This Discovery Rewrites What Happened After the Romans Left Britain.
Vložit
- čas přidán 11. 03. 2024
- 🔴 YOU WANT TO SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL? 🔴
🤗 Join our Patreon community: / maiorianus
😉 Or become an official Maiorianus member on CZcams: / maiorianus461
🎁 The official Maiorianus merch store is now OPEN:
maiorianus.myspreadshop.com
⚔️ SPQR Shop, excellent hand-crafted Roman rings and other items:
spqrshop.com/?sca_ref=4770010...
Enter the code "Maiorianus" to get a 20% discount on every purchase. The ideal present for any fan of Rome 😉!
The wonderful background music is by Adrian von Ziegler: • Relaxing Roman Music -...
Disclosures: Some links in the description are affiliate links which means that if you purchase something by clicking on one of them, your host Sebastian will receive a small commission at no additional cost to you. In this way you will be supporting the channel to improve the video production quality at no extra cost to you.
🤗 One-Time Donation?
- PayPal: paypal.me/Maiorianus
- Bitcoin: bc1qv4lsfsplvfecrrgvmfclhga28we7mvh9563xdj
🔗 Share the video with anyone who might be interested (it helps a ton!)
📬 Contact us: maiorianus.sebastian@gmail.com
#Maiorianus - Věda a technologie
🤗 Join our Patreon community: www.patreon.com/Maiorianus
I'm going to repeat my post below.
Can you show any evidence of a mass barbarian invasion from the mainland?
There hasn't been a shred of evidence. No battle sites, no mass graves, no DNA, nothing a part from one monks writings...he also talked about half man half beast creature's etc.
Please stop pushing this false narrative
Your pronunciation of Romano-Britons is a bit confusing. I kept thinking what do good people of Brighton have to do with it 😁
Dear Sebastian ... Congratulations on another excellent video! No matter how much I hear about the Roman Empire, it's never quite enough!
Especially seen that it's likely you are to pick up on the themes you left this episode with, to echo @fierceuk above, and with all humility and acknowledgement that your English is about 734 times better than my German, if you do make another video, please please note it is a "hard i" in Briton. In other words the "i" is the same sound as in "it" "bit" and "pinch". In fact, it is is extremely similar to how one says "Britain" - certainly the first syllable is identical. With "Briton" even the stress is still in the first syllable like it is with "Britain". But where the "ai" part of "Britain" is a schwa - a general, non specific vowel sound - you can differentiate Briton from Britain by forming a more definite "hard o" sound like you are already doing - as in "off" "pot" and "cottage".
Brighton - which is what you're currently saying - is a large, prosperous and cosmopolitan town on the south coast of England which enjoys sunny weather and a somewhat louche reputation - I have friends there, and they are VERY louche, so take my word for it😂
I wouldn't normally quibble over accents/pronunciation - in fact they add charm and engagement - but where it can cause confusion or inhibits the natural flow of your narrative (in other words creates barriers to understanding and/enjoyment), that is a slightly different matter.
I only mention it to help and advise and allow you to make any small changes so you can keep your output the best it can be!!🙂
what is the big mystery ? iecland vulcanos had 2 year eurupsion making the sun go black for 2 years
no harvest and evry tribe on raiding for survival
THATS why rome left england thy tink it whas the end of times
Hi Sebastian. Have you looked into the recent archeological research on Ostia Antica? It’s now believed that people continued to construct buildings there even as the port city declined at the end of Roman times.
Great civilizations never collapse abruptly: it takes several seasons of “reality” television and countless ‘Kardashians’ marathons to accomplish a complete systems collapse...
In the past great civilizations were conquered and their citizens died in battles the world will never forget defending them to the last. Our civilization looks like being the first in history that will die because its citizens simply lost the will to live shortly after inventing reality TV.
What you’re describing is a demolition.
Civilisation is sometimes a thin veneer applied by a civilising coloniser, which can collapse abruptly if the coloniser departs with little warning. Kenya... India... Rhodesia... Afghanistan... all examples. Surviving a decolonisation without falling into sectarianism, civil war and kleptocracy is near-miraculous, and I have huge respect for those that have done so - it is a true mark of civilisation.
I studied this period at Uni years ago and many of my contemporaries held a fashionable view that after 410 the inhabitants of Western Britain reverted overnight to being tribal "Celts" as if the Imperial age had scarcely happened at all. I'm pleased to see that this is not a widely held view now and your video helps greatly in helping to prove that Romanitas held on in this island for many generations. Thank you.
Being Welsh and conscious of Welsh history and legend I assure you that the people of the West never lost sight of their status as an important player in the Imperial world.
I'm from near the Welsh borders myself and agree the most recent research papers point to a much more subtle and varied process of continuity fusion and transition after the initial migration phase which had most impact on the southeast coast region .
@grahamdeamer128 - It seems logical that "Romanitas" would have had a greater hold in the big cities and more settled areas and probably less in the more rural areas, just as the Norman Conquest probably had more immediate impact in terms of who the local bigwigs were and didn't entirely displace the "Saxon" culture of the average serf!
@@phil5365 I'm Welsh, but lived in East Anglia for a long time. There the Anglo-Saxons lived in huts and let their animals live in the Roman villas (according to an archaeologist friend of mine). It says a bit about the people from that area. 🤣
@@dandare1001 Yes - but that happened AFTER circe 540...
@@teleriferchnyfain So is that when the Anglo-Saxons were more established? Before that was the slow exit of Roman culture. Is that what you mean?
I wonder what the ancient Romans would have thought if you went back in time and told them that their provinces of Gaul, Britannia and Hispania would one day have large, powerful Empires of their own. Maybe they wouldn't believe it, or maybe they would think, "of course they will, they learned from us!".
They’d find it hard to believe Britannia would eventually have the largest Empire in the world (and around it) but they’d definitely take credit like you said😂
The latter, of course.
That's unironically what the ancient Chinese thought when they made contact with Rome. They literally wrote that the Romans were from China, but left it at some point.
Or that they would again be overrun by immigrants.
Yes I thought that was funny and interesting, same with them thinking Rome produced their own silk. The Chinese also had the habit of calling everyone that wasn't Chinese "barbarians" - which probably wasn't the wisest diplomatic strategy, especially when speaking to countries that became more powerful than them.@@samiamtheman7379
I have to marvel that one can find channels like this, driven by the love of history, almost casually, these days. What a time to be alive.
After considering the continuing contact of South West Britain with Western Gaul, Hispania and the Eastern Mediterranean, along with 'scrap gold' archaeology from the 'Saxon' controlled areas (indicating two-way trade), I have long held a view that the real collapse started after the arrival of the Justinian plague via the trade routes. I believe my view is supported by stories such as Tristan and Isolde and the 'Saxon' victories of the 570's.
Good pick-up of the Justinian Plague c532+. Intriguing...
