Corruption In The Roman Empire

Chalking up the fall of the Roman Republic to a decline in traditional Roman morality, while not false, sells the events and changes that were the causes for the fall of the Republic short. At the end of The Third Punic War with Carthage we arguably see the Republic at its height. However in only a decade things begin to change, we see events that send Rome as a Republic past a point that Rome could not recover. Gaius Marius’s military reforms, specifically that of allowing for the captive cencsi, men who owned no property, and the creation of professional soldiers is the true catalyst for the downfall of the Republic. By enacting these reforms Marius opened up military duty to Rome’s largest group of citizens, however it created unforeseen issues, such as what to do with these men once they returned from battle. These reforms opened the door for military generals like Sulla and Caesar to gain the unquestioned support of their troops, in many instances gaining more respect from the soldiers then they had for the Roman state itself. These military reforms are a constant through line through the fall of the Republic, touching large political issues such as the conflicts between the Populares and the Optimates, or the rise of The First Triumvirate; socioeconomic issues such as the rise of Roman aristocracy, development of a slave based agriculture system to the profits from war. The complexity in which these reforms help lead to this immoral Roman state is complex and has been

The great Roman Empire expanded across all of Europe and into the Middle East. Its military was one of the finest. With major trading in Africa and Britain, the economy flourished with brining many citizens a healthy income. With amazing advancements in culture and technology, Roman society was at its finest. During the Pax Romana, the Romans had 200 years of peace and good ruling by level headed dictators and emperors. Despite Rome’s greatness in all of these areas, Rome would eventually fall. Surprisingly all of these qualities that led up to a flourishing empire were the same ones that led to its demise. As Germanic tribes invaded, the military weakened and the government became unstable.

Corruption in Rome did not begin until the Late Republic. Rome could not keep up with its own success and growth. There was a lot of competition within the ladder of offices in Republican Rome which was also a significant source of the destruction of Rome. Only two consuls were elected each year causing intense and violent competition between candidates. The candidates were thirsty for power and would do whatever it took to be at the top. One consul, in particular, is that of Pompey.

The Roman Empire was one of the most impregnable empires at it’s time. It conquered the Mediterranean Sea and was a well organized and blooming empire, at first. Many problems began to hit Rome straight in the face, three of the main problems that ended this magnificent empire were the economic problems, the weakness and vulnerability of their army, and the fallibility of the leaders and politics.

Despite Rome’s impressive amount of money, people, core values, and supposed strength, Rome fell indefinitely due to lower-class problems, foreign invasions, and legal injustice. Because of its lower-class

The fall of the Roman Empire was an ambiguous process that many historians still ponder, and the components that made up the deterioration of the Empire remain obscure. However, what many historians fail to realize that the decline of the Roman Empire was the epitome of cause and effect. Properly analyzing the history behind the process leads historians to realize that it was a chain of circumstances that began with the political corruption of the Western empire. It was the catalyst for many of the other principal reasons for Rome’s decline. Political corruption was a fundamental factor that led to economic failure and superfluous military spending, all which contributed to the fall of Rome. Document 3, Roman ambassador to the Huns, 449 CE, illustrates how political corruption tore apart

Rome, a grand empire, was known for its bloodshed and wealth, had a powerful period of conquering and culture. But why can an empire so huge and grand, fall to the ashes? Rome was a small settlement around 750 BC, then developed as the wealthy people grew weaker in Greece. Rome gradually expanded, as they conquered lands and made their small settlement into an empire. Even if a grand empire like Rome thrived on, they overcame problems that would lead to their fall. Through the use of primary and secondary source documents, this paper will explore the causes of the Roman Empire's ultimate downfall due to a combination of military problems, unstable government, and natural disasters and disease.

historians. This paper will state this cause in Documents A,B,and C, which will explain 3 key points that led Rome to downfall. It is unclear why the poison inside the empire was cultivated, but might be the leadership,strategy, and defense.

