If you enjoyed this video, please like and leave a comment. It helps the channel a lot. Many thanks. Join the channel (Pleb Tier) to gain access to episodes 3-10 in this series (see playlist).
I've been directed to your channel by Radical Liberation, and after listening to your shared podcast on Pius XII I've resolved to catch up on your other podcasts in order.
I believe the term 'Politeia' was used during the Byzantine times as a translation for the Latin 'Res Publica'. Often times it is translated as simply 'the state'. The Romans do not abandon their ideas easily.
Fascinating and illuminating. I'm glad to have stumbled across your channel. Frankly I wish I knew more about European history beyond my personal fascination with the early 1900s.
Re: Regarding the succession under the Nerva-Antonine dynasty. I think that while lineage was still important, one thing that is really obvious is the fact that none of the emperors except for Marcus Aurelius even had a son to succeed then, which to me shows degeneration of the family.
I really enjoyed this. You guys had a historically accurate view to the best of the information we have. Any corrections I could offer would be debatable. Really good stuff.
Absolutely fascinating! I just found this channel and I can't wait to hear more! I found the discussion both informative and thoughtful. Sometimes history is presented too linearly, and I love the insight that imperial western Rome had periods of stability (a couple of decades) and then came perilously close to no way back. This cyclical effect, imho, is a better way of understanding true decline. Society is like a bridge. As it ages, it needs repairs. Depending on its exposure to the elements, in may need small or significant mending. And sometimes it needs to be torn down and rebuilt for different times and needs. Thank you for the illuminating discussion!
For some reason AM puts me to sleep or I doze off in my imagination within 2 mins of him talking. His voice is too smooth and sounds like he's reading, his points are great but his voice is not built for this...
@@jaye3547 What subjects do they cover, and is it the same in depth/discussion format? I've never heard of them and am somewhat new to the history podcast/YT space.
Going back through these again now. Thinking I could get most of a playlist finished today in a sitting (well, maybe not just sitting) perfect background noise, I say it alot but.. once again, amazing content A.M and Columba, easily my favourite channel now.. sorry to the agent, but until he can pronounce apostolic.. we all know who the 10 here is lol
Brilliant stuff, very interesting, well researched and you have a fantastic voice/accent for putting the information across clearly. Keep up the good work 👍. I do however have a very unpopular opinion for you. I personally view the Roman empire as "ending" when Rome became Christian. After that I believe the people ceased to be fully Roman in a traditional sense and became something else. A Christian empire, spiritually and traditionally different enough that there can be seen a clear distinction. Now this isn't a value judgement on which is better or worse, just the way I identify Rome is as two separate entities Pagan "classic" Rome and The Christian empire formally known as Rome lol which was more akin to a proto-crusader state.
What would you call the transitory period where most imperials were agnostic or followed a non-roman (by your standard) religion? And if we base it off religion then surely rome never existed as they are basically Greeks in religion.
I'm just reading through "The History of Western Philosophy," and it mentions some of the things covered here in the Pre-Socratic section, i believe. Interesting stream chaps, cheers
Great stream but I really disagree with Colomba’s assessment of Eastern Rome slipping through a continuous steady decline. A major problem with Byzantine history is that people look at Justinian’s conquests as the benchmark, despite them being completely superficial and irresponsible, but they look good on a map. Therefore everything afterwards seems a decline, when actually there were more substantial and meaningful conquests/developments. Plus, they managed to claw themselves back from the edge of destruction in 717 to having the edge over the Arabs in the 10/11th centuries, just one example of this flawed notion of ‘steady decline’.
Can anyone provide some background behind this podcast/channel? It seems like it's a continuation of some existing series or channel but I can't find anything out there, such as who these guys are. Enjoy the content but feel like I am coming in at the middle of something greater.
regarding what evola, virgil, martial etc had said about roman blood being diluted, were they referring to the spirit being diluted by the enfranchisement of the provincials? or quite literally that intermixing with said provincials had diluted the blood?