"Stay a while and listen"
The Justinian plague was truly apocalyptic
Would make sense it would have killed of the populations of many of Britain's last big cities that the Romano britonic Lords pulled their romanised manpower from, this decrease in manpower could left have the armies of the britons in the western territories in areas like Cumbria and Wales undermanned who would have pulled men from big cities , that would have been severely hit by plague.
@@constantinexi6489it was the black plague after all.
There were cut scenes from the movie Apocalypse Now that showed Willard and the boat crew arriving at a French plantation, where the French colonialists living there had carried on as if Dien Bien Phu etc. had never happened. They were living in a sort of dream - pretending the wars would never affect them.
When you described a Roman missionary travelling to Britain, expecting to find a very degraded society, and coming across a villa in the West that seemed unchanged from the times before the Roman left, it reminded me of those scenes.
Thats a great analogy! I could see it being very similar, with their own militia, speaking their own language stubbornly hokding on ehike dreaming of past glories.
Interesting analogy and highly evocative, especially since in Heart of Darkness a similar analogy is drawn about the first Romans arriving in Britain!
Probably didn’t know how to live any other way.
Wow, I was just gonna type this! Exactly what I was thinking.
All this optimistic-hype - when it could be a brutal reality. That some Romans spent their fortunes hiring mercenaries to guard their plantations. And they instilled a reign of terror on the populace, in attempt to hang on to the past.
Finding a "newer" mosaic on the floor speaks nothing of what really went on. It was a time of epic collapse, volcanic winter, worldwide plague/famine, and the breakdown of society. My guess - it was NOT rosy.
Beda, known as the Venerable Beda lived 673--735 AD . He was the internationally known mathematician who wrote math textbooks, promoted the AD dating system and came up with a practical date for Easter based on the phase of the moon on January 1. I have read that he knew of families in England who were Roman descendants and still spoke Latin as their native language.
@dhm7815 Bede (modern English spellng) actually did work to reform the entire Calendar. This was because the old Julian system had become increasingly out of step with the actual seasons of the year. (This was due to the fact that while the Romans understood the priniciple of the leap year, the solar year is not precisely 365.25 days long and eventually the very small difference added up to a huge error.) While Bede's work was important, it required both a shift to the Gregorian Calendar, which was created in1582, but not adopted in England until 1752, and modern technology, to really measure the year.
Bede did not really change the date of Easter, rather he was interested in the system of mathematics which the Catholic Church used to calculate Easter and reported how the English Church came to adopt the Roman dating and system of calculation after the Synod of Whitby in 664 and how this brought unity to the English Churches. Prior to Whitby, different systems were used and this meant different areas began and ended Lent or celebrated Easter at slightly different times. This was no problem until a Queen from Kent married a Northumbrian King. They could end up fasting or feasting days apart from one another. Bede did not get rid of the need to calculate the date for each year - this is due to the fact that Easter is connected to the Jewish Passover and the Equinox and the differences between an imprecise Solar calendar and an imprecise Lunar calendar made the calculation more complex over time. There are still differences in the date of Easter, not only from year to year, but between Catholics/Protestants and the Orthodox and Coptic Churches as well as others such as the Armenian Church. For historical and scientific reasons some wish to continue to calculate Easter, based on Passover, the Equinox and the full moon, while others wish it were a fixed date every year.
See: theconversation.com/fix-the-date-of-easter-the-venerable-bede-would-be-spinning-in-his-grave-54096#:~:text=One%20of%20the%20key%20episodes,was%20still%20fasting%20for%20Lent.
@@charleshayes2528 Well explained. Just an honorary mentioning of professor Milutin Milanković (1879-1958) who produced a Revised Julian calendar in 1923 now adopted by all but five of Eastern Orthodox churches.
I am mentioning this for the “Julian” element in the name: it reminds us of its Roman origins.
@@someoneno-one7672Thank you for telling me. I didn't know that. Sadly, the historical schism between Catholics and Orthodox (c. 1054) and political tensions since, means Orthodox are historically unwilling to use the Gregorian Calendar, since it is named after the Roman Catholic Pope Gregory XIII. This may also explain why other Ancient Churches, such as the Armenian, Coptic and Ethiopian Churches also use a different calendar for their liturgical year. However, modern ecumenical endeavours, including the attempt to fix the date of Easter in a way which would be acceptable to all, might mean the calendars eventually become aligned.
By the way, I read a weird short story, years ago, where it was said that Satan wanted everyone to agree on the Calendar, because only then could he bring about the end of the world, so that resistance to a standard was actually a good thing. It is probably 40 or even 50 years since I read that, so I am sorry I can't remember the details or the author or even the title.
@someonenp- one7672
...and Caesarian origin !
Britain and Dacia, two Provinces from which Rome withdrew from, remarkably, managed to remain culturally Roman in many ways even when no longer officially a part of the Empire. Another great post!
exept britannia was de romanized.
@flyingfoamtv2169 Pretty much right after it was de-romanised, it began to be romanised again.
The Anglo Saxon Kings, Welsh Princes, and Gaelic Kings of Scotland all began flirting with roman imperial status once they established themsleves in the aftermath of the anglo-saxon migrations.
Then the further spread of roman Catholic christianity drew the British Isles back into the wider post-roman world
@@Oldmanplum catholisicm doesnt equal roman society. i dont consider the catholic world to be roman by default, in fact i wouls argue that in the medieval era all of western europe was culturally and politically post roman.
It's been centuries since Spain left the New World, and yet Spanish culture is alive and well throughout Latin America.
@@rumrunner8019 Tell this fact to our(Romania) neighbor to the West, who keeps pushing a self-interested narrative that denies our Latin heritage.
One of the first things the Britons did after the Romans left their island was to invade Gaul. Their forces were much smaller than the Goths and the other Germanic tribes who invaded the same territory, and after Riotamus was defeated by the Goths, the Britons conquered the territory of Armorica. That land has been called Brittany - or Bretagne -ever since.
The Eastern Roman Empire sent trade missions to the tin producing areas of Britain, as this was still the world's leading source of that metal.
Gildas wrote De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae around 540 AD, and if you accept the situation had got worse from a British point of view, he would not have written that book if there was no longer anyone who could read it.
Riothamus came to Gaul as an ally (probably as a foederati force), as the video clearly states.
He’s also the BEST candidate for Arthur…
Great presentation! I have read that it is theorized when Constantine III took the Roman Army out of Britain, he actually only took the Field Army and left the Border Troops behind. That would include the Saxon Shore Forts and Hadrian’s Wall, the soldiers, most of whom were descendants of soldiers who had married local women, as Sebastian has clearly described. I look forward to hearing more about this “lost” province!
There are almost no coins found at Hadrian's Wall older than 402 A.D. No coin means no army. Maximus took troops in 383 A.D., Stilicho took troops in 401 A.D., and Constantine took anyone else left behind in about 407 A.D. That's it. After that, no more troops in Britain are getting paid from Rome. Local defense militias? Sure, but not getting paid.
Not only that ..many were "Germanic" descended particularly the dispatch riders of the angarion who maintained the roads way stations and postal and haulage systems.
