Why The Roman Empire Fell:

http://www.tribunesandtriumphs.org/roman-empire/reason-why-the-roman-empire-fell.htm ^

[Vinylly]

I was doing a Google Search on 'Why The Roman Empire Fell'. I was sincerely shocked at the reason. The United States is now in the same position as when the Roman Empire fell. History is repeating itself and very few people realize this.

[smokingfrog]

Agendus XXI

[logician2u]

Opinions differ as to the primary causes of Rome's fall. As contemporaneous history is most often written by the victors, scholars often have less than complete written history of wars, rebellions and plagues of antiquity which, given the sources, may be more biased than what we would tolerate on the cable news channels these days. The importance of archeology in reconstructing what really happened cannot be overstated.

As for parallels between empires Roman and American, I suggest you take a look at this book from 2005 (or the updated version, after the housing bubble popped--it's expanded, not revised). Even though their book is about financial stuff that most of us here already know--hopefully--in the course of the narrative, the authors draw a rather gloomy word picture of America's descent into empire in the Roman tradition, commencing exactly 100 years ago, rehashing in detail various socio-economic conditions that led to the Roman Empire's collapse, suitably buttressing their (at the time, minority) opinion that the United States is, indeed, an "empire of debt."

Does 1913 ring a bell in your mind? A triple-whammy, right?

[Intolerant in NJ]

Special interest groups fighting and working against each other instead of for the common good.....

[tinyowl]

Reason why the Roman Empire fell - Christianity

Christianity - Life and the future seemed hopeless for the millions who were ruled by Rome where an early death was almost inevitable. Christianity taught the belief in an afterlife which gave hope and courage to the desperate. Eventually a Roman Emperor, Constantine the Great, proclaimed himself a Christian and issued an edict promising the Christians his favor and protection. Attitudes in the Roman Empire changed from being antagonistic to becoming pacifistic"

Not sure I quite follow this (sarcasm - it's actually complete crap logic - no logic attempted.) This seems a typical shot at Christianity inserted by the publisher and not in the original text. It's not even a very good attempt. If a loss of Morals and Ethics were destroying Rome ... how exactly did Christianity help destroy Rome? Again - even without all the obvious counter-arguments, they don't even make a case for it, except to weakly suggest that 'antagonism giving way to pacifism killed Rome' ... but Christianity is not exactly pacifistic ... Jesus came with the sword.

[cloudmountain]

Carthage - Obama --both must go the way of the dodo. Ah, the Roman Senate. Those were the days.

The Italians DID teach the French to cook.

From Cloud Mountain, on the GOOD side of the salt cellar.

[cloudmountain]

Who was the first Roman emperor?

Augustus.

And, he has a great (to the 100000th power) grandson who pitched for the Washington Senators at one time. :o)

Right-hander with a WICKED curve ball that not only curved but BROKE down and away...always a grounder if it was ever hit.

[cloudmountain]

Gibbon’s life was rather sad, wasn’t it? Protestant, Catholic, kind of Protestant again, then a kind of atheism, as I read. Oh well, he’s with his Maker now.

[LoneRangerMassachusetts]

One needs to consider that as the massive bureaucracy crumbled, warlords rose to power and the Christian Church rose as an institution. My take is that the authority of Rome fell to local power.

[gusty]

The argument was that the old Roman religion was more martial in outlook. More emphasize on warfare. Similar arguments were made in the mid 20th Century by Fascists and Nazis who admired the old Roman and Germanic religions for the same reason. Roman religion was also completely tied to the state. One showed loyalty to the state by following Roman religious practices. It is why Christians were persecuted at times during the Roman Empire before Constantine. The Romans did not object to the dogma so much, they really did not care, they objected to the refusal of Christians bowing down to Roman deities. To the Romans, it was a sign of disloyalty to the Roman state. The Roman view of religion was you could do whatever you want in privacy, but you must show loyalty to the Empire in public, and that included participating in Roman religious ceremonies.

