| Line 211: |
Line 211: |
| | ==Other Reasons for the Fall of the Roman Empire (in the West)== | | ==Other Reasons for the Fall of the Roman Empire (in the West)== |
| | | | |
| − | Historians date the end of the ancient world at A.D. 500 or 600, or perhaps as early as 375 when the Huns invaded Europe from Asia. The last Roman Emperor was the nine-year-old Romulus Augustus, and he was deposed (removed from power) in A.D. 476. This is the date most often used by historians to denote the "fall" of the Roman empire. Keep in mind, however, that the eastern half of the Roman empire based in Constantinople that split from the west in A.D. 264 never "fell"; it thrived for another thousand years.
| + | '''A.D. 476 is the date used for the "fall" of the Roman empire'''. That was when the last Roman Emperor, nine-year-old Romulus Augustus, was deposed (removed from power). Keep in mind, however, that the eastern half of the Roman empire based in Constantinople that split from the west in A.D. 264 never "fell"; it thrived for another thousand years. |
| | | | |
| | There was not a single event that ended the ancient world, or even a series of events. But by A.D. 600, there was very little left of ancient civilizations, and all the intellectual and cultural progress had ceased. The culture, the military, the upkeep of roads, the sense of justice, and the governments were gone. | | There was not a single event that ended the ancient world, or even a series of events. But by A.D. 600, there was very little left of ancient civilizations, and all the intellectual and cultural progress had ceased. The culture, the military, the upkeep of roads, the sense of justice, and the governments were gone. |
| Line 217: |
Line 217: |
| | The Roman empire was the last of the great ancient civilizations, and countless papers, books and Ph.D. theses (dissertations) have been written trying to explain ''why'' the Roman empire collapsed. In the 1700s, British historian Edward Gibbon wrote a comprehensive six-volume set of books entitled ''The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire''.<ref>http://www.ccel.org/ccel/gibbon/decline/files/decline.html</ref> This became the most celebrated work of English historical literature. Gibbon attributed the decline of the Roman empire primarily to the rise of Christianity. Roman citizens began to care more about heaven than earth, in Gibbon's view, and supposedly stopped caring so much about work and government. However, this argument may not persuade you, as nations with overwhelmingly Christian populations have thrived throughout history. Also, Gibbon's theory does not explain why the western half of the Roman empire fell but the eastern half did not. Both were Christian. | | The Roman empire was the last of the great ancient civilizations, and countless papers, books and Ph.D. theses (dissertations) have been written trying to explain ''why'' the Roman empire collapsed. In the 1700s, British historian Edward Gibbon wrote a comprehensive six-volume set of books entitled ''The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire''.<ref>http://www.ccel.org/ccel/gibbon/decline/files/decline.html</ref> This became the most celebrated work of English historical literature. Gibbon attributed the decline of the Roman empire primarily to the rise of Christianity. Roman citizens began to care more about heaven than earth, in Gibbon's view, and supposedly stopped caring so much about work and government. However, this argument may not persuade you, as nations with overwhelmingly Christian populations have thrived throughout history. Also, Gibbon's theory does not explain why the western half of the Roman empire fell but the eastern half did not. Both were Christian. |
| | | | |
| − | The military invasions by barbarians described above were an obvious factor in the fall of civilization. They were a constant distraction to the Roman emperors and ultimately the Roman army could not continue to fend off the attacks. The army itself was vulnerable to disloyalty, as it enlisted barbarians who cared little about Rome. Enormous political instability resulted in 28 different generals (the "barracks emperors") in less than 100 years. | + | '''The military invasions by barbarians described above were an obvious factor in the fall of civilization'''. They were a constant distraction to the Roman emperors and ultimately the Roman army could not continue to fend off the attacks. The army itself was vulnerable to disloyalty, as it enlisted barbarians who cared little about Rome. Enormous political instability resulted in 28 different generals (the "barracks emperors") in less than 100 years. |
| | | | |
| − | Economists often say that all of history can be explained by economic trends, and the decline of the Roman empire is an example of this. Diocletian's economic policies were dreadful, imposing price controls and ordering people to stay in their current jobs. Emperors spent lavishly on themselves and other friends and the currency suffered from inflation that accompanies overspending by government. Like modern governments, the Roman emperors produced cheap coins when they needed money, thereby causing inflation. Economic problems resulted, and small farmers sold their family land to large estates. An early form of feudalism called "Patrocinium" developed whereby farmers worked on land owned by others. Eventually many farmers gave up and migrated to cities. But slave labor was popular in the cities, so the former farmers could not obtain jobs and large unemployment resulted. With nothing to do, crowds began to look for entertainment. | + | '''Economists often say that all of history can be explained by economic trends, and the decline of the Roman empire is an example'''. Diocletian's economic policies were dreadful, imposing price controls and ordering people to stay in their current jobs. Emperors spent lavishly on themselves and other friends and the currency suffered from inflation that accompanies overspending by government. Like modern governments, the Roman emperors produced cheap coins when they needed money, thereby causing inflation. Economic problems resulted, and small farmers sold their family land to large estates. An early form of feudalism called "Patrocinium" developed whereby farmers worked on land owned by others. Eventually many farmers gave up and migrated to cities. But slave labor was popular in the cities, so the former farmers could not obtain jobs and large unemployment resulted. With nothing to do, crowds began to look for entertainment. |