Curious for Columba's take on the importance of shared ethnicity and/or blood relations vs. shared consciousness (I say this after hearing EMJ dropped)
On Julian Apostate who became partially relevant for my MRes thesis on Procopius of Ceasarea. Ammianus Marcellinus uses Julian as a model for being a good Emperor, being classically educated (Amm. 16.5) and one who strikes fear (timore) into barbarians who bring tribute to him (Amm. 22.7.10). The relevance of this is my argument that Procopius disapproved of Emperor Justinian for lacking the correct education and having a policy of paying off barbarians, a sign of weakness/fear. Whilst Julian was not Christian, Christian Romans during the reign of Justiain could see his virtues and hoped that their own rulers had the same virtues/romanitas.
Christianity didnt kill the Roman Empire in a uni-directional and monocausal sense. More than cause it was the effect of decadence, overstretch and the loss of genuine Roman people and therefore Romanitas. Christianity was an inclusive ideology, i.e. destined for everybody and as a medium of a commonn identity it was incompatible with and helped to transform the entire ancient world. Like the current ongoing cultural revolution Christianity changed the people’s minds from within. In its rising state it was one of the final straws that broke the camels‘ back. Later on, when established as the one and only honorable „ideology“ it was made compatible with the realities of life. I think, in this sense E. Gibbon was absolutely right.
12:30 - Evola's definition reminds me of cultural history as David Hackett Fischer did. Describing cultures as a set of folkways and attitudes about the world, that are the cause of, rather than caused by economic realities. Also the plot of Mount and Blade: Bannerlord is essentially "What if there was no Aurelian". The Empire becomes three warring kingdoms in all but name, each claiming to represent a different ideal but functioning almost identically, only differentiated from the barbarians by their military composition, architecture, and a handful of starting policies. The player character can become a "Senator" in the Northern Empire simply by swearing fealty to its ruler with sufficient renown. Even the roman roads are barely visible on the campaign map, though there are mods that change this.
I wish you'd challenged some of Evola's baseless assertions about Christianity in the quotes you read. The idea that Medieval Christendom was just paganism masquerading as Christianity is utterly laughable to anyone who knows the faith or the period.
1:29:40 around here when talking about the fall of rome. I think A lot of people miss that while it did do a lot of spread important ideas concepts and material goods Its fall allowed all those things to truly flourish in the aftermath of its destruction.
Start with the ancients themselves! Suetonius' 'Lives of the Caesars' is a collection of biographies of Rome's emperors that includes all sorts of crazy stories and a lot of fascinating historical information. Very easy to read as well!
1:07:00 this why I really question the DRs Ceaser narrative/hope. Can we actually call it a positive? Has this ever been a positive for a society? Other than maybe Cromwell, which would give hives to some people I understand ;)
@@sunset-inn Famous Emperor/ Philosopher, and author of the book "Meditations" One of the wisest men to ever live, restored the Empire in his time and his thinkings bring discipline and logical argumentation into the lives of millions that exist even today.
@@sunset-inn There was a once a dream called Rome. You could only whisper it. Anything more than a whisper and it would vanish. This is an allusion to the fact that Rome as a symbol held a special and almost magical existence. The symbol of Rome as it existed in the realm of Plato's Forms. And to merely bring up the virtues and strengths that the symbol of Rome should have represented brings it into stark contrast of our lived and imperfect reality. Rome as it is can never compare to Rome as it should be. The same thing happens today in America, where to bring up the American Dream immediately shatters it, as our eyes reveal that reality is a sad and broken reflection of what America should be. In a modern context one might say that speaking aloud about the Dream of Rome reveals it to be a "social construct" which causes the Dream of Rome to vanish in the same way that it has happened to the notion of the American Dream. Atleast that's how I read and interpret it. Though I'm open to criticism and slander. 🤗
Made a response video to this vid. The res vid is called "RE: Rome And Romanitas. A Response to Apostolic Majesty. Let's face it, it's over guys. Rome, that is."
This stream is making me really despise Evola. That he presumes, without any evidence, that modern rainbow Christianity is the real thing and the past Christianity is really just paganism pretending to be Christian is just infuriating. The more I hear of him the more he sounds like Blavatsky and Crowley.
