The Barbarians are coming!

[Swoop109]

Nice overview of each (albeit with some information that conflicts with other sources I have heard/read) but I think the days of simple documentaries are nearly over. It's about time we started seeing more in depth coverage of history on History Channel programming (and I don't mean endless footage of WWII). Some of the recent shows (last couple of years) on Egypt have been written far better than these four pieces, IMO.

I was a little disapointed in the programs. While they did a good job of covering the strictly historical aspects of the four different groups, I would have liked to have seen some more on their culture, beliefs and inner social structure. I know that a lot of this material would have to have been based on the best educated guesswork currently possible, but the shows didn't really offer any material that I had not seen else where.

 

[Storm Raven]

Was anyone else annoyed that the sequences concerning the Goths and Huns showed the Romans using basically 1st Century era equipment and tactics hundreds of years after they abandoned that type of orgnaization and equipment?

And that Harold Godwinson's troops were armed and equipped as if they were post Nomran invasion soliders, and not an Anglo-Saxon fyrd supplemented by huscarls?

 

[MrFilthyIke]

For those of us who missed one or both the first time, they'll be shown back-to-back this Saturday (1/24) beginning at 8pm eastern.

~~Sharraunna

Sweet, now I can see it! (I work 3pm till midnight )

 

[Alcareru]

I was a little disapointed in the programs. While they did a good job of covering the strictly historical aspects of the four different groups, I would have liked to have seen some more on their culture, beliefs and inner social structure. I know that a lot of this material would have to have been based on the best educated guesswork currently possible, but the shows didn't really offer any material that I had not seen else where.

I was kinda bored by the whole thing. The History Channel's original programming is kinda hit and miss. Theyll regurgitate the linear by the book stuff trying to put a personal and dramatic angle on it by following the rise and fall of a leader, instead of giving us a deeper look at a culture. They often end up making alot of history boring. But then again the WWII- I mean History Channel's programming as a whole is pretty superficial.

For what its worth, I thought their last hyped series the Alamo wasnt too bad. I tend to like History Channel International a bit more.

 

[Swoop109]

I hate to say it, but the History Channel is starting to become, IMO, politically correct in its depiction of some events. They seem to fail in pushing for the interesting material that could open up the minds of their veiwers.

If they really wanted to do a program on the edge the how about a speical on the Amercian penal units of WWII, or the possibility of Amercian POW's held by the Russians up through the 1960's.

 

[frankthedm]

I hate to say it, but the History Channel is starting to become, IMO, politically correct in its depiction of some events. They seem to fail in pushing for the interesting material that could open up the minds of their veiwers.

If they really wanted to do a program on the edge the how about a speical on the Amercian penal units of WWII, or the possibility of Amercian POW's held by the Russians up through the 1960's.

Its info-tainment done for the ratings, keeping it marching in step helps the bottom line.