Yale University Lecture Series on the Fall of the Roman Empire.

**Crouchy23232323** · March 08, 2015, 05:11 PM

The series is really good, this episode in particular covers many of the factions in Attila. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_ssRpso9e8

Enjoy.

**RedGuard** · March 16, 2015, 10:10 AM

thanks for these. I had some subed a long time ago but haven't been able to find them.

**Marcus Aemilius Lepidus** · March 16, 2015, 10:26 AM

The way of presenting it is quite nice, but at university i was always bored of this overview lectures and the most profs hate it to hold them because they rather do something more specific

**Damocles** · March 16, 2015, 01:12 PM

I remember a debate in our class, where it was argued that the Western Roman Empire was essentially brought down by illegal immigration.

That said, the professor is wrong on a few things. Especially the tired and trite about Odoacer's pledge of fealty to the Eastern Emperor having no significance. Uh, yes it. It had enough significance, that when Odoacer grew too big for his britches, he was deposed by the Eastern Emperor, and Odoacer's replacement, Theodoric the Great - while exercising independence in affairs of the Goths - meticulously observed his duties to Rome for the next TWO generations. During this time, the Roman Senate grew unparalleled in power and influence on the peninsula, deciding popes even over the objections of viceroy and Emperor.

When Theodoric began to pull away, of course, over the self-inflicted wound of Byzantine religious persecution of Catholics. But he died before the rupture could become severe, and there was chaos afterwards.

Of course, it ended with the Lombards and Byzantines both invading Italy and devastating it to such an extent, that Justinian (in a move that reflected his animosity to Latins, Catholics and the Rome Senate, and the reality of the ludicrous scale of devastation) abolished many senatorial titles, to Pope Gregory's lament.

So the Eastern Roman Empire exercised EXTREME influence over Italy, for at least another 100 years, after 476.

**wulfgar610** · March 16, 2015, 04:07 PM

I think he got this one wrong at around 20 minutes. The Imperial government did indeed borrow money from the wealthy to finance itself. In the first century the interest rate was about 1% every season for an annual total of 4%. When Augustus became Emperor he had an enormous state debt to deal with, hence why he cut the army size back affordable levels. Communities had loan sharks. Instability and debasement of the currency saw Imperial interest rates rise 12% pa in the 3rd century and this was main factor in the 3rd century crisis. If somebody has a surplus, then there is something to be borrowed. Legionaries would have paid interest on their equipment loan.

However this market wasn't as well regulated as the much later banking system.

**Crouchy23232323** · March 17, 2015, 04:44 AM

No doubt this guy does have inherent bias'. As humans we all do. Still, interesting stuff, IMO.

**WelshDragon** · March 21, 2015, 07:58 PM

Originally Posted by Crouchy23232323

No doubt this guy does have inherent bias'. As humans we all do. Still, interesting stuff, IMO.

Very true, well said. I watched a few of his lectures the other day, they were entertaining but didn't really give any insights that aren't commonly known, but definitely worth watching, better than a sitcom or some other mindless entertainment.

**Tardi** · March 21, 2015, 08:58 PM

Originally Posted by Crouchy23232323

The series is really good, this episode in particular covers many of the factions in Attila. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_ssRpso9e8

Enjoy.

Thank you it was interesting. Put more videos of this kind here. Thanks.

**Geronimo2006** · March 29, 2015, 12:08 PM

An issue that didn't get a mention were the problems of tax collection. This was the job of local city senates whose members were called decurions. Under the Dominate (284-476), decurions had to make up tax shortfalls from their own pocket, causing many to avoid this position if possible.

**Bramborough** · April 01, 2015, 04:56 PM

Interesting lecture. Lots of good stuff here; none of which was brand new to me, but the prof did a nice job of synthesizing the particulars into broader trends. I also kinda like his self-description as a "moderate catastrophist"...it comes off a little bit like hedging his bets, but it strikes me as a common-sense approach to such a complex period of which we still have huge gaps in knowledge. I do think, however, he oversells a bit how "non-scary" or "pathetic" the various German "refugee" groups were.

