Explain th decline of the roman empire?

Answer 1

The Roman Empire declined, for the following reasons;

1) Probably the most important, it was a slave based economy, that perpetually needed to expand, to keep a steady influx of slaves.

2) Because they were constantly at war, the population in Rome, pretty soon the whole of the Italian peninsula, simply could not keep up, they could not provide enough soldiers. Emperors and generals were killing them, faster than what ancient Italians could make them.

3) That most famous set of two words you hear in High School government class; absolute power. Although Rome began life as a republican democracy, said democracy did not posses a system of checks and balances such as the one created for the yet unborn United States. Because the Roman form of Republican Democracy was weak, it could not withstand corruption, thus, military strongmen easily took over, the first of these strongmen was Julius Caesar. The reason Caesar was assassinated, was the general fear he would plunge Rome into a primitive monarchial system again. The ancient Romans believed that democracy was a more civilized, and advanced form of government, and they hated and resented Caesar for pretty much declaring himself "Emperor of Rome."

4) Although often cited "frequent attacks by Barbarians" is not accurate. The truth is, the Roman military machine is the most cold bloodedly formidable the west, if not possibly the world, has ever seen. How do I put this into perspective? Imagine, for a moment, that the U.S. army recruited all young men aged 15. Conscription into the Roman army, I believe began that early; these were just kids, boys really. Now imagine, that the training is just as tough as Navy SEAL buds training, only instead of lasting 32 weeks, the training lasts for a solid 5 years. Also, at the end of that training, its a 20 year contract, you are to serve from 20 to 40, at the age of 40, you may be granted a plot of land somewhere in Gaul or Iberia (France or Spain respectively). Imagine military training as tough as the Navy SEALS, but it lasts 5 years, from age 15 to 20, consider, what manner of soldier that would produce. In addition to being highly trained, and keeping brutal discipline, they had what in the ancient world was considered cutting edge warfare technology. Until the catastrophic defeat by Arminius the German, himself a former Roman soldier who knew all about their tactics and formations, the Roman army was thought to be invincible. Arminius is famous, because he led a force of Germans which exterminated a Roman legion 10,000 strong, so terrible was the loss that Emperor Octavian cried out "give me back my legions!" I don't remember the name of the dude he was screaming at, but allegedly he said something along the lines of "Gaious! Gaious! Give me back my legions!" Not even sure the guy's name was Gaious so don't quote me on that. Rome did not let that loss go unavenged though; do you want to know why the Goths did not push into Europe sooner? Arminius was a German, and all the peoples of Germany, are descended from the Goths. All "Teutonic" peoples are; the Angles, the Saxons, the Jutes, the Vikings, in short, Adolf Hitler's "Aryans" were all descended from the Goths, the Goths are the progenitor people of the "nordic" people, kind of how like in the middle east, the ancient Babylonians were the progenitor people of pretty much all other semites, with the exception of southern Arabians. Whatever the case, in Arminius' time, the whole of the area of southern and what is now Western Germany, was populated by Goths and various subgroups of goths. However, after the loss of the legions was avenged, the goths were restricted largely to what is now Northern Germany, Scandinavia and Denmark. You want to know why? All along the Rhine and Danube, to avenge the loss of Octavian's Legions, the Romans killed all of them. Absolutely all of them; terrified, they fled north, the few who survived. Nordic supremacy is a myth dude; the Legions Arminius killed were avenged, easily, ten times over. Rome thrived on warfare, much like the modern U.S., when Rome was at war, its economy thrived. True we are experiencing a recession now, but look at history, look at WWII; constant war, stimulates industry, and in many ways Rome was barely different. However if Rome still existed, believe me, this country would be no match for them; Roman military discipline was to say the least, inhuman.

5) The Roman military machine like I said, was formidable; it was more than capable of handling whatever raids came its way. In fact in Great Britain, the Romans had been fending off attacks from the Angles and the Saxons for centuries. Also, the reason King Arthur, the historical one, successfully prevented the true British people from extermination by the Saxons, and later the Angles, was because the historical King Arthur was indeed a "Knight," although, the Clive Owen movie is not accurate. The origins of European Knights, in fact lie in Rome, and even as the western empire was poised to decline, believe me, even the western Romans had Cataphracti just like the Byzantines did. Spread too thin, having shed too much blood, Rome was forced to create universally trained soldiers, hence the birth of the Cataphract, a soldier trained in archery, swordplay, phalanx formation, archery, and the ability to use the sword and spear, and be an archer, from horseback. In other words the historical King Arthur would have been an EXTREMELY versatile fighter. Let me reemphasize, one more time, nordic supremacy is a myth; a lot of the man power provided to the Romans to defend Britain, came from the native Celts. Celtic young men were inducted into the Roman army, where they would be trained, taught the methods of warfare and for centuries they successfully repelled Anglo and Saxon attacks. When Rome abandoned Britain, the forces defending the island were reduced by 50%. Half of the army defending Britain was Roman, the other half was native Celtic. By then, the Anglos and the Saxons had grown huge population wise, and constant, incesant war, not to mention squables between different Celtic chieftains had badly weakened the Celtic population. What the historical King Arthur did first, was unify the Celts, he engaged in a war of conquest, to become high King of Britain. Once that was over and done with, his next order of business was to deal with the Saxons. King Arthur successfully repelled the Saxons throughout his reign, until his death, sadly he left no heirs. An arrow must have been shot through his nards or something; moving on, the point I am trying to make is that the historical King Arthur, was outnumbered by the Saxons 10 to 1. He was able to hold them off, because he was using Roman military discipline and tactics, plus, King Arthur himself as well as his "knights of the round table" were all Cataphracts, every bit as formidable as the ones that defended Byzantium. The origin of the European Knight, is in fact, rooted in Rome, they were the ones who made that innovation. Later on other European peoples began adopting the idea of the Cataphract.

