47 replies to this topic

[adriantc]

It has been two weeks since I returned from a trip to Rome (among other cities). It was one of my dreams to visit the eternal city of Rome, the city that was once the center of the civilized world. Many of my friends didn't like Rome, because, as they said: "there are only a bunch of stones to be seen". I totally disagree with them. It's hard to express what I felt when I saw the Colosseum, the Imperial forums or Trajan's Column, so much history and power in a single city. It is amazing to think that I stood on the same spot where, 2000 years ago, stood the emperors of the world. It was also hard for me to understand, seeing today's italians, how they managed to conquer most of the known world.
In recent years I started having a passion for history. For my history is made up of 3 parts: Alexander The Great (considered one of the most successful military commanders in history and the world's biggest empire builder), The Roman Empire (the world's biggest empire and the most important of them all) and The Third Reich (Drittes Reich, Tausendjähriges Reich "Thousand-Year Empire").
As I stood among the ruins of ancient Rome I started thinking... how could the italians conquer the world since they are like my own people, the romanians (we are half latin) - very lazy and uncivilized (at least compared to some other countries). But the roman 2000 years ago couldn't have been lazy or uncivilized, they were the flower of menkind.
What follows is my very own opinion... it is not to be considered professional or 100% true. It is just my opinion!

There are a bunch of reasons why the Roman Empire fell. I will discuss them in the order of their importance:

1. Tyranny - When Julius Caesar killed the too corrupt Republic he had replaced a form of bad government with one, which at that time, seemed good. On the short run (~180 years) the empire was better then the old republic, but on the long run it was to be the core of the rotten empire. A long series of emperors had nothing to do with the well-beeing of the empire, they only saw their own interests and vices. Internal crisis weakend the imperial army which was no longer capable of defending the empire.
2. No more practice of virtues. In the time of the republic the romans built the empire step by step, discipline was a common word, law and order reigned everywhere. The barbarians where not (yet) afraid of the mighy legions. When the republic turned into the empire, it was near its peak. Pace came and there was no more need for a well disciplined army or brillliant generals; people mixed and the roman blood was no longer pure (it is strongly related to the difference I wazs talking about: ancient roman- modern italian). The barbarians where now afraid even when they heard the name of the Roman Empire. So on the base of peace and prosperity (the Pax Romana) the empire started to slide downwards. Soon the barbarians started to realise that the mighty roman army was not what it used to be. While they were attacking the boders of the empire the internal crisis decimated the flower of the roman army. And the fall was only at the beginning. Diocletian was the last good emperor to realise that the empire could no longer be governed by one person... At this point there was no turning back...
3. Christianity - some may not agree with me but I (and other people way smarter then me) think that Christianity is one of the most importnat reasons of the decline of the Roman Empire. Christianity told people that the life on earth is, for the most part useless. The material world is only temporary, so people no longer practiced the virtues and simply waited for the kingdom of heaven. The army was no longer considered a priority, because God will not reward the brave man of the legions. As I see it Christianity corroded the very pilars of the Roman society. As there was no more wish to fight, the end was no longer a problem of if, but of when.

I should state that I have been impressed (and probably heavly influenced) by Edward Gibbon's (arguably the most influential historian to write in English) History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, a book which I strongly suggest reading to all those interested in this topic.

Hope you had the patience to read my long post. I would be happy if you would post you're own theories or even theoriesthat you have heard and agree with. Criticism is also welcome!

Edited by adriantc, 14 August 2006 - 03:37 PM.

[Madkat-Z]

Well I think they fell into too many ditches "Semper Raeda in Fossa Est."

Ok I had to say that. Anyway my real theory for why I think the Roman Empire fell, was mostly because of leadership issues. I don't think that Christianity really played a role in Romans demise, but it could of had an effect. There is also a theory out there that lead in the water supply was the reason the empire fell. For some reason I can't see how that could of have caused an empire of that size to fall, but its just a theory.

[Panzer]

I recently did a big report at school about Julius Caesar and i found out some very interesting things! He assassinated his political and military rivals so they couldnt strike against him, he did lead the Roman Empire to greatness by expanding north into Europe but anyone who was in the spotlight apart from Caesar was usally assassinated.

Mayby when Caesar was killed thats why the Roman Empire started to fall, because there were no "good" politicians or military leaders left.

[TypoMage]

Well like most things they must come to a end. Same thing with are civilization. Pretty soon it will fall. Hopefully not in a long time. The dinosaurs fell. It is just how things go.

[savge17]

IMO the Roman empire feel due to the loss of one of its finest leaders, Julius Caesar. If Julius Retained control over the other men thatw ere in his group then he would have made Rome a civizilation of great and unique power that would last a lot longer. Rome was a very powerful place but the fact of the loss of caesar cost it everything.

