Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Medieval and Byzantine History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Medieval and Byzantine History Medieval and Byzantine History Forum - Period of History between classical antiquity and modern times, roughly the 5th through 16th Centuries


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old March 9th, 2009, 05:23 PM   #1
Citizen
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 17
Fall of the Roman Empire


This is always a popular subject. This thread will be devoted to discussing the reasons why Rome fell. BTW the Roman Empire did not fall in 476, but in 1453, only the west fell in 476, and it is with the Western Empire that this thread will be concerned with.

--


I believe that a number of factors were involved.

Point1: The Capital moved from Rome to Constantinople. Know with the Tetrarchy there were four capitals, but with Constantine the center of Roman Power moved east.

Point2: The Western Empire was less populous and poor then the Eastern Empire.

Point3: The Sassanids drew much of the Roman Military toward the East, leavening the West without enough forces to protect it.

Point4: The Western and Eastern Empires seemed be in conflict with one another after 395 AD.

Point5: The coloni stopped paying taxes to the Emperor in Milan and later Ravenna, but paid them to the Nobles/Landlords.

Point6: The Romans hired barbarian’s foederati rather than using their own home grown forces.

Point7: Some argue that Rome did not fall, but evolved into the Barbarian kingdoms of the west, which might not have been barbarian.

__________________________________________________ _____________

George Clemenceau: "America is the only nation in history which miraculously has gone directly from barbarism to degeneration without the usual interval of civilization."

A nation," wrote the French philosopher Ernest Renan "is a group of people united by a mistaken view about the past and a hatred of their neighbors."
Ulmo is offline  
Remove Ads
Old May 4th, 2009, 03:06 PM   #2
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Apr 2009
From: NJ
Posts: 400
Re: Fall of the Roman Empire


Nice post. I, and it seems everyone else is to lazy to discuss it. Sorry dood.
Julius Nepos is offline  
Old May 6th, 2009, 11:21 AM   #3

ttanner's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Mar 2009
From: Ohio
Posts: 353
Re: Fall of the Roman Empire


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulmo View Post
BTW the Roman Empire did not fall in 476, but in 1453, only the west fell in 476, and it is with the Western Empire that this thread will be concerned with.
I agree to a certain point. When did the Roman Empire stop being called the Roman Empire? wasn't it before the 1400s?
ttanner is offline  
Old May 6th, 2009, 04:31 PM   #4
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Apr 2009
From: NJ
Posts: 400
Re: Fall of the Roman Empire


Quote:
Originally Posted by ttanner View Post
I agree to a certain point. When did the Roman Empire stop being called the Roman Empire? wasn't it before the 1400s?

No good sir. The Eastern Roman Empire's people and Emperors never referred to themselves as anything but Roman up until the bitter end. Modern historian's refer to the Eastern Roman Empire as the Byzantine Empire as a way of distinguishing it from the earlier Easter Empire because since it survived for so long it developed a culture all its own.
Julius Nepos is offline  
Old May 6th, 2009, 05:24 PM   #5
Lecturer
 
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 306
Re: Fall of the Roman Empire


Amy Chua dictates the fall of the Roman Empire was because (I've shortened parts of it so that I could type less):


While tolerance was essential to both Rome's rise to world power and its maintenance of the Pax Romana, it also sowed the seeds of Rome's eventual disintegration. As we have seen, Rome was far more successful than Achaemenid Persia in assimilating diverse conquered peoples through the inducements of citizenship, participation in the empire, and the appeal of Roman culture. Whereas most of people under Ach. rule never "Persianized", stunning numbers of Roman subjects "Romanized".

But not all. Particularly in the Hellenic east and the "barbarian" north, the empire sought to absort peoples whose varying traditions and cultures were, for one reason or another, more at odds with Rome's and more resistent. The great early emperors tolerated this heterogeneity, and their tolerance undoubtedly worked to Rome's advantae througout the High Empire. But precisely because of Roman toleration, the peoples of the east and north were permitted to remain socially intact, relatively autonomous, and relatively un0Roman; over time, they chafed at imperial rule and began agitating for independence.

The historian Anthony Pagden explains, "As the empire grew and the diversity of the peoples it included increased, so its sheer heterogeneity became more difficult to handle" In the fourth century, the divide between Latin-speaking west and the Greek-speaking east deppened, and in 395 the empire was permanently split in two. At the same time, the empre "began slowly, but inexorably to be hollowed out from within as long-quiescent subject peoples revolted and once-loyal subjects seized the opportunity to carve out independent states for themselves".

