Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Introduction
Roman Empire was one of the largest geopolitical entities of its time. The reasons for its collapse are numerous, with various sources and parties throughout history citing one or several as the predominant reason for its collapse. Christian sources, such as the edicts and memoirs of Pope Gregory I, Pope Innocent III, St. Augustine and the like, claim that the collapse was perpetrated by the lack of divine favor and that the empire was built on sin, thus destined to collapse into it. Others, like Niccolo Machiavelli, Gibbon, and others, have claimed that it was Christianity and the fall of imperious morality that brought about its collapse. This paper will evaluate the continuities and discontinuities between the shards of the empire (Ostrogothic, Visigothic, Frankish kingdoms, as well as the Byzantine Empire) and consider the value of classical authors and their recollections of the collapse.
The Collapse of the Empire and How Its Pieces Drifted Apart
The official date of the collapse of the Roman Empire is on 4th of September, 476, when its capital was stormed and taken by the barbarians led by Odoacer, who deposed the last emperor, Romulus Augustus. However, this event has been the final nail in the coffin, only highlighting what has been truthful for many years before that. The Roman apparatus of managing such large territory has proven to be ineffective over the years due to a lack of effective communication between the various areas of the empire, they largely had a form of autonomy over regional matters. These areas have benefitted from the civilization Romans have brought upon the lands in the form of education, infrastructure, construction, law, and other means. However, it also exerted a hefty tithe from the territories outside of Rome in order to enrich the metropolis. Thus, the seeds of dissent were already built into the fabric of the empire itself it made the subjects of its rule prosper from the Roman peace it had brought upon the lands, making them stronger and more apt for unified governance, while at the same time giving them ample cause to break away.
Classic Sources, Emphasis on Morals and Religion, and Ignorance of the Materialistic
One of the main causes cited by many classic sources is that, for one reason or another, the people of the Roman Empire simply refused to stand and fight for their Empire as they did before, during the Punic wars against Carthage. Thinkers like St. Augustine saw the tragedy of the Fall of Rome as something of a divine retribution against the Christians of the past and all the nations forced together by the yoke of Rome. Niccolo Machiavelli, a more realistic thinker, saw that the fall happened due to the widespread Christian values, which made men much more likely to tolerate evil, seeking to emulate Christ in suffering.
A materialistic view of the matter offers yet another facet to the tragedy by the time of its collapse, the Roman Empire had a large and dispossessed class of slaves and poor hired labor, which consisted of the majority of the Empires civilian population. Unlike the Roman Republic, these people did not own much that was worthy of protecting and dying for. The land close to Rome has also been long since privatized. Barbarians made up a good portion if not the majority of legionnaires. None of these matters had anything to do with religion and morality but were, rather, the result of the dominant economic system in Rome, which was built on slavery and exploiting colonies.
Conclusion
Classic sources usually focus on the spiritual aspect of the fall of the Roman Empire. The fact that the Ostrogothic, Visigothic, and Frankish kingdoms, as well as the Byzantine Empire, continued to exist even after its fall, shows that the calamity had been complete in practice long before the 4th of September, 476. These sources remain important, however, as they demonstrate the feelings and thoughts of people at the time.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.