Prove me otherwise. Pro tip: you can't.
You are right, but Christianity was only one of the many reasons for the fall of Rome as you can see in that list.
>>1311284
Romans liked getting fvcked apparently.
>>1311284
The Julian Calendar fucked up the Roman Empire.
Prove me otherwise. Pro tip: you can't.
>>1311294
explain
>>1311297
you first.
>ITT: Just another day on /his/.
If Christianity really was the cause, then the Empire in Constantinople would have been proper fucked instead of surviving another 1100 years.
What did lead to the fall of the Western Empire are as follows:
>the division of east and west.
The East Empire took with it the most economically lucrative provinces in the empire, being Greece, Anatolia, the Levant, and Egypt, leaving the Western Empire with Italy and North Africa, and the comparatively rural Gaul, Iberia, and Britannia. The Western Empire became absolutely desperate for cash because of losing the money the East brought in.
>PAYING GERMAN MERCENARIES
This was the big one, and directly related to the cash problem. West Rome could no longer afford to train fully experienced legions so they had to subcontract the army to mercenaries who were loyal to money, rather than Rome or the Idea of Rome. So when the gold stopped flowing to the mercenary army, the army turned against them very quickly.
>the Huns and the Great Migration
German peoples fled in bulk into roman territory seeking safety from Attila the Huns' rampage across Central Europe, which was the direct cause for the Barbarian Invasions that West Rome could not keep under control in the slightest.
Some German tribes actively worked with the Romans though, with the Goths fighting alongside Rome to defeat the Huns at Chalons.
with the German tribes realizing just how powerless the Roman Legions were and with no gold going to them, they decided to just take the gold by sacking cities, unstable government leads to a full collapse and there you have it, no more Western Rome.
>>1311306
gotta love summer
>morons in this board ACTUALLY believe medieval propaganda about Roman "orgies" and "debauchery"
Open a book Christcucks
The Romans thought YOU guys were the ones doing weird sexual shit, same accusations
>>1311346
This is a Christian mosaic depicting the idealized man.
>>1311346
This is a pagan mosaic depicting the idealized man.
>>1311346
That wasn't Christian propaganda. It was conservative and senatorial propaganda
>>1311354
Can you find me one lewd Christian mosaic? I can find you plenty of pagan ones. . .
>>1311284
Why did the Byzantine empire last that much longer then? Superior orthodox?
>>1311351
Yeah Christian art was certainly a devolution wasn't it?
>>1311418
Not in the slightest.
>>1311370
You are not familiar wih the erotic despiction in Romanic art, arent you?
>>1311315
I would argue that Christianity fucked over the Byzantines hard.
Consider the following: the Orthodox establishment based on Constantinople was so heavy in its persecution of "heretics" that during the Muslim invasions, many of those Christians in the Levant and Egypt actually welcomed the Muslim invaders and collaborated. One famous example is that of the Greek Paulicians, who joined forces with the Muslims in Asia Minor to drive out the Byzantines, whom they saw as oppressors despite being Christian and of the same culture.
Consider also the two major Iconoclast controversies that caused the Empire to experience significant interior turmoil that cost it its ability to more aggressively counteract Muslim incursions in a time when it was still able to do so.
Also, Christianity very much led to a devolution in terms of art and sciences, due to Christians repudiating anything that they associated with 'paganism'. Hence, why art went from the naturalized ideal of the Romans to the childish and stylized shit from the Middle Ages; why the art of making concrete was also lost.
>>1311436
Do you mean Romanesque art? The style that was developed almost seven centuries after Rome fell? That is your evidence to show that Roman Christians were actually the ones participating in orgies?
>>1311426
There's no denying the decline of artistic skills after the death of hellenism. It would take Europe nearly 1000 years to catch back up.
>>1311453
>1453
lolz
>>1311458
In your opinion.
>>1311470
In the opinion of most art historians. Maybe you have a preference for this style of art, but it certainly doesn't display the same level of mastery.
>>1311474
Art historians are entitled to their opinions but how does one measure "mastery" I wonder. . .
>>1311457
No, thats my evidence to show you how much I care about your feelings.
>>1311503
My feelings are irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
>>1311487
Level of ability?
