(1) The Romans were one of … Read Full Bio ↴There are two bands called "The Romans":
(1) The Romans were one of Los Angeles' first super-groups with members of the budding art/punk scene sweeping Southern California in the early 80's. With members from Human Hands, Monitor, BPeople, The Deadbeats, 45 Grave, Consumers, Tikis, the LAFMS and Green On Red, The Romans added a unique voice to the "LA Punk" movement. While the explosive chemistry of The Romans was short lived, with only 2 full-length LPs ever recorded (their second LP produced by Steve Wynn of Dream Syndicate), band members went on to make rock history with Mazzy Star and Opal. On the debut release, The Romans were Mikey Borens, Pat Delaney, Juan Gomez, Keith Mitchell, and Michael Uhlenkott, and was engineered by the legendary Paul Cutler. Their debut 1983 LP, YOU ONLY LIVE ONCE was released on cd with 8 bonus tracks by Warning Label Records.
(2) Powerful and very talented band from Maaseik, Belgium, which make music in the best tradition of Hüsker Dü, the Lemonheads, the Posies and Therapy!.
The two brothers Laurens & Chris Leurs and their friend Frank Coonen become runners-up in the 1988 final of Belgians biggest talent contest, Humo's Rock Rally. After the mini-album Ball & Chain (Produced by Kloot Per W) and the full album Trigger Happy, they take a retreat. They perform as backing vocals for other Belgian Artists like De Mens, Ze Noiz and The Paranoiacs.
In 1993 they hit back real hard with "Major Panic". Not less than four singles are released from this album : "Down down underground", "Fire Brigade" (a Move cover), "Minneapolis" and "My friend Stan" (a Slade cover), all of which got raving critics and wide airplay. They tour the country extensively (e.g. as the opener for Iggy Pop).
Or as Knack put it in a review of the album "the Romans have plotted their revenge together with producer Paul Despiegelaere (see Machines). "Major Panic" plays in the first league of the best Belgians of all time and is miles ahead of almost everything that went through our hands in the last half year. That much praise is due to six songs of outstanding quality and their fine harmony in singing and living. They had it already and they found it again."
In an article in Humo, the band is introduced as follows : "After the very good album"Trigger Happy" The Romans have been without a record contract for two years , so with less gigs, so with less airplay, so with less screaming teenagers in skintight jeans, because that's how it goes. That is incomprehensible because (1) the new Major Panic is an excellent rock album and we wish the nitwit in the record company who caused the break a lot of itch and a short arm, and (2) in the meantime countless other groups in the world have had the opportunity to dump countless tons of shitty records on the world."
1996 sees the release of another good album "Be my star" with the brilliant single "Someday Cindy" and "How slow" and "I am the liar". Jacky Huys said about this record "We've always liked the chaps from the Romans, even though the guitar-rock on Be my Star isn't really up-to-date and it begins to appear they've definitively missed their train to Top-ville".
1998 has the next Romans album and a move to a new record company : Oyster Records. El Diablo was received well by the press, but apart from the curious single ""Space Girl", which faired very well in De Afrekening, the album didn't cause much of a stir. As the bio says : "But The Romans don't let it go to their heart, as their primary concern is not 'becoming famous' but writing songs with a capital 'S'."
Although their talent is well-appreciated by the alternative rock-audience and recognized by the critics, they haven't managed to produce a breakthrough to the general audience or markets abroad. But as Laurens Leurs said in 1993 "I am glad with our position as underdogs. It is the most comfortable position to be in as a musician. I don't want to have to prove myself constantly. ... The Romans will never be the next big thing.".
In april 2000 The Romans compiled the best of their material they have recorded in the period from 1989 until 2000 on acompilation album, called "So Far". There even is the release of a single, "Burn 2000", a new version of the song that appeared on the mini-album "Ball & Chain", got a lot of airplay but never got out on single-format.
In his latest newsletter to the fans, Laurens Leurs said "After 12 years of sweating, labouring, amusing us, rehearsing, manifesting us, we make a round-up of what the Romans have done to this day. This brings to an end an important period of the Romans. What now?! With this, the pages of the nineties' book is definitely turned over. New ambitions need to found, new goals to be set. "You gotta walk and don't look back".
Only a few weeks later, the decision was made : The Romans split. The reason are no "artistic differences", "ego-clashes" or solo-plans, but a feeling that everything has been done.
