The Fall Of The Roman Empire

While the fall of the Roman Empire is well known, the exact causes of why it fell can be difficult to pinpoint. Many historians believe that Rome 's downfall was due to poor leadership, weakened economics, or perhaps a combination of the two along with other seemingly unrelated factors. However, there is a string of evidence suggesting that there were three main components that took place to bring about the fall of the Roman Empire. These determinant attributes did not happen all at once, and there was a domino effect with each one directly influencing the others. The fall of Rome occurred after a series of preventable events, including unacceptable emperors, the heavy reliance on slaves, and the increasingly uncontrollable borders of Rome.

Roman empire was perhaps the most prominent empire, it’s size and influence made its fall puzzling. What’s the crisis of the Roman empire in the west contributed to internal or external dysfunction? The complex historians over different generations debating whether the client was faulted by immigration, external invaders, Christianity, political policy, and economic policy. The fall of “A ancient civilization. . . Symptom Of economic decline and their inhabitants were displaying signs of a loss of civic initiative” over a considerable period of time. /20 Katz/ The notable work researched to Debate whether the fall was external or internal include the fall of the Roman empire by peter Heather, the decline of the Rome by Joseph Vogt and The decline and fall of the Roman empire by Edward Gibbons.

The seemingly unstoppable Roman empire was certain to fall in a matter of time. Even though Rome was majorly affected by external attacks, I feel like the fall was because of the internal decline. The economy and social issues were the key factors that led to the descent of the large empire. A vast amount of their problems came from within the city. Every decision that Rome made had an extensive effect on the city itself and the rest of the world. Many foolish decisions made by terrible emperors weakened the city and eventually cause the many aspects of Roman life to crumble.

My first reason for why Rome fell was because of a massive earthquake that did a lot of damage. Such as leaving the Mediterranean sea dry by the sudden retreat of the see it also did massive damage to Rome and it’s cities. When the earthquake had also hit it was a flood that hit the coast of Sicily. In the cities of Greece and Egypt at most 50 people were left dead in the city of Alexandria alone with no other cities being disrupted by the flood as that much. As it astonished and terrified the subjects of Rome. As their symptoms of a declining empire and left a sinking world.

The Roman Empire is known as one of the strongest empires in history, due to their advanced technology, strong military leaders, and republican government. As the empire started to expand, so did their power. However, after years have gone by, the Roman Empire started to fall. Their fall may have been caused by political reason, such as the empire being just too much to handle, Diocletian splitting the territory in half, and their government corruption.

At the start of the common era, the Roman Empire had grown to control the Mediterranean world. This made the empire both feared and admired. When Rome reached its height in both wealth and status, it began to experience problems that led to the fall of the Roman empire. To this day, historians still debate how a once great empire fell. There were two major internal and two major external causes for the fall of the Roman Empire.

There were several reasons for the fall of rome but internal problems such as military deficiency, political turmoil, and a weakened economy were the predominant forces leading up to the fall. Civil wars were a common occurrence in western Europe and often challenged the imperial throne. “It is worth once again emphasizing that from 217 down to the collapse of Western Empire there were only a handful of periods as long as ten years when a civil war did not break out” (Goldsworthy). Emperors constantly faced threats for the throne and often abandoned war against foreign enemy to deal with a Roman rival or Usurper.

Some external factors that lead to the fall of Rome are plagues and decline in trade. Evidence of these two factors can be found in document 1. Evidence in document 1 can be found when it says, “There was a noticeable decline in trade and small industry and the labor shortage caused by the plague affected both the military recruiting and the economy. Armies were needed more than ever but financial struggles made it difficult to pay and enlist more soldiers.”.And this evidence shows that the plague and lack of trade, gave less money to Rome, which made them pay their soldier less, and gave less of a reason to join the military. Which then gave their armies less power, and made it easier to let attackers take land, kill Roman armies, and make Rome have less power, leading to the fall of Rome. Although the other external factor that lead to the fall of Rome was attackers, (raiders, Huns, etc). Evidence of this is in document 5. In document 5 it shows that “The visigoths raided Greece, killed Emperor Valens and took over south of Danube.” Also there were vandals who invaded Italy, conquered North Africa, and destroyed other parts of Rome. Which lead to the fall of Rome because there was chaos that allowed leaders to make bad decisions (such as exempting upper class from laws and diverting the army to churches). And allowed the leaders to be assassinated in midst of the chaos. And that made Rome’s land shrink and lose power without ; Emperor Valens and other Emperors being assassinated, raids in Balkan and Greece, the Visigoths taking and invading Italy, and raiding/ransacking Rome. And they [Visigoths] were able to take over and conquered North Africa and Carthage. And without those pieces of land and having to battle with the attackers attackers Rome lost power and

