fandomhigh | History of Medieval England - Thursday 6th Period: Discussion 1: Introduction and Pre-history to 500

Entry tags:

History of Medieval England - Thursday 6th Period: Discussion 1: Introduction and Pre-history to 500

Good afternoon, class. Now I get to torture you all by making you all stand up and introduce yourselves to your classmates. This is because I'm ~~sadistic~~ want to get you used to the concept of talking during our discussion sessions. Please give your name and what one thing you'd like to find out in this class.

Your homework, due next Tuesday ~~but to be posted in this post~~ is to pick a topic from the once-optional-now-mandatory reading list I gave you on Prehistoric Britain and Roman Britain and give me ETA a minimum of one hundred ~~Wikipedia~~ words on it. Got it? Good.

[[OOC comment threads are done!]]

[[ETA: OOC: At some point I stopped receiving comment notifications for this post. I'm scanning and trying to jump into discussions. But since I'm trying to foster discussion *amongst* all of you, I try not to jump in everywhere.]]

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

"I read the myth of Maximus, having a 'dream' to go there, and I read part of the history of Claudius, and all I can think of is it was a status thing. Our empire is better than yours, it has more acreage. Even if we can't hold it or tax it effectively or do anything except style ourselves Britannicus," Parker said dryly. "It's not like they needed the resources, and England was hell and gone away from Rome. So I can't figure it out either."

"Wasn't there anywhere else to expand, though? It kinda messed with the natural border thing they had going on, which clearly bothered them as they thought they had to build two walls."

"Persian Empire in the east, Sahara south of their empire, wild barbarians to the north-- I guess they did have to go west. Though it sounds like they shouldn't have bothered, and have worked on consolidating Rome." Parker blinked. "Hadrian's Wall, and...?"

"Antonine Wall, it was actually more to the North of Hadrian's Wall but they couldn't keep it under control for long." He shrugs.

"Romans like to build things almost as much as they liked to conquer them." Parker made a face. "Okay, so, I guess they could have gone to Iceland, or explored even further west, and I know there are theories that the Romans hit the New World first. Still. They were there about, what? Three hundred years or so? Before the Roman Empire collapsed and left the British to get on with it themselves. England must have been worth something to them to begin with."

"Sheep and land? Britain isn't exactly strategically placed there. Ores? Did they have gold and silver?" He really doesn't know.

"Caesar was pis... um, cross with the Britons for helping the Gauls to fight the Romans. And to the Romans, Britain was this sort of mythical place with treasure that they weren't sure existed.

Like Atlantis is to ~~most of you~~ us."

"Ohhh. So, the same mistake Columbus made, then. Got it." Parker frowned. "So, some strategic reason, some hopefully mercenary reason to first go there; then they expanded, becaus they had superior technology to the tribes, and that's what Romans do."

Elizabeth nodded. "I think that was it. Mostly it was because they could, y'know?"

"So it was the Eldorado of the err whateverth century?"

"To the Romans at least, yeah. Don't know if anyone else thought it."

"I guess they must have been disappointed in the end."

"Actually, I believe Roman Britain was considered quite important. It acted as a proving ground for aspiring politicians and a powerbase for usurping emperors. And when it was invaded and lost to the Saxons, that was considered the first death knell of Rome."

"It also was tremendously wealthy in ore -- as you asked earlier, Mr. Mitchell -- and food. Plus, they assumed that as an island it would be an easily defensible chunk of land. On that score, they were wrong, as the northern tribes proved."

"But if they had managed to conquer the northern tribes, then it would have been more so, wouldn't it?"

"Who considered that the first death knell? The romans or us?"

"Historians do. What with their twenty-twenty hindsight and all."

Re: DISCUSSION 2: Medieval English History: Roman Britain

cameronmitchell.livejournal.com - 2006-01-12 22:49 (UTC) - Expand

Re: DISCUSSION 2: Medieval English History: Roman Britain

prof-methos.livejournal.com - 2006-01-12 23:35 (UTC) - Expand

Re: DISCUSSION 2: Medieval English History: Roman Britain

cameronmitchell.livejournal.com - 2006-01-13 00:51 (UTC) - Expand

Re: DISCUSSION 2: Medieval English History: Roman Britain

lady-jessica-bg.livejournal.com - 2006-01-13 00:45 (UTC) - Expand

"But the walls weren't necessarily just for defense," Elizabeth says. "It was a symbol of Roman power, showing the local tribes that they could build this wall eighty miles long, whilst they still lived in round huts. There's also been recent research that it was a customs line, so that they could charge tax on anyone coming in wanting to trade."

"Oh, that makes sense. Money usually figures into it somewhere. I'm not sure if the impressing worked a lot if they kept getting attacked regardless of the wall, though."

"They also needed to awe the population on the south side," Elizabeth pointed out. "The further north they got, the more hostile people were ~~and it's not changed omg~~."

"Right," Cameron nodded, "which Boudicca proved too. You're smart."

"So," Parker said slowly, "it was a revenue maker, and a way to show the southern tribes, 'hey, we're doing something about those nuts in Scotland.' If that was the purpose, I guess it was more successful, since England remained more Romanized."

"Well, yeah. The Scottish nuts were a threat to English tribes as well. The thing was, the Romans were good leaders. It helped unify all these tribes, and gave them something to strive for - Roman citizenship."

"The question is, are the differences between, say, Scotland and England there because England was under Roman control at one point and Scotland wasn't, or because England later was conquered by a culture that had been even more Romanized? For instance, it is generally accepted that Rome spread Christianity around Europe. How does that then explain the fact that Scots and Irish missionaries -- from cultures not under Rome's political control -- were responsible for Christianizing most of modern-day England -- as well as a signifigant amount of continental Europe."

"Christianity wasn't a significant force in Rome until, what? The fourth century? Which was just about the time they lost contact with Britain on a regular basis," Parker said, thinking aloud. "How did Christianity get to Ireland, then? Leaving aside the Joseph of Arimathea story."

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only