Members :
- Laurens Leurs (vocals, guitars)
- Chris Leurs (vocals, bass)
- Frank Coonen (drums)
To Those Who Know
The Romans Lyrics
Jump to: Overall Meaning ↴ Line by Line Meaning ↴
Of what could be done
Was there more that I missed
Beyond the fun?
A dessert rolling in
Solitude is my own bliss
It's nothing I persist
I'm still on the waiting list
I can't help but insist
Creative minds exist
Not under pressure, under influences
That make someone special
Cause' as for now, I have no schedule
On the level, there's potential
My music may not satisfy the ears of people
That will listen
I'm on a mission, without tradition
It's my decision, no submission
It's free admission
There's no audition
But why do I feel so alone?
I can express myself in many different ways
But it seems like being different is my favorite everyday (Oh yeah)
Get out of my way right now
The Romans's song "To Those Who Know" is a powerful contemplation of self-reflection and artistic choice. The first verse presents the singer asking themselves if they have taken advantage of all the opportunities and experiences available to them, or if they have missed out on something more profound than mere fun. The lines "A dessert rolling in/Solitude is my own bliss/It's nothing I persist" express the idea that the singer is content with being alone and reflecting on their life's choices. They are waiting for something but are not sure what.
The second verse is an affirmation of the value of being a creative mind. The singer insists that creativity cannot flourish under pressure or external influences. Instead, they assert that there is potential in being independent and not conforming to traditions. The lines "My music may not satisfy the ears of people/That will listen/I'm on a mission, without tradition/It's my decision, no submission" signify the singer's rejection of the pressure to make music that is merely popular or trendy.
The third verse poses a question of why the singer still feels alone despite the possibility that there are others out there who feel the same way. The lines "It's free admission/There's no audition/But why do I feel so alone?" express the idea that the freedom to express oneself artistically does not guarantee belonging or acceptance. The final line "Get out of my way right now" is a firm assertion of independence and artistic dedication.
Line by Line Meaning
I'm checking off the list
I am going through my priorities and ticking off the tasks that I complete
Of what could be done
I am assessing what all still needs to be done
Was there more that I missed
I am thinking if there is anything important that I might have missed
Beyond the fun?
If there are significant things beyond regular fun that I should be doing
A dessert rolling in
I am imagining a sweet dish coming my way
Solitude is my own bliss
I prefer being alone as it gives me peace
It's nothing I persist
I don't try to avoid solitude
I'm still on the waiting list
I am waiting for something important to happen
I can't help but insist
I strongly feel and believe that what I am doing is significant
Creative minds exist
I believe that there are minds capable of creativity
Not under pressure, under influences
The creativity I am talking about is not under any sort of pressure or influence
That make someone special
I believe that one can be special without external factors influencing them
Cause' as for now, I have no schedule
At the moment, I don't have anything planned
On the level, there's potential
But, there's definitely potential in what I do
My music may not satisfy the ears of people
I am aware that my music may not be liked by everyone
That will listen
The people who do listen to my music
I'm on a mission, without tradition
I am on a personal mission without any particular tradition or cultural influence
It's my decision, no submission
I am in control of my decisions and not bound by any laws or norms
It's free admission
Anyone can listen to my music without any cost
There's no audition
No one is required to give any test or audition to hear my music
But why do I feel so alone?
Despite everything being free and open, I am still struggling to not feel isolated
I can express myself in many different ways
I have various ways to communicate myself
But it seems like being different is my favorite everyday (Oh yeah)
But having my unique identity and being different is what I love
Get out of my way right now
I don't want anyone to interfere or obstruct my path
Lyrics © DistroKid
Written by: Benjamin Coto
Lyrics Licensed & Provided by LyricFind
@DJPeachCobbler
As usual, I do not cite my sources, because I still have a full-time job and I just can't be bothered. However, here are most of the (secondary) sources I used, and which I recommend if you'd like to learn more!
"Greece Against Rome by Philip Matyszak" - Very approachable, although the interplay between the various successor kingdoms was quite complicated and it delves fairly deeply into that. I don't recommend this book unless you're interested in classical antiquity IN GENERAL, and not just Rome. To be clear, you should be.
"The Story of Greece and Rome by Tony Spawforth" - Certainly less approachable, but incredibly well-written. There are two types of non-fiction books on the ancient Mediterranean. Those which talk about pottery shards, and those which don't. Those which do are drier, certainly, but also don't indulge themselves in unreliable primary sources, instead choosing to focus on that which we can ascertain from archeological evidence. This is the book to read on this subject if you've got patience and a true hunger for knowledge.