In the 5th century C.E, the Roman Empire, a shell of what it once was, was sacked due to multiple problems inside and outside its huge borders. Weak leadership, military problems, & foreign invasions were the 3 primary reasons for the “fall” of Rome. Due to these unresolved issues, the Romans lost the power & authority that once made them so powerful and revered across the world and fell to enemies that they once could have easily defeated. To begin with, a constant change of weak leadership lead to an unstable empire. In Document A, emperors were constantly changing, often in violent ways such as assassination & suicide.

Although the fall of Rome remains obscure, what many historians fail to realize is that the decline of the Roman Empire was the epitome of cause and effect relationships. Properly analyzing the fall of Rome leads historians to realize that a chain of circumstances, beginning with the political corruption of the Western empire, was a catalyst for superfluous military spending and economic failure, all which contributed to the fall of Rome. Because the Praetorian Guard would select the highest bidder and put him into office, the emperors would not represent the people as a whole and did not instill the beliefs that the people held. In Document 1, Roman Emperors, 235-285, a chart shows the inconsistency of the Roman emperors and the violence

Rome was the largest and most powerful empire of its time. Its reign from 27 CE to 200 CE was by far the greatest civilization at that point. However, at some point every empire falls. The primary reason for this was the people of Rome. Due to the citizen’s unhappiness, Rome slowly crumbled starting with its leaders, then its army, and finally its economy.

Many anthropologists and historians have speculated about the different causes and effects of the fall of the Roman Empire. Some have even stated that Rome did not fall but instead, was merely transformed. However, there were many causes that did end this prodigious empire. Many seemingly small decisions made by powerful emperors over the course of just over a century lead to its destruction. In this paper it will be established that the Roman emperors, in an effort to save their political power, made adjustments to warfare/treaty practices and made political changes which over time lead to the inevitable collapse of the realm, this caused a drastic regression in the living standards of the Roman citizens, implying that the Empire did indeed collapse and not transform.

In the later half of the fourth century the Western Roman Empire fell after nearly a five hundred years of dominance and is still widely considered the world’s greatest superpower (Andrews). Many people attribute the crumbling of the empire to multiple different reasons, like corrupt and insane leaders to overspending and inflation. As J.B Bury said once “the fall of the roman empire was a series of contingent events. In this paper we are going to cover the three main reasons. Political and Economical problems plus problems with the military(Wood).

The Second Triumvirate was a “formal magistracy legally appointed which could dominate the Senate and the State” (Scullard) and would prove to be the final straw in an already failed Republican system. The Roman Republic was ruled by a Constitution, which relied on a balance of three elements; The Senate; the Magistrates; the Assemblies. When the balance was upset either by ambitious magistrates, armies or tribunes then civil war was the result. The Senate proved ineffectual in preventing the Second Triumvirate from unbalancing this concept thus the played a significant role in the Republic’s fall. The Second Triumvirate, like those before them, had been able to take advantage of a vulnerable Senate to achieve their own personal aims in defiance of the Senate. The lack of faith in the Senate, which was present for this period of time, was what granted the Second Triumvirate to be the final push in the fall of the Republic. The Sullan legacy continued to be displayed in unlawful acts conducted by this three-man rule. Marc Antony, Octavian, and Lepidus all knew the significance of having an army at their hands and wealth that would ensure two things for them, power and civil war at the hands of conflict. It is therefor known that the Second Triumvirate played a significant role in the fall of an already fallen Republic.

Since its collapse, historians have attempted to explain the struggle for power and control over both the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire that followed. To explain the complexities of the Roman Republic, the Empire, and their political complexities can be a daunting task. For nearly ten centuries Rome would rule most of the known world before the fall of the Western Empire (Byzantine) in 476 C.E. Before that fall occurred, a fundamental change would take place that would transform the original Republic into the Roman Empire. Many factors would be directly and indirectly responsible for this transition. These would