He's not wrong though. We actually live in the most Christian time in history, precisely because it is pure undiluted Christianity. The Golden Age of Europe only existed when Christianity was tempered with our traditional European modalities and faiths. Pure Christianity is just pure Semitism, and it's not surprising that this coincides with our decline. It's a hard thing for people to swallow because they have become so wedded to the idea that Christianity is somehow central to Western civilization and the European identity, when in reality that is not the case.
I'm not so happy about the romanticism of Christianity and undermining the Empire bc of "slavery." That sounds such a basic Liberal viewpoint to take--stripped of all context from the time. I rather take the Nietzschian view of Christianity as lacking the Dyionision and paving the way for slave morality (albeit in its true form it held together the Eastern Empire in a good way for a long time. Much better than modern liberalism). So I agree with AM more than Columbia although both are clearly intelligent and learned gentlemen.
In Catholicism the Dionysian is sublimated in the Mass and channelled through the festival cycle, or Carnevalesque, such as Lords of Misrule at Epiphany, Mardi Gras/Carnevale, the Feast of Fools and so on.
Yeah that stuck out to me as while I agree that the Roman Empire was a horrible place (I was on the side of the Carthaginians when learning about the punic war) I don't believe becoming Christian in anyway improved things. If anything, the Romans pulled Christianity away from its egalitarian roots. Christianity was once the faith of women and slaves and it was Roman culture that stamped that out
@@aquilatempestate9527 The Roman Empire had a policy of religious tolerance for Judaism that goes back to 63 BC and Pompey's original conquest of those folk. Without Pagan Rome, those folk and their culture never could have survived to the modern day.
Apostolic Majesty seems to think that revived Christianity could provide some remedy, in some sense. This is strange. Some Italien guy in the early thirties got it right: „The first Bolshevism is in the Bible“. ( What he had in mind was n o t Stalin‘s conservative regime but the socialist/communist hopes, delusions and claims that were made nearly all around the world).
If you enjoyed this video, please like and leave a comment. It helps the channel a lot. Many thanks.
Join the channel (Pleb Tier) to gain access to episodes 3-10 in this series (see playlist).
This is a seriously brilliant idea for a string of podcasts. Exactly the high brow stuff that we need right now. Thank You very much & God Bless!
I agree but there is a serious lack of charisma here
Great stream, learned a lot, very interesting
I've been directed to your channel by Radical Liberation, and after listening to your shared podcast on Pius XII I've resolved to catch up on your other podcasts in order.
I believe the term 'Politeia' was used during the Byzantine times as a translation for the Latin 'Res Publica'. Often times it is translated as simply 'the state'. The Romans do not abandon their ideas easily.
Fascinating and illuminating. I'm glad to have stumbled across your channel. Frankly I wish I knew more about European history beyond my personal fascination with the early 1900s.
I tweeted this at TheBritisher as "Anglo-Catholics taking pot-shots at Edward Gibbon and you."
I discovered your channel quite by chance. Love the content and looking forward to working my way through the catalogue.
Top notch stream: love it. Please, AM, this NEEDS images - they cry out .
Just found you from AA's channel. Looking forward to listening to your entire output. Thank you for taking the time to share your know knowledge.
1:13:47 "whereby the people have no opportunity or responsibility ... the art degenerates."
Re: Regarding the succession under the Nerva-Antonine dynasty. I think that while lineage was still important, one thing that is really obvious is the fact that none of the emperors except for Marcus Aurelius even had a son to succeed then, which to me shows degeneration of the family.
I really enjoyed this. You guys had a historically accurate view to the best of the information we have. Any corrections I could offer would be debatable. Really good stuff.
Absolutely fascinating! I just found this channel and I can't wait to hear more! I found the discussion both informative and thoughtful. Sometimes history is presented too linearly, and I love the insight that imperial western Rome had periods of stability (a couple of decades) and then came perilously close to no way back. This cyclical effect, imho, is a better way of understanding true decline. Society is like a bridge. As it ages, it needs repairs. Depending on its exposure to the elements, in may need small or significant mending. And sometimes it needs to be torn down and rebuilt for different times and needs. Thank you for the illuminating discussion!
