Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > History Help Forum > History Help
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

History Help History Help and Homework Forum - Pre-University and University History Help and Homework Questions


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 5th, 2017, 03:53 AM   #1
Citizen
 
Joined: Nov 2017
From: England
Posts: 1
Post Why did Rome fall?


What are the main reasons for the Romes fall?
What is the most important reason, and why do you think that is the most important reason?
Rihanna1 is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 5th, 2017, 05:35 AM   #2
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2014
From: appalacian Mtns
Posts: 4,227

Their army wasn't Roman anymore, but foreigners that couldn't be trusted.
M9Powell is offline  
Old November 5th, 2017, 06:13 AM   #3
Scholar
 
Joined: Oct 2015
From: Virginia
Posts: 564

Only the Western half "fell" in 476, it was murdered by 200 years of Germanic invasions that wrecked the economy and the urban centers. The Eastern half continued for 1000 years.
Dentatus is offline  
Old November 5th, 2017, 07:50 AM   #4

JeanDukeofAlecon's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Jan 2016
From: Victoria, Canada
Posts: 909

Many factors working in tandem brought down the west, but the two most basic are foreign invasions/migrations and the political and administrative turmoil which made it impossible to deal with those invasions. The military had shifted, in the west, from a national army to its own institution with unique traditions, goals (namely personal profit), perspectives, and even a specific dialect of Latin pretty far removed from its civilian equivalent. This was, in part, a consequence of the increasing "Barbarization" of the military, as Germanic soldiers made up a higher and higher percentage of both the common soldiery and the officer corps; that last bit also contributing greatly to the aforementioned political turmoil as Germanic general-regents dominated court in the 5th century.

The fall of the western Roman empire is essentially the story of the imperial government's failure to accommodate migrations, extract adequate resources from the increasingly disconnected provinces, control its increasingly estranged armies, or even remain functional, let alone stable, at a court level; all this against the backdrop of Huns, (largely quasi-Romanized) Germanic invasions, and civil war.
JeanDukeofAlecon is offline  
Old November 5th, 2017, 12:50 PM   #5

sparky's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2017
From: Sydney
Posts: 2,078
Blog Entries: 1

.
They ran out of monney
sparky is offline  
Old November 10th, 2017, 01:47 PM   #6
Citizen
 
Joined: Nov 2017
From: San Francisco
Posts: 4

The main reason:

Destabilization of central government. As Rome's power and wealth grew, there was less concern about maintaining the army, roads, and borders, and more about personal advancement which gave way to assassination and bribery as the regular means of moving up the political ladder, solely for the purpose of amassing personal wealth and power.

Also, Rome was too large. Even for an empire that size, the means to traverse it, and the armies to defend it, it could not maintain that size without proper support from the government. With an unstable central government, the money and means to support that army was weakened. As a result, foreign enemies with stronger armies (ie. the Sassanid Empire) were able to threaten and weaken Rome's dominance.
reader is offline  
Old November 10th, 2017, 02:19 PM   #7
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,344

One of the other problems is imperial succession. Any son of a current emperor or rebel emperor, ambitious general, senator, governor in some far flung province, bribe the right barbarian or praetorian guard, or army coup* could in theory become emperor. Such a system leads to factionalism and the establishment of feudal enclaves.

* Army coup I am referring to one of the more obscure rebel emperors - early the morning the general was in his tent with his live-in mistress playing hide-the-sausage, when some of his men marched in. (The mistress was not too pleased about being interrupted.) They complained - we are too far away from the capital, we have not been paid in six months, and we want to make our native live-in mistresses our wives. The general replied, "There was only one problem, I am loyal to the emperor." The captains replied, "You are our emperor now, if you refuse, we will cut your balls off and move onto a commander that is one rank lower than you." He took one look at his not too pleased mistress, "Then I am your emperor." They took him out (still sky-clad) lifted him up onto their shields and made him emperor. Then the rebel emperor took his army towards Rome to make sure of his election had the force of law - he was defeated and killed. Thus, the empire died a little more.
kazeuma is offline  
Old November 10th, 2017, 11:52 PM   #8

sparky's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2017
From: Sydney
Posts: 2,078
Blog Entries: 1

.
the barbarians didn't want roman coins they were so debased that they were worth nothing , however they were keen on getting the tittle and prerogative of Duxes
it allowed them to levy taxes in kind and feed their followers , the locals were rather satisfied with this they had local produces while Roman taxation had been grievous.
as the barbarians spread through Gaul , Hispania and most importantly the bread basket of north Africa
Rome found itself in the position of Vienna post WW1 an ex empire with no tax base , no res sources and no manpower .
It kept on out of ceremonial inertia but really was a dead man walking ,
when Odoacer refused the tittle of Caesar but took the tittle of king of Italy , even this paltry pretense was dead , a few vague Illyrian claim to the contrary

the Eastern Empire was not Roman , only the Greek daughter of Rome ,
its history is wholly separate in spite of pronouncement to the contrary
sparky is offline  
Old November 17th, 2017, 07:09 PM   #9
Lecturer
 
Joined: Jan 2016
From: Ohio
Posts: 300

-Barbarian invasions over the course of couple centuries led to fall of Western Rome.

-Government corruption/political instability (I read somewhere there were 20 emperors in 75 years, nuff said)

-Roman Legions were terrible.. they couldn't have a strong citizen filled army, so relied on foreign mercenaries to swell their ranks.

-Over expansion and over spending (the same reason the British empire later broke up, its hard to keep an empire protected and communications in line when it is so huge)

-Less Slavery. as with a lot of ancient civilizations, slaves were a vital part of the empire. Once they stopped expanding and armies got weaker, they could no longer maintain their flow of slaves.

Last edited by TheMusicMan; November 17th, 2017 at 07:14 PM.
TheMusicMan is offline  
Old November 17th, 2017, 07:13 PM   #10
Lecturer
 
Joined: Jan 2016
From: Ohio
Posts: 300

I just found this link again. It touches on a couple things I didn't and goes far more into detail.

8 Reasons Why Rome Fell - History Lists
TheMusicMan is offline  
Reply

  Historum > History Help Forum > History Help

Tags
fall, rome



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fall of Rome vs Transformation of Rome heirtothewind Ancient History 3 November 22nd, 2014 07:06 PM
The Fall of Rome Kote History Help 11 February 14th, 2014 03:45 AM
Fall of Rome or Continuation of Rome? pikeshot1600 Medieval and Byzantine History 57 December 9th, 2013 12:06 PM
Fall of Rome - same year as Earthquake in Rome? Inc European History 9 November 28th, 2011 06:53 PM
Fall of Rome Balthazar Ancient History 10 May 4th, 2008 08:24 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.