History Channel's "The Dark Ages"

[docoflove1974]

Last night History International (US) showed a 'documentary' called "The DarkAges," and in typical fashion nowadays the voiceover narrator was a bit over-the-top on some of the comments. The experts interviewed were fine enough, but there were some comments by the narrator which I had questions about:

 

--Alaric's siege of Rome was portrayed as being two years long (continuously), and that because of the length of the siege there was drastic starvation which caused cannibalism. Really? I was under the impression that, while not exactly easy to endure, the Gothic siege wasn't nearly as drastic as the Vandal destruction of Rome. (This was all narrator comments; none of the experts interviewed were hinting at this.)

 

--Clovis was portrayed by both the narrator's comments and the experts as an

[DecimusCaesar]

I saw a trailer for this series on Youtube and I had the same problems with it. I decided to watch a few clips from the series and it was filled with historical errors, including the claim that the Western Roman Empire was destroyed by the Goths in AD 410. The narrator is a bt over top as well, with claims that the Goths were all "dirty, sweaty smelly thugs" who "ravaged the city" and "burnt down it's architectural masterpieces" before slaughtering the Romans in a bloodbath that left "the city streets running red with blood of its own people". Alaric certainly did plunder Rome, but the massacre and destruction on the scale that this series implies never took place. Even historians who are opposed to the downplaying of Alaric's sacking of Rome would find this series a bit over the top.

 

The series also had some big budget reconstructions, although these were a bit off as well. There were incorrect props, sets and costumes, including fifth century Romans in first century clothing (The History Channel never seems to get that right) and barbarians in animal skins and bear skin caps. The Visigoth captain is also dressed in a Viking style horned helmet.

Edited August 8, 2008 by DecimusCaesar

[docoflove1974]

I saw a trailer for this series on Youtube and I had the same problems with it. I decided to watch a few clips from the series and it was filled with historical errors, including the claim that the Western Roman Empire was destroyed by the Goths in AD 410. The narrator is a bt over top as well, with claims that the Goths were all "dirty, sweaty smelly thugs" who "ravaged the city" and "burnt down it's architectural masterpieces" before slaughtering the Romans in a bloodbath that left "the city streets running red with blood of its own people". Alaric certainly did plunder Rome, but the massacre and destruction on the scale that this series implies never took place. Even historians who are opposed to the downplaying of Alaric's sacking of Rome would find this series a bit over the top.

 

Yeah, I had some reservations in general about the program, but these two elements in particular stuck in my craw. Having read a bit about the 3rd and 4th century issues between the Romans and the Goths, the depictions by this program really sounded overhyped.

 

The series also had some big budget reconstructions, although these were a bit off as well.

 

Now that you mention this, I swear that some of the 'historical clips' they showed came from other History Channel presentations. I know I've seen some of these actors and sets before!

[Scipio Africanus Major]

I saw a trailer for this series on Youtube and I had the same problems with it. I decided to watch a few clips from the series and it was filled with historical errors, including the claim that the Western Roman Empire was destroyed by the Goths in AD 410. The narrator is a bt over top as well, with claims that the Goths were all "dirty, sweaty smelly thugs" who "ravaged the city" and "burnt down it's architectural masterpieces" before slaughtering the Romans in a bloodbath that left "the city streets running red with blood of its own people". Alaric certainly did plunder Rome, but the massacre and destruction on the scale that this series implies never took place. Even historians who are opposed to the downplaying of Alaric's sacking of Rome would find this series a bit over the top.

 

Yeah, I had some reservations in general about the program, but these two elements in particular stuck in my craw. Having read a bit about the 3rd and 4th century issues between the Romans and the Goths, the depictions by this program really sounded overhyped.

 

The series also had some big budget reconstructions, although these were a bit off as well.

 

Now that you mention this, I swear that some of the 'historical clips' they showed came from other History Channel presentations. I know I've seen some of these actors and sets before!

I've always viewed,at best, the History channel and History International as introductory level programing . It is so rare that anything dealing with ancient and early medieval history is almost a treat. They bring some very knowledgable people on the programs,but the inaccuracies are inexcusable. I usuaully just ignore these programs.

[Ludovicus]

The series also had some big budget reconstructions, although these were a bit off as well. There were incorrect props, sets and costumes, including fifth century Romans in first century clothing (The History Channel never seems to get that right) and barbarians in animal skins and bear skin caps. The Visigoth captain is also dressed in a Viking style horned helmet.

 

By the late Empire Rome was not the fashion center of the Empire. Constantinople was. I share your frustration with the anachronistic costuming of these TV presentations. History is much more complicated and interesting.

[barca]

Last night History International (US) showed a 'documentary' called "The DarkAges," and in typical fashion nowadays the voiceover narrator was a bit over-the-top on some of the comments. The experts interviewed were fine enough, but there were some comments by the narrator which I had questions about:

 

I saw the show just recently. One of the so-called experts stated that during Alaric's siege (410) the Romans continued to watch Gladiator competitions in the Colosseum. He didn't bother to mention that the Emperor Honorius banned these games in 404.

Edited September 26, 2010 by barca

[Artimi]

I haven't seen this show, but some of your comments reminded me of a the book Antonina written by Wilkie Collins. But Collins had an excuse for inaccuracies, his book was written about 1850.

[Ludovicus]

I haven't seen this show, but some of your comments reminded me of a the book Antonina written by Wilkie Collins. But Collins had an excuse for inaccuracies, his book was written about 1850.

 

PBS, our public television, usually does a much better job with its history programing than the History Channel. Even the Nation Geographic Channel leaves much to be desired. 5th century Romans wearing 1st century styles! That's a major error.

[Ludovicus]

The more I learn about the History International's cable programing the more I don't want to view any of the shows. For example, this afternoon's offerings include a show on how Satan has been tricking mankind throughout history.

[sonic]

I saw the show just recently. One of the so-called experts stated that during Alaric's siege (410) the Romans continued to watch Gladiator competitions in the Colosseum. He didn't bother to mention that the Emperor Honorius banned these games in 404.

 

I'm not allowed to watch TV programmes on Late Rome anymore. Whatever value there is in watching the experts give their views - and I must admit I agree with some but not all - the large number of mistakes that are made result in my shouting at the television. Needless to say, my other half and my son do not appreciate this, so I'm banned.

 

______________________________________________

 

PS. Just watched a clip of the programme from the internet:

Utube

 

I'm off to bang my head against a wall ...

Edited September 28, 2010 by sonic

[Ludovicus]

I saw the show just recently. One of the so-called experts stated that during Alaric's siege (410) the Romans continued to watch Gladiator competitions in the Colosseum. He didn't bother to mention that the Emperor Honorius banned these games in 404.

 

I'm not allowed to watch TV programmes on Late Rome anymore. Whatever value there is in watching the experts give their views - and I must admit I agree with some but not all - the large number of mistakes that are made result in my shouting at the television. Needless to say, my other half and my son do not appreciate this, so I'm banned.

 

______________________________________________

 

PS. Just watched a clip of the programme from the internet:

Utube

 

I'm off to bang my head against a wall ...

 

Thanks for the link to the clip. I think I'll go bang my head against the wall now, too.