But too much diversty was only part of the problem. Far more devastating, after the golden age Rome descended into an era of intensifying religious persecution and ethnic bigotry. Although not the only cuase of Roman decline, intolerance helped tear the empire arpart.

Christianity was deeploy implicated in the new intolerance, first as a target and later as its primary source. Over the course of the third century AD, Christainity spread to every corner of the empire, representing by the year 300 approximately on tenth the population. The early Christians wer enot popular among their fellow subjects. Not only did they deny the gods of Rome, they were also accused of incest........ Because of their refusal to participate in the official rites of sacrifice to the deities, Christians were often held responsible for military defeats as well as natural disasters like plagues...

In AD 303, Emp. Diocletian launched the Great Persecution against Christianity. At the time, the Pax Romana was breaking down, with Germanic tribes invading from the north and the Perisans in the east... For nearly ten years, Christians were systematically persecuted..... Amazingly, in the battle between the mighty Rome and the fledgling Christian Church, the Church won. The Rome of Christainity in Rome's fall has been debated for centuries. Although tempered by various qualifications, Biggon's view was that Christianity's emphasis on "a future life", "passive obedience" and "usillanimity" fatally corrupted Rome's traditional virtues.... Rome's embrace of Christianity intorduced into imperial policy a virulent strain of intolerance that undermind those strategies of assimilation and incorporation that had so successfully held together the empire's diverse populations...
Undoudtedly \, CVonstantine and his successors believed that religious uniformity would reinvigorate the empire and strengthen it against increasing barb. attacks. In fact, the opposite occurred. The attacks on Pagans and heretics proved deeply self-destructive, acutally facilitating barbarian encroachments. In NA for example, the shutdown of pagan temples provoked bitter rioting, and threw popular support behind Vandal king Genseric. Elseowhere, pogroms led to an exodus of Jews, allying themselves with Perisa...
Worse still, a plague of intensifying ethnic conflict swept over Rome beginning in the alte fourth century AD. Germanic immigrants occupied a highly precarious position within the Roman empire. On tohe one hand, they represent potentiall fearsome enemes; invaders who had pushed their way across the Danube through the empire's collapsing frontier defenses. On the other hand, they represent potential allies; offereing desperately needed manpower for the badly depleted Roman military.
At first, Rome's traditional strategy of tolerance and uncoerced assimilation appeared to be succeeding with the various Germanic tribes. They were allowed to live under their own rulers.... Their men filled the ranks of Rome's armies.
But the assimilation of Germanic immigrants was never complete and always turblulent. From early on, the Germans were subjected to peridoic Roman abuse and contempt. Their sons were sometimes taken as hostages to ensure obedience.... distrust and hostility intensified on both sides.

Essentially, the famous Roman tradition of tolernace had hit a limit it could not cross. The Germans disgusted the native Roman people...
In the late fourth century, Rome for the first time adopted policies of apartheid against one of its subject peoples, barring intermarriage, forbidding Roman from wearing trousers and othe rbarbarian clothing, and condemning the barbarian' form of Christianity as heretical. Officers of German hiertage were accused of disloyalty, denied posts.... Mob lynching of Goth soldiers became common.. biggest example beign Stillcho

Enmity escalated, and the destruction of Rome came with astonishing rapidity. Disliked and despised, the Germans, retaliated by hating the people whose glories they had once hoped to share. Outraged, Germans once loyal to the empire turned against the Roman.. Stilcho's men joined forces with teh Gothic King Alaric, who laid siege to Rome itself and sacked it in 410. By 476, the western Roman Empire was no more.

Rome thrived so long as it was able to enlist, absorb, reward, and intermix peoples of diverse ethnicities, religions, and backgrounds. The empire sank when it let in peoples that it failed to assimilate, either because they were unassimilable or because their culture and habits exceeded the limits of Roman tolerance. Out of a mixture of religious and ethnic intolerance, Rome sparked wars and internal rebellions it could not win. It was precisely when the empire sought to main the purity of Roman blood, culture and religion -replicating the mistake that Claudius and later Gibbon imputed to ancient Athens and Sparta - that Rme spiraled downward into disintegration and oblivion.

From Day of Empire: How Hyperpowers rise to global dominance, and why they fall
Jebusrocks is offline  
Old May 15th, 2009, 10:35 PM   #6

Ankrom's Avatar
Archivist
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 169
Re: Fall of the Roman Empire


Quote:
Originally Posted by ttanner View Post
I agree to a certain point. When did the Roman Empire stop being called the Roman Empire? wasn't it before the 1400s?