What a phenomenal conversation.
Lesson of the video: Rome might not be eternal, but Roman larp definitely is
Lol😂
You should shill these more, can't believe I've only just subscribed from AA
For some reason AM puts me to sleep or I doze off in my imagination within 2 mins of him talking.
His voice is too smooth and sounds like he's reading, his points are great but his voice is not built for this...
AA?
@@Sevatar_VIIIth Academic Agent, AM was last on his podcast a few weeks ago to discuss the Putin/Tucker interview, though that stream is paywalled now
@@jaye3547 What subjects do they cover, and is it the same in depth/discussion format? I've never heard of them and am somewhat new to the history podcast/YT space.
Going back through these again now. Thinking I could get most of a playlist finished today in a sitting (well, maybe not just sitting) perfect background noise, I say it alot but.. once again, amazing content A.M and Columba, easily my favourite channel now.. sorry to the agent, but until he can pronounce apostolic.. we all know who the 10 here is lol
Two thumbs in the air for this
Incredible podcast. Great work!
This guy Columba, respect.
A great channel! Thank you!
After a third listen, I think I can safely say I stand more with Columba’s opinion on the continuity of Rome.
Brilliant stuff, very interesting, well researched and you have a fantastic voice/accent for putting the information across clearly. Keep up the good work 👍.
I do however have a very unpopular opinion for you. I personally view the Roman empire as "ending" when Rome became Christian. After that I believe the people ceased to be fully Roman in a traditional sense and became something else. A Christian empire, spiritually and traditionally different enough that there can be seen a clear distinction. Now this isn't a value judgement on which is better or worse, just the way I identify Rome is as two separate entities Pagan "classic" Rome and The Christian empire formally known as Rome lol which was more akin to a proto-crusader state.
What would you call the transitory period where most imperials were agnostic or followed a non-roman (by your standard) religion?
And if we base it off religion then surely rome never existed as they are basically Greeks in religion.
Have you heard Cardinal Newman's take on this. The Roman Empire lives on in its successor states: Spain, england, france, the Philippines etc.
Have you seen the biblical prophecy about this in Daniel? Rome is identified as the 4th kingdom which will never fail. So, the Church, I suppose
Excellent stream!
What is the best book on Roman history? I would like to get into this more, but I don’t really want to read the “mainstream” books on it.
AA led me here
@@namerelevant2499 who is aa?
@@adrianapostol8360 academic agent
@@adrianapostol8360 Academic Agent, who I'll add also led me here years ago
I'm just reading through "The History of Western Philosophy," and it mentions some of the things covered here in the Pre-Socratic section, i believe.
Interesting stream chaps, cheers
1:28:11 this is a beautiful description
Great stream but I really disagree with Colomba’s assessment of Eastern Rome slipping through a continuous steady decline. A major problem with Byzantine history is that people look at Justinian’s conquests as the benchmark, despite them being completely superficial and irresponsible, but they look good on a map. Therefore everything afterwards seems a decline, when actually there were more substantial and meaningful conquests/developments. Plus, they managed to claw themselves back from the edge of destruction in 717 to having the edge over the Arabs in the 10/11th centuries, just one example of this flawed notion of ‘steady decline’.
See Byzantine history in episode 2: Constantinople
Colomba seems to me to be right.
Can anyone provide some background behind this podcast/channel? It seems like it's a continuation of some existing series or channel but I can't find anything out there, such as who these guys are. Enjoy the content but feel like I am coming in at the middle of something greater.
regarding what evola, virgil, martial etc had said about roman blood being diluted, were they referring to the spirit being diluted by the enfranchisement of the provincials? or quite literally that intermixing with said provincials had diluted the blood?
Great podcasts!
“I hope this pattern doesn’t repeat itself in our civilization.”
