What Really brought the fall of the Roman Empire?

Question

Why did the ancient Roman Civilization crumble? What could the empire have done differently to have avoided their imminent collapse? Were their military forces stretched too far? Thanks all!

Answer 1

There were many reasons for the fall of the Roman Empire. Each one intertwined with the next. Many even blame the introduction of Christianity for the decline. Christianity made many Roman citizens into pacifists, making it more difficult to defend against the barbarian attackers. Also money used to build churches could have been used to maintain the empire. Although some argue that Christianity may have provided some morals and values for a declining civilization and therefore may have actually prolonged the imperial era.

Decline in Morals and Values

Those morals and values that kept together the Roman legions and thus the empire could not be maintained towards the end of the empire. Crimes of violence made the streets of the larger cities unsafe. Even during PaxRomana there were 32,000 prostitutes in Rome. Emperors like Nero and Caligula became infamous for wasting money on lavish parties where guests ate and drank until they became ill. The most popular amusement was watching the gladiatorial combats in the Colosseum. These were attended by the poor, the rich, and frequently the emperor himself. As gladiators fought, vicious cries and curses were heard from the audience. One contest after another was staged in the course of a single day. Should the ground become too soaked with blood, it was covered over with a fresh layer of sand and the performance went on.

Public Health

There were many public health and environmental problems. Many of the wealthy had water brought to their homes through lead pipes. Previously the aqueducts had even purified the water but at the end lead pipes were thought to be preferable. The wealthy death rate was very high. The continuous interaction of people at the Colosseum, the blood and death probable spread disease. Those who lived on the streets in continuous contact allowed for an uninterrupted strain of disease much like the homeless in the poorer run shelters of today. Alcohol use increased as well adding to the incompetency of the general public.

Political Corruption

One of the most difficult problems was choosing a new emperor. Unlike Greece where transition may not have been smooth but was at least consistent, the Romans never created an effective system to determine how new emperors would be selected. The choice was always open to debate between the old emperor, the Senate, the Praetorian Guard (the emperor's's private army), and the army. Gradually, the Praetorian Guard gained complete authority to choose the new emperor, who rewarded the guard who then became more influential, perpetuating the cycle. Then in 186 A. D. the army strangled the new emperor, the practice began of selling the throne to the highest bidder. During the next 100 years, Rome had 37 different emperors - 25 of whom were removed from office by assassination. This contributed to the overall weaknesses of the empire.

Unemployment

During the latter years of the empire farming was done on large estates called latifundia that were owned by wealthy men who used slave labor. A farmer who had to pay workmen could not produce goods as cheaply. Many farmers could not compete with these low prices and lost or sold their farms. This not only undermined the citizen farmer who passed his values to his family, but also filled the cities with unemployed people. At one time, the emperor was importing grain to feed more than 100,000 people in Rome alone. These people were not only a burden but also had little to do but cause trouble and contribute to an ever increasing crime rate.

Inflation

The roman economy suffered from inflation (an increase in prices) beginning after the reign of Marcus Aurelius. Once the Romans stopped conquering new lands, the flow of gold into the Roman economy decreased. Yet much gold was being spent by the romans to pay for luxury items. This meant that there was less gold to use in coins. As the amount of gold used in coins decreased, the coins became less valuable. To make up for this loss in value, merchants raised the prices on the goods they sold. Many people stopped using coins and began to barter to get what they needed. Eventually, salaries had to be paid in food and clothing, and taxes were collected in fruits and vegetables.

Urban decay

Wealthy Romans lived in a domus, or house, with marble walls, floors with intricate colored tiles, and windows made of small panes of glass. Most Romans, however, were not rich, They lived in small smelly rooms in apartment houses with six or more stories called islands. Each island covered an entire block. At one time there were 44,000 apartment houses within the city walls of Rome. First-floor apartments were not occupied by the poor since these living quarters rented for about $00 a year. The more shaky wooden stairs a family had to climb, the cheaper the rent became. The upper apartments that the poor rented for $40 a year were hot, dirty, crowed, and dangerous. Anyone who could not pay the rent was forced to move out and live on the crime-infested streets. Because of this cities began to decay.