Well my high school history teacher said that when Rome left it started the dark ages and everyone just apparently immediately forgot how to do anything and just rolled around in the mud
I heard that too. Somebody was REALLY lazy when they came up with that one.
Well there’s definitely some truth to that, look at the decline of African countries after they became independent from their European conquerer.
The technological rollback was much worse in some regions such as Wales.
In other areas, as long as the remaining population was high/dense enough and the local resources allowed it, city life continued for a while. Depopulation (not just from the loss of elites), lack of access to goods that used to be imported, and fragmentation of the territory can really hasten the decline. Culturally, everyone wants to continue, but they have to abandon the institutions, services, and even the cities themselves, once they can't occupy all the roles and maintain what's there.
I was mostly making fun of the horrible history teacher I had in high school, it know it was much more complicated but she truly believed Europeans were just idiots that couldn’t do anything.
The Welsh language, has a lot of Latin borrowings, or rather evidence of Latin words borrowed into the Brythonic language, the ancestor language of Welsh, which have carried in being used till today
There also standing stones from the 6th century written in Latin. Many Christian foundations, churches and monastic date to the 6th Century in Wales.
My sense is that the Anglo-Saxon conquest of Britain took place in stages rather than in one catastrophic go and that the Plague of Justinian probably had a hand in the collapse of sub-Roman Britain. A similar divide, with a different eventual result, was seen later with the Danelaw.
I've wondered how organized and purpose-driven the Anglo/Saxon/Jute migration to Britain was along those same lines. Was it intended as an immediate conquest or just a desire to integrate into the area so long as their needs were met?
Excellent point.
They were unconnected raiders, like the later Vikings. There was no ‘invasion’ nor ‘conquest’
DNA research in the UK certainly shows there was no replacement of Celts by Anglo-Saxons. We carry both sets of genes plus much more.
All elites assume the “little people,” “the deplorables” cannot survive without them. These elites are invariably those who write history. This is true even today. Consequently, our views on history, indeed on most things, are heavily influenced by their biases and prejudices.
Historians write history..many were little people
@@HepatitisBChannelHepatitisB The literate write history; historians compile it. Elites choose what will and won’t be broadly published and easily accessible.
I’d be really interested in a video of this era from a class struggle point of view. Why did peasants continue to work for the landed gentry when the army was gone?
@@andyds11 I’m sure you could find one in the Moscow state archives.
@@andyds11 Because the landed gentry had the overwhelming majority of the military power, and hence the peasants needed (or were 'convinced' of the need for) their protection.
Also, the peasantry was a very disparate 'class', and they had no 'class consciousness' as the Marxists like to say - so no one felt the need to overthrow the landed gentry, which often wasn't that different from the peasants anyway.
At least this is how I understand the situation; I'm not a historian and the British Isles were (and still are) a very different place depending on where you are.
Some areas in Morocco and Algeria also maintained Roman culture and society up until the Muslim conquest
Really? I wonder how the Vandal Kingdom in North Africa thought of that?
I visited the villa at Chedworth two weeks ago. The rediscovered mosaic has now been covered up again to preserve it for now until they can get funds to properly display it.
i've always had a theory and it's just mine, mind you. The legendary tale of the High King Vitegeren that invited the Anglo-Saxons in was, in fact, real. He was a Roman landowner who still held villas and was an administrator. Maybe even a Dux. He hires some Saxons for mercenary work, as resources in manpower are low. Then, he doesn't pay them so they rebel. Just a theory.
That's just your theory? Have you copyrighted it because it seems to be the story of every arthurian novel i have read in the last ten to twenty years.
I work in the shadow of Caer Guorthigernus, where he (Gwrtheiryn or Vortigern, depending on how Brythonic was transcribed) met his end when his tower caught fire after being struck by lightning while besieged by Uther Pendragon, according to Geoffrey of Monmouth. Monmouth is just over the other side of the hill. A few hundred yards from my office is St. Dubricius Church (Dyffrig or Tiburcius in other transcriptions) - he who crowned Arthur at Amesbury and at his Whitsun court at Caerleon, just 15 miles down the road. Around the bend in the River is Hentland, where Constantine of Kernow (Custennin) founded a seminary, and on the other side from Coppett Hill was King Constantine's Ford, overlooked by a Norman Castle built to guard it, and between the seminary and the ford is the former St Constantine's Church. The ford remained in the Crown Estate until a bridge was built in about 1870. Constantine it was to whom Arthur passed his crown to deputise for him.
I could go on...
When the British monk Gildas wrote a Jeremiad against the contemporary rulers of Britain about in the first half of the 6th century he referred to the ruler who invited Saxon mercenaries in only as "superbus tyrranus", the "proud usurper". Centuries later the Welsh writer Nennius called him Vortigern. However the prefix vor- could simply be a translation into Welsh of superbus, and tigern is the Welsh pronunciation of Latin Tyrranos.
Look at all of the alleged Saxon "victories" prior to 546 in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles. These appear to have been excerpts from Saxon sagas, that is dinner theatre. These stories were recounted to glorify the host. Moreover when you look at the details of these battles they appear yo involve no more than a couple of dozen fighters on each side. But the bottom line is all of these alleged battles are located within less than 30km/18miles of the eastern or channel coast. And the Kingdom of Wessex was ruled by kings with Welsh names until the 8th century.
Why 546? Firstly it is almost certainly after the Welsh States were described as still having a Latin administration as a result of a political restoration by Ambrosius Aurelianus after the alleged Vortigern, but also because 546 has recently been identified as "The Worst Year" in the first millenium because it was a year without a summer, probably because of a volcanic mega-eruption.
@@jamescobban857 Hi, thanks for the linguistic lesson and for the information about "The Worst Year". It would be interesting if someone did a video or a series on how weather or natural phenomena impacted history. There are the volcanic eruptions, the little Ice-Ages, such as the climate that influenced Dickensian views of White Christmases as normal and there are also the floods that hit the Humber and River Hull in 1253 and the possible "tsunami" that travelled up the Severn in 1607!
There’s a lot of evidence that this actually happened, you know.
After the withdrawal of Rome from Britain, archaeology suggests there was a continuance for quite some time.
Vindolanda was occupied for 400 years after 410 AD.
At Tintagel, in the 5th and 7th centuries, there were around 100 buildings.
Sherds of amphora, pieces of fine plates and bowls, and fragments of decorated glass vessels show that the people were trading with the Mediterranean world.
With the financial collapse, the key to survival was income.
Presumably, the stanegate provided tolls from travellers to maintain vindolanda.
Tintagel probably traded metals and miscellaneous goods for Mediterranean high-quality goods.
Given that the invaders came across the German Sea up the rivers, the west was relatively shielded from them initially, and the sea provides a valuable food source in time of scarcity.
A community of miners and metalworkers would be ideal for a defence force.
