was the fall of the Roman Empire (in the classical incarnation) inevitable or could anything have saved it? What could have happened differently that would allow Rome to conquer the globe?
Is this possible or is it just history nerd fantasies?
Whoops, posted wrong map.
>>495695
The Roman Empire heavily relied on its (mostly germanic) auxiliaries and foederati mercenaries since their own "latin" military, the legion pretty much declined, however to these soldiers were paid with land and to able to pay your former soldiers you have to conquer foreign soil with the help of your auxiliaries and foederati which you in return have to pay as well.
The whole "payment with land" thing is pretty much a vicious circle and led to instability
When the Republic fell and the smallholding agricultural class was subsumed by the villa system, it became inevitable that it would be easier for Romans to become rich by seizing Rome than by seizing foreign lands.
>>495744
That actually started already with the Roman Republic during the Punic Wars, since the farmers were away fighting as soldiers their families couldn't support the farms and had to sell them to the richer aristocrats which caused a lot of poverty and after the failure of the gracchi reforms and their assassinations pretty much signify the start of Roman decay
>>495744
Say, for the sake of argument, the Romans gained the technology for steam engines, firearms and better medical knowledge. Would this be enough to conquer the globe? With this, conquering other lands would be easy enough to counter that problem, right?
>>495695
>>495695
>inevitable
Nothing is inevitable, but the system was rotten.
>no actual way of gaining legitimacy other than support from the army and being famous, gain power by paying dickloads of money to the army/waging frivolous wars (hi Britannia)
>murder old emperor, bribe Praetorian Guard, increase army's wages
>do this a hundred times in as many years
>currency gets completely debased
>shift from farmer-soldiers to the masses in Rome, power central to muh bread and circus
>instead of farmer-soldiers you now have massive latifundia staffed by slave labor
>Pliny once stated that 5 landowners owned practically the entire province of Africa
>have fewer and fewer auxiliaries protecting the border due to them becoming citizens b/c military service and therefore unable to perform as auxiliaries
>be eternally slow on updating military tactics
They could have tried not doing these things.
>>495764
>That actually started already with the Roman Republic during the Punic Wars, since the farmers were away fighting as soldiers their families couldn't support the farms
Hannibal sacking the shit out of the countryside didn't help either
>>495766
Although a more advanced military would have obviously saved the empire from the massive external threats (Huns, Celts, Germanics, Sassanids) but it wouldn't have saved them from their internal struggle, they would however been able to expand even further than the mediterranean.
But you would also have to take into consideration that such advance technology would have caused a variety of new problems, overpopulation due to lower death rates and a more steady and greater food supply for example.
>>495783
Certainly but sacking is only a temporal problem, losing your (and your entire future family's) independence to an aristocrat or being forced into poverty is much graver
make peace (and I mean actual lasting peace) with the sassanids so both sides could actually focus on their own internal problems and other borders
>>495812
get a load of this guy.
>>495838
Dumb frogposter, the wars with the Sassanids are the principle reason Byzantium lost so much territory to the caliphs.
>>495695
Empires fall. Nothing lasts forever.
all empires fall, that is one constant of history
>>495695
>Whoops, posted wrong map.
no you didn't
Northern Africa had traditionally been one of the most important provinces of the Roman Empire, it had a rich, urbanized population and supplied grain for the city of Rome, as well as Italy.
Additionally, the Vandal conquest of Sicily, Sardinia and Corsica had endangered mainland Italy, exposing it to frequent pirate raids and hampering trade in the Western Mediterranean. Procopius states that regular Vandal raids on Roman mainland had been one of the main reasons behind Emperor Leo's decision to launch the campaign against Gaiseric.
Thus, the Romans had planned an expedition against the Vandal Kingdom, aimed to restore the province for the Empire. Emperors Leo I in the East, and Anthemius in the West, joined their forces.
Several contemporary chronicles claim that huge resources have been assembled by Rome, Procopius for example, says Leo prepared 100,000 men for the campaign as well as thirteen hundred centenaria of gold to fund the war efforts. Other sources mention a huge fleet of ships, and the number accepted today is more than thousand vessels.
The war had been resolved in the decisive Battle of Cape Bon, near the coast of modern Tunis, where the Romans suffered a crushing defeat, with half of their fleet sunk. Basiliscus's own incompetence greatly contributed to the failure of the campaign, according to Procopius and his work 'History of the Wars'.
