New Showbiz

You are here:
What Killed the Roman Empire?

What Killed the Roman Empire?

2022

Director

Frédéric Wilner

Runtime

90 minutes

Average Rating

No ratings yet

Synopsis

Why did the Roman Empire, which dominated Europe and the Mediterranean for five centuries, inexorably weaken until it disappeared? Archaeologists, specialists in ancient pathologies and climate historians are now accumulating clues converging on the same factors: a powerful cooling and pandemics. A disease, whose symptoms described by the Greek physician Galen are reminiscent of those of smallpox, struck Rome in 167, soon devastating its army. At the same time, a sudden climatic disorder that was underway as far as Eurasia caused agricultural yields to plummet and led to the westward migration of the Huns. Plagued by economic and military difficulties, attacked from all sides by barbarian tribes, the Roman edifice gradually cracked.

Where to Watch

Diversity & Representation

Overall Score

5.5/10

Fair

Category Breakdown

LGBTQ+ Representation

Fair

The documentary focuses on epidemiological and climatic factors rather than social identities. There are no explicit LGBTQ+ character arcs or narratives present.

Gender Representation

Fair

The narrative prioritizes systemic forces like pandemics over individual agency. While the physician Galen is mentioned, the film lacks exploration of gendered power dynamics.

Racial & Ethnic Diversity

Good

The film disrupts Eurocentric narratives by highlighting the impact of the Huns and Eurasian migrations. It shifts agency away from a purely Roman-centric perspective.

Religious & Cultural Diversity

Good

The film adopts a secular, scientific framework. It replaces moralistic or providential explanations for Rome's fall with materialist views on disease and climate.

Disability Representation

Minimal

Ancient pathologies and smallpox-like symptoms are discussed. However, these are treated as epidemiological data points rather than character-driven explorations of disability.

Strengths

  • Challenges Eurocentric history by emphasizing the agency of non-Western migratory groups like the Huns.
  • Provides a sophisticated, multi-disciplinary approach using climate science and epidemiology.
  • Replaces traditional moralistic or divine explanations with a secular, materialist worldview.

Areas for Improvement

  • Lacks character-driven narratives to explore social identities or gendered power dynamics.
  • Treats physical suffering and illness as data points rather than human experiences.
  • Offers minimal representation of LGBTQ+ perspectives or social critiques.

AI Analysis

The documentary offers a refreshing departure from 'Great Man' history by focusing on systemic and environmental drivers of imperial collapse. By centering climate shifts and migratory patterns, it successfully challenges traditional Eurocentric perspectives on Roman exceptionalism. However, the film's scientific and macro-historical focus limits its exploration of social identities. The emphasis on pathogens and weather patterns leaves little room for character-driven narratives regarding gender, sexuality, or individual lived experiences. Ultimately, while the film excels at providing a multi-disciplinary view of history, it remains a specialized scientific inquiry rather than a study of intersectional human identities.

How are these scores produced? →

Rate this Movie

No rating selected
Use arrow keys to select a rating from 1 to 5 stars
Optional text review, maximum 2000 characters
Tip: Wrap spoilers with ||double pipes|| to hide them
0/2000 characters
You must be signed in to submit a rating

Reviews

No reviews yet. Be the first to share your thoughts on this movie!

Use the rating form above to leave a star rating and optional review.