazy how close it was to these coins never being found and imagining how much more we don’t know about history simply because artefacts are missing or destroyed.
Great Video frater
Looking forward until they find the Gold coin of "Chadecus Maximus".
..on matters lie this i keep an open mind with a big dose of skepticism..
nice spikey 👑 crown
A radiate crown
That'd be still cool, nevertheless.
Instead of a "forgotten Emperor thought to be faked". To
"A forgotten former Commander-Pretender who proved a later roman text that was originally thought to be a work of more-so fiction about a event (or time), as potentially real."
((However and perhaps; a less than catchy title for a news broadcast. lmao))
I think it makes sense that Sponsian was some guy who held power in Roman Dacia, whether a prominent Dacian or a Roman commander who may have even been a bit rebellious towards the current Emperor to be forging his own coin in the area.
Justice for Sponsian.
This guy was the first sponsor of the History Channel.
Emperor long enough to get one coin minted before assassination
As we even nowadays have countries that use the head of the state in coins, I see no reason to doubt Sponsian's historicity, if the coin are genuine as they look like.
Awfully expensive prank to bury.
This is Silbinacus all over again lol
Though, this one is markedly more substantial. Maybe he was in power for only a few months, a general who declared himself emperor in some delusion of grandeur and his contingency of men backed him. But if he was some major upstart, you;d think there’d be written record of his chicanery
And now for todays slonsor Emperor Sponsian!
Sponsian's full name is Sponsianbob Squarepants
Maybe the "emperor Sposian" was victim of Damnatio memoriae? Just thinking about, how much of this Damnatio memoriae worked until now, but now we know maybe there is someone who absolutely could be exist but until we don't have for certain like Historia Augusta or Geta?
It's more likely that he was just so obscure and irrelevant nobody bothered to write about him. Damnatio memoriae was reserved for very important people that the senate or emperor found extremely disagreeable. Sponsian likely wouldn't even rate one.
Hi! This is the first time that I write on your channel, first of all allow me to thank you for all the great content you upload here, everything is insightful, entertaining and educational. You made a great coverage of this article about the Sponsian mistery, truly, I share your overall view on the subject. I just read the article by Paul Pearson and please let me humbly and respectfully disagree on something you present on the video which is based on his claims. Pearson´s lab studies reach the conclusion that the item is much older than expected. They conclude that the object is not a modern forgey, which is great! But that is not enough to claim, as Pearson does, that it is in fact an authentic coin! This is something maybe only a numismatist understands and cares about, but, being a monetiform object does not necessarily mean that it is a "coin", much less an authentic one. This item is NOT an aureus. It is in fact NOT an official roman coin. There are thousands of objects in history which resemble a coin-like object and depict sometimes idealized or fantasy motifs, and this may very well be also the case. It is worth studying though. Thanks again, I really enjoy your channel!
Hey! Thanks for the feedback. I think that current consensus is that it is a binio aka double-aureus. There are several of them of roughly (not to the standard of an imperial mint) equal weight and both sides of them are very "coin-like": the obverse with emperor's head and legend + the reverse copied from an actual coin from 2nd century BC.
I haven't watched yet, but whatever you say, I believe.
If think you have presented a very plausible set of reasoning behind what happened. I know there are also a couple of usurpers that we only know about because of coins. I am inclined to think he was real, as are the coins and was probably a local potentate, maybe even hailed as imperator, his not being proclaimed emperor might explain why he was not mentioned by the Kaisergeschite.