Another thing struck me. I've read about this period a good bit, and the names of groups, individuals, towns, etc, I'm long familiar with...in print. But I've never personally known someone who knew a lot about ancient history (or cared to)...so I've never talked about it, nor heard anyone else do so. I was rather amused by how I've been mentally mispronouncing a lot of these names for years. I had "Stilicho" right, but in my head have been accenting the wrong syllables in "Alaric" and "Theodoric" for, well, a couple of decades.

**Marcus Aemilius Lepidus** · April 17, 2015, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by Bramborough

Interesting lecture. Lots of good stuff here; none of which was brand new to me, but the prof did a nice job of synthesizing the particulars into broader trends. I also kinda like his self-description as a "moderate catastrophist"...it comes off a little bit like hedging his bets, but it strikes me as a common-sense approach to such a complex period of which we still have huge gaps in knowledge. I do think, however, he oversells a bit how "non-scary" or "pathetic" the various German "refugee" groups were.

Another thing struck me. I've read about this period a good bit, and the names of groups, individuals, towns, etc, I'm long familiar with...in print. But I've never personally known someone who knew a lot about ancient history (or cared to)...so I've never talked about it, nor heard anyone else do so. I was rather amused by how I've been mentally mispronouncing a lot of these names for years. I had "Stilicho" right, but in my head have been accenting the wrong syllables in "Alaric" and "Theodoric" for, well, a couple of decades.

Well that is often the problem with english scholarship in general. They don't use the original names. Pompey, Anthony, Pilate etc. that's just strange. When i studied in England for some years i was suprised that most of the classics students didn't learn latin or greek. I had to worte an exam on an inscription where i was given only the english translation. Just by looking i knew that there were several arguable passages which i could have identified if they had used the original inscription from CIL. If they use only translations or shortcuts of the real names they will never learn to pronounce them. As that i have to admid that i have an little advantage to speak latin because our way of talking is very close to latin. Old latin should sound quite hard like german

That's why the modern philology is saying that Caesar has to be spoken like Kaisar.

As for Alaric and Theoderic. This is another wonderfull example. These are english versions. For saxons these names work, but they are not even close to that and as those the names are Alarich and Theoderich. The meaning is the same but the pronounciation is diffrent. What would be correct is using Theodericus but that's a latinisation of the germanic name.

**pratolano** · April 17, 2015, 05:00 PM

Wow Caesar is actually pronounced like Kaiser? Wirklich?! I wonder what else I've been pronouncing incorrectly in my head! Is it "Yoo-lee-us Kaiser?" (from an [American] English standpoint)

**Marcus Aemilius Lepidus** · April 19, 2015, 08:45 AM

Originally Posted by pratolano

Wow Caesar is actually pronounced like Kaiser? Wirklich?! I wonder what else I've been pronouncing incorrectly in my head! Is it "Yoo-lee-us Kaiser?" (from an [American] English standpoint)

It is not exactly Kaiser although it is not far from it. It sounds harder like Kaizar. What is read in english like a smoth C is latin usually pronounced as an K, not a surprise since original latin rarly uses the K as a letter. Cerberus is for example more Kerberus etc.

On a quick research i found this: http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/l...npronounce.htm

If you like you hear it i can suggest this documentation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJrvCoKgrbo

It is from a french-german television channel but all the scenes with actors are made in latin under the carefull eyes of some of the leading philologists. Although the Antonius actor is using sometimes Cäsar as well, watch after minute 1:45 m in the clip above. There Octavian is correctly announced.

**Crouchy23232323** · June 26, 2015, 04:55 AM

Thought posting this link would be apt, if you want to start somewhere delving into the history and time period of ''The Last Roman'' DLC. Part of a Yale course on the fall of the Roman Empire. Enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbN8OTHecuI