U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
 
Old 02-19-2008, 02:55 PM
 
Location: Tolland County- Northeastern CT
4,455 posts, read 2,557,985 times
Reputation: 1237

Advertisements

Thoughts and evaluations of the empire 27bc to its fall in 476ad.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-19-2008, 03:54 PM
 
630 posts, read 1,073,993 times
Reputation: 338
As long as Romans were in the legions everything was ok,when it became unfashionable and they let their subjects do their fighting for them, it was a long painful decline.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2008, 04:26 PM
 
25,262 posts, read 27,370,393 times
Reputation: 34520
The real fall of the Roman Empire came when several Roman emperors such as Vespasian, et al, began to ban scientific innovation. I don't have the sources in front of me right now, but Roman historians began to write of amazing labor saving devices that were banned for fear of creating widespread unemployment. Nobody says exactly what those inventions were, but it's really a tantalizing glimpse into history. Quite possibly, the Roman ruling elite squelched the beginning of an industrial revolution.

We do know that innovation, long a key Roman strength began to die away shortly afterwards. After all, the key military advantage that Germanic tribes had over the Roman army was the stirrup. Had the Roman culture encouraged innovation, would the barbarians held this key advantage for such a long time?

Other factors:

-- The ongoing political turmoil with succession.
-- The movement of political elite away from military service.
-- The split of the Empire into two separate entities.
-- The institution of bread and circuses, rather than ongoing economic innovation.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2008, 04:30 PM
 
2,377 posts, read 3,502,413 times
Reputation: 1631
The Romans were,I think, in Britain from about 55 BCE, with an unsucessful attempt to conquer it a little earlier. Plus Rome traded there for tin for a long while before it invaded. Rome left in the 400's, but the Roman Empire did not fall untill 1453 when Constantinople was taken be Memhet II. A very interesting era of history,which set the stage for all later civilization...
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2008, 06:24 PM
 
Location: Tolland County- Northeastern CT
4,455 posts, read 2,557,985 times
Reputation: 1237
The' first citizen', as what emperor Augustus liked to be called built a solid foundation for the empire that lasted even through the 'Second Century Crises' when from 200-280 there where 20 or more emperors. This was the period of the 'barrack emperors' when the emperor was chosen by the Army and Praetorian guard for a price.

The 'Pax Romana' lasting from 97-180, during the reign of the '5 good emperors' starting with Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antonius Pius and finally Marcus Aurelius was testament to the greatness of these leaders, but also the solid foundations of Augustus (27BCe-14AD) The Pax Romana was the peak of the empire.

The decline began when Marcus Aurelius' son Commodus assumed the throne in 180, after his fathers death- this event was portrayed in semi historical films, with 'The Fall of the Roman Empire' (1964) & 'Gladiator' (2000)

Diocletian- emperor 284-305 brought stability from the chaos of the 2nd century- that helped the slowly crumbling empire endure nearly 2 more centuries. Diocletian put an end to the disastrous phase of Roman history known as the "Military Anarchy" or the "Imperial Crisis".

Christianity was made the 'state religion' of the empire by emperor Constantine (the great) around 312. Basically outlawing the pagan gods of the past.

Last edited by skytrekker; 02-19-2008 at 07:12 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2008, 07:19 PM
 
Location: Tropical Florida
13,024 posts, read 24,442,181 times
Reputation: 11335
Well by 450/455 A.D. they were too weak to go on much more. To many Barbarian invasions and corrupt and enempt Emperors sealed its doom.

However they probably lasted to 476 A.D. and maybe didn't fold in 455 A.D. do to General Aetius (Conqueror of the Huns). First he destroyed the invading Burgundians and then drove the Visogoths to Iberia but the greatest threat to them was the Huns who would have sacked Rome as they had destroyed everything in their path.

With General Aetius and his Visogoth allies beating the Huns he at least held off the empires impending doom. I wonder also if he wasn't assasinated by the Emperor Vallinitian III he may have assumed Military Dictatorship and restored the weakened military to protect the shrinking empire.

So my interest has always been the frontloaded and backloaded Generals i.e. Julius Ceasar just before it's beginning and Flavius Aetius just before it's end.

Last edited by Six Foot Three; 02-19-2008 at 08:02 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2008, 12:21 PM
 
1,764 posts, read 3,851,978 times
Reputation: 741
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6 FOOT 3 View Post
...but the greatest threat to them was the Huns who would have sacked Rome as they had destroyed everything in their path.

With General Aetius and his Visogoth allies beating the Huns he at least held off the empires impending doom.
Keep in mind Attila the Hun spared Rome. The Pope made the request of him, and he complied.

The Romans defeated the Huns only after Attila had died and the sons began squabbling amongst themselves.

Attila was buried in a secret gravesite under the Tisza river in modern-day Hungary. The remnants of the Huns dispersed back east, although many [including some of Attila's sons] settled in modern-day Bulgaria, and over time adopted the Slavic language of the Bulgars [no wonder they're such good wrestlers!].
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2008, 12:38 PM
 
3,253 posts, read 5,181,909 times
Reputation: 1897
BTW, 'Rome: Total War' is a good game.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2008, 01:31 PM
 
Location: Tropical Florida
13,024 posts, read 24,442,181 times
Reputation: 11335
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Rankin View Post
Keep in mind Attila the Hun spared Rome. The Pope made the request of him, and he complied.

The Romans defeated the Huns only after Attila had died and the sons began squabbling amongst themselves.

Attila was buried in a secret gravesite under the Tisza river in modern-day Hungary. The remnants of the Huns dispersed back east, although many [including some of Attila's sons] settled in modern-day Bulgaria, and over time adopted the Slavic language of the Bulgars [no wonder they're such good wrestlers!].
I get what your saying Tim....But remember that the ''Battle of Chalons'' while a draw between the 2 armies ....it did give the impression that the Huns were not invincible and while Attila did have to be bought off by the Pope ...Aetius and his arny was shadowing him as Attila did not go after Aetius again.

If Attila had crushed Aetius and the Goths at the Battle of Chalons then forget about the Pope buying him off as he would have IMHO had conquered all of Western Europe as it would have been totally defenseless with no Army and Attila would have took the Gold, Treasures and Lands anyway.

Interesting when Vallintinian III was assasinated his guards (served under Aetius) looked the other way.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2008, 02:50 PM
 
1,764 posts, read 3,851,978 times
Reputation: 741
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6 FOOT 3 View Post
I get what your saying Tim....But remember that the ''Battle of Chalons'' while a draw between the 2 armies ....it did give the impression that the Huns were not invincible and while Attila did have to be bought off by the Pope ...Aetius and his arny was shadowing him as Attila did not go after Aetius again.

If Attila had crushed Aetius and the Goths at the Battle of Chalons then forget about the Pope buying him off as he would have IMHO had conquered all of Western Europe as it would have been totally defenseless with no Army and Attila would have took the Gold, Treasures and Lands anyway.
Good points 6-3. I will send you some rep, as your knowledge of the Romans is way beyond mine.

I just never miss an opportunity to defend Attila - not because I admire the "bloodthirsty barbarian," but precisely because [IMO] he wasn't that [although that is how he was often portrayed].
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top