Posted on 06/23/2020 2:49:29 AM PDT by C19fan
Scientists say a massive volcanic eruption in Alaska more than 2,500 years ago triggered a global climate shock on the other side of the Earth that led to the fall of the Roman Republic. The eruption of Mount Okmok on an Alaskan island in the year 43 BC – an event known as 'Okmok II' – spewed ash particles that cooled the planet by shading incoming solar radiation. Scientists say this caused with a spell of extreme cold in the Mediterranean during the European summer – the second-coldest of the last 2,500 years.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Increases in the price of food and decline in its availability commonly trigger discontent. Caesar’s enemies acted because they saw the moment as favorable, with Caesar’s popular support waning.
The thing is that the Roman Republic was already dead from the murders of the Gracchi brothers (120 BC) or the Social war (90 BC) - by that time the Roman republic was an oligarchy with no control on the elites.
Marius followed by Sulla took advantage of this and were Emperors in all but name, as was Caesar.
In fact the “Emperors” for the first 300 years were titled “Princep” — “first Citizen” - hence the term used is the Princepate.
During that 300 years the Republic technically continued with lessening power, until Diocletian started the Dominiate and threw away the last fig-leaf of a republic.
I don’t see weather as a factor from 130 to 27 BC - rather that the Roman Republic became an Empire without an Emperor and didn’t know how to manage its new wealth.
As chatty as Roman writers were, you would think one of them might have mentioned it was chilly...
Exactly, it was a system that was not prepared to outlive the attempts of its own wealthy and influential people gaming it.
1) Roman political institutions and traditions, designed for a city state, were unequal to governing a large empire.
2) Roman cultural concepts like "dignitas" where a Roman aristocrats sense of self worth and honor were intricately tied to their prominence and achievements.
3) Political leaders such as Marius, Sulla, and Caesar were therefore willing to become autocrats as the only way accomplish their goals. It wasn't enough for Rome to succeed, they had the be the ones responsible for that success.
Climate, was probably a condition that exacerbated the political/military/economic environment and provided obstacles and opportunities that otherwise would not have occurred.
Wait until Yellowstone or Mammoth Mountain erupt.
Then, the snowflakes will melt.
Collapse of the Second Triumvirate (And Octavian/Augustus being the last man standing of the three) around 11 or so years, after the eruption, was more influential than a natural disaster.
That is all plausible, but it leaves unaddressed the point that weather calamaties and famines do have effects. My guess is that with modern science now providing proof of a cause, historians of ancient Rome will find proof of the effects.
Arrogance, greed, pride, over-expansion, improper planning to deal with over-expansion, nepotism, personnel gain over service/infighting, fear about
“heading for tomorrow” because of finance/civil troubles, cynicism over benevolence (More reaction though) etc... nothing new under the sun, human nature is a b’tch sometimes.
Ping to SunkenCiv.
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3386361/posts
Above is a link to an old article with regards to climate change and the Vikings having a rough go with it. Along with an interesting link (in the posts) about some book a bunch of Freepers liked.
I read books and listened to podcasts about the fall of the Roman Republic and never seen one word describe weather as a factor. The date of 43 BC is important because Julius Caesar was assassinated in 44 BC. Caesar has already delivered the mortal blow to the Republic.
—
So true. Don’t know if you may be referring to the Mike Duncan “History of Rome” podcast; a most excellent series.
The Roman Republic was on a trajectory to fail for decades before 43 BC with the rise of the Gracchus Brothers and later Gaius Marius. Civil wars had already broken out by the time of Mariaus as his legions faced off again st Lucius Sulla. By the time Julius Caesar rose to power, the Republic was little more than a fiction and its burial was complete following the 40 year reign of Ocatvius/Agustus.
Volcanos in Alaska had zero to do with it.
I listened to Duncan’s series and more recently his Revolutions series. Dan Carlin has an excellent series on the fall of the Republic.
I think the death knell for the Republic came with Hannibal, much earlier. Italia had been a land of virtuous farmers until Hannibal laid waste to farms and fields all over the country, which were then bought up by the rich, who became powerful landowners with the massive import of slaves to work the land. The people, essentially, went on the government dole. Yes, the failure of the Grachii brothers to achieve reforms, the Social Wars, Sulla’s reign, all played their parts, but they were consequences of this fundamental shift toward a slave-driven and increasingly oligarchic society. We should take note, as well, that in the end, Statism and socialist, perhaps even what we could call communist efforts to save the economy of the Empire would prove disastrous.
good points, I’d need to think that over
I listened to Duncan’s series and more recently his Revolutions series. Dan Carlin has an excellent series on the fall of the Republic.
—
So many great podcasts out there to listen to. I’ve learned far more about history than all whatever was taught in school.
A great follow-up podcast to “History of Rome” is Robin Pierson’s “The History of Byzantium” which covers the Eastern Roman Empire up thru its fall in 1453.
The real problem is that a Republic is an excellent system of government for a people who have a common set of values and identity, but it doesn’t work for running a far-flung empire.
A Republic needs *citizens* who value individual freedom and accept personal responsibility, trusting the government little and those who run it hardly at all.
An empire needs obedient subjects who fit into their place in a giant machine run by those who know best for them; there’s no other way to integrate people from many different cultures, with many different values and languages.
Rome after the second Punic war, as with the United States after WW2, gained an empire but lost a republic.
My thinking is the benefits of breaking the unwritten rules to gain power went up exponentially when the Republic because a de facto empire. It went from being number 1 in a city-state to being number 1 in an far flung empire.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.