No, but Christianity did damage one of the key political tools Romans used to keep their empire intact.
The Romans tried to create local versions of the empire, that incorporated local gods and customs. Most pre-Christian religions could accommodate the addition of Roman state religious practises to their own; Christianity could not.
After Rome adopted Christianity as its state religion, it lost the ability to create local admixtures of religion, and this contributed to the loss of cohesion toward the end.
2007-11-18 09:51:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by Hera Sent Me 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
The first issue the Roman empire faced was the fact is was huge
it could not be efectivly ruled from one city, It was hard to get enough men to redily patrol the borders let alone dispatch them quickly if you had a major war on mutiple borders to solve this problem the Roman recruited germanic and other barbarian tribes men to fight for them. Next internal warfair you had genreals who sought to take out political rivals in hopes of becoming emporor and sporadic revolutions from opressed conqured peoples. Before Contantine they split the empire into 4 parts..then it got united. Constantine became Christian in hopes of savingthe empire and while the building of Constantinople did result in strife between Alexandria and Imperial athority I should also note that taxation was one of the issues. The Western Impire colapsed first as the money was in constantinople.
Then the Eastern Empire had a major war with the Persians about the same time as the Slavic invasions. The two wars sapped alot of manpower from the military which then resulted in the Muslims taking what is now the Middle east. The Roman population never compleatly recovered but the borders stabilised ab it then the Turks invaded in the 11th century and finaly conqured Constantinople 1453. So to say the issue was Christianity ignroessimple fact. the Empires size presented logistical issues. The Romans had to transport every thing by horse or gally perhaps if they had better transportationthey could have efectivly patroled their borders and the interior
as an army was impressive if they 20 miles a day in peace time while a modern mechenised force might travel about 40 miles in an hour.
2007-11-18 21:12:10
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Probably not.
It was the central thesis of Gibbon's 'The Decline and fall of the Roman empire', but there were other, far more important factors.
The largest sole reason for the fall of the Roman Empire was the Westward expansion of the Huns, which pushed smaller Germanic tribes into the Empire, which fragmented under their pressure. Things like Christianity and lead poisoning had very little effect.
2007-11-18 17:46:09
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Several things caused the fall of the Roman Empire:
1. The Rise of Christianity did partially: early Christians refused to serve in the Roman army.
2. The use of lead: Romans used lead for cooking pans (among other things) which caused lead poisoning
3. Overextension: Roman generals had the right to land upon their retirement. This caused the empire to constantly expand in order to give Roman officers their share of the land. This was the biggie, it eventually became so big it had trouble defending itself. This resulted in a lot of tribes invading it and ultimately bringing it down.
2007-11-18 17:45:44
·
answer #4
·
answered by The Doctor 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
It was a reason for the demise of the Roman Empire (I'm going to call it R.E. for short) but it was not the main reason.
There are several reasons why the R.E. fell; overexpansion, orgy-loving indulgent emperors, outside invasion, etc.
But Christianity was also a factor, too (in the Book of Daniel, it may have been referrenced as a prophecy...I think).
2007-11-18 17:47:28
·
answer #5
·
answered by chrstnwrtr 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, The Byzantiene Empire survived for another 1,000 years. Also by the Roman Empire i assume you mean the western Empire because when Rome fell the Capitol of the Roman Empire was technically Byzantium (also called Constantinople, or Istambul)
2007-11-18 17:43:49
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? and ?: The Light of the World 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
No the Romans them self are responsible for the collapse of their empire. Hundreds of years later the xian got any traction in Europe.
Pagan ruled for almost a thousand years post zero BC
2007-11-18 17:52:42
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, he/seh is not right. Christianity was not the caused of the decline of the Roman Empire. Here is a link:http://ancienthistory.about.com/cs/romefallarticles/a/fallofrome.htm
2007-11-18 17:53:33
·
answer #8
·
answered by J. 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
No. The roman empire fell because of several reasons:
1) inability to rule because their ruling family became inbred which led to psychosis.
2) stretched too far, without infrastructure to support
3) barbarians fighting on several fronts
2007-11-18 17:49:31
·
answer #9
·
answered by CC 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
No.
Ironically enough, many archeologists, so fond of pointing out multiple causes for anything, point solely to the use of 'plumbium' in the plumbing... 'plumbium' of course, being where we get the chemical symbol, Pb, which stands, of course, for lead.
Lead poisoning killed the Roman empire.
2007-11-18 17:48:13
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