How and why did Rome fell?

Question

we all know that after Rome fell, the Human Race was brought to its knees and the once so great civilization was throwed back to Barbaric times where it all started, so how and why did Rome fell??? and what would the world be like now if Rome did not fell???

good point, mmmmm Pizza

Answer 1

Because it tried to take over the world and had a corrupt goverment. Ring any bells?

Answer 2

The Roman empire only fell in the west. The eastern empire remained powerful for centuries after, and was still there when western Europe got its act together again, so all was not lost. The constant wars defending its borders from invasions drain its resources and the increasing dependence on mercenaries loyal to their generals, not to Rome, meant even more resources were wasted in civil wars. I think we would be worse off had Rome remained powerful in western Europe. The parts of the world that continued under Roman rule in eastern Europe and the near east have not done as well as the west in the last millennium.

Answer 3

Once Octavian named Tiberius as his heir, it was clear to everyone that even the hope of a restored Republic was dead. Most likely, by the time Augustus died, no one was old enough to know a time before an Emperor ruled Rome. The Roman Republic had been changed into a despotic regime, which, underneath a competent and strong Emperor, could achieve military supremacy, economic prosperity, and a genuine peace, but under a weak or incompetent one saw its glory tarnished by cruelty, military defeats, revolts, and civil war. The Roman Empire was eventually divided between the Western Roman Empire which fell in 476 AD and the Eastern Roman Empire (also called the Byzantine Empire) which lasted until the fall of Constantinople in 1453.

Answer 4

A good recent analysis of this question is "The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians" by Peter Heather, an Oxford professor. It's in paperback. Amazon.com or alibris.com might already have a used copy cheap. It's a densely argued treatment from economic, cultural, and military points of view. One intriguing point is that the barbarians changed: The nations the emperors faced after AD 376 were different from those met by Julius and Octavius Caesar.

Answer 5

It grew too large and unwieldly, the far flung campaigns after a while became a drain on resources, add to internal strife over religion and politics and soon the whole civilisation and city was weakened to the point where a determined invader stood a good chance of making gain.
The misconception is that the Roman culture disappeared overnight, it didn't but became amalgamated with the local cultures and societies it had sought to dominate.
Just look at the European languages that stem directly from Latin and the influence to this day.

Answer 6

What you are asking could fill volumes. Edward Gibbons wrote a book with a word count higher than the bible's chronicling the decline of Rome from the dominant superpower to the collapse of the western authority to the eventual snuffing out of Constantinople by the Turks over a thousand years later.

In a nutshell, the Roman Empire crumbled because of
A: poor economic policies, which led to the economy taking on too much debt and floating that debt with inflation
B: political instability, as various emperor-wannabes vied for dominance subjecting Rome to frequent and brutal civil wars
C: decline of the professional army. With Rome sapped of economic strength, it could no longer support the heavy legionaires of yesterday. Rome resorted to turning its army into a near immobile border patrol, supplanted by a mobile force held in reserve. But even this decayed until Roman armies were little more than conscript hordes. But even that decayed, and the Romans had to resort to granting German tribes land in exchange for their providing to Rome a quota of soldiers. This lasted until Rome ran out of land, naturally.
D: The rise of despotism. The Emperor had almost always had autocratic power, but their avarice had always been held in check by the senate and people. However, by late antiquity, the senate was irrelevent, the people had no problems being sycophants to an emperor who fancied himself as a living God. Most stereotypes that you have heard of regarding a ruler (purple cape, scepter, golden crown, etc) all started with the late antiquity emperors.

Answer 7

Imperial Overstretch - the financial and psychological cost of having too many men stationed in far-flung regions of the empire. Started to rely more on mercenaries.

Hmmm, sounds familiar.... blackwater.

Answer 8

The romans had an empire so huge it got to hard to control and when the last roman emperer died the empire split into west and east empires and evntually the romans fell to the huns!!!!!!

Answer 9

The world might not had so many different varieties of pizza. WE now know what pizza is, so we all love it.

hehehheheheheheheeee....Sorry m in a good mood.

Answer 10

they got too big and too cocky.