No, the governors and pro-consuls ruled well. Rome collapsed from whithin.
2007-10-15 06:20:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by Lavrenti Beria 6
·
4⤊
1⤋
No it fell when the politicians in Rome became more interested in them selves then the Empire, the citizens decided they shouldn't have to do anything but be entertained by the rulers, and the Roman military became more from the outlying areas/tribes and mercenary the Roman. It fell from within. The Vandals who sacked Rome had been Roman trained and served Rome as a very loyal border army until the Romans refused to pay them because it would have had to cut back on the "circuses" to entertain the citizens of Rome which was to the rulers at the time more important then defense. Rome died because a very complacent population became more interested in comfort and "what's in it for me" then the empire and the future. Many of the outlying areas actually carried on quite well after the fall of Rome.
2007-10-15 06:34:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by GunnyC 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
That's part of the reason. They were continually expanding, and giving everyone citizenship. Towards the end of their empire, few knew what it meant to be a 'Roman'. Things were ran differently across the empire, and getting messages across the empire in order to synchronize them became problematic. In the end, it splintered and factioned because too many different forces were pulling it in different directions.
To the fools that think what caused Rome's collapse will cause ours: BS, we have enough communication infrastructure to keep everything synchronized. If and when the US does fall, it will be for completely different reasons.
2007-10-15 06:27:21
·
answer #3
·
answered by Pfo 7
·
1⤊
3⤋
Much like what is going to happen to the USA. The Roman dynasty folded from within due to the number of foreigners who moved into the empire. Does this sound familiar?
2007-10-15 06:26:55
·
answer #4
·
answered by Richard S 4
·
3⤊
2⤋
to a level. The undesirable voters had few concepts in Rome, as means and threat have been an increasing form of concentrated in the hands of the wealthy and those born of noble households. The undesirable often rioted whilst circumstances have been given undesirable. somewhat than attempt to point the enjoying container and advance opportunities for the undesirable, the emperors somewhat gave out loose grain to attempt to maintain them content cloth. As different answerers noted, a much bigger situation grow to be the armed forces. squaddies envisioned land delivers or money as quickly as they achieved their excursion of accountability, and in the event that they did no longer get it what they concept they deserved, they might revolt against the present emperor. the consequence grow to be that new emperors gave a 'donative' (somewhat a super funds bribe) to all of the squaddies to attempt to maintain them unswerving. This grow to be a much bigger factor in Rome's economic plight. length of the empire grow to be a situation. to attempt to control it extra effectively later emperors often split the empire in 2 to make it much less confusing to administrate. finally the split grew to grow to be everlasting. This grew to grow to be a situation because of the fact the jap 0.5 grow to be wealthy and the western 0.5 grow to be no longer. The western 0.5 fell early because it ought to now no longer advance the money it necessary to take care of its borders, forcing them to offer away land delivers to barbarians in replace for mercenary service. As Roman territory shrank the tax base shrank with it, inflicting a vicious downward spiral.
2016-12-18 08:16:55
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Rome made the mistake of hiring mercenaries (Goths, Visigoths, etc) to do its fighting for it.
Eventually the Mercenaries realized they could make more money by taking over Rome itself
ring any bells?
2007-10-15 07:03:20
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
No, it was the faimilys of the Roman Empire vieing for power causing it to split into diffrent factions and with that the ancestors of the old countrys wanted back their indipendence causing it to split even more.
2007-10-15 06:23:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by jeff_da_best 2
·
2⤊
3⤋
So they say, but I believe it was, though ruled well, too corrupt making collapse inevitable.
2007-10-15 06:20:34
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
No, The barbarian army took control of the empire.
2007-10-15 07:01:55
·
answer #9
·
answered by NICK A 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
Perhaps but really it fell because people forgot what it meant to be Roman, to much outside cultural influences and luxury did them in.
2007-10-15 06:21:21
·
answer #10
·
answered by TyranusXX 6
·
3⤊
1⤋