| | | | |
| | The aphorism "idle time is the work of the devil" applied to the people of Rome. For entertainment, people would go to the Colosseum and watch people (at one time, Christians) be fed to lions, or see two gladiators fight each other until one died. The morality of the Roman people was in complete decline. It was like everyone now spending hours each day watching murder on television, except it was real then. Nothing is achieved, and the content of the entertainment becomes increasingly immoral. | | The aphorism "idle time is the work of the devil" applied to the people of Rome. For entertainment, people would go to the Colosseum and watch people (at one time, Christians) be fed to lions, or see two gladiators fight each other until one died. The morality of the Roman people was in complete decline. It was like everyone now spending hours each day watching murder on television, except it was real then. Nothing is achieved, and the content of the entertainment becomes increasingly immoral. |
| | | | |
| − | The imposition of heavy taxes also had a demoralizing effect. Failed harvests compounded the economic problem. Moreover, the reliance by the Roman economy on slavery eventually hurt the civilization, as the wealthy became accustomed to doing nothing and having free labor to work for them. Social decay accompanied the idle time and abusive use of free labor. The peaceful time known as Pax Romana has been blamed for not bringing in revenue from foreign wars, as Rome was no longer looting foreign territory. The end of the expansion of the Roman empire led to an end of the new revenue, and collapse from within. It appears that the economic model for success of the Roman empire required continual expansion to succeed. Illness did not help either: a plague reduced the population of Rome. | + | '''The imposition of heavy taxes also had a demoralizing effect'''. Failed harvests compounded the economic problem. Moreover, the reliance by the Roman economy on slavery eventually hurt the civilization, as the wealthy became accustomed to doing nothing and having free labor to work for them. Social decay accompanied the idle time and abusive use of free labor. The peaceful time known as Pax Romana has been blamed for not bringing in revenue from foreign wars, as Rome was no longer looting foreign territory. The end of the expansion of the Roman empire led to an end of the new revenue, and collapse from within. It appears that the economic model for success of the Roman empire required continual expansion to succeed. Illness did not help either: a plague reduced the population of Rome. |
| | | | |
| − | Other historians cite a lack of leadership. Under the theory that leaders, not ideas, define history, the Roman empire can be described as thriving when it had strong leaders (emperors), and failing when it did not. Julius Caesar (100-44 B.C.) was a strong leader, and he is credited with establishing the Roman empire in the place of the Republic, which did not have a strong leader. During Pax Romana, there was a series of strong emperors. But upon the end of the Pax Romana in A.D. 180, the empire was handled by weak, incompetent or crazy emperors, many of whom served only a brief period before being assassinated. The end came with a nine-year-old emperor being removed from power by a foreign invader. That could hardly be a surprise to anyone.
| + | '''A lack of leadership contributed to the decline'''. Under the theory that leaders, not ideas, define history, the Roman empire can be described as thriving when it had strong leaders (emperors), and failing when it did not. Julius Caesar (100-44 B.C.) was a strong leader, and he is credited with establishing the Roman empire in the place of the Republic, which did not have a strong leader. During Pax Romana, there was a series of strong emperors. But upon the end of the Pax Romana in A.D. 180, the empire was handled by weak, incompetent or crazy emperors, many of whom served only a brief period before being assassinated. The end came with a nine-year-old emperor being removed from power by a foreign invader. That could hardly be a surprise to anyone. |
| | | | |
| − | Perhaps the Roman empire was too big and too diverse to maintain indefinitely. No other empire has been able to control that much territory, with all its diversity, for hundreds of years. Future leaders tried to restore the Roman empire; Charlemagne claimed in A.D. 800 that he had reestablished it. But the full power and glory of the Roman empire was gone forever. | + | '''Perhaps the Roman empire was too big and too diverse to maintain indefinitely'''. No other empire has been able to control that much territory, with all its diversity, for hundreds of years. Future leaders tried to restore the Roman empire; Charlemagne claimed in A.D. 800 that he had reestablished it. But the full power and glory of the Roman empire was gone forever. |
| | | | |
| | ==The Byzantine Empire (in the East)== | | ==The Byzantine Empire (in the East)== |