We’re already on the last leg or two of the stool.
we have Christ now though
Lol lmao 😂
New to the channel, absolute Chad energy here
How does one rate Adrian Goldsworthy as a historian of Ancient Rome? His biography of Caesar was quite good I thought.
Nice stream gentlemen!
Curious for Columba's take on the importance of shared ethnicity and/or blood relations vs. shared consciousness (I say this after hearing EMJ dropped)
Anyone have a source on the various essays and excerpts he was reading?
On Julian Apostate who became partially relevant for my MRes thesis on Procopius of Ceasarea.
Ammianus Marcellinus uses Julian as a model for being a good Emperor, being classically educated (Amm. 16.5) and one who strikes fear (timore) into barbarians who bring tribute to him (Amm. 22.7.10). The relevance of this is my argument that Procopius disapproved of Emperor Justinian for lacking the correct education and having a policy of paying off barbarians, a sign of weakness/fear. Whilst Julian was not Christian, Christian Romans during the reign of Justiain could see his virtues and hoped that their own rulers had the same virtues/romanitas.
Will be doing a Julian the Apostate stream on the 10th.
For a pleb like myself with zero knowledge of Rome, are Gibbons's books a good place to start?
Definitely not the place to start, my friend. I'd even say the place to end
@@Wallace43266ok thanks
Christianity didnt kill the Roman Empire in a uni-directional and monocausal sense. More than cause it was the effect of decadence, overstretch and the loss of genuine Roman people and therefore Romanitas. Christianity was an inclusive ideology, i.e. destined for everybody and as a medium of a commonn identity it was incompatible with and helped to transform the entire ancient world. Like the current ongoing cultural revolution Christianity changed the people’s minds from within. In its rising state it was one of the final straws that broke the camels‘ back. Later on, when established as the one and only honorable „ideology“ it was made compatible with the realities of life. I think, in this sense E. Gibbon was absolutely right.
12:30 - Evola's definition reminds me of cultural history as David Hackett Fischer did. Describing cultures as a set of folkways and attitudes about the world, that are the cause of, rather than caused by economic realities.
Also the plot of Mount and Blade: Bannerlord is essentially "What if there was no Aurelian". The Empire becomes three warring kingdoms in all but name, each claiming to represent a different ideal but functioning almost identically, only differentiated from the barbarians by their military composition, architecture, and a handful of starting policies. The player character can become a "Senator" in the Northern Empire simply by swearing fealty to its ruler with sufficient renown. Even the roman roads are barely visible on the campaign map, though there are mods that change this.
H if hi Jung g
I wish you'd challenged some of Evola's baseless assertions about Christianity in the quotes you read. The idea that Medieval Christendom was just paganism masquerading as Christianity is utterly laughable to anyone who knows the faith or the period.
I shall sit with a wee dram o whiskey and listen to this tonight...slainte
1:29:40 around here when talking about the fall of rome. I think A lot of people miss that while it did do a lot of spread important ideas concepts and material goods Its fall allowed all those things to truly flourish in the aftermath of its destruction.
What’s the best book on Rome ever written? Want to start reading but who knows where to start
Start with the ancients themselves! Suetonius' 'Lives of the Caesars' is a collection of biographies of Rome's emperors that includes all sorts of crazy stories and a lot of fascinating historical information. Very easy to read as well!
The TV show Spartacus.
What's this debate with semiogogue you are talking about?
Biggest cringe was when he said Islamic architecture was bad. Like I’m sorry but I’ll take any grand mosque over some fuckin pillars lmao
Take a shot every time Columba says something "degenerated"
The leather bound books , on the shelf come a little alive ..
indeed
1:07:00 this why I really question the DRs Ceaser narrative/hope. Can we actually call it a positive? Has this ever been a positive for a society? Other than maybe Cromwell, which would give hives to some people I understand ;)
Still none the wiser of the meaning of Romanitas
Can't seem to find the Joshua Chamberlin book
Hey Revan, it's Houston Stewart Chamberlain. Forgive my error.
What did the Romans ever do for us?
Marcus Aurelius.
The Games.