[Gondero Werkus]

See I've always thought that one big reason to help them fall was that they were smart enough to make indoor plumbing but they didn't know that lead causes problems with humans.

Now after so long of a time using lead piping for all of your water needs (i.e Public Bath Houses) you will start to get lead poisoning and/or birth defects like crazy.

[pixieloo]

Quote

3. Christianity - some may not agree with me but I (and other people way smarter then me) think that Christianity is one of the most importnat reasons of the decline of the Roman Empire. Christianity told people that the life on earth is, for the most part useless. The material world is only temporary, so people no longer practiced the virtues and simply waited for the kingdom of heaven. The army was no longer considered a priority, because God will not reward the brave man of the legions. As I see it Christianity corroded the very pilars of the Roman society. As there was no more wish to fight, the end was no longer a problem of if, but of when.

I think Christianity may have had something to do with it as well. But not all Romans were Christians. In fact, the Romans were the ones that crucified Jesus on the cross.

I'm a little confused though. Are you saying the Roman Empire fell because they were Christian, or because other nations were Christian?

[adriantc]

Panzer, on Aug 14 2006, 11:26 PM, said:

I recently did a big report at school about Julius Caesar and i found out some very interesting things! He assassinated his political and military rivals so they couldnt strike against him, he did lead the Roman Empire to greatness by expanding north into Europe but anyone who was in the spotlight apart from Caesar was usally assassinated.

Mayby when Caesar was killed thats why the Roman Empire started to fall, because there were no "good" politicians or military leaders left.

Yeah it is very much true... One of the main reasons why the Roman Empire started to fall is the lack of good emperors and generals. What I want to discuss is why there were no good emperors. I don't see how the lead theorie could explain that!

pixieloo, on Aug 15 2006, 06:34 PM, said:

I think Christianity may have had something to do with it as well. But not all Romans were Christians. In fact, the Romans were the ones that crucified Jesus on the cross.

I'm a little confused though. Are you saying the Roman Empire fell because they were Christian, or because other nations were Christian?

I'm saying that the Roman Empire fell because, in time, they converted to Christianity. If you look into the timeline of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire you will see that after Constantine ("first Christian Emperor", fully legalized Christianity in the Empire) there were no good Christian emperors anymore... just a very long line of emperors who did not care about the good of the empire, only for the good of themselves. It also happens that the last pagan emperor Flavius Claudius Iulianus (also known as Julian the Apostate) was, even though he enjoyed only a very short reign, one of the best after Constantine.
Before Christianity was adopted in the Empire people would, for example, consider military service a sacred duty for which they expected some sort of reward from the gods. When Christianity was adopted in the Empire people became unwilling to kill and careless with their life, no longer praticing the ancient (virtues. That is why I consider Christianity to be one of the main reasons why the Roman Empire fell; the conversian had a much greater influence in all aspects of life in comparison with other reasons.

[morosophos]

The reasons as to why the Roman Empire fell really depends on what sense we mean by "The Roman Empire."

If we're even talking about the empire, that is, the emperor's state, then it could have fallen for several reasons. As already mentioned, there were many corrupt emperors in succession. The cult of the emperor, where thrived the practise of deifying the leaders, certainly inspired humongous ego. Of course these men felt that as being godheads as well as figureheads of the state, they deserved respect and all things that go with it, despite the well-being of the Empire. Resources that should have been used to maintain public services were used foolishly as luxeries for heads of state. A second reason for the fall is obvious and has been seen throughout history in respect to many empires, most recently in my mind the Drittes Reich. Put simply, the Empire occupied too much land and was guarded by too few. The Roman Empire stretched from Britannia through Africa. The opposition had already gotten so bad in Britannia that a wall had to be built to keep the enemy from Roman territory. The Roman army was very strong in the day of Caesar. The legions endured forced marches lasting for days, building in a few hours an entire fort that housed all the gear, animals, and the soldiers themselves. The individual was rugged, knowing no comforts or luxeries in excess. The problem is the culture changed; people became used to luxeries and were no longer apt nor fit to do the sort of hard labour they'd done before. Some of Caesar's first words written in his De Bello Gallico:

"The strongest of all these are the Belgians, because they are the farthest away from the civilised culture of our Province, and very seldom do merchants carry to them things which tend to effeminate minds."

