- This topic has 9 voices and 41 replies.
-
Posts
-
What do you think was the main reason for Romes fall? Civil wars? Political? It seems to me most of Romes probabal causes were internal. And when did Rome fall? (I've heard this is debatable as well)
What do you think was the main reason for Romes fall? Civil wars? Political? It seems to me most of Romes probabal causes were internal. And when did Rome fall? (I've heard this is debatable as well)
You ask a very complex question. Rome didn't fall per se, it crumbled over a very long time. I think Christianity was both a blessing and a curse to Rome. It was a blessing in that it unified the Empire under Constantine and reinvigorated it for some time, but then it also became a curse as it changed the fundamental institutions of Rome. Once Rome's external enemies were defeated (the Gauls, Carthage, Jugurtha, the Maccabbees and Zealots) internal wars between the Senate and the Caesars or between various ambitious leaders opened gaping wounds that only served to erode Rome from within. Rome taxed itself into terrible burden at the expense of the outlying provinces and basically overextended itself thus leading to the need for two Imperial Capitals (Rome and Constantinople). Half the empire spoke Latin and half spoke Greek. Rome basically fell victim to its own successes as its citizens coveted opulence and came to depend on inefficient slave labor and military conscripts to keep the machinations of its disjointed economy operating. Bureaucracy, both secular and ecclesiastical, contibuted to ever increasing inefficiency that became the imperial enterprise.....basically Rome just drowned in its efforts to administer such a large and diverse geographical territory....yet it managed to do so for many centuries. Rome was always an idea or ideal to begin with, and once the people lost faith in that idea, the end came soon thereafter.
I don't know the answer to that question. I do know that the Roman war machine was so powerful from a tactics and technology perspective that it could probably have beaten powerful opposing armies even if the Roman one was not on top of its game. However, it's important to remember that the Romans did lost some battles well before it eventually fell in the 5th Century. You can see, for example, a list here of Roman battle, most of which they won, but some of which they lost.
What do you think was the main reason for Romes fall? Civil wars? Political? It seems to me most of Romes probabal causes were internal. And when did Rome fall? (I've heard this is debatable as well)
They were trying to keep things under control by giving the citizens what they wanted... couldn't keep up; the tribes coming in weren't getting their share and revolted.Do we see a familiar pattern here? Wally
Well i guess the most amazing and mighty empire that ever rise was the Romans. why they fell is still a reigning question. One thing for sure Rome was a place controled by probaly the best of world rulers. from my point of view Rome fell because it was a god-less empire that perform some of the most senseless treatment on their prisoners and were kinda atheistic people. the fall of rome proves one thing for sure a god-less life or godless lives has heavy consequences.
Interesting that Mazzini rallied Young Italy with the three R's of Rome's greatness: The Roman Republic, the Roman Church, and the Renaissance. Seems like the Church was coming into its own before the fall, no? Edict of Milan 313 vs The Fall based on various dates (early as 378 to the traditional 476)… I do agree that the abuse of folks isn't very Christian in the higher sense.I still maintain it's more about not giving the people what they thought they needed; gets to the generic cause of all revolutions and revolts. Wally
Just something to think about with this question, from around 300 C.E. how much of Rome was actually Roman?
Moral Bankruptcy is clear by the rule of Honorius. When he was informed Rome was taken (by Alaric the Goth 410) He thought the courier met his pet hen. Ultimately it was Rome's reliance on "Barbarian" Tribes for defence. With Romans buying their way out of the army, it's fall was a betrayal or two away...This is what happens when stories of Roman cruelty dating from the days of Augustus (Octavian), Tiberius and Germanicus... are suckled for 400 years. Roman governance collapsed in 476, but it's institutions survived via the church...
Roman governance collapsed in 476, but it's institutions survived via the church...
I see you subscribe to the traditional date of the fall of Rome. Roman governance did not cease with the death and overthrow of Romulus Augustulus at Adrianople. The forms of Roman government survived in a diminished reform through to today. Roman Law lived on in civil society as well as in church law. Local Roman governments throughout the empire continued until they succumbed to invasion or were rendered unrecognizable by time and change.As to why Rome fell, certainly the barbarization of the empire played a part. I would argue that a bigger reason was the moral decay at the center of the empire. It was this decay that made barbarization palatable to the emperors. The needed soldiers and the average Roman was uninterested in defending the empire so the emperors had to get them from somewhere. In the end, it was expediency, compounded by moral decay, which allowed the enemy within the empire and then ate it alive from the inside out.
