The Fall of Rome

The Roman Empire is probably the most significant and influential state formation of the Ancient history, being the largest and the mightiest state in Europe and having made an inestimable contribution to the development of civilization as well as culture and science of Ancient Greece. It is rather reasonable that many historians choose to take the fall of Rome in 476 for the edge between ancient history and the history of the Middle Ages and Renaissance (Gill). Rome, the center of the empire, had been considered to be the main city of the world and the cradle of European civilization for many centuries. However, the beginning of our era brought decline and – later – inevitable fall to the Roman Empire.  

The decline of Rome began in the third century AD with splitting the Empire into two parts – the Western Roman Empire and Eastern Roman Empire later renamed into Byzantine Empire with its capital located in Constantinople. Facing numerous problems and regular invasions of the barbaric tribes, the Western part of the empire soon died away with the conquest of Rome and Odoacer dethroning the last Roman governor, Romulus Augustus. The eastern part of the empire continued its existence for a thousand years more until it was ravaged by the Turks. The historical background of these events is so abundant on possible reasons and preconditions that historians still cannot reach consensus on a universally accepted set of reasons. Of course, it would be possible to state that Romans just exhausted their potential. There are plenty of factors neither of which can be considered universally true. At the same time, regardless of the Western empire’s decay, the Eastern Rome Empire continued to flourish. The current paper will outline and consider the most credible and influential factors that could have caused the fall of this immense and mighty empire.

Reason 1: Goths, Huns, and Visigoths

The destructive effect of nomad tribes’ invasions has been discussed as one of the most significant reasons for Rome’s decay. This point of view is adopted by Ward-Perkins who claims a sort of military crisis caused by the invasion of people from Asia to have triggered the fall (Ward-Perkins). 

Having conquered the territory of the Black Sea region be the beginning of the 3rd century, the unions of Goths launched the military campaign against the Roman Empire. The first battle between Romans and Goths took place in 378 bringing overwhelming defeat to the Roman army and death to the emperor. After a pause lasting about 50 years, the tribes besieged Rome. Although the capital suffered raging hunger and diseases, Roman refused to surrender or accept Alaric’s proposals (Alaric was the head of the Goth army). 

Unfortunately, despite desperate attempts to hold the line, the enemy had managed to gain control over Rome – it was for the first time in the history of this glorious empire that barbaric tribes had captured this city. Later, Vandals became the ones to deliver the final blow to the capital of the Western Roman Empire, killing an immense amount of citizens and enslaving the survivors.  It is reasonable to add, that the name of this tribe has turned into a common noun for villains and destroyers as a result of the atrocities the conquerors committed in Rome. 

However, it was Guns who led the Western Roman Empire to the complete collapse. The cruel nomad tribes having their roots in China traveled through the continent gradually destroying the nations they came across on their way. Having eventually reached Rome, Guns headed by Attila raged there for two years. Roman army leaders had managed to go into a conspiracy with Attila’s bride who later murdered her husband right on their wedding day. 

Reason 2: Moral degeneration and change of values

Another significant reason to precondition the fall of Rome belongs to the social sphere of life. This is the overall moral decline of Roman society. The decline in morals began in the upper classes of Roman society including nobility, emperors and their court and later infected the whole society. Immorality in sexual behavior crossed all possible borders with emperors keeping boys for their pleasure, organizing orgies and practicing adultery and monogamy rather widely. The way of life led by the emperors impresses with numerous perversions and morally unacceptable actions: Nero taking a castrated slave for his wife, Commodus appearing in front of people in woman’s clothes and having a harem, Elagabalus married a Vestal Virgin by force, etc. Passing from the upper classes to slaves and lower classes of Roman society, this immoral way of living gained more popularity and was practiced during religious festivals. Resulting from the hedonistic principles planted by the leaders of the empire, the corrupt and destructive way of life infected the whole society: forced prostitution prospered; people were amused by bestiality, gladiatorial combats and other activities presupposing cruelty in the arena; consumption of alcohol became enormous as well as popularity of gambling. 

Furthermore, some historians relate the decline in civic morality to the spread of Christian religion and loss of conventional values typical for a polytheistic religion displaced by Christianity (Andrews). This point of view is supported by Edward Gibbon stating that Christianity and its abuse had a direct impact on the decline of the empire (Gibbon). Legalization of Christianity brought confusion into Roman’s minds and took a divine status away from the emperor as well as made the focus shift from the glory of the empire to the glory of the ‘sole deity’ (Andrews).