I live near Split, Croatia, where Diocletian built his retirement home. City where I live used to be called Salona, it was one of the main cities of roman empire, and the capital of illyricum. We have ancient ruins of the city, its beautiful to walk among them, unfortunately, the state doesn’t take good care of them, as they are falling aparat. I love roman history, and I want to thank you for your channel. Keep up the good work. ✌️🇭🇷
If you were seeking shelter, wouldn’t you use an abandoned building like the one the mosaic was in? Wouldn’t you build a fire on the floor? Those buildings stood for centuries after the Roman’s left. Of course the local people would make use of free shelter.
THIS CHANNEL IS GOLD
Its reasonable to think that even if Roman soldiers left Britain, artisans, architects, and engineers might have chosen to stay behind.
This is true. Many had started new lives, and had established homes and families. There was no real reason to leave.
The British WERE Roman citizens, since 212. Many legionnaires retired in Britain, as did Senators & rich merchants. It was just as Roman as Hawaii is American - more so in fact .
Only a/the Field Army left with Constantine 3rd, & it may have not been in Britain long in any case. The regular garrison would only have supplied any elite troops for his expedition into Europe. He was successful for a couple of years, enough time to sort out the defences of Britannia, as he also had the Roman Rhine armies to use, as well as barbarian allies. No one expected that Britain was to be lost to Rome, this only happened after Constantine's defeat, when Rome failed to send a new administration, because of the chaos at the centre of the Empire. The Britons would not have considered the Romans to be occupiers at this time, because they were Romans. It was the incoming Germans that were foreigners.
@@danielferguson3784 Actually Britannia WASN'T lost to Rome - Rome (in the form of the Roman Governor of Gaul) even asked Riothamus (High King of the Britons) to give aid against the Franks. Rome told the British Romans to 'fend for themselves' ie choose their own officials instead of waiting for Honorius to do so (cause, very over-extended & facing lots of problems at the time.
You never fail to show unexpected discoveries of the late Roman history. Simply perfect!
Interesting. It was the higher quality Field Armies that left in Constantine's bid for power. Remaining behind would have been the lower grade garrison units, though by the early fifth century, there may have been some leveling of quality between the two branches.
It's fun to think about some Romano British lord and his household stubbornly refusing to leave when everyone around them was retreating.
It'd make for a good character drama.
It has: "The Long Sunset", R. C. Sheriff, czcams.com/video/DuQpglShKvE/video.html
Roman British citizenry didn't evacuate, period. The legions were recalled.
I recall a BBC (?) program by one of the time team people exploring the topic of writing post 400 in Britain. Sure enough, 6th century Latin on tombstones were decently common. Easy enough to find here on YT
Gloucestershire here, where Chedworth is. We all know that Roman civilisation in these parts lasted until the Battle of Deorham, in 577. Also, looking for Mons Badonicus ? Try Bredon Hill... Yes, also very much hanging the hat on King Arthur being a local lad and early 6thC Romano British leader.
Academic Martin Henig, a senior member of Wolfson College, Oxford, suggests that the fifth-century illustrated manuscript the Vergilius Romanus was produced in Britain.
Yeah - that’s pretty much what most think…
I saw a documentary on this so it’s nice to see you cover this.
Wine was also imported to western Britain until the 560s so the trade networks had not completely broken down across the imperium, creating a unity outside speaking Latin or worshiping Christ
The depth of the comments on this site are beyond anything I have ever seen on CZcams. Wonderful! Happy Trails
The history changing archaeological discoveries at Chedworth Roman Villa were astounding, and blew a hole through everything that has been mainstream about the decline and fall of Roman Britain. It also gives even more support to the actuality of the Battle of Badon in the early 6th century. This Romano British army must have been extremely strong and well organised, as it effected a shattering defeat to a combined army of Saxons and Jutes from Sussex and Kent, which effectively ended their westward expansion into Dorset and Wiltshire for at least fifty years. What was really interesting about this battle, is that there is speculation the Romano-British forces still contained Sarmatian Cataphracts (Equites Cataphractarii). These heavy cavalry were the tanks of their day. Both they and their horses were covered in scale armour. The Sarmatian Cataphracts first appeared in Britain in the 2nd century AD. The Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius sent a large contingent of 5,500 to the province. They remained in Britain right up until the previously supposed end of the Roman period in around 410 AD. Although still called Sarmatian, by the 5th century AD, they would have been made up from Romano-Britons, descendants of the original 2nd century Sarmatians. Whilst the serving Cataphracts may have been withdrawn to the continent as the Empire began to fall apart, the veterans would have remained in Britain, and would have trained their sons to defend their lands. That being so, in 520 AD, a fully trained force of these heavy cavalry would still have been available to Ambrosius Aurelianus, albeit in much reduced numbers. Roman Britain did not actually disappear in 410 AD, that is a fallacy. It lasted for much longer in the West of Britain, well into the 7th century.
They may have used Ermin Street between Cirencester, Swindon and Marlborough to outflank the Saxon army.
(And this battle may have also been the origin of the legend of King Arthur.)
All the evidence is that Badon took place at the end of the 5thC not in the early 6thC. There is zero evidence that it was against the Jutes and Saxons expanding westwards on the south coast. This is pure speculation.
The Anglo Saxon chronicle which (supposedly) records that south coast expansion, makes no mention of Badon.
Ambrosius Aurelianus, as is evident from Gildas, (probably writing in the mid 530s), was a character of the 5thC, not the 6th, since Gildas mentions his grandchildren.
He was likely dead for more than 50 years by 520.
They still speak French in West africa today.
Died around 498-500
Well, this explains the part of the Matter of Britain where Arthur tries to conquer Rome: he was so Roman be tried to become emperor.
A most interesting and completely unexplored question worthy of your consideration is: what remained in post-Roman Britain of the Christian church as part and parcel of the Western Christian culture. That British Christians continued sporadically to attend Gallic Christian synods and local councils appears to be well-established; and we know that the British church was sufficiently advanced to spawn at least one "world-class" theologian in Pelagius - condemned by Augustine of Hippo himself and a Church Council held in Jerusalem. Yet so little (if anything at all) is explored on the internet regarding the Romano-British church. Has the history been wiped clean and doctored to support the notion that only Rome-sent Augustine of Canterbury evangelised the English? That is, that the pre-existing Romano-British Christians of Southern England had ALL fled Westwards and Northwards to a new Celtic fringe?
@user-re2fl3sh2d While a fair number must have fled to e.g.; Brittany (witness how many Cornish Saints turn up in Brittany for instance) it can't be the whole story, since the Synod of Whitby, 664 and two generations after Augustine of Canterbury, met to discuss which celebration of Easter to adopt - popularly it is seen as Irish versus Roman, but the one they actually chose may have been Northumbrian (and not strictly the Roman dating) rather than the Irish one. Another issue, which seems trivial to us, is which monastic haircut to use, "Irish" or "Roman". Augustine's mission seems to have been to the new Saxon/Angles/Jutes in Kent and surrounding areas and not so much to the indigenous and already Christianised peoples, but if Augustine had completely won over all of the "English" to Roman Christianity and if Celtic Christianity had been entirely limited to Brittany and Ireland (and maybe, bits of Wales) then there would have been no need for the Synod. It can only have been because there was a living tradition of "Irish" monasticism and diverse celebration of Easter that the Synod was necessary. Also, monastries were often the founding or mother church of an area, so monastic tradition would have almost certainly influenced popular piety.
