The mythic kings are actually reported as being Etruscans. The wars with the neighbours only start after the oligarchic putsch as schemes to acquire private lands and to distract from economic problems, mainly debt slavery. Before the takeover by the rich, the competition among cities was to actually provide the better living conditions for people. Migration was very common and the non-rich staged several walkouts after the oligarchic putsch.
@@livelovelife32 Michael Hudson, The Collapse of Antiquity. He traces the Roman, Spartan, Athens histories under a so far unique perspective: the most basic internal contradiction in "western" societies is debt service.
Why are you teaching Roman myths as if they were actually history? Rome was not founded in 753 BC, this is clearly established by archaeology. Ostia was not founded by a Roman king. Nothing at Ostia predates the middle of the 4th century BC. Since, at this time, Rome was in a war with Tarchna and Caisra over, among other things, the salt marshes near where Ostia was eventually founded, it makes sense that Gaius Marcius Rutilius founded Ostia during his dictatorship. While by no means certain, it makes a lot more sense and is far likelier than that a Roman king who may never have existed founded a city which did not start leaving archaeological evidence until centuries later. These myths are fine to study, but in a video that purports to be a historical account of how Rome conquered Italy, they have no place.
The mythic kings are actually reported as being Etruscans. The wars with the neighbours only start after the oligarchic putsch as schemes to acquire private lands and to distract from economic problems, mainly debt slavery.
Before the takeover by the rich, the competition among cities was to actually provide the better living conditions for people. Migration was very common and the non-rich staged several walkouts after the oligarchic putsch.
interesting info. Could you give me one of your sources for it? Would love to read/listen to it.
@@livelovelife32 Michael Hudson, The Collapse of Antiquity. He traces the Roman, Spartan, Athens histories under a so far unique perspective: the most basic internal contradiction in "western" societies is debt service.
Thanks 😊
Thank you...interesting👍🏼😊
Interesting!
Close but not quite.
Why are you teaching Roman myths as if they were actually history? Rome was not founded in 753 BC, this is clearly established by archaeology. Ostia was not founded by a Roman king. Nothing at Ostia predates the middle of the 4th century BC. Since, at this time, Rome was in a war with Tarchna and Caisra over, among other things, the salt marshes near where Ostia was eventually founded, it makes sense that Gaius Marcius Rutilius founded Ostia during his dictatorship. While by no means certain, it makes a lot more sense and is far likelier than that a Roman king who may never have existed founded a city which did not start leaving archaeological evidence until centuries later.
These myths are fine to study, but in a video that purports to be a historical account of how Rome conquered Italy, they have no place.
So what is the more accurate date for the foundation of Rome and your source for it