6) What cause the fall of Rome, was internal squabling, disunity, and corruption, the truth is, the Romans, like the Soviets, defeated themselves. Militarily, only China was a rival, and they were thousands of miles away. Economically, even in hard times, the Romans had a penchant for organization combined with flexibility that modern day mediterranean and latin American countries don't enjoy, said regions being the TRUE cultural inheritors of Rome. Culturally, the United States is nothing like Rome; this country is largely Teutonic, not mediterranean, in fact the whole of the history of the western world can be seen as a war of two cultures, the Germanic peoples to the north, the mediterranean peoples to the south. In ancient times, Rome was the super power, in modern times it is now the United States, a Teutonic country. Tragically, for Latin America, the Mediterranean, Italy, Spain, and to a certain extent France, part of the Roman cultural legacy, is political corruption. Latin America, Spain, Italy, and to a certain extent France, the cultural inheritors of Rome, are all corrupt. The Arab countries of the Levant, Greece, Turkey, all the lands once ruled by the Byzantine empire, an extension of Rome, they are all politically corrupt. Rome did not leave us, any of us born into that culture, a legacy of power, they left us a legacy of corruption, waste, and worst of all, humiliation and domination by barbarians. Stinkin' guidos.

Of what remains of the Roman cultural legacy, its not even a shadow. Only Spain, France and Italy, are economically prosperous, and in Italy even, that prosperity is seen only in the north of the country. On a positive note, although cruel, the ancient Romans were not nearly so racist as even modern day Teutonic peoples are. If they were, modern Italians would not be the mongrels of the mediterranean; Italians in reality have so much, from so many places in the meditarranean world, its easier for them, just to refer to themselves as "Italian." If people in Italy were concerned about what part they descended from, if you had Sardinians saying they were Greek, or Souther Italians (some) saying they were Arab, or some Romans saying they were Jewish, the confusion, would be unreal. Italy is a big enough of a mess politically as it is, the country REALLY DOES NOT need ethnic division, so they all simply call themselves "Italian." Also, although Spaniards formed the "upper class" in Latin America, Spain sent families to Mexico, Chile, Venezuela and Colombia, by the boat load. Both men and women, intermarried freely with the locals (native Americans). You had pure spanish girls marrying native American men, and native American women marrying spanish men. In the begining yes, there was sexual exploitation in favor of the Spaniards but in later years that changed. The main cause of the rebellion against Spain, is that Spaniards grew so arrogant, they began exploiting even their own people; pretty soon even pure blooded Spaniards were not good enough. If you were born in Latin America, you were "lower" than them. The combination of widespread resentment, in addition to those Latin American born Spaniards wanting power for themselves, led to rebellion. Outside the ruling classes though, in larger society, racism was largely nonexistent; Spanish fathers had no problems if their daughter married a native American man, or a mestizo man, and in modern times in Spain, there are many Spaniards, men and women, married to people from Latin America.

Part of the cultural legacy of Rome, is the philosophy that "if you're horny and need to marry, race should not be an issue........" See that way of thinking does not really exist in Germanic culture, it never has; everywhere the German peoples have gone, they have slaughtered everyone, and replaced the population. They did it to the Celts who used to inhabit what is now Germany, they did it to the Cymry in Britain, who are now called "The Welsh" and they did it to the North American native Americans. I have caused controversy on youtube, saying that the Teutonic peoples ought to be exterminated because, given their historical pattern of exterminating other peoples, if they themselves are not killed off, given enough time they will kill everyone else.

They have a history of murder; they have murdered before, they WILL murder again. Personally I loathe and despise Rome, Italy, and Italians, for not finishing the bastards off when they had the chance.

In the end though, its none of my concern, and besides further talk of such personal issues will get me reported. Know though, that there are many views out there, besides the traditional one, that do not blame attacks by Barbarians on the fall of Rome. Rome had long been a weakening and decaying empire, long before the Germans burned the actual city. Moreover, sooner or later the peoples of Latin America, Italy, France and Spain need to realize, they are in fact the same culture, and there would be much to be gained if they were a single political unit, what the British feared during the War of the Spanish succession.

You need to have a wider perspective on things; the history of the western world, has been Rome versus the Teutonic peoples, and that war, has not stopped, the truth is, it has not stopped, it is still ongoing, and it is a war, the Germanic peoples have been winning for the past 500 years. If you happen to be Italian American, then, shame on you! Your ancestors had the chance to finish off the Barbarians, but true to the "dumb guido" stereotype they didn't! You know there was a time in Italian history, when all men were like Rocky Marciano.

Like I said, shame on you.

User:67.148.120.72747