Inferior Technology

During the last 400 years of the empire, the scientific achievements of the Romans were limited almost entirely to engineering and the organization of public services. They built marvelous roads, bridges, and aqueducts. They established the first system of medicine for the benefit of the poor. But since the Romans relied so much on human and animal labor, they failed to invent many new machines or find new technology to produce goods more efficiently. They could not provide enough goods for their growing population. They were no longer conquering other civilizations and adapting their technology, they were actually losing territory they could not longer maintain with their legions.

Military Spending

Maintaining an army to defend the border of the Empire from barbarian attacks was a constant drain on the government. Military spending left few resources for other vital activities, such as providing public housing and maintaining quality roads and aqueducts. Frustrated Romans lost their desire to defend the Empire. The empire had to begin hiring soldiers recruited from the unemployed city mobs or worse from foreign counties. Such an army was not only unreliable, but very expensive. The emperors were forced to raise taxes frequently which in turn led again to increased inflation.


THE FINAL BLOWS
For years, the well-disciplined Roman army held the barbarians of Germany back. Then in the third century A. D. the Roman soldiers were pulled back from the Rhine-Danube frontier to fight civil war in Italy. This left the Roman border open to attack. Gradually Germanic hunters and herders from the north began to overtake Roman lands in Greece and Gaul (later France). Then in 476 A. D. the Germanic general Odacer or Odovacar overthrew the last of the Roman Emperors, Augustulus Romulus. From then on the western part of the Empire was ruled by Germanic chieftain. Roads and bridges were left in disrepair and fields left untilled. Pirates and bandits made travel unsafe. Cities could not be maintained without goods from the farms, trade and business began to disappear. And Rome was no more in the West.

Answer 2

Well, I don't know how I could provide a better answer than "Fluffytwin", since I read most of her answer and she's "right-on". Let me add, however, two or three more perspectives. I agree with her section on military to an extent. She is right about having to hire foreign people to be soldiers and the unreliability of that, but I disagree with her when she uses the term "frustrated" Romans. The supposition I get in reading her answer is that Romans were "frustrated" due to the amount of money spent on the military and it's "draining the government" and it's "leaving few resources for other vital activities". Although a modern day pacifist / democrat would fall for that, what she fails to realize, or at least put forth, is that Rome was built by the military, and if weren't for the military, Rome wouldn't have been 1/4th its size or have 1/10th the resources and "vital activities" it was enjoying during "Pax Romana". Therein lies the second perspective I wanted to bring out and that was that Rome's military, being as effective as it was, also made it a target for "wannabee" empires to attack. It's kind of like the old "King of the Hill" game we played back in my childhood. You might be on top of the hill, but all your playmates were there to "knock you off" the hill. As a very avid bicycle racer for 20 years, and following the international races such as the Tour de France, I can remind you, if you've ever watched it, that Lance Armstrong and others have always said that the worst thing that happens to you during the race is that you wear the Yellow Jersey, the winner's or leader's jersey. That's because you become the target for everybody else to aim for. People like Lance Armstrong, the American 7 time straight winner, a world record, always likes to wait till the last day to wear the Maillot Jeune "Yellow Jersey" so he could win the race without ever having been targeted for tougher competition. So, Rome's military defense came as a consequence of it's very military history and it's conquering others, thereby making it a target of conquerors. My third perspective I'd like to share with you is that Rome had become "soft", militarily and characterologically. As "Fluffytwin" said, Rome's morals had gone to pot (and I don't mean marijuana :-))) ), if you could say it ever had any morals. Rome had become extremely pompous, and not trying to stay strong like it once was, believing it was invincible based on its history. Therein was a HUGE aspect of its downfall. If you don't stay strong, your "undoing" will not be far away. As per any individual thing, such as a foreign general or war, none of that had near as much to do with Rome's downfall as much as it's overconfidence and pomposity. This country has a lot it can learn from Rome's experience, and I hope we do. Getting soft, militarily or otherwise, is a HUGE mistake. God Bless you.

Answer 3

The answer is to be found in a modern book by Prof. Heather of Oxford. He argues that the Roman Empire can still be around in western Europe if there is an Emperor whose writ still runs in Western Europe. Also, there should be a bureaucracy supported by taxes, and the bureaucracy should use the money to field a Roman army. All these conditions were still met in AD 454. Aetius defeated Attila at the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains, in Gaul. Heather puts AD 476 as a good date to end the Roman Empire of the West. After that date, Romans in Italy, Gaul, and Spain would have to reach agreements with local barbarian chiefs and land holders.