"Rome: The Rise and Fall of an Empire by Simon Baker" - This is a beach read, through-and-through, but that is no insult. It jumps around through the life of the Republic and Empire, and is exceedingly entertaining, albeit sorta pulpy. If you just wanna have a good time and get a broad overview of Rome, this is the one. Can't recommend it enough.
Thanks for watching.
Rome invicta,
DJ Peach Cobbler
@everyone1liesd459
23:40 this explains a lot
I've always heard that saying fiddle while Roma burns and I would wonder why he wouldn't do something
Your whole video up until that point explained it well for me
Thank you
26:10 more knowledge
@alexandercolefield9523
3 things I want to say about this video:
A: The lack of Sparta in this entire dialogue speaks volumes. By the time of Rome, Sparta was just a bug on the windshield of Rome's war machine conquering Greece. There were a few Romans who admired the Spartans, but the Spartan system was obviously one of failure in the Roman era. Ironically the Spartans too were blunt, straight forward people who prided themselves on power, very much like the earlier Romans. The fact that it is Athena on Trajan's armor above the she wolf, and not any other Greek symbol, speaks to Athen's specific cultural dominance.
2: The lack of Christianity in this video is in my opinion a bit of a fault. Christianity to me is the puzzle piece that links all of this lack together. Lets circle back to Alexander's invasion of the Persians, which unified Greek and Persian culture. Persians were Zoroastrians, and the Hellenization of Zoroastrianism created a more philosophical version of Monotheism.
A few centuries later, Christianity arose as a very specifically anti-Roman religion, not anti-Greek, no the finger was pointed squarely at Rome's bluntness and empire. And how did Jesus die according to the tale? He died from a mob rule jury decision from the Romans, a death very much like that of Socrates. Jesus died a Philosopher's death. Christianity then spread like wildfire to the Greek parts of the Empire, the Romans, being Greek weebs, formed secret underground Societies of Christians and eventually took over Roman itself. When Rome became Christian, Roman culture had been completely supplanted by that of the Greeks, and that new culture would survive another millenium.
Γ: The Japanese comparison is interesting, it doesn't completely fit, but, we do have a situation where an Empire (America / Rome) invades another older civilization (Japan / Greece). In the proceeding generations the new empire admired the culture of the conquered and adopts it, as the Japanese seem to do capitalism better than Americans.
@MajoraZ
Tangential, but we actually have documentation on what the Aztec (or more specifically, the Mexica of Tenochtitlan) thought of other Mesoamerican civilizations and fellow Nahua ethnic subgroups. The Florentine Codex is a 12 (13 with index) volume series of documents totaling thousands of pages which give insight on Mexica religion, history, social customs, hierarchies, ethics, occupations and industries, moral adages, and tons more. And at the end of volume 10, which is all about social classes, occupations, there's a whole chapter about Mexica sterotypes of other people. I'll give somewhat of a brief overview on each civilization and culture and what the Mexica thought of them below,:
- Chichimeca: Chichimeca is actually a broader label to describe mostly nomadic or nomadic tribes in Northern Mexico, as opposed to the urban civilizations in Mesoamerica (Central Mexico, the Gulf Coast, Oaxaca, West Mexico, Chiapas, and the Yucatan Peninsula), though the Mexica and other Nahua groups the "Aztec" label applies to (some use it to specifically mean the Mexica) were actually Chichimecs themselves who had migirated into Central Mexico and adopted local civilization. The Chichimeca were both viewed as primitive and savage, but also hardy, headstrong, skilled bowmen (the bow was associated with the Chichimeca, as opposed to the civilized toltecs with the Atlatl) and warriors, and there being a monk-like respectability in their simple lifestyle. Basically, the Mexica and other urbanized Nahuas saw them/their earlier roots as "noble savages".
- Toltecs: As with the Chichimeca section, this is more a telling of histories/legends then ethnic sterotypes. The Toltecs were a maybe-real-but-heavily-mythologized, or entirely mythical civilization in Central Mexico that existed in the centuries preceding the Nahua migirations into the area, where the Toltec were seen as this utopian Nahua society that gave rise to the arts, sciences, high culture, laws, and so on. (In reality If the Toltec existed at all theywere probably a medium sized kingdom among many, probably weren't Nahuan, and those things/civilization in Central Mexico goes back much, much earlier); with them invariably in all accounts declining or collapsing (sometimes cyclically) due to moral degeneration and temptation. There is a looooooot more that can be said about Aztec legends of the Toltec and how it played into their ethnic and dentity and was used to legitimize their political power, but that's it's own giant topic.