[gusty]

The irony is that the barbarian warlords who took power after the fall of the Western Roman Empire considered themselves culturally Roman. The might have usurped the power of the Empire, but the culture they accepted lock, stock, and barrel.

[The_Reader_David]

Stylish? No, but something Christians have been doing since he came up with the unsupportable notion the Christianity weakened the Empire, causing it to fall. He was “trashed” in his own day for it. The notion is unsupportable precisely because the Empire lasted over a thousand years as a formally Christian Empire (from Theodosius’s formal adoption of Christianity as the Imperial religion in 380 until the Fall of Constantinople to the Turks in 1453).

[Jabba the Nutt]

Big Government killed the Roman Empire. They inflated their currency to fund government. They created massive amounts of regulations, price controls and bureaucrats. That destroyed the yeoman farmer basis of Roman Citizens. Rome was left with no one left to fill our their legions. They ended up with a Ruling Class and a Mob Mass. In political science, this is called Ceasarism, where a "Strong Man" rises to run the show for the vast mob of plebians.

I just read today, the US Middle Class is poorer than in 1989. That's 25 years of decline. That's 25 years of Republican and Democrat Party control.

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

Damn mummies.

[trubolotta]

I see what you are saying but I have not progressed far enough in reading Gibbons to reach a conclusion one way or the other. What I have read mostly concerned a church torn by disputes over heresy with the state falling on one side or the other as emperors and state officials would come and go.

Your point about the length of life of the empire is not lost on me. It fared very well compared to all others. But it did reach a turning point and regardless of how we view the east and west split, when the shrinkage of the empire started, it proved irreversible.

One question I ask is if Christianity did end the Roman Empire, and that empire was corrupt, it that not a good thing or must that judgment be based only upon what followed? If by what followed, how long do we give it before we make another judgment? Also, is there some common factor related to the collapse of other empires that were definitely not Christian? When the Soviet empire collapsed we cheered though I wrote a piece long ago saying there would be extreme danger because of the moral vacuum. That evil empire no conscience or soul. I mention this only for perspective. Imperial collapse is not always bad but what follows is not always predictable.

I’ll offer a parallel thought: Is it just that a pagan nation responsible for the murder of over 50 million innocent children collapse? By what hypocrisy can we applaud the collapse of one evil empire yet try to preserve a different evil empire? Obviously we seek change, but for how long before we acknowledge it may never happen without a cataclysmic collapse?

[trebb]

They instituted the Dole and started giving some folks free livings so they could make music and paint pretty pictures...

[The_Republic_Of_Maine]

Thank you, I want my children to have a well rounded, but sound, classical education. That’s one of the many reasons we home school.

[The_Republic_Of_Maine]

comparing one of Gibbons’ conclusions to the sources he cites would make an interesting study for a high schooler.

I am convinced, we will order the set, used, this week.

Thanks

[The_Republic_Of_Maine]

This is not to sound snide, but if students who attend public or private schools are ready in college, my kids are ready in the ninth or tenth grade.

None of my children will ever step inside of a public school for anything other than a case study in how far behind and how little education is offered and or achieved in any public or private school.

Every parent should volunteer in a public school for a day or two to see what I am talking about.

Students don’t read to teachers, teachers read to students.

Unless it is in the teachers manual, it is not going to be taught.

I am not trying to lecture or insult parents of public schooled kids, nor am I trying to insult the kids, but, the bottom line is, the public schools are not education they are indoctrinating and preparing the kids to be good little worker bees in an oligarchic society.

[morphing libertarian]

Not trying to insult.

I am friends with several families who have great kids home schooling and thy are all ahead of their peers.

I was trying to do introductory material with an overview over the centuries. The reading is far from elementary. Also it would give them the perspective of contemporary and modern historians.

I’m not a big fan of Gibbons. I still recommend him for someone who will do in depth research and he should be included by those who major in the subject.

Best wishes!

[The_Republic_Of_Maine]

I do thank you. My wife and I agree that we should read it first, then the kids.

Sounds as thought we will need to be able to answer questions.