Answer 4

Here's what I got out of AP World History. There was a declining population and it was becoming more difficult to recruit effective armies. Many of the late emperors (which were weak and were selected by army intervention) had "lustful and cruel habits" and their subjects shared a general despondency about life now as well as the absence of an afterlife. Plagues reduced the population by 3/4 (1 million to 250K). The upper classes became pleasure seekers, uninterested in political, economic, and intellectual activities.

If I remember correctly, the Germanic invaders played a part in the collapse of the Western Roman Empire, while the Eastern part of the Empire (which became the Byzantine empire), remained vibrant and deep-rooted in its culture. The development of Christianity also played a part, since it divided the population between traditional Roman religion and the new faith.

Finally, my notes summarize by saying, "Overall, 'impersonal forces' like disease, moral, and political decay'" brought an end to the Roman Empire.

Hope that helps!

Answer 5

The Roman Empire fell from forces within the empire and not from outside forces.

It was the poor government and leadership it was the corruptions and crimes against the people by the leadership. It was endless wars and the bankrupting of the City State both financially and ethically.

The same forces that brought down Rome are healthy and working hard to bring down America... and those forces are working... America will NEVER be able to recover from what George Bush, the Oil Companies and Big Business have done to this country.

Answer 6

The answer is that given the data available historians are still uncertain (there's a lot that we don't know about the Romans). There are a number of lists about that delineates over a hundred factors. One would expect that a number of these worked together to cause failure. Remember too, the empire separated; the Western "fell" about 475AD, the Eastern went on until 1453. It's a great subject, still hotly debated in the historical community. Perhaps we can just say, ,"Nothing lasts forever."

Answer 7

First of all, the Roman Empire crumbled because they stopped invading other countries. It was the way they made money. Also, no more roman wanted to get into the army because they could not get the richness and a piece of land like their ancesters. Therefore, the army engended mercenaries (people from other countries who fight for anyone as long as they get payed) to work from them. The roman army was less and less roman. There was revolts inside the army. Also the roman empire was envaded by the normans who were themselves chased by another group (can't remember the name). Plus, there was a new religion that was starting to take over Rome, christiannity. The population was in conflict, which led to the seperation of the Empire. Constantine first established his capital in Constanople and let his population believe in the religion they wanted. One empire felt before the other one, but i can't remember which... i forgot alot of details, but i hope it helps you!

Answer 8

The same answer as in http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Aoe7J.Y6.Xx3z1Hpf3igLS7ty6IX?qid=20070523095656AAV8NPU&show=7#profile-info-20af19563193d6f76a6c7f153bd57eb9aa

They made the mistake of breaking their promises to the Visigoths, especially as it was in the middle of the Great Migrations. A classic case of a superpower not realizing that the balance of power had changed.

"The Goths remained in Dacia until 376, when one of their leaders, Fritigern, appealed to the Roman emperor Valens to be allowed to settle with his people on the south bank of the Danube. Here, they hoped to find refuge from the Huns. Valens permitted this. However, a famine broke out and Rome was unwilling to supply them with the food they were promised nor the land; open revolt ensued leading to 6 years of plundering and destruction throughout the Balkans, the death of a Roman Emperor and the destruction of an entire Roman army."

"Over the next 15 years, occasional conflicts were broken by years of uneasy peace between Alaric and the powerful German generals who commanded the Roman armies in the east and west, wielding the real power of the empire. Finally, after the western general Stilicho was murdered by Honorius in 408 and the Roman legions massacred the families of 30,000 barbarian soldiers serving in the Roman army, Alaric declared war. After four attempts to storm Rome, Alaric remained unsuccessful. He resolved to cut the city off by capturing its port. On 0410-08-24, however, a traitor or group of traitors within Rome opened the Salarian Gate, letting the Visigoths in. While Rome was no longer the official capital of the Western Roman Empire (it had been moved to Ravenna for strategic reasons), its fall severely shook the empire's foundations."

"Visigoths : Gothic War (376-382) & Alaric" : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visigoths#Gothic_War_.28376-382.29

Answer 9

You people don't know anything! The real problem was gays...Germanic tribes, political instability, but mostly gays- trust me, I was there. For a while things were great- we drank, sexed and rode the log flume ride at the nearest Synagogue, but they screwed it all up with their hair gels and silk shirts...it's why I moved to Canada.

Answer 10

television.