Fall of the Roman Empire - Page 4 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Rome, Greece, Egypt & other ancient history (c 4000 BCE - 476 CE) and pre-history.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
User avatar
By MB.
#14827601
HiFo baby I didn't know how else to contact you you weren't getting my pms apparently. I know it's way OT I can split this thread up as required.

In terms of what Beren and Ned Lud was saying they obviously need to interpret Britain in its medieval context, that is, as an Imperial cross-roads. By 1030ad Britain was only significant in so far as it was part of the Danish Imperial calculus, followed immediately by being part of the norman (also norsemen) calculus. Then the angevin empire. This concept of linear decent of Anglo-Saxon monarchy did not really exist
#14827831
starman2003 wrote:You mean the angles, saxons and jutes who came were just mercenaries? :) You'd think Brittany wouldn't have acquired its name had the flow of refugees there not been substantial. And what about the SOSs sent to Ravenna? Weren't they from the upper classes?
Beren the Roman masses had no problem with despotic rule of the early Caesars, and btw I doubt barbarian rule was less despotic (Indeed arian invaders like the Vandals persecuted the catholic populations of areas they overran.) They just no longer supported Roman rule specifically--the reason for te collapse of the WRE before Justinian.
MB that's way OT here--did you post on that old blog thread on Alternate scenario Leyte gulf? It's been a while since I checked.
Yes, mercenaries made up of various German people. It's worth remembering that the Saxons, on all the evidence, didn't have sails. If anyone was actually attacking Britannia Prima it was the Irish - there is no evidence of 'Anglo-Saxons' anywhere near it, and why should the Germans be the only people to occupy land anyway? About the appeal to Ravenna, if it ever existed it came from some of the small worlds that where losing out in the subsequent dogfights, though there is much to suggest the whole thing is guff, based on a message to an Italian city. The Brtish bosses kicked out the Imperial administration in 410 or thereabouts, and anything afterwards depends on archaeology, which is growing more ad more informative.

I didn't [pot anything on that subject.
#14827833
The Brtish bosses kicked out the Imperial administration in 410 or thereabouts

It was in 400 AD, and the Romano-Celtic elite didn't kick out the Roman administration, on whom they depended for defence. Instead, the Romans withdrew their forces from Britannia and informed the Romano-Celtic elite that they would have to take care of their own defences from now on. The fact that they felt the need to import Saxon and other Germanic mercenaries instead of mobilising their own population suggests that they couldn't trust their own people, which further suggests that they were a despised and alienated elite. They probably got what they deserved at the hands of Hengist and Horsa.

And the Romans were entirely justified in withdrawing their forces, which were desperately needed to defend Rome itself. The fact that the city of Rome was sacked by Alaric just a decade later rather suggests that they had actually left it too late. The province of Britannia should have been abandoned to its fate decades earlier.
#14828140
Potemkin wrote:It was in 400 AD, and the Romano-Celtic elite didn't kick out the Roman administration, on whom they depended for defence. Instead, the Romans withdrew their forces from Britannia and informed the Romano-Celtic elite that they would have to take care of their own defences from now on.


Around 407 Constantine took the WRE's British forces to Gaul to deal with the marauding Vandals, Alans etc. I don't know if his action was meant to signify abandonment of Britain for good.


The fact that they felt the need to import Saxon and other Germanic mercenaries instead of mobilising their own population suggests that they couldn't trust their own people, which further suggests that they were a despised and alienated elite.


It's not that the people necessarily despised the rulers; with few exceptions, they just wouldn't fight anymore. This seems to have been a problem all over the WRE.

And the Romans were entirely justified in withdrawing their forces, which were desperately needed to defend Rome itself. The fact that the city of Rome was sacked by Alaric just a decade later rather suggests that they had actually left it too late. The province of Britannia should have been abandoned to its fate decades earlier.


Constantine acted on his own and just sought to restore the situation in Gaul, though naturally his action while others were inactive led to him being given the purple. I think the worst problem was not holding on to Britain that long but alienating the germanic soldiers after Stilicho's death. That was really dumb. The Roman masses it seemed, would no longer fight, so if barbarian troops were alienated (and deserted to Alaric) who else would?
#14828155
Potemkin wrote:It was in 400 AD, and the Romano-Celtic elite didn't kick out the Roman administration, on whom they depended for defence. Instead, the Romans withdrew their forces from Britannia and informed the Romano-Celtic elite that they would have to take care of their own defences from now on. The fact that they felt the need to import Saxon and other Germanic mercenaries instead of mobilising their own population suggests that they couldn't trust their own people, which further suggests that they were a despised and alienated elite. They probably got what they deserved at the hands of Hengist and Horsa.

And the Romans were entirely justified in withdrawing their forces, which were desperately needed to defend Rome itself. The fact that the city of Rome was sacked by Alaric just a decade later rather suggests that they had actually left it too late. The province of Britannia should have been abandoned to its fate decades earlier.


The troops left to support the bit for power of Constantine 111 - look it up. It had nothing to do with the collapse of Rome. Like so many people, you are paying no attention to current research.
#14828156
The troops left to support the bid for power of Constantine 111 - look it up. It had nothing to do with the collapse of Rome. Like so many people, you are paying no attention to current research.
#14828166
Ned Lud wrote:The troops left to support the bid for power of Constantine 111 - look it up. It had nothing to do with the collapse of Rome. Like so many people, you are paying no attention to current research.


You could've just edited your post instead of double posting. ;) Constantine did what he could to restore the situation. No use gaining power over a totally collapsed state.
Russia-Ukraine War 2022

@JohnRawls Why do you think that? If you were[…]

Isn't oil and electricity bought and sold like ev[…]

@Potemkin I heard this song in the Plaza Grande […]

I (still) have a dream

Even with those millions though. I will not be ab[…]