European Civilization.
Some of the best stories and quotes in existence.
@@thetyrantofsyracuse Marcus Aurelius?
@@sunset-inn
Famous Emperor/ Philosopher, and author of the book "Meditations"
One of the wisest men to ever live, restored the Empire in his time and his thinkings bring discipline and logical argumentation into the lives of millions that exist even today.
@@thetyrantofsyracuse Is it him who said that there was a dream called Rome? What did he mean by that?
@@sunset-inn
There was a once a dream called Rome. You could only whisper it. Anything more than a whisper and it would vanish.
This is an allusion to the fact that Rome as a symbol held a special and almost magical existence. The symbol of Rome as it existed in the realm of Plato's Forms. And to merely bring up the virtues and strengths that the symbol of Rome should have represented brings it into stark contrast of our lived and imperfect reality.
Rome as it is can never compare to Rome as it should be.
The same thing happens today in America, where to bring up the American Dream immediately shatters it, as our eyes reveal that reality is a sad and broken reflection of what America should be.
In a modern context one might say that speaking aloud about the Dream of Rome reveals it to be a "social construct" which causes the Dream of Rome to vanish in the same way that it has happened to the notion of the American Dream.
Atleast that's how I read and interpret it. Though I'm open to criticism and slander.
🤗
Made a response video to this vid. The res vid is called "RE: Rome And Romanitas. A Response to Apostolic Majesty. Let's face it, it's over guys. Rome, that is."
This stream is making me really despise Evola. That he presumes, without any evidence, that modern rainbow Christianity is the real thing and the past Christianity is really just paganism pretending to be Christian is just infuriating. The more I hear of him the more he sounds like Blavatsky and Crowley.
He's not wrong though. We actually live in the most Christian time in history, precisely because it is pure undiluted Christianity. The Golden Age of Europe only existed when Christianity was tempered with our traditional European modalities and faiths. Pure Christianity is just pure Semitism, and it's not surprising that this coincides with our decline.
It's a hard thing for people to swallow because they have become so wedded to the idea that Christianity is somehow central to Western civilization and the European identity, when in reality that is not the case.
@@Laotzu.Goldbug delusional.
@@ArakeenArchivistHard cope.
@@Laotzu.Goldbug how come this is "the most Christian time in history"?? I don't understand? With what is modernity compatible with Christianity??
I'm not so happy about the romanticism of Christianity and undermining the Empire bc of "slavery." That sounds such a basic Liberal viewpoint to take--stripped of all context from the time. I rather take the Nietzschian view of Christianity as lacking the Dyionision and paving the way for slave morality (albeit in its true form it held together the Eastern Empire in a good way for a long time. Much better than modern liberalism). So I agree with AM more than Columbia although both are clearly intelligent and learned gentlemen.
In Catholicism the Dionysian is sublimated in the Mass and channelled through the festival cycle, or Carnevalesque, such as Lords of Misrule at Epiphany, Mardi Gras/Carnevale, the Feast of Fools and so on.
Might is Right.
Slavery comes and goes throughout history.
Yeah that stuck out to me as while I agree that the Roman Empire was a horrible place (I was on the side of the Carthaginians when learning about the punic war) I don't believe becoming Christian in anyway improved things. If anything, the Romans pulled Christianity away from its egalitarian roots. Christianity was once the faith of women and slaves and it was Roman culture that stamped that out
Christianity was the Bolshevism of the old Med.
In that they were able win the cultural revolution of their age?
@@aquilatempestate9527
The Roman Empire had a policy of religious tolerance for Judaism that goes back to 63 BC and Pompey's original conquest of those folk.
Without Pagan Rome, those folk and their culture never could have survived to the modern day.
Based and Spengler pilled
Apostolic Majesty seems to think that revived Christianity could provide some remedy, in some sense. This is strange. Some Italien guy in the early thirties got it right: „The first Bolshevism is in the Bible“. ( What he had in mind was
n o t Stalin‘s conservative regime but the socialist/communist hopes, delusions and claims that were made nearly all around the world).