I am a retired Evangelist and Bible Teacher and am very aware that the "Irish"/Celtic methods of planting monastic communities and churches varied somewhat from the Roman approach, which was more bureaucratic and centred on Bishops. However, one of my books, which is excellent in other ways, is deeply disappointing because it begins its discussion of English Christianity with Augustine and doesn't really ask what came before. The fact that the Anglican Church (and the pre-Reformation Catholic Church) traces back to Canterbury for its foundation shouldn't, at this late date, prevent an honest appraisal of what came before. After all, the Celtic churches were still within the mainstream (both Catholic and Orthodox, since they were still one Church at this point) and brought in traditions, such as Confession, which may go back to Egyptian monasticism and which were much more tolerant than the view that post-baptismal sin could not be forgiven.
@@charleshayes2528 Thank you for raising some of the points that I left out of my original post for reasons of brevity: touching on "Irish" monasticism, the Synod of Whitby and the apparent tensions in continuing English Christianity that the latter sought to resolve. (The additional point you raise regarding the strong Breton connection is well taken.)
The key issue is, I think, pointed at in your statement that "Augustine's mission seems to have been to the new Saxon/Angles/Jutes in Kent and surrounding areas and not so much to the indigenous and already Christianised peoples...". Even accepting the underlying premise that Augustine targeted exclusively the new Kentish overlord-class - a very Roman Church way of doing things which that Church continued to favour universally over the intervening centuries - we are indeed left with the erasure from history and the record of those "already Christianised peoples" left over from Rome's occupation of the island. What of those who did not flee but stayed on as farmers and (vestigial) urban dwellers?
Insofar as Provincial England had a continuing Christian church, then it no doubt mirrored in its form and organisation the models found in nearby Gaul and the Low Countries - if not the wider Empire. That implies bishops and elders/presbyters. Had these all vanished before Augustine turned up, or did he just discard them as redundant and superseded, best passed over in silence and neglect to avoid embarrassing questions of whose legitimate authority trumped whose? Did Augustine write them off as Donatists?
You can see why both the pre-Reformation and post-Anglican might edit out entirely this hangover story from the end of Roman Britain.
@@user-re2fl3sh2d Hi, thanks. I do tend not to be brief. However, I will try here. Your questions are all good. On the one hand, it isn't correct to see the Romano British (Celtic) Churches as somehow completely separate from Rome or as proto-Protestant. It is not at all similar to the current separation of Western Catholicism from Eastern Orthodoxy, or even more the schism between Catholics and Protestants, where the "orders" and sacraments of the latter aren't considered valid by Rome.
In the 6th/7th century historical context, there was still only one Church, but with varying traditions and interpretations. It took centuries for the schism of 1054, between East and West, to finally take place and while there was obviously diversity in the West, hence Whitby, there was also an underlying unity at a time when things were less solidified and codified than later. The Western Church didn't introduce compulsory celibacy for priests until the 11th century, for example.
So, it isn't likely that Augustine saw the locals as heretical or false. However, their use of different traditions and having a different model of evangelism may have raised his eyebrows. From my reading, it was a rare Bishop who could distinguish the common core of the faith from the specific "correct" way of doing things.
OK, better stop, not as brief as I intended.
There are some remarkable post-empire archaeological finds along Hadrians wall that hints to this.
Amazing video. Yes some roman soldiers stayed in Britain for sure after 410. Saint Germanus met a tribune during his mission in Britain in 429 AD. And at least one fort of the Adrian wall ( Birdoswald) continued to be occupied for several decades. Ambrosius Aurelianus had the title of dux , not of rex. It means that he was a roman officer. But it is possible that the roman identity of the Britons faded away quite quickly: When Gildas is referring to the resistence of the locals against the Saxons he never mentions the term " Romans". He talks about " cives" citizens.
You're jumping to many conclusions without real evidence, his writing are in latin and therefore he's gonna use a whole bunch of terms which he believed were applicable but meaning something different and more local to what you interpret it as.
@@nodruj8681 I did not jump to any conclusions. I said it is a possibility. But I will gladly explain why I formulated this hypothesis. As I said, Gildas never refers to the Britons as Romans. He calls them cives. Taken in isolation , this fact does'nt mean anything. But let's compare Gildas to other sources which relate the course of events occurred in the fifth and sixth centuries elsewhere in the former territories of the Western Roman Empire. Hydatius and Isidore of Sevilla, when describing the gradual conquest of the Iberian peninsula by the Visigohts and the Suebi, when referring to the local population, use systematically the term "Romans". The same goes for Gregorius of Tours when describing the conquest of Gallia by the Franks. When Eugippus describes the evacuation of the civil population from Noricum by Odoacer he uses the term Romans as well. We observe the same usage by Aurelius Victor and Procopius when referring to the civil population living in Africa and Italy under Vandalic and Ostrogohtic rule respectivly. Even in the postroman berber kingdom of Altava a part of the population was still called roman and the king was " rex Maurorum et Romanorum". Furthermore, Gildas states that Ambrosius Aurelianus was possibly the only Roman who survived the onslaught of the Saxons. That clearly means that Gildas did not consider the Britons as Romans anymore.For this reasons I deem possible that the Britons reverted to their ancestral national identity in a relative short time. Concerning the title "dux" in opposition to "rex" , Gildas is quite clear: he mentions reges and tyranni. Kings and Tyrants. They were of course petty tribal kings and chiefs. Ambrosius is the only one called " dux" which is a typical roman military title. In this capacity, Ambrosius had the supreme command over the numerous petty kings and led the romano british forces against the Saxons.According to Gildas, Ambrosius's father wore the purple. That can only mean he was either a patrician senator or a high magistrate( with civilian or military powers, either a consul or a consularis ). So it is safe to assume that Ambrosius instead of reclaiming the title of rex, wich was sacrilegious for a Roman, tried at least to rivive a roman military office, ( the one of dux Britanniarum reported in the Notitia Dignitatum for instance).
But 'Cives' meant Roman.
Wow you mean the anglo saxons were illegal immigrants in there day. Did they come in rubber boats.
@antoniotorcoli5740 If Isidore or Gregory refer to Romanized people outside of Italy as Romans, and Gildas does not, that reflects not at all on the Romano-Britons. If Gregory referred to Gauls as Romans and RB as something else, that could be significant. But we have no such comparison. That makes it very likely that not using Roman is a Gildas peculiarity, especially when he obviously wishes to denigrate the RB compared to Real Romans.
Many of these Romans had been British for three hundred years. I have ancestors in Ireland going back about a century but I can’t imagine just going back to Ireland because life got tough in America.
Many immigrants to America wound up going back home, but the Irish had the fewest returnees.