"Coin expert, Henry Coin"
This video was sponsored by Sponsian
I have an another idea - maybe Sponsian was some sort of local roman warlord and separatist, just like Postumus - who established Gallic Empire in 260 AD? Alternatively, isolated loyal & forgotten guy like Syagrius in Gaul or various romano-british & romano-berber petty kings after decline of Western Empire. And because "imperator Sponsianus" achieved nothing and he was isolated, Roman historians didn't consider him to be worthy of remember.
the G AVG on the back-side means Gaius Augustus (aka Caligula) the mintor; actual issuer of the mint. Sponsianius is then his father Germanicus, imperator 'by rights' instead of Tiberius. Caligula could have minted these coins to honor his martyred father and also to convince the romans that he heritaged the throne 'rightens' through his fathers lineage rather then by adoption by his predecessor, the despised Tiberius. Thus a kind of a propaganda-tool for Caligula himself. An attempt to rewrite history even by issuing some official coins. Sponsiani is rather a title then a name, dedicated, applied to the offspring of Andrew the elder (the first germanicus or Alpheus) the side-branch of the julio-claudian family that brought forth Nerones Chrestos. They were aka Nicolaitans 'the favorites of the people'.
Historia Augusta strikes again
Very plausible speculation that he was referring to imperium in the old republican sense (of magisterial authority) rather than claiming an imperial title.
Guy de la Bedoyere has some excellent videos discussing the coin, especially from a numismatic perspective, and offers some interesting hypotheses. His most plausible explanation is that it’s authentically ancient, but was produced in India as a poor copy of a Roman coin, of which we have many examples. He doesn’t believe Sponsian was a real rebel emperor. This is based on the poor quality of the image on the coin face, the absolutely baffling image on the reverse of the coin which looks like it’s a direct copy of a very old *Republican era coin* which has absolutely no meaning or relevance in this context, the fact that the name Sponsian really only has record as name or nickname of probable slaves owned by Livia Augusta, the fact that rebel emperors universally payed in debased silver rather than in gold, the garbled and incoherent Latin on the front of the coin, etc. etc.
Also while the BBC does suck, I wouldn’t exactly pounce on them as “decadent” or whatever like I’ve seen some comments here do. The media always goes for the headlines, and frankly the fault here is of the original research team for presenting the hypothesis of a new Roman emperor which caused the media to pick it up in the first place. You can’t hardly blame the media for not launching an analysis of the coin to determine it themselves when scholars, with some blatant oversights, have presented research to laymen if that makes any sense.
I'm sorry to ask, but, why the ancient Indians would make a imitation of a Roman coin?
The the evidence shown in the PLOS paper actually strongly suggests that the coins were in quite intense circulation long time before they discovered (extensive wear and scratches subsequently covered by the cemented mineral deposits). If some joker in Dacia just made the coins for a prank (nevermind that casting them was not quite a simple procedure in the first place), then why would the be so worn? The also have a plausible explanation in the paper about the republican design.
My theory is that they took some old existing Roman coins, melted them down together - which could have caused the impurities - and made these new ones with a name someone knew to be rare.
I’ve also read that the coins’ private owner first had experts claiming them false based on the unusual (read: artificial looking) damages/erosions, then he had “some other historian” (possibly a guy with a bachelors’ ) look at it who then said it was real. And from there on they faked it ‘till they made it.
I do think it's rather likely that they were just poor quality and strange because of the strenuous situation in Dacia, cut off during the Crisis of the Third Century, and that Sponsianus was either a leader of a Legion or a Dacian governor who took the purple only to continue running Dacia independently of the Empire. I consider it likely that he gave up his power, much like Tetricus, to Aurelian.
@@nosauce7410 I mean... I wouldn't rule it out, though I yet have some mayor doubts here and there as to why specifically these coins differ that much in quality compared to other very short-lived 'reigns' from either that period or let's say the Year of the 6 Emperors... Agree to disagree?
It could even have been a forgery from the day. Someone sees people are making short lived coins and makes his own from impure metal, using lesser techniques to make them and then passing them off as full value.
Oh wow. That was quick. Sponsianus got big quick.
I think sponsian was probably a real person, but not an emperor or a userper.
I mean to say that it isn't necessarily beggars belief that local governors might feature on coins
A coin expert called Henry COIN????
History lost the name of the leader of the Bar Kochba revolt until recent archaeological discoveries so why not a minor brief usurper?
Best emperor ever!
AVE SPONSIANUS IMPERATOR !
