The fall of the seemingly all-powerful Roman Empire has been blamed on a tremendously long list of mistakes and events that are still heavily debated in today’s society; some examples of the these events include the invasions of various barbaric tribes into Rome, the economic decline and overspending of Roman society, the splitting of the empire into the East and the West, and even the rise of Christianity. While all of these causes likely contributed to the overall downfall of Rome, one in particular stands out—the copious invasions of growing barbarian tribes into Roman territory. The Visigoths, Vandals, and Huns are only a few examples of the plentiful number of barbaric factions that had a hand in Rome’s devastating collapse (Andrews).
…show more content…
Others claim that the splitting of the Roman Empire into the western and eastern halves by Diocletian had the biggest impact on the downfall of Rome due to the growing weakness of the West and the resolute power of the East (Andrews). Many theories abound as to which factor posed the ultimate threat to the health of Roman society. It seems, however, that historians and researchers persistently return to blaming the collapse on the barbarian invasions of the diverse groups listed above into the western sector of Rome’s abundant region (Johnstone).
In the 300s AD, barbaric tribes began to move beyond Rome’s borders and into the kingdom that would soon fall. The tribe posing the loftiest threat to Roman society at this point in time seems to have been the Goths. The Goths were so intent on disabling Rome that by 410 AD, they had invaded the city of Rome and debilitated it to the point of utter defenselessness; the ruler of the Visigoths, Alaric, is solely responsible for leading this ransacking mission through the western Roman capital (Andrews). The western component of the …show more content…
Once Constantine put a resounding halt to the persecution of those who practiced this new religion, it is believed that the credibility and confidence stocked in Roman emperors began to dissolve. The society had once viewed the emperor as the highest authority, and in a sense he was godlike. However, once the people placed their hope in a monotheistic faith such as Christianity, they no longer held the same view of the emperor. This alteration of viewpoint weakened not only society but also the emperor who perhaps began to place less emphasis on his unwavering ability to lead his people (The Fall of the Roman Empire). Though these arguments are quite convincing it is well known that the eastern component of Rome, which is believed to have been more focused on Christianity than the West during this time period, survived significantly longer than the western component could possibly have hoped to stand. So, even though the East was more immersed in the emergence of Christianity, it managed to remain sturdier than the West. Therefore, it seems liable that Christianity was not a major factor in the West’s or the East’s downfall, but the largest contribution came from the insistent raids of the barbarians. Indeed, the West’s population was less abundant and less publically focused on religious
Others claim that the splitting of the Roman Empire into the western and eastern halves by Diocletian had the biggest impact on the downfall of Rome due to the growing weakness of the West and the resolute power of the East (Andrews). Many theories abound as to which factor posed the ultimate threat to the health of Roman society. It seems, however, that historians and researchers persistently return to blaming the collapse on the barbarian invasions of the diverse groups listed above into the western sector of Rome’s abundant region (Johnstone).
In the 300s AD, barbaric tribes began to move beyond Rome’s borders and into the kingdom that would soon fall. The tribe posing the loftiest threat to Roman society at this point in time seems to have been the Goths. The Goths were so intent on disabling Rome that by 410 AD, they had invaded the city of Rome and debilitated it to the point of utter defenselessness; the ruler of the Visigoths, Alaric, is solely responsible for leading this ransacking mission through the western Roman capital (Andrews). The western component of the …show more content…
Once Constantine put a resounding halt to the persecution of those who practiced this new religion, it is believed that the credibility and confidence stocked in Roman emperors began to dissolve. The society had once viewed the emperor as the highest authority, and in a sense he was godlike. However, once the people placed their hope in a monotheistic faith such as Christianity, they no longer held the same view of the emperor. This alteration of viewpoint weakened not only society but also the emperor who perhaps began to place less emphasis on his unwavering ability to lead his people (The Fall of the Roman Empire). Though these arguments are quite convincing it is well known that the eastern component of Rome, which is believed to have been more focused on Christianity than the West during this time period, survived significantly longer than the western component could possibly have hoped to stand. So, even though the East was more immersed in the emergence of Christianity, it managed to remain sturdier than the West. Therefore, it seems liable that Christianity was not a major factor in the West’s or the East’s downfall, but the largest contribution came from the insistent raids of the barbarians. Indeed, the West’s population was less abundant and less publically focused on religious