Yes, please, you really must make a video of the Romano-Britons who went to fight the visigoths in Gaul.
Congrats on your magnificent graphics and animations. They are excellent and really help visual and imagine the past !
Ich habe irgendwie übersehen, dass Du die 100k geknackt hast, Glückwunsch!!
Many historians have suggested that Gloucestershire and nearby counties only became English after the battle of Dyrham, near Bath, in (from memory) 577.
This is described in the Anglo-Saxon chronicle, and is consistence with a flourishing villa at Chedworth.
Note: There is a nice pub near Chedworth - The Green Dragon.
Ed. Consistent, not consistence. Predictive texting!
Sadly the pub in Chedworth itself, the Seven Tuns, has now closed. I know the Green Dragon though, at Cowley.
Constantine iii always fascinated me for some reason. I always liked to think about what would have happened if he defeated Honorius and if it would have been better for the West
Always loved Kipling's poem ;The Roman Centurian's Song'. Starts 'Legate, I had the new last night, my cohort ordered home'.....'I've served in Britain 40 years, what should I do in Rome'... 'Now let another take my sword, command me not to go'. Mind you, if he'd 'served' for 40 years' he was getting on a bit...Great poem though.
Yes, one of my favorite Kipling poems. Also C.S. Lewis presents a very interesting picture of Merlin as a Romano-Brittan in his novel _ That Hideous Strength _.
@olwens1368 I don't think I know that poem, although I have read a lot of Kipling. I never thought about the question of enlistment in the Legions, just had a look, and apparently, we are talking about 17 years old at minimum and a usual service of 25 years. So a soldier could be in his early 40s when given the opportunity to retire and we know that many did retire into cities and towns referred to as "colonia" where the Roman population held Roman citizenship, even if they were born there as children of veterans. Apparently, Colchester, Gloucester and Lincoln are known to have been "colonia". Perhaps Kipling didn't have access to the data, but even a man of 40 years service would only be 57 and could live for decades longer if fit and well-fed. (Of course, average lifespan doesn't mean that individuals were all dead at a young age, since the average is influenced by infant mortality, illness and accident. Most Victorians, for example, could and did live far longer than the average, which is skewed by the massively high infant mortality under the age of 5 and other early deaths before adulthood.)
Wonderful Old RK was ahead of his time for sure.........a prescient genius if ever. Like you I adore this work....unlike Orwell!......and the Centurion's Song 'moves' me so and has done for many years. Such 'sweep' from so little:~ "Let me work here for Britain's sake ~ at any task you will ~ A marsh to drain, a road to make or native troops to drill'"
When I was in college, I would eat lunch with one of my professors. she was an elderly lady who could speak Latin. I wanted to improve my Latin, and she said she would help me if we spoke only Latin during lunch. As it turned out my Latin was so bad we had to speak English much of the time. She was originally from Gloucester and told me that the area around the River Severn from the Walsh border to Oxford was the last area of Britain that was truly Roman for, she said, several hundred years after the Romans left. The reason was the trade with the coasts of Spain and France with Celtic peoples that spoke Latin. The trade was in cattle and agricultural goods. This find seems to support what she told me.
Very Interesting.Being born in the former Pons Aelius of the indigenous Brigantia tribe.
(A Geordie if you like!) This put a refreshingly new complexion on what we previously believed as fact! Well done!
what probably happened that the Comitatenses troops went overseas with Honorius, the border troops, more closely tied to their local communities, mostly would have stayed put in Britain (not Brighton) and gaps in defenses were filled with foederati's, for example the Saxons such as those led by Hengist.
Excellent video about one my favourite subjects. Ceasing to be part of the Roman Empire after 360 years as a province was one of the most significant and traumatic moments in British history. I suspect it was very difficult for the inhabitants who lived through it as the population collapse shows. Being a colony as part of a powerful empire is falsely presented these days as nothing but bad but in fact bestowed peace and stability on most ordinary people.
Have you read "Britain after Rome", by Robin Fleming? (She's a professor of medieval history). It's an interesting read.
Something similar has been known about from Roman Verulamium (St Albans) since the first half of the 20thC, when water pipes were discovered in the old city and found to have been installed long after the town was thought to have been totally deserted. Verulamium is in the general Chilterns area, known to have been isolated for a considerable time from the main Anglo-Saxon settlements all around in that part of England. Physical anthropological surveys conducted in the 1920s on people of proven local ancestry in the Chilterns even showed a larger proportion of them corresponded to a "Celtic" type than the predominant Anglo-Saxon types.
I actually don't find this particularly surprising, these villas are owned by various wealthy individuals and I can imagine some of these people hunkering down survivalist style and etching out a new life under changing conditions. Also, considering that people are fleeing the less stable areas, it would be reasonable to assume that these local elites would in fact increase in power and importance as they take and support the refugees from other parts.
So love this channel that you started. I followed you on the old channel and left it when you quit as your voice is what kept me listening to you. I don't post much and just lurk and listen. But I do need to say this as the quality is great.
...lurk and listen ...😂😂😂 Kinda what we all do.
My favorite era and topic! Thank so much!
Very interesting...my old college history professor, Dr. Landon, once told us the last major city to fall in the West and thereby the true end of Greco-Roman culture in western Europe, did not happen until around 700 A.D. I would only dispute the idea that the incoming tribes were "enormous"...they might have been numerous but their numbers were never that large.
Great video Maiorianus! I wanted to comment so your channel may be boosted to appear to more history fanatics because it is a gem of modern youtube
When I was a young student of history at university in Sweden in 1990s I was very interested in the historical borderland between Antiquity and Medieval time. I felt that this time period (roughly AD 400-800 from the downfall of Western Rome until the arrival of the Vikings) was underappreciated, and I still feel it is. Therefor, I have been very happy to follow the Maiorianus channel, not only for its narrative content, but also for the captivating illustrations. (Where do you get them from? Are they AI generated?) I do, however have a question and a thought about the early Anglo-Saxons arrival. Could it have been that they tried to blend in and adapt to the remnant of Roman life? Was it really that they wanted to destroy buildings and culture that looked Roman to them?
Would love to hear your take on Riothamus, Ambrosius Aurelianus, & Cunedda. I believe all three have some connection to the legend of King Arthur.
One of them (I’d say Riothamus) is undoubtedly the ‘real’ Arthur in fact.
@@teleriferchnyfain Based on what I've read about the guy, I'd have to agree. His name may have been "Arthur" or "Artorius" as "Riothamus" was apparently a title.
@@morgan97475 Exacty. He's the origin of the legends in other words.
@@morgan97475 Artorius possibly. Or Ambrosius Aurlianus. Or Vitalinus of Glouscester (or a son of his). Or Caradoc... All strong contenders.
Another very good episode on the compelling period.
As you must know, there are quite a few clearly Roman place names in Wales. But I would also like to know what happened to these late remnants of Roman technology and life style. We’re the people absorbed into a new Anglo-Saxon culture, or overrun and killed?