You need to read Hieronymus Wolf!
Ankrom is offline  
Old May 16th, 2009, 12:49 PM   #7

zwolf1215's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: May 2009
From: New Jersey
Posts: 655
Re: Fall of the Roman Empire


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulmo View Post
BTW the Roman Empire did not fall in 476, but in 1453, only the west fell in 476, and it is with the Western Empire that this thread will be concerned with.
While being true, I feel that after the Roman empire was split into east and west is when the empire went into decline and its super power status of western europe was starting to dwindle.

Also exactly how strong was the Byzantine military? I know they were defeated by the Holy Roman Empire during the 4th crusade.
zwolf1215 is offline  
Old May 16th, 2009, 02:37 PM   #8
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Apr 2009
From: NJ
Posts: 400
Re: Fall of the Roman Empire


Quote:
Originally Posted by zwolf1215 View Post
While being true, I feel that after the Roman empire was split into east and west is when the empire went into decline and its super power status of western europe was starting to dwindle.

Also exactly how strong was the Byzantine military? I know they were defeated by the Holy Roman Empire during the 4th crusade.

Incorrect! The Fourth Crusade was comprised crusading soldiers from various country's and the Venetians. And I believe someone opened the gate for them to come in. They were never defeated in a pitched battle in that disgusting venture.
Julius Nepos is offline  
Old May 16th, 2009, 09:31 PM   #9

zwolf1215's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: May 2009
From: New Jersey
Posts: 655
Re: Fall of the Roman Empire


Quote:
Originally Posted by Julius Nepos View Post
Incorrect! The Fourth Crusade was comprised crusading soldiers from various country's and the Venetians. And I believe someone opened the gate for them to come in. They were never defeated in a pitched battle in that disgusting venture.
Fourth_Crusade Fourth_Crusade
"The Fourth Crusade (1199–1204) was originally intended to conquer Muslim Jerusalem by means of an invasion through Egypt. Instead, in April 1204, the Crusaders of Western Europe invaded and conquered the Christian (Eastern Orthodox) city of Constantinople, capital of the Byzantine Empire. This is seen as one of the final acts in the Great Schism between the Eastern Orthodox Church and Roman Catholic Church."


So did no actual fighting go on?
zwolf1215 is offline  
Old May 17th, 2009, 12:51 AM   #10
Superss
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,500
Re: Fall of the Roman Empire


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulmo View Post
This is always a popular subject. This thread will be devoted to discussing the reasons why Rome fell. BTW the Roman Empire did not fall in 476, but in 1453, only the west fell in 476, and it is with the Western Empire that this thread will be concerned with.

--


I believe that a number of factors were involved.

Point1: The Capital moved from Rome to Constantinople. Know with the Tetrarchy there were four capitals, but with Constantine the center of Roman Power moved east.

Point2: The Western Empire was less populous and poor then the Eastern Empire.

Point3: The Sassanids drew much of the Roman Military toward the East, leavening the West without enough forces to protect it.

Point4: The Western and Eastern Empires seemed be in conflict with one another after 395 AD.

Point5: The coloni stopped paying taxes to the Emperor in Milan and later Ravenna, but paid them to the Nobles/Landlords.

Point6: The Romans hired barbarian’s foederati rather than using their own home grown forces.

Point7: Some argue that Rome did not fall, but evolved into the Barbarian kingdoms of the west, which might not have been barbarian.

__________________________________________________ _____________

George Clemenceau: "America is the only nation in history which miraculously has gone directly from barbarism to degeneration without the usual interval of civilization."

A nation," wrote the French philosopher Ernest Renan "is a group of people united by a mistaken view about the past and a hatred of their neighbors."
Thee Roman Empire fall cause they tryed and coqued to many countries,no counreis survive by coquing thee whole earth.
Heidi XX is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Medieval and Byzantine History

Tags
empire, fall, roman


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Roman or Byzantine empire? Commander Medieval and Byzantine History 24 May 4th, 2009 03:14 PM
Roman Republic vs. Roman Empire ice2w Ancient History 9 March 25th, 2009 09:26 PM
Decline of Roman Empire Angela Brown488 History Help 3 March 7th, 2009 03:27 AM
Decline of the Roman Empire? Universeman Ancient History 56 October 30th, 2007 11:36 PM
Roman empire of the west cptJACK Ancient History 12 February 21st, 2007 03:05 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.