| Decline Of The Roman Empire |
Index for Decline Of |
Website Links For Decline |
Information AboutDecline Of The Roman Empire |
|
, the last of the Western Roman Emperors .]] The decline of the Roman Empire, also called the '''fall of the Roman Empire''', is an weblog entry August 25 2003 . Retrieved June 2005.. The traditional date of the fall of the Roman Empire is September 4 , 476 when Romulus Augustus , the Emperor of the Western Roman Empire was deposed. However, many historians question this date, and use other benchmarks to describe the "Fall". Why the Empire fell seems to be relevant to every new generation, and a seemingly endless supply of theories are discussed on why it happened, or indeed if it happened at all. Mainstream theories Mainstream theories about Rome's fall can be split into several general categories: "Declining empire" theories Generally, these theories argue that the Roman Empire might have survived, but due to some combination of circumstances didn't. Some historians in this camp believe that Rome "brought it on themselves," i.e., ensured their own collapse by either misguided policies or degradation of character. Vegetius The historian Vegetius theorized and has recently been supported by the historian Arthur Ferrill that the Roman Empire declined and fell due to a combination of increasing contact with barbarians and the subsequent "barbarization", as well as a surge in decadence and the following lethargy. This resulted in complacency and ill-discipline among the legions, making it primarily a military issue. Gibbon Edward Gibbon famously placed the blame on a loss of Civic Virtue among the Roman citizens. They gradually Outsourced their duties to defend the Empire to Barbarian Mercenaries who eventually turned on them. Gibbon considered that Christianity had contributed to this, making the populace less interested in the worldly ''here-and-now'' and more willing to wait for the rewards of Heaven . Von Mises Ludwig Von Mises argued that the Inflation and the Price Controls promoted by the later emperors destroyed the economic system of the ancient world, this leading into Hyperinflation , deterioration of the imperial economical basis and transfer to Barter Economy instead of a more advanced monetary economy. The theory assumes the hyperinflation combined with price controls undermined the economic system of the empire, and it simply went into bankruptcy, unable to pay its legions. The theory further argues that the Eastern Roman Empire ( Byzantine Empire ) survived for over a millennium after the fall of the Western empire because of its smaller economic decline. Richta On the other hand, some historians have argued that the collapse of Rome was outside the Romans' control. Radovan Richta holds that technology drives history. Thus, the invention of the horseshoe in Germany in the 200s would alter the military equation of ''pax romana'', or a borrowing of the compass from its inventors in China in the 300s would also alter that equation. "Doomed from the start" theories In contrast with the "declining empire" theories, historians such as Arnold J. Toynbee and James Burke argue that the Roman Empire itself was a rotten system from its inception, and that the entire Imperial era was one of steady decay of its institutions. In their view, the Empire could never have lasted. The Romans had no budgetary system. The Empire relied on Booty from conquered territories (this source of revenue ending, of course, with the end of Roman territorial expansion) or on a pattern of tax collection that drove small-scale farmers into destitution (and onto a dole that required even more exactions upon those who could not escape taxation), or into dependency upon a landed élite exempt from taxation. Meanwhile the costs of military defense and the pomp of Emperors continued. Financial needs continued to increase, but the means of meeting them steadily eroded. "There was no fall" theories Lastly, some historians take issue with the use of the term "fall" (and may or may not agree with "decline"). They note that the transfer of power from a central imperial bureaucracy to more local authorities was both gradual and typically scarcely noticeable to the average citizen. Pirenne Henri Pirenne published the "Pirenne Thesis" in the 1920s which remains influential to this day. It holds that the Empire continued, in some form, up until the time of the Arab Conquests in the 7th Century , which disrupted Mediterranean trade routes, leading to a decline in the European economy. "Late Antiquity" Historians of Late Antiquity , a field pioneered by Peter Brown , have turned away from the idea that the Roman Empire "fell". They see a "transformation" occurring over centuries, with the roots of Medieval culture contained in Roman culture and focus on the continuities between the classical and Medieval worlds. Thus, it was a gradual process with no clear break. Despite the title, in ''The Fall of the Roman Empire'' (2005), Peter Heather argues for an interpretation similar to Brown's, of a logical progression from central Roman power to local, Romanized "barbarian" kingdoms spurred by two centuries of contact (and conflict) with Germanic tribes, the Huns , and the Persia ns. However, unlike Brown, Heather sees the role of the Barbarians as the most significant factor; without their intervention he believes the western Roman Empire would have persisted in some form. Historiography Historiographically , the primary issue historians have looked at when analyzing any theory is the continued existence of the Eastern Empire or Byzantine Empire , which lasted for about a thousand years after the fall of the West. For example, Gibbon implicates Christianity in the fall of the Western Empire, yet the eastern half of the Empire, which was even more Christian than the west in geographic extent, fervor, penetration and sheer numbers continued on for a thousand years afterwards (although Gibbon did not consider the Eastern Empire to be much of a success). As another example, environmental or weather changes impacted the east as much as the west, yet the east did not "fall". Theories will sometimes reflect the eras in which they are developed. Gibbon's criticism of Christianity reflects the values of the Enlightenment ; his ideas on the decline in martial vigor could have been interpreted by some as a warning to the growing British Empire . In the 19th Century Socialist and anti-socialist theorists tended to blame Decadence and other political problems. More recently, Environment al concerns have become popular, with Deforestation and Soil Erosion proposed as major factors, and Epidemic s such as Malaria also cited. Ramsay MacMullen in the 1980s suggested it was due to Political Corruption . Ideas about transformation with no distinct fall owe much to Postmodern thought, which rejects Periodization concepts (see Metanarrative ). What is not new are attempts to diagnose Rome's particular problems, with Juvenal in the early 2nd Century , at the height of Roman power, criticizing the peoples' obsession with " Bread And Circuses " and rulers seeking only to gratify these obsessions. One of the primary reasons for the sheer number of theories is the notable lack of surviving evidence from the 4th and 5th centuries. For example there are so few records of an economic nature it is difficult to arrive at even a generalization of how the economic conditions were. Thus, historians must quickly depart from available evidence and comment based on how things ought to have worked, or based on evidence from previous and later periods, or simply based on Inductive Reasoning . As in any field where available evidence is sparse, the historian's ability to imagine the 4th and 5th centuries will play as important a part in shaping our understanding as the available evidence, and thus be open for endless interpretation. Notes References
Further reading
|