Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
The roman empire was a very primitive organization. It did not educate, did not explain itself to it's citizens. It did not invite their cooperation into it's decision making. There was no network of schools to ensure a common understanding and no distribution of information that made the roman citizen aware of what was going on.
Those thoughts came mainly from H. G. Wells the historian.
In a way we should expect that from the Roman time frame in history. While that was long before the dark ages, it still was a very dark time. Fast forward to today and look at the confusion we face in trying to sort out all the information that is hurled our way.
The roman empire was a very primitive organization.
By what standard?
It did not educate, did not explain itself to it's citizens.There was no network of schools to ensure a common understanding and no distribution of information that made the roman citizen aware of what was going on.
Huh? Rome had one of the most extensive educational systems of the ancient world, some might argue that it far exceeded anything that would come after it for hundreds of years.
Quote:
In a way we should expect that from the Roman time frame in history. While that was long before the dark ages, it still was a very dark time.
The era following the fall of the Roman Empire is called dark because it didn't rise to the level that preceded it, so I'm not getting your point.
I even challenge the notion that Rome failed. It lasted in one form or another for about 1000 years. What government has done better? Will America be here in 2776? We'll see.
Fortoggie means well, I am sure, but he may want to study some Roman history before proceeding.
I've heard Wells called several things, but never an historian.
Rome 'primitive'? I'd think one can certainly argue the case if you're looking say at its founding back somewhere in the 8th century BC. Today archaeologists can go down 13 strata layers into some particular areas of the city to draw inferences on its primitive early history of being a small village near the Tiber. From the looks of it she didn't do too bad with Romulus and Remus. Arguably Rome was probably the most influential city in the world in the history of civilization. And it's true she wasn't 'built in a day!'. Ans little did the architects know that when they built the Palatine Wall that it would be a seminal event in the political life of Rome and eventually world civilization. For it was there that political rhetoric and debate started to flourish among the Romans.
How do you mean "failed". It lasted longer than most empires. It was only a failure if you take the "eternal city" nonsense seriously.
In real life empires are just as mortal as individuals. The question was never whether Rome would fall, but only when it would happen. And like I say, Rome was luckier than most on that score.
Maybe this is more of a stakeholder argument? (Wells is not a historian, but neither am I)
Stakeholder meaning when citizens feel they no longer have a stake in the functions of the government, thus loyalty to preserving the government gets thrown to the side.
Kind of like the USSR; while people were loyal to the land, culture, way of life, etc; there was no stake in the Soviet government, thus sweeping it away was not an issue for many people. People felt their cultre, way of life, etc was a separate entity than the government.
The Roman Empire had to fail ultimately. It couldn't have maintained such a vast empire for much longer. Too many rival groups that eventually became nations. Even today, with all our sophistication, the members of the European Union can't seem to agree. Imagine the difficulty of doing so in 400AD.
But the comments attributed to HG Wells concerning education, distribution of information, and "dark time" are way off the mark. These had no bearing on the fall of the Roman Empire.
The Roman Empire had to fail ultimately. It couldn't have maintained such a vast empire for much longer. Too many rival groups that eventually became nations. Even today, with all our sophistication, the members of the European Union can't seem to agree. Imagine the difficulty of doing so in 400AD.
But the comments attributed to HG Wells concerning education, distribution of information, and "dark time" are way off the mark. These had no bearing on the fall of the Roman Empire.
From a strategic point of view, Rome had to continue to grow. It was the influx of goods and new trade which contributed to their success as much as anything else, up to the point where the First Legion met their deaths in a forest in Germany and Rome quit trying. Since it was inevitable that they would have to stop growing at some point that would be the moment their fates began to reverse. Given their success in adding new territories and without much resistance, and offering worthy rewards, they have to be called one of the most strategically successful of empires which added many years to their existance since they had a strong core. The brilliance was that local was still local and local leaders ruled using local laws. And Rome brought much trade which tied its many parts together with economic ties. Rome held sway in foreign policy but stopped the wars between smaller places along the way too.
When it stopped expanding, and absorbed the same tribes but under their own command, as contract soldiers into its army, it was the beginning of the end for that strength. And it is true that all empires will fall, some quickly, some not, based on the mechanics of how they formed and how they stayed together. In those considerations, Rome was rather successful.
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 register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