By "things which tend to effeminate minds," Caesar surely means "excess treasure which turns our citizens into a bunch of sissies to the point where they can't do their work like they used to." The Belgians originated from northernmost Gaul, whence incidentally the barbaric invaders who finally did western Rome in came. Caesar is an oracle. ^^;;

We could also possibly define the Roman Empire by culture and people, who were diverse and relatively accepting, so long as you paid your dues. When a people was conquered, the Roman Empire demanded tribute, but let that people continue on its customs and private affairs. The Romans kept their laws, and all under Rome were also expected to obey. Any laws passed exclusively within a province were valid within that province only, and Rome really didn't care. Such was the case with the Jews and Christians. Rome didn't care about Jesus. Notice how in the Bible, the Pharisees are basically powerless until they can find a reason why Rome would care about Jesus, hence the story where they try to trick Jesus by showing him the coin with Tiberius Caesar's face on it, etc. Pontius Pilate, praetor of Judea, didn't see anything wrong with him, but under pressure by the people, sent him to death. Those who presided over his apostle Paul's cases didn't believe Paul had done anything, either. They reacted with frustration and anger over those who prosecuted him, mainly because they had no legal ground whatsoever. They didn't care. However, when Constantine became Caesar-Pope, everything changed. Paganism was made illegal, and all of the sudden, church married state. The culture and people of Rome were killed, and Rome fell in that respect.

[adriantc]

morosophos, on Aug 27 2006, 02:01 AM, said:

The reasons as to why the Roman Empire fell really depends on what sense we mean by "The Roman Empire."

If we're even talking about the empire, that is, the emperor's state, then it could have fallen for several reasons. As already mentioned, there were many corrupt emperors in succession. The cult of the emperor, where thrived the practise of deifying the leaders, certainly inspired humongous ego. Of course these men felt that as being godheads as well as figureheads of the state, they deserved respect and all things that go with it, despite the well-being of the Empire. Resources that should have been used to maintain public services were used foolishly as luxeries for heads of state. A second reason for the fall is obvious and has been seen throughout history in respect to many empires, most recently in my mind the Drittes Reich. Put simply, the Empire occupied too much land and was guarded by too few. The Roman Empire stretched from Britannia through Africa. The opposition had already gotten so bad in Britannia that a wall had to be built to keep the enemy from Roman territory. The Roman army was very strong in the day of Caesar. The legions endured forced marches lasting for days, building in a few hours an entire fort that housed all the gear, animals, and the soldiers themselves. The individual was rugged, knowing no comforts or luxeries in excess. The problem is the culture changed; people became used to luxeries and were no longer apt nor fit to do the sort of hard labour they'd done before. Some of Caesar's first words written in his De Bello Gallico:

"The strongest of all these are the Belgians, because they are the farthest away from the civilised culture of our Province, and very seldom do merchants carry to them things which tend to effeminate minds."

By "things which tend to effeminate minds," Caesar surely means "excess treasure which turns our citizens into a bunch of sissies to the point where they can't do their work like they used to." The Belgians originated from northernmost Gaul, whence incidentally the barbaric invaders who finally did western Rome in came. Caesar is an oracle. ^^;;

We could also possibly define the Roman Empire by culture and people, who were diverse and relatively accepting, so long as you paid your dues. When a people was conquered, the Roman Empire demanded tribute, but let that people continue on its customs and private affairs. The Romans kept their laws, and all under Rome were also expected to obey. Any laws passed exclusively within a province were valid within that province only, and Rome really didn't care. Such was the case with the Jews and Christians. Rome didn't care about Jesus. Notice how in the Bible, the Pharisees are basically powerless until they can find a reason why Rome would care about Jesus, hence the story where they try to trick Jesus by showing him the coin with Tiberius Caesar's face on it, etc. Pontius Pilate, praetor of Judea, didn't see anything wrong with him, but under pressure by the people, sent him to death. Those who presided over his apostle Paul's cases didn't believe Paul had done anything, either. They reacted with frustration and anger over those who prosecuted him, mainly because they had no legal ground whatsoever. They didn't care. However, when Constantine became Caesar-Pope, everything changed. Paganism was made illegal, and all of the sudden, church married state. The culture and people of Rome were killed, and Rome fell in that respect.

That is a very good explination. In other words we could say that the Roman Empire fell because of its own succes. Caesar legions very strong, well trained and disciplined, but as the Empire grew stronger and stronger and as there were no more enemies to fight the army was reduced, the fighting spirit died and insted of Roman legions came Barbarian mercenaries. When Rome enemies realised the decline they started to attack the (now weak) border. So as I see it once you get to the peak of something there is no other way then down. It is just what happened to the Roman Empire.
Concerning the "did Christianity have something to do with the fall of the Empire?" problem I already stated that, in my opinion is one of the main reasons for the decline in discipline and fighting spirit and on the long run for the decline of the Roman Empire. On the other hand Christianity did something good. Once the Western Empire fell in the 5th Century the barbarians were well into converting to Christianity. And even thought for 10 centuries the church has closed the eyes of the world to science and culture (thus the Dark Ages), the church was the only institution which managed to preserve the science and culture into the chaos that followed the Empire's fall.