The literary tradition of the Britons, as documented by Nennius in his “heap”, the Historia, indicates that the Saxon “invasion” was primarily a case of the Romano-British elites hiring the Saxons as mercenaries, and the Saxon forces rebelling after the Romano-British elites refused to pay the agreed wages.
While the specifics in Nennius were probably the equivalent of a Hollywood historical film, the broader outlines are consistent with the archaeological record-more so, in fact, than the traditional narrative that was taught in school. In many cases, the early English settlers were located in their own settlements nearby the Roman towns, rather than in the towns themselves. Local peasants (yes, an anachronistic term, but it is well understood) were generally not displaced, although some of the elites might have migrated westward when the early English settlers started to think of themselves more as jarls than as karls, as the real elites and not just the thugs of the elites. Perhaps some, as in the Vortigern story, married into the families of the leaders of their foreign mercenaries, and the lineages just merged together over time.
Supports David Keys' view as Dark Ages only began in 538AD with Anglo-Saxons only in East Britain.
Not really surprising given the distribution of classical latin inscriptions all over the west of Britain as opposed to ecclesiastical latin between the 5th and 9th centuries. Whilst it doesn't show evidence of villa building it does show the continuation of a strong romano-british culture hundreds of years after the soldiers left and one not veneered by the church.
While I love history, one person can't know it all, and so I would move from one era of interest to another, placidly leaving gaps to perhaps fill in later. I was mostly disinterested in late antiquity until I found this channel. You have made it perfectly fascinating.
You have my ear now... there have been recent excavations at Caerleon (City of the Legion) which discovered that it had a purpose-built port on the River Usk. Can you cover that?
Local tradition maintains that it was for five years used for some Dux called Arthur to hold court at Whitsun. I say local... some monk called Geoffrey of Monmouth.
Yes, covered in Holy Kingdom by A.Gilbert
And by Ross at Britain's Hidden History
I did some quick research on this and found that 4 legions were stationed in Britain to keep the peace (XIV, II, IX, XX) with 3 up north near the Scottish border and one closer to London. That means that there were roughly 20,000 Roman troops in Britain, assuming the legions were at full strength. Most of the security against bandits and raiders would have been locals, probably including many retired Roman military men, plus mercenaries (including Saxons, etc.), and these would have still been in Britain after the legions left, and in fact may have actually been beefed up. The professional Roman troops would not have been close enough to be of much help for many of the towns and villas. For the people living in and around this Roman villa, the withdrawal of the Roman legions may not have even been noticeable for a while.
Obviously, things did eventually break down, but I am not totally shocked that Roman influence continued for some time, especially away from the east coast where Angles, Saxons and Jutes were "immigrating". I think it would be interesting to see a study done on just how the existing Roman / Briton population interacted with the "immigrants". I am assuming that in some cases, the Saxons just wiped out the existing population and took over the farms / towns, but was this the case every time, or were there times when a Briton village five miles away from a Saxon village interacted with trade, marriage, etc.?
Three place names on the Mersey Estuary: Inch (Ynys), Celtic; Frodsham, Saxon; Helsby, Norse. Evidence here of a mixed population fifteen hundred years ago.
Thanks!
Wow, more and more of the "whimper, not a bang" scenario.
You can definitely do a video on the possible inspirations of the King Arthur legend
As a Northumbrian interested in the history of my country, I'm often frustrated as well as inspired by the many mysteries of what happened here between 410 and 604. Thanks for this video!
The key to this story is Arthur. The word is Gallic for bear it was either a nickname or a battle standard it was not a given name it only became that after many centuries pass.
Definitely a cognomen rather than a name. BTW Riothamus is a title, as is Vortigern….
Germanic bear god was my understanding.
The person using ‘Arthur’ as a cognomen was tapping into the double significance of that name - the Celtic deity as well as the Roman Lucius Castus Artorius of the 2nd century.
I am sitting not a dozen miles from Chedworth. A place well worth visiting. There are a significant number of other large villas in the surrounding Cotswold Hills.
According to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles, the Saxons did not really penetrate into that region until as late as 577. In that year, 'Cuthwine and Ceawlin fought with the Britons, and slew three kings, Coinmail, Condidan, and Farinmail, at the place that is called Deorham, and took three cities, Gloucester, Cirencester, and Bath.' Deorham, or Dyrham as it is now spelt, is about 35 miles from Chedworth, pretty much straight down a major Roman road known as the Fosse Way.
So there were clearly* Romano-British political entities, based in Roman cities, nearly 170 years after the traditional date for the legions' departure. Chedworth would very likely have been within one of these (Gloucester or Cirencester, being half-way between the two). The Saxons called them "kings", but who knows what titles those individuals and their followers may have used?
* Admittedly, the ASC was not compiled until the reign of Alfred, about three centuries later. But that seems a strange thing to make up if such "kingdoms" had never existed. The authors evidently believed in them.
Thank you. I am very interested in Roman Britain and the Saxon time period. Can you suggest a current book that does justice to this time period.
Always been fascinated by what happened to Britannia after Constantine III pulled out, thankyou for enlightening us on this new discovery, Maiorianus.
Thanks for another great video! I have been a rome jerd since childhood but always avoided the late empire because it depressed me.... until this channel, you have completely turned my understanding of what happened completely upside down! From the "Barbarians" who overthrew the west, actually being vassals of the eastern emporer amd Italy becoming part of that empire, to the actual destruction of Rome being at the hands of the East and not wanton destruction by the barbarians, who actually maintained the traditions and culture of the empire, to Roman urban culture in parts of mainland Europe persevering all the way until the Viking era...tying the supposed dark ages into the time of the Holy Roman Empire.... totally bridging that gap... it explains so much that previously seemed contradictory.... now this, Amazing, it totally changes the perception of history, if they were still adding to, or even building new fully Roman style Villas into the 500s... how long could Roman Culture have lasted? Into the 600s? Further? Amazing....
Great content. This video is quite interesting. I am a Big fan of Roman history.
It sounds like British leaders were inept back then too.
“My king, we need to buy weapons and fortifications!”
King: “I just bought a new floor.”
English leaders. The Scottish sent the Romans packing.
@@dirkscott5410 Nah, they just thought Scotland was worthless and saw no point in invading.
Makes sense that Chedworth continued as it's a reasonable distance from the Fosse Way and the road as I remember ends there.
I visited it for the first time half a century ago when they were still uncovering it..
Definitely made an impact on me...
I still remember the four seasons mosaic..
Bourton on the Water is not too far away with it's model village.. the Romans must have been there.
40 or so miles north on the Fosse Way is Chesterton Windmill that overlooks the site of what was a Roman place next to the Fosse Way.
Some miles north is High Cross where Watling Street crosses and near there is Brinklow mott .. where the Fosse Way actually goes round something.
(Maybe a video for you to do? there's some other places you might like to know about...)
Fascinating! Adjusts, but also confirms the bifurcation of 5th and 6th century Britain into the Roman west (where this villa is) and the gradually more Anglo-Saxon east. Of course, the final coup de grace for Roman Britain came with the Justinianic plague of 541-2, spread via its normal ties to the Empire, while Anglo-Saxon areas, with much fewer such ties, survived, and spread west.