- Otomi: This was an existing civilization in Central Mexico and in NorthWestern Mesoamerica. Sadly, there's not a ton of archeological documentation or their sites of colional period source son their Prehispanic culture, but many Otomi towns and cities got displaced during the Nahua migirations, and there was one major Otomi kingdom, Meztitlan, that escaped Aztec conquests. In the Florentine, the Otomi are described as "civilized", because they "wore cloaks, sandals, and breethcloths" (of course, because so did the Mexica/nahuas) and had nobles, priests, kings,, and that the sandals they wore and the skirts women had were of good quality. It says they "disliked flat roofs" and preferred straw ones; and that they had good maize, and their best foods were fruit tamales, cooked beans, dogs, gophers and deer. In terms of what the Mexica saw as bad, they chastise the Otomi for being greedy (they bought all they longed for...even though it was not really necessary"); for wearing gaudy clothes and feathers and body paint; for being lazy ("although great workers of the land, they did not apply themselves to gaining the necessities of life") being being unskilled and stupid: There's a whole list of jokes the Mexica would make about calling each other Otomis when somebody was unskilled or dumb ("Not only art thou like an Otomi, but thou art a REAL Otomi, a miserable...green head, thick-head, a-big-tuft-of-hair-over-one's head, otomi blockhead"). It also notes that though the Otomi were great wavers, their textiles had little value as they preferred Maguey fiber rather then cotton.
- Matlatzinca: A civilization in Central Mexico, located around the Toluca valley. Says their name comes from the way they husked maize, by beating it inside nets (Net = matla(tl) in Nahuatl), and that they also one of their sacrifice methods was to crush somebody inside a net (The text goes on to describe the origin of a few other names for the civilization, like the Quaquata and Toloque). They say they were good with using slings in battle and for hunting, and due to their homelands being cold, they were a rugged and hardy people skilled at manual labor, and apparently had a reputation for being "presumptious and disrespectful", with one of their alternate names being used as an insult for that, but on the flip side they made great pulque(? it says "maguey wine", which I assume means pulque) called Quatealtl that was the REAL shit that instantly made people drunk. The text goes on to call them uncultured for wearing maguey clothes and not speaking Nahuatl, though some did, and pronounced "r" weirdly, and that their lands lacked chillis and salt, and that their main dishes were tamales, beans, atole, and popcorn. Apparently the fact that they bathed early in the morning was also seen as a positive moral virtue.
- Totonac and Huastec: These were civilizations along the gulf coast in what's now Veracruz, best known because Cempoala, the capital of one of 3 major Totonac kingdomss, was one of the first cities to give Cortes refuge on his expedition. The Mexica say they have long, columnar faces ans are broad headed, and notes the tropical climate they lived in was good for growing fruit and copal. Like with the Otomi, the Mexica praises the Totonacs for wearing similar clothes to themselves, also mentioning quetzal tassels, fans, and reed-mats (which are a big thing to the Aztec), and that the women had nice shirts and shawls, both embroided and multicolor, wore cloth strips with feathers in the hair, and that they did their hair and fashion well using mirrors. Likewise, that the women were skilled seamstresses and both the men and women were tall, slender, but firm and attractive. It goes onto say they were good singers and dancers, and good cooks with tamales, chillis, and specialty tortillas.Much of this they also apply to the Huastecs, but note that that they liked to collect heads from captive warriors, and disiked how they didn't use breechcloths and filed their teeth down.
- "Olmeca, Uixtoti, and Mixteca": This requires some explanation: "Olmeca" here does not mean the Olmec civilization as we know it, which existed in southern Veracruz and Tabasco thousands of years before the Aztec period, but rather the inhabitants of that area during the Aztec period. The Mixtecs were one of two very major civilizations in Oaxaca, alongside the Zapotec; and honestly I'm not sure what the Uixtoti are. In any case, the Mexica state that their land was a place of richness and abundence, with wealth and flowers: Gold, Silver, precious stones, cacao, spices, rubber, troupial, spoonbill, cotinga, and parrot feathers, etc; and their people great artisans, in fact calling them Toltec descendants.
