Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Fall of Rome
Topic Started: Mar 23 2014, 08:18 AM (200 Views)
Simon Darkshade
Member Avatar
Nefarious Swashbuckler
At what point was the fall of the (Western) Roman Empire inevitable in your view and why?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Basil Fawlty
Member Avatar
Post Tenebras Lux
Roughly, circa 500 B.C.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Petar
Member Avatar
The General
Probably the middle 4th century, because the cultural and social decline that had begun earlier became irreversible by then. The beginning of the Migration Period didn't help either.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John
Member Avatar

I am with Capt. Obvious on this one. At this particular stage in human history, an empire is destined to fall due to the inadequacies of human governing institutions and small nation-states are destined to be conquered by them. The only far-fetched chance the Roman Empire would have had would have been to decentralize power and establish quasi-democratic institutions in the various regions that they governed.
Edited by John, Mar 23 2014, 02:28 PM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lewington
Member Avatar

When the Republic went from beyond saving or reform and on down the path of autocracy. The idea of an intricate system of checks and balances to prevent tyranny may be a bit anachronistic though.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Basil Fawlty
Member Avatar
Post Tenebras Lux
More seriously, there are two commonly held views on the subject.

The traditional explanation is a Gibbonesque focus on internal decline, as seen in the drop in economic fortunes (particularly in the Western Roman Empire) and the rise in civil strife. The oft-mooted moral decline and influence of Christianity would fit broadly in the same category.

Another view, which has been popularized in recent years by Peter Heather and others, is that the Romans were simply beaten. The barbarians invaded and managed to win.

It strikes me as similar to many other historical debates, including that surrounding the American Civil War. Some attribute the Confederacy's collapse to lack of internal cohesion and poor leadership. Others take the line I quoted once before - "I always thought the Union Army had something to do with it."

My own opinion probably lies in the former category. I tend to view any empire that large as destined to collapse due to the lack of technology and communication. The Romans managed to get by for a long time by looting conquered peoples, and when that was no longer possible, they discovered the truth of Augustus's famous quip about Alexander: administering is harder than conquering.

It was an evil empire and deserved it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lewington
Member Avatar

Is Gibbon's account of the Fall of the Roman Empire a valid read? I once saw someone say that it is a good reflection of Enlightenment thinking, but a poor history itself.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Basil Fawlty
Member Avatar
Post Tenebras Lux
It is such a titanic read and so old that it probably wouldn't be the most optimal use of time, although it would introduce you to many themes. It is not the go-to source these days. A first-year professor of mine said that if anybody claimed to have read it, he wouldn't believe us, so it would also give you bragging rights. Not that that's a good reason to read a book.

It has what some have called, at minimum, an anti-Catholic bias, and at most a broadly anti-Christian one.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · History · Next Topic »
Add Reply