Hey, everyone, Sebastian here. Just wanted to let you know that I will once again be participating in this year's Intelligent Speech Conference.

Deception, lies, fakery, fraudulence, and forgery is what they have on the docket for Intelligent Speech 2025.

So, obviously, I've got to be there. For those that don't know,

intelligent speech is an online conference that highlights the best in history podcasting.

Intelligence Speech 2025 deception will be taking place on the 8th of February 2025.

So if you want tickets, go to intelligent speechon of weird that at one point in history, the Romans

abandoned Rome as their capital. Now, it shouldn't seem weird.

In the grand scope of history, the moving of a capital city is not at all unusual.

Nations do it all the time.

Take China, for example.

Over the course of its long history, there have been at least nine different cities that have served as the capital of a united China, depending on how you count.

Countries are invaded, dynasties change, revolutions occur, administrative needs evolve, and new cities present themselves as the more natural or strategic seats of power.

Capital cities change. It's just a fact of history. And yet, there's still this irrational part of me

that feels sad when I reach the part of the Roman story where the empire

decides that Rome is no longer useful as a capital city. I know I'm not the only one that

feels this way. Many people, even venerable old historians, first get fascinated by Rome as children.

This can often lead to people developing weirdly sentimental feelings about Rome.

I think I'm one of those people.

Now, it might be because the Romans started as a city state.

In fact, you could argue that Rome was the most successful city state in history.

The early Roman identity was inextricable from the city they founded on the Tiber River.

The whole Roman project, at least at the start, was about the betterment

...