To begin with, one of the main problems of the Roman Empire was their economic problems and corruption. For example, in an excerpt of a historical text written by Priscus, which was a Roman ambassador to the Huns in 449 C.E, he reported a conversation he had with a former citizen whose land had been conquered by the Huns. In their conversation the former Roman citizen stated, “ The conditions of [Roman] subjects in time of peace [is worse than war]...taxes are very severe, and unprincipled men inflict injuries on others… A [wealthy lawbreaker] … is not punished for his injustice, while a poor man … undergoes the legal penalty… The climax of misery is to have to pay in order to obtain justice…” This supports that one main problem that ended the Roman empire was economic problems and corruption because it shows that if rich people in Rome committed a crime they would only have to bribe their way out of trouble while on the other hand poor people will have to face their consequences which is unfair so when they got invaded by the Huns they decided that it was best if they conquered than to join the military to help their empire. In addition another economic problem is that the the Roman Emperors had to pay their own soldiers to stay loyal which lead to emperors having to mint more coins which is further supported by BrainPop which states, “Roman emperors often bribed their soldiers with money to make sure they remained loyal. And when emperors didn’t have enough to pay their troops, they would mint cheaper coins. This caused the value of Roman money to plummet.” This also supports that one important cause that caused the Roman Empire to decline was the corruption and economic problems because in order for a empire or a civilization to function efficiently, they need to respect all people

Similarly, acknowledging author bias is significant in Peter Heather’s Fall of the Roman Empire because the influences from writers contribute to the reliability of the texts. Since Heather worked on the “Germanic people” previously, it influenced his writing as he mentions the Germans frequently throughout his work and refers to them as the ‘invaders’ like most of the authors. Therefore, his bias towards the “Germanic people” cannot make this text fully reliable. It does however, provide numerous accounts of information which is useful when talking about how the Roman empire fell. According to Heather, some internal factors were mainly political aspects, the economic and the military and also contributed to the fall of the empire. The external

Ancient Rome was an empire so dominant, wealthy and economically- stable which came to a dramatic fall in the period of 250AD- 500AD. Ancient Rome faced unexplained unfortunate events which crumbled the Great Empire from the affluent empire to a impoverished society. For centuries historians have timelessly theorised and analysed many debates and research in relation to the Fall of the Roman Empire. What really caused the predominate Roman Empire to fall? Did Rome fall naturally? Was disease, such as malaria a major contributor to the Fall of the Empire, Was man -made infrastructure a problem during Ancient Roman times? Was the fall a natural event? Was the climate changing causing natural disasters? Maybe, perhaps, all the theories interweaved with each other at the same time causing a catastrophic downfall, defeating the Ancient Roman Empire. Edward Gibbon (Gibbon, 1909, pp 173-174.) quoted,

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).

After 50 thousand deaths, it was clear, Rome was seen, as a declining empire and a sinking world. I think the fall of the Roman Empire was due to Military weakness, weak leadership, and disasters and diseases.

The Roman Empire refers to the time period beginning with Augustus. This empire lasted from 30 BCE-476 Causally when an empire collapses, the assumption is it was because of physical and external factors. There were many theories to why it collapsed. Most historians studying the fall of Rome, agree that neither internal nor external forces can be ignored, yet many continue to write arguments that emphasize one side or the other of the debate. Humanist scholar Francesco Petrarca blamed internal powers for the demise of the empire. Two arguments were written to find what really cause the decline. After reading them, Internal factors contributed to the fall of the Roman Empire. Rome was at a high point but it never had a chance of dominating the world. It was more of a power than a superpower. which argument is stronger? This debate still continues today.