I Figured It Out; The Fall Of The Roman Empire

[Tytonidae Alba]

You also have to consider the slave revolution that had weakend the armies, and the plauge that came from Germany, and the strength of Attila and his Hunnic warriors.

[Flavius Scipio]

the empire that they conquered was eventually their downfall as, while they were conquering an empire they had their legions at full strength and many vetran units. when a sort of peace fell as in the romans were not conquering any more their legions one could say fell in to disrepair as the romans got complacent and even after the reforms of constatine where the army was split into the Limitanei (the border guards) and the Comitatenses (the mobile field army).More non romans were recruited into the army that in the end they were not fighting as a "roman" legion but rather fighting as a group of peoples under the roman banner when the west fell it was as a result of this dissection of the military and the failures of the emperors in trade, wars, management, etc... and the eastern empire survived simply because it had the well established cities and economy and because the eastern romans were adapting to eastern life rather than simply romanising everybody they could.

[Hamilcar Barca]

am just saying that a lot of institutionalized brutal practices of the Roman Empire (gladiator games, massacre of inhabitants in captured towns, e.t.c) disappeared, or almost disappeared, with the rise of Christianity. I'm not Christian myself but I am trying to look at things objectively. The examples you quoted, Hamilcar, are very valid but then, which Kingdom or Empire did not have a residue of cruelty?

 

Well, village massacres certainly did continue but everything else you point out there is correct. I was simply pointing out that Christianity did little to curb cruel and thoughtless violence. I have no doubt that there were people in such times who displayed good will and compasionate kindness to their fellow man, but it is kind of funny that those running the Church was often the last group of people which did just that.

 

I was raised in a Christian Family and while I commend basic Christian principles like any normal person does as well as hold in great reverence in respect the great Pope John Paul II. Their almost unbroken span of crimes and follies spanning the last 2,000 years cause me to criticize them indefinatley. No organisation is perfect but lets be honest, some Popes/cardinals/bishops have gone down in history alongside the worst men who ever lived. So its not Christianity which I 'm having a go at, its some of those that were supposadly 'running' it.

 

I've unintentionally turned this into a rant. Sorry.

[Legio XX Valeria Victrix]

am just saying that a lot of institutionalized brutal practices of the Roman Empire (gladiator games, massacre of inhabitants in captured towns, e.t.c) disappeared, or almost disappeared, with the rise of Christianity. I'm not Christian myself but I am trying to look at things objectively. The examples you quoted, Hamilcar, are very valid but then, which Kingdom or Empire did not have a residue of cruelty?

 

Well, village massacres certainly did continue but everything else you point out there is correct. I was simply pointing out that Christianity did little to curb cruel and thoughtless violence. I have no doubt that there were people in such times who displayed good will and compasionate kindness to their fellow man, but it is kind of funny that those running the Church was often the last group of people which did just that.

 

I was raised in a Christian Family and while I commend basic Christian principles like any normal person does as well as hold in great reverence in respect the great Pope John Paul II. Their almost unbroken span of crimes and follies spanning the last 2,000 years cause me to criticize them indefinatley. No organisation is perfect but lets be honest, some Popes/cardinals/bishops have gone down in history alongside the worst men who ever lived. So its not Christianity which I 'm having a go at, its some of those that were supposadly 'running' it.

 

I've unintentionally turned this into a rant. Sorry.

 

 

Well, thanks for clearing that up Hamilcar. By the way I am interested in learning more about the Arab massacre you mentioned. Could you fill me up on that one?

[Felix Marcellus]

Did I mention Rome was too big. Seriously. When you have an entity near the size of the US and a lack of:

 

1. High Speed Communications which facilitate a timely reaction to crises

2. Overwhelming technological overmatch

3. Solid alliance (of the willing; not a forced alliance)

4. Nationalism (Romans may have been very nationalistic about their empire, I doubt all the auxiliaries were so nationalistic about it)

5. Running water, Flushable Toilets, Air Conditioning, central heating (Basically this translates into a bunch of po'd people who will eventually need to blame someone for their miserable lives... and I'm just kidding with this one. HAHA...

6. (Which is really 5 since 5 was a joke) Accountability at the highest level of government (meaning the emperor is not someone who can be 'un' re-elected so what does he care if his foreign policy sucks and domestic policy consists of conscripting men and material to reinforce his sucky foreign policy)

7. (Which is really 6... and so on.) The JAY-OH-BEE. Seems to me there was a lot of work done by slaves that could've been given to citizens. Low unemployment rate is directly inverse to a stong economy.

 

 

 

: your nation ain't going to last forever. And there's obviously more which has and has not already been pointed out here in this thread.

 

But seriously, the flushing toilets, running water (and I ain't talking about those nasty public fountains), and air conditioning would be where my vote went. And if I didn't have a roll of Charmin after the next election I'd start up HizbaFelix and plant IED's on the Via Appia until I got them.

[trajen777]

I thought it long and hard, and came to this conclusion... they became a bunch of pussies at the end and refused to enlist, or for that matter, draft armies of decent, hardworking men. It's was every roman males fault as well as thier leadership. Blame Joe Ceasar, he took his countrymen to ruin. Just like with what almost happened in France (WW1) with the Four Coporals, you can only blame the leadership so far before you take into account the character of the people serving beneath them, and how they fed of each other to produce disaster.

 

Had good men served. good leadership would of emerged to meet the demands of the craft.

 

Actually i used to feel the same way - however as i did more research i came to understand that the Rome really ran into major trouble wiht the advent of the Plauge under the reighn of Marcus Aur. when upwards of 50% of the roman pop died. Including a high % of the army. This major pop loss really impacted the army and the tax base. Even worse was the plauge in the middle of Justianian's rule, soon after the caputure of Italy from the goths. Upwards of 50 - 70 % of the pop died - for example the pop of the empire after the capture of Italy and Africa was the same as before these populous regions were captured. The loss of rev and armys was a true didaster.