Just found your channel. This era is my favorite to study. Thank you for a new perspective. I was also taught the Romans left Britannia , full stop. No consideration that during the occupation, families were made and established and of course they carried on as before after the Romans left. It was probably a gradual process.
I pity the poor guy who rode all the way from Rome to London and further north, just to tell the soldiers to go home. It’s not like you could pick up the phone and call your outpost office!
It was an informative and wonderful historical coverage video about civilized Romanian that was influenced by the remaining in western Britain 🇬🇧 after a century of official Roman legions retreated to content territories. Thank you for sharing
A very interesting video, I really enjoyed your coverage and insights. I subscribed, and am eagerly looking forward to the video you mentioned making in the future about Riothamus.
I Love Late Roman History!
Early 500s would put you up against the volcanic eruptions and related plagues(Justinian mentioned in other earlier comments but without mention of their relation to the global climate volcano based aftermath) after the world temperature dropped (The years without summer).
Well, I can believe it. I have a heated floor in my bathroom. 😳 After you have one you can really see the utility and comparative efficiency of having things like that. I can’t get a hypocaust built in my house these days but the Roman innovations would only have been abandoned by those that simply couldn’t have reproduced them.
Very beautiful video. You're getting better each day. Congratulations my friend.
Rome pulled out the army but the provincial and very especially local administrations should have persisted anyhow, maybe with new people in charge, locals rather than Romans proper from the continent, but that was always how the Empire worked ("an empire of cities", "city-states" often under the imperial administration). The issue is that there should have been something bigger than just the cities (in decadence) and the villae (not enough to create a new political entity on their own), something that enforced the law and the hierarchical class order (elsewhere the villae were often burned by the bagaudae rebels and the oligarchs had to resorts to barbarian thugs to defend their privileges, as we see in Gaul and Hispania). And there's where we get to the legend of Arthur and the realistic interpretations of this myth: something like that must have existed, some sort of British realm or realms in the interlude until the Anglosaxon conquest, which was surely not done in a day anyhow.
A great read about the so called dark ages of Britain is " The Age of Arthur" by John Morris. Following the withdrawel of the Roman troops in 410 the Christian Diocese, province of Brittania was left to organize it's own affairs. And leaders such as Vortigern and Aurelianus set themselves up as local emperors ( Carausius did this in 4th Century), and wore the imperial purple. This leads to the not so mythical Artorius who defeated the pagan Saxons at the battle of Badon. Thus establishing for a period of 25 years or so a golden period of a romano Christian Britain again. He probably died at the battle of Camlan. About 21 years after battle of Badon. The Cambrian Annals state that " the Battle of Camlann, where Arthur and Medraut fell". Medraut ( Modred) probably served Arthur rather than, in later stories, being his enemy. It is no coincidence that royal families in the successor states in the future fragmented Britain often named their sons Arthur. The reign of Arthur which ended around 525 A.D. marked the end of Roman Britain and the beginning the Medieval period and the eventual conquest by the Daxons of most of Britain.
@@Ian2844 - Interesting theorization. I do wonder about the issue of the Church, because the Arthurian legend may represent it as important but that may be embelishment by the Christian authors which wrote the legend down later on. What does archaeology tell us about post-Roman religion, how do churches and monasteries evolve: do they decline, are ransacked or even existed in England to begin with? Christianity was not that strong in the Western Empire and Britain is a case where we do know for sure that dechristianization happened to nearly total extent, although if this owes to the Saxon invasion or is something older I don't know for sure.
Except it’s not a myth’ in the way most people think - it’s a legend based on a real person (the one who DID hold Roman Britain together). My vote goes to Riothamus.
@@teleriferchnyfain - I'm all for legends (oral history) having a kernel of truth and disentangling that part being most interesting. Myth (mythos) is a Greek word that means "thread" after all, as in Ariadne's thread maybe, which you have to follow to escape the labyrinth... but which is anything but straightforward anyhow.
Do we know that post-Roman Britain was held together and that it was specifically by some guy named Arthur? We don't. What legend says is that, after a period of decay and probably of wars the guy became king and restored a semblance of order but that he could not ultimately keep the realm together (died trying).
TBH, what intrigues me the most is the conflict between Morgana and Arthur, the Pagan (goddess, same as the Morrigan, ultimately the same as Basque Mari but in subsumed Indoeuropean version) vs the Christian, which resembles a lot some Basque legends, especially the one in which the Lord of Bicay marries Mari (supreme goddess, a ritual that AFAIK also happened in Insular Celtic contexts as legitimization of the monarch) and has to swear that he would never bring his Christian religion inside the home. However one day he discovers his wife having a goat-like foot and instinctively makes the sign of the cross. At that point she jumps out of the window with her sons never to return (symbolizing maybe the breakdown of the pact and thus suggesting the illegitimacy of that Lord and his Castile-allied dynasty).
@@LuisAldamiz A lot (like the Arthurian ones) have more than just a 'kernel' of truth. You realize that Davy Crockett is basically as much a 'legendary figure' as Arthur, in many ways (so many stories that didn't really happen, at least as reported....)
There actually was a Perseus, an Aladdin, a Heracles...
Riothamus basically fits what Arthur is supposed to have done, frankly. We don't KNOW his name nor do we know Arthur's - Arthur is a nickname, Riothamus is a title.
Wow! That was truly informative. As you said, an intriguing era with many misconceptions attached 👏👍👌
I'm glad to have found this channel. Very useful for my research.
Just subscribed to your excellent channel. It’s reassuring to know that there are still scholars and researchers who appreciate the value and interest in relatively obscure elements of history and have the ability to explain theories accurately, succinctly and in a manner which holds interest. There are so many ‘colourful’, poorly researched and downright inaccurate channels it’s great to stumble on a reliable one - one which supplies the evidence for its statements. Please keep it coming.
One very minor point, ‘Britons’ is pronounced as in ‘Britannia’ and not like the UK south coast seaside town of Brighton. This is a suggestion rather than a criticism.
Great video!
Beautiful. Thank you. I will be back...
Fascinating stuff. Thanks!
Like the Last Homely House of the Elves.
Another brilliant video!
Let's hope you are still on CZcams making videos ten or twenty years from now, so we can hear about new archeological discoveries with your brand of video making. Every video you have made held my interest to the very end! Many receive more than one viewing.
Long live rome
Great vid, but just fyi the pronunciation of Brittons isn't "bright-on" but rather just like how we say "Britain" today (though not spelled as it sounds) "briht-tohn".
glad to find your channel. thank-you.
Thank you for this, excellent video.
Great video! Thank you! But please note that Briton is pronounced Britton and not Brighton (like the seaside town).
thank you very much for your work!
Well done . Thank you .
I've been meaning to do this for a while and now that I can afford it, here's some love! ❤
Thanks a lot, I really appreciate it