For example the early Christian and medieval artists would not be able to reproduce even the very common portraits of their predecessors. I don't think Christianity is solely at fault (although the general dislike for "worldliness" and disdain for anything reminiscent of paganism probably didn't help), but classical training was lost during the tumultous collapse of the western empire and had to be reconstructed over hundreds of years.
Other way around OP
>>1311474
No I'm pretty sure most art historians fall into the "naturalism isn't inherently better" camp.
>>1311517
Your argument rests on the assumption that classical training is superior so would you please prove this to be so?
>>1311517
Forgot pic.
I'm not making a judgement on what is good art. Just that skills deteriorated.
>>1311532
Using the word "deteriorated" is a value judgment.
>>1311530
Nigga...
>>1311530
Frankly, Classical training has less to do with aesthetics and more with technical ability.
Christian and Medieval artists did not have the technical knowledge of how to work stone so as to make it resemble the Classical style, hence why sculpture generally died off in Medieval Europe, and what few examples there were were quite crude in comparison.
Not about aesthetics, it's all about workmanship and technical knowledge.
>>1311541
Don't be pedantic. Their skills had decreased. That doesn't mean their art was inferior.
>>1311554
This makes sense.
>>1311453
>Christianity very much led to a devolution in terms of art and sciences
I always hear this but then there is not one spec of evidence for it.
Of course they disregard that the Church developed science, scholasticism, rediscovered the classics, integrated Greek Rationalism into Christian thought.
They also disregard that throughout history christian thought has always been the most intelligent thought.
Find me an intellectual culture as strong as the one in and left behind by Christendom.
>>1311544
source?
>>1311453
This
>>1311543
>>1311570
>Of course they disregard that the Church developed science, scholasticism, rediscovered the classics, integrated Greek Rationalism into Christian thought.
Mostly a myth. Christians destroyed whatever could not be construed in a Christian light. Aristotle and Plato were only preserved because the Church thought their philosophy had somehow "predicted' the coming of Jesus. Other philosophers' works that could not be construed in such a manner were either outright destroyed or left to rot without being transcribed.
>>1311603
>de bagans had alweady disgovad galgulus but de ebil gwistian monks let it rot dats why we din kno bout it till de enwightenment
>>1311593
I love this.
>>1311290
where does this pict come from ?
>>1311603
>Aristotle and Plato were only preserved because the Church thought their philosophy had somehow "predicted' the coming of Jesus
I'm sure you have the evidence to prove this?
Disregarding Sophists and most not all, but most pre-Socratics is not a mark against the Church.
Does the library of congress have Kenyan tribal roster?
No, does this mean that it despises knowledge?
no.
>>1311292
Lol did Juvenal really advocate the abortion of mulatto babies?
>>1311667
>pict
>>1311351
>>1311353
>first pic
>"This is a Christian mosaic depicting the idealized man."
>A lonely guy ready to whiteknight for his religion
>second pic
>"This is a pagan mosaic depicting the idealized man."
>A man being successful at socializing, interacting and (by implication) having sex with women aka being successful at contributing to the gene pool
Look mate, in all honestly those two pics could be reinterpreted in several other ways by someone trying his hardest to advocate for his own point of view. It's easy to spout nonsense and make it sound like a legit argument (to some at least) when talking about something so relative like the "idealized man in the christian and the roman worlds". I did just that right now, I pulled stuff from my ass just like you did!
All things considered, there are merits and faults in both the man who fights for his faith and the man who actively provides children to his country for the next generation. I highly doubt a change in religion could be THE ONLY reason behind the fall of the western half of the empire. As other anons said, there were economic instabilities (low tax output and trade from the western provinces), public disorders (the slow convertion of the population and the potential violent clashes between pagans and christians, not to mention the tensions between roman citizens and germanic immigrated refugees), the mass germanic migrations/invasions themselves and the poor administration of a weakened empire done by an elite who still held the by-then outdated idea that Rome was still a strong empire who could hold all invasions at bay. Don't nitpick, I'm sure you're better than that.
>>1311453
>post talking about the fall of the ERE ends with 1453
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_JVaMuZZBQ
>>1311453
>fall of ERE
>post ends with 1453
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
>>1313027
kek
>>1311284
go back to your crypt Gibbon. Christianity was a symptom of the decline of the Empire.
