The Fall Of The Roman Empire Analysis

Rome was not built in a day is a common phrase coined to convey feelings of patience. Although it is just a saying it is interesting to see what is not emphasized; how long the fall of Rome took. It takes a much longer time to found and establish an empire as opposed to destroying one. However while Rome wasn’t built in a day it wasn’t destroyed in a day either. Empires and kingdoms rise and fall, an important aspect of examining empires is distinguishing when one has fallen and when one has risen. Usually a significant and distinguishing factor of an empire is the ruler. However, while emperors heavily impact the distinction between different empires, it is possible for a ruler to be tied to two empires simultaneously. Especially when one …show more content…
While both of these are evidenced heavily, there is a slight tendency to call him the first Emperor of Byzantine but if analyzed through a different perspective and by taking certain factors into account it is possible to see how he was indeed both.
Polybius once said referencing the fall of the Roman Empire “And it is all too evident that ruin and change are hanging over everything.” Many historians attribute the fall of The Roman Empire to Barbarians and religious qualms. “The Roman Empire in its final phase was most profoundly affected, on the one hand by the Christian religion and on the other, by those foreign tribes generally called “barbarians.” There is hardly an argument against the declination and fall of Rome being attributed by these problems. The Early Roman Empire was in a constant state of conquest and assimilating foreigners into the culture under the strict watch and rule of emperors such as “Trajan or the Illryians of the late 200s.” The Early Roman Empire had a strong culture of power and expansion that was seen throughout the early Roman which in return heavily influenced the mentality and