Interesting
That BBC headline is a doozy
The BBC News website article is very good, goes into some stuff not covered here.
If I were a Roman Emperor I would have huge temples with my name and statues as to not be forgotten
GL with it I am more concerned how will it survived a sack
MSM clickbaiting and telling lies? Well I never...
It didn't know that I needed to know more about Dacia, but thanks for that. Sponsianus seems not unlike the many late Roman generals who seized power locally and never made it to Rome to perform rites at the temples and be accepted by the Senate. Some who were proclaimed emperor by their men while out at the frontier DID manage to take over the whole empire, such as Vespasian, who was in Egypt when the legions there acclaimed him.
Incidentally, although we call these men "generals," most were not professional soldiers in the modern sense. They were wealthy Patricians who had held elected offices in Rome, and had at different times exercised administrative, judicial and priestly as well as military functions, so they all felt qualified for imperium.
Calling the BBC's report on the Glasgow University analysis "clickbait" is a bit rich.
Hey, that’s me!
Having read the study the scratches and dirt dont prove antiquity that was a logical leap made by the paper
Don't have it on hand rn. There is a line that say something like "Them being from antiquity is the only possible scenario that is consistent with the analysis of scratches and dirt".
@@RomabooRamblings Thats what they say but theres no standard metric for how scratched a ancient coin can be or should look, that is based on numerous factors inc but not exhaustively the velocity of circulation and not age.
and the whole study was based on an extremely small sample size. its a joke. they arent numismatists. they are hacks
@@Minilopo18 So essentially, what they conclude is just that the scratches and dirt are actually real and not added by the fraudsters.
@@RomabooRamblings not even that by what scientific measure can they say the scratches werent made between 1700 and today or that they weren't buried or pressed into dirt in the 1700s?
I'm going to cast a few coins naming me the emperor of the world in the most durable metal ever, just to fuck with archealogists from the future.
What if Sponsian was just a schizophrenic guy with an ego who really believed he was an emperor?
Would be very unlikely. Not only having significant access to gold but also having to personally carve himself onto the iron stamp before he could even begin minting which takes time.
A local commander minting coins to pay his men in troubled times sounds very plausible, after all i do know that imperator meant commander long before it meant emperor
but i have a question: is it grammatically certain that "sponsiani" or whater it is short for is a name?
could it mean something else?
unfortunately i do not know enough latin to be able to answer this, but i was struck by the similarity to the word "sponsio" which was the word for a small gift given by a patron to his client in republican times.
but of course this could mean nothing at all; and i hope the question is not deemed too stupid. . . . .
hmm interesting
It’s no longer accurate to continue to defame the Historia Augusta as “historical fiction”. Many of the key appointments and conflicts mentioned in the work that were ignorantly believed in the past to be inventions have been independently corroborated by modern archaeological and epigraphical discoveries. It’s also one of the most important sources we have for the late Roman Empire of the 3rd and early 4th centuries.
What other sources were proven to be right by the Historia Augusta? The book seems to be borderline fictional.
How do you pronunce the AE in classical Latin? Is it "Ay" like "Ay, papi" or is it "A-eh" ilke "Ah, eh... no."?
@@scintillam_dei That depends on which pronunciation guide you choose to follow. "Kaisar" would be the revised classical pronunciation taught in schools since the late 19th century, which derives partly from the work of Erasmus.
"Seezar" would be the traditional English way of saying it, which corresponds to how medical and legal professionals talk in the UK.
Then there is the Roman Catholic version, which is closer to how Italian is spoken, and is used in church music.
If you want to be understood, it's best to adapt your speech to your audience.
@@faithlesshound5621 Erasmus, Darwin's grandfather?
Brits have a tendency to butcher other languages. Thanks for your response though. It tells me AY seems to be a modern concoction, but maybe it's legit. I need to learn more.
C was K though.
@@scintillam_dei Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam.
C can sound like English "ch" before front vowels in church music. For example, when singing "regina caeli."
"Fake" no, some upstart general named imperator by his legion, yes most likely.
So....ate these coins of worth?