Reason 3: Economic decline 

Apart from barbaric invasions and immorality, the Roman state had been actually rotting from the inside overwhelmed with a pile of economic problems that were never solved. The lion’s share of the Empires population (which incorporated the lower classes and peasants) didn’t feel or share the prosperity of the empire as they were overloaded with high taxes (Alchin). As the governors had high expenditures for luxury goods imported from the East paying mainly in gold, the shortage of gold to produce Roman coins led to the devaluation of the currency and incredibly high level of inflation. This respectively forced the government to resort to the long gone barter system which – in fact – threw the empire far back in development. At the same time, these factors increased the gap between the rich and the poor in the state.

Andrews states, that financial and economic crisis was also affected by the excessive reliance upon slaves as labor force (Andrews). As emperors stopped expansion policy, the flow of slaves from the conquered territories dried up causing a shortage in labor force. At the same time, whereas slaves were major labor force (there’s nothing surprising as it was free), the lower working classes suffered unemployment. Although the government established free trade in order to create perspectives for the Plebs, they lost the competition with the foreign traders and were subsidized by the stated yet having no job and living the idle life. Hence poverty was increasing as well as the difference between the classes. Poor management in the issue of the economy put together with numerous economic problems gradually led to the decline.

Reason 4: Excessive spending on military and decreasing military strength

Probably, this aspect is one of the most important reasons for any empire to lose its entire splendor. Any empire needs mighty and well-organized military forces to maintain control over its territories; however, the Roman Empire happened to experience numerous difficulties in the military sector which contributed to its fall. The scale of the empire (which was probably overexpanded) caused certain logistical and administrative issues. It is rather obvious that a governor needs a large and well-trained army to control such a vast territory. Unfortunately, the military system of Rome corrupted: governors were incapable of controlling their military commanders; army management as weak leading to the loss of military efficiency; recruiting was also at the low level due to demographical crisis and lack of motivation among citizens. Moreover, the empire tended to fill in the gaps in recruiting barbarians to the army. Eventually, the immigrant foreigners constituted the army (Milani-Satarpia), infiltrating into the mechanisms of administration in Rome. To add more, these soldiers terrorized civilians that added to growing enmity between the army and the civic population. Being victims of the army’s atrocities, civilians suffered worsening economic conditions (and so did the state). 

Despite increasing spendings on the military forces which laid the economy low, the results were unsatisfying and the empire was eventually incapable of defending itself from invasions.

Reason 5: Splitting the empire

It is well known that Diocletian divided his immense territories into two parts establishing two capital cities – Rome in the West and Constantinople in the East (Phelps). Such splitting was driven by the desire to reinforce the government’s efficiency in both parts and ensure the better defense of the borders. Nevertheless, the attempt failed and this decision became the beginning of the end for the empire. As two capitals grew apart and experienced lack in cooperation pursuing different interests, two parts of the empire became increasingly vulnerable. 

Reason 6: Strengthening of the Byzantine Empire

As Diocletian chose to split the empire into halves, the state first became easier in administration, but later differing interests and culture peculiarities made the empires drift apart. This political decision first seemed reasonable bur later contributed to the fall on the empire as east and west came across inner disagreements instead of cooperating and sharing military aid for the sake of defense. Nevertheless, the eastern empire grew and built up its strength to take up the baton from the westerns one. Constantinople, the capital, was brilliantly guarded and didn’t fail to stand barbarian invasions whereas Rome was becoming all the weaker and losing its political and economic meaning.

Eventually, the western political structure gradually came to its decay with Rome being ravaged by the Turks in the fifth century, though the eastern part remained flourishing for another thousand years before it was attacked by the Ottoman Empire in the 15th century. 

In fact, the list of reasons which had had an impact on Rome’s decline is rather long with ever more being supposed by historians. For example, some do assume that the decline of the empire was much presupposed by climatic changes and ‘decline in agriculture’ (Huntington). The great transmigration of people that indirectly caused nomadic tribes’ invasions was also triggered by the changes in climatic conditions as people were forced to seek a more favorable climate for living and activity. 

Effect

The fall of Rome virtually had no consequences for the west as the power of Roman governors was illusory after 455. Rome’s 12-centuries-long grandeur had come to its end as the capital of the western empire eventually fell. Odoacer who had dethroned the last Rome’s emperor, admitted dependency on the Eastern Roman Empire on political grounds, sending emperor’s honors to Constantinople. The western territories were later rapidly occupied by Germans who established their kingdoms characterized by feudalism (as a principally new system). The Eastern Roman Empire fell in 1453 from the Turks, but in fact, it was more of an inner takeover when power passed from Christians to Muslims. In 962, the German king founded the Holy Roman Empire defeated in 1806 by Napoleon. 

In general, the fall of such a significant state formation literally marked the transition from one historical period to another, the transition from the ancient history to medieval history. Moreover, it is impossible to underestimate the contribution made by the Roman Empire to the development of civilization, politics, and culture as its legacy has been still used even nowadays.