This failure further exhausted the Western Empire, contributing to its subsequent 'fall' to the Germanic invaders in 476.
I think Christianity is to blame for the fall of Rome.
Despite the meme, Christianity gave Romans the idea that the heaven on earth would come soon. Visigoths came in a moment were war was no more a valour, so it was easy to shake up their identity when they didn't know how much time it passed since the coming of the messiah
>>495695
>was the fall of the Roman Empire (in the classical incarnation) inevitable or could anything have saved it?
If avoiding the century of plague doesn't count, then simply just having 4-5 good emperors in a row instead of the 3rd century crisis.
>>495731
Nope.
Roman military was still strong and well organised except almost all the good troops stationed on the eastern border to protect against Persia. Even then the only huge military defeat Romans suffered during the fall was done to Eastern Roman Empire rather than western.
All around RE military was still something nobody could fuck and get away with. Even if they could win a battle, they would still lose the war since every single enemy they could face would have to go back to their fields on harvest while RE had professional military with enormously efficient supply system.
The problem lied in growing bureaucracy, plagues, cold war with Persia draining tons of money, fucked up agricultural structure ever since Punic wars etc. etc. etc. etc. rather than plain "huh military got weak".
>>496616
>huh military got weak
I didn''t say that, just this
>The Roman Empire heavily relied on its (mostly germanic) auxiliaries and foederati mercenaries
Also I assume the OP is talking about the Western Roman Empire rather than the East which after all fell a good thousand years later
>>496539
>Christianity was created around 30 AD
>West Rome fell in 476
>East Rome in 1453
Must have been Christianity's fault, I'm sure.
>>496901
It's even funnier when you know that the Germanic peoples were Christian too.
Belisarius is really one of history's greatest cucks
if the secret histories are to be believed
and i think they have some legitimacy desu
Remove the fucking Senate from the start
I think it was Majorian, a late emperor, when he was down to basically Italy and Istria, managed to conquer back most of Hispania and France, but the rich nobles and senate decided to kill him because they were scared about losing their land. Not once did they think that if they kill him some retarded cunt will take the throne, lose all our land through wars and leave us with nothing
would have Rome had a chance to return had Justinian made peace with the Ostrogoths?
>>496901
Christuanuty was declared religion of the empire in 380 A.D.
A century is enough to dismember west roman empire.
East empire was always christianity based and it was nothing related to the glory of the ancient Rome.
If you want to talk about Rome in its core, traditions, costumes and so on, the empire was no more directly after the division.
If you want to talk about Rome and its political empire than it is right, it survived for a long time thanks to Christianity.
Just it wasn't the true "Roman empire" with Roma caput mundi.
>>496539
>thinks anybody takes this shit seriously
Found the atheist/protestant
The Roman state apparatus was supported by constant expansion, tribute, and slave supply booms needed to keep both the landowning class and the army happy. They stopped being able to expand because their borders were the Sahara, Persia, and Germania. The Sahara is empty desert. Persia had proven itself ungovernable to Western powers. Germania was mostly forests and people spread out across its entire space in tiny settlements, a small population altogether, but one where the majority of men were capable of going to war and defending themselves from deep Roman incursion because war wasn't a restricted privilege like it was within the confines of civilization. Logistcally, Rome had great troubles projecting power deep into Germania because there were no great river systems between the Rhine and the Elbe.
Without being able to expand, the legions and their generals turned inward and looked to get a bigger slice of the pie they already had. The great latifundia, no longer profitable due to a lack of slaves or the tribute wealth needed to buy them from elsewhere in the world, became unworked. Large portions of rural land became depopulated. All the while, the German client tribes have grown stronger under the Roman shadow. They were invited to work the unworked land, hired as mercenaries. They kept their own laws. Rome basically let its western provinces evolve into the Germanic successor states, there was no "fall", or at least destructive events associated with this migration period are hard to distinguish from previous periods of civil disorder.
The Germanic warlords of this era viewed the Emperor in Constantinople as their legitimate suzerain, and to some degree this was actually the de facto state of things. But the combination of the brutality of the Gothic War, the Sasanian War, and the Justinian Plague combined to make their relationship over the West increasingly tenuous, and the Rashidun conquests finally put an end to it outside of the Church administration.