- Purepecha: In the text, called the Michoaque. The Purepecha (also known as Tarascans) actually had the third largest empire in the Americas after the Inca and Aztec empires and repeatedly crushed attempted Aztec invasions. Here the Purepecha are noted to often shave their heads, and there's an emphasis on how much of their clothing was made with skins and hides rather then textiles, which isn't described negatively, but I'm sure the implication was poor, same with them noting their preference for the bow (again, associated with the Chichimecas, ironically though their use of the bow is often credited to their military success over the Aztec). Like the prior trio, they are described as great craftsmen, with women being skilled weavers and seamstresses, and talks about how they would cook in giant feasts what they'd eat across multiple days. But then there's a scathing series of insults about how the men didn't wear breechcloths and how their piercings were too big, and how the women didn't wear blouses but only skirts, so both the men and women had their naughty bits out; and that they were poor cooks.
- Other Nahuas: Sadly, this is very light, and basically is just the Meixca saying "they're like us but they don't speak Nahuatl quite as elegantly as we do". However, it's widely disscussed in other sources and modern academia that the Acolhua subgroup, which had many cities on the eastern side of the Valley of Mexico, the political core of the Aztec Empire (most notably Texcoco, the second most powerful Aztec city after Tenochtitlan) were seen as more intellectual and closer to alleged Toltec heritage compared to the Mexica, who were seen as fierce warriors closer to the Chichimeca roots; in a sort of Athens vs Sparta way. However, this is at least partially the result of accounts by Acolhua authors in the 16th and 17th centuries trying to make themselves look better. (and inded the Mexica leveraged both their chichimeca and claimed Toltec heritage to present a dual warrior-intellectual image)
I skipped over some cultures that aren't talked about as much, and tried to focus on the information that was more the Mexica views of their cultural idiosyncrasies rather then just the descriptive info they give about their practices. I also think it's worth noting that it's probably not an accident so much of these descriptions are focused on the goods each culture had, since the Aztec Empire's goal in expansionism was to extract resources from tributary and vassal states, and that the Mexica women sort of dressed conservatively and were sort of prudes, hence so many other groups being described as scandalous or garish.
@DJPeachCobbler
As usual, I do not cite my sources, because I still have a full-time job and I just can't be bothered. However, here are most of the (secondary) sources I used, and which I recommend if you'd like to learn more!
"Greece Against Rome by Philip Matyszak" - Very approachable, although the interplay between the various successor kingdoms was quite complicated and it delves fairly deeply into that. I don't recommend this book unless you're interested in classical antiquity IN GENERAL, and not just Rome. To be clear, you should be.
"The Story of Greece and Rome by Tony Spawforth" - Certainly less approachable, but incredibly well-written. There are two types of non-fiction books on the ancient Mediterranean. Those which talk about pottery shards, and those which don't. Those which do are drier, certainly, but also don't indulge themselves in unreliable primary sources, instead choosing to focus on that which we can ascertain from archeological evidence. This is the book to read on this subject if you've got patience and a true hunger for knowledge.
"Rome: The Rise and Fall of an Empire by Simon Baker" - This is a beach read, through-and-through, but that is no insult. It jumps around through the life of the Republic and Empire, and is exceedingly entertaining, albeit sorta pulpy. If you just wanna have a good time and get a broad overview of Rome, this is the one. Can't recommend it enough.
Thanks for watching.
Rome invicta,
DJ Peach Cobbler
@gaso2892
I LOVE YOU DJ PEACH COBBLER (no homo tho)
@seraphim9219
I ALSO LOVE YOU DJ PEACH COBBLER (i am living in your walls)
@lludo6538
What’s the third part gonna be about you hellish entity?
@animebattles9469
Where can I get that merch you're wearing???
@everyone1liesd459
23:40 this explains a lot
I've always heard that saying fiddle while Roma burns and I would wonder why he wouldn't do something
Your whole video up until that point explained it well for me
Thank you
26:10 more knowledge
@bruvamichal7437
Greeks: You're too late, Roman. I've already sculpted YOU as the Soyjak and ME as the Chad
@Ballin4Vengeance
Yeah… but did you write your name on it?…
FOR NOW I HAVE INSCRIBED THE CHAD SCULPTURE AS “ROMAN” AND THE VIRGIN SCULPTURE AS “GREEK. YOU HAVE ULTIMATELY PLAYED YOURSELF!
@primeweeds
🤌🤌🤌
@averongodoffire8098
Justinian: but your the one calling yourself ROMAN HELENIE! RAAAAAAGH!!! *greek fire noises*