rome - Dear Dr. Marylou Ruud, I am very excited to hear...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Dear Dr. Marylou Ruud, I am very excited to hear about your brilliant idea for a television series on the fall of the great empire of Rome. I must disagree on that Edward Gibbons theory as the most solid answer. Throughout history there have been many different ideas of how Rome fell or if Rome ever fell at all. For the purposes of your television series I would be more than happy to assist you in finding which one of these options is the most practical. Three historians that have formed the major ideas of the fall of Rome are Edward Gibbon, Peter Brown, and Henri Pirenne. All of these men have very different ideas of how Rome fell and the idea that I will be suggesting to you will include ideas from all three of these historians. I'd like to suggest that the “fall” of Rome was a very gradual decline rather than a tragic fall. It did not happen in a specific year or with a specific war. It was a gradual change in the citizens of the empire and a change in their leaders. The major events that I will be addressing that I think led to the fall of Rome are the growth of Christianity, the invasion of the Germanic tribes, and then I will briefly discuss what I see as the final straw for the Roman empire, the invasion of Islam. These events impacted the people, the leadership, and how they acted or reacted to other events in their lives. The main theme that can be seen as the fall to what is known to the world as the Great Roman Empire, was the acceptance and integration of people and traditions that were not their own. Edward Gibbon only analyzed texts. A great downfall of Rome that he failed to mention, was the economy. Gibbon called the 2 nd century the happiest of years. Rome was very prosperous in the 2 nd century. There were many building projects going on, roads were being built, and everything seemed peaceful and very civilized. It was during this century though that the empire stopped expanding. 1 Rome's expansion was what was bringing in all the money. The empire never really produced anything. Due to some bad decisions made by what Gibbon refers to as the “five great emperors”, the economy went down the drain. None of these emperors had sons to succeed them and soon the military took over the task of choosing the emperor. A flaw in Roman law was that there was no way to get rid of an emperor if he was doing an unsatisfactory job. This led to the Roman military losing loyalty to the emperor and killing him off when they weren't pleased. Late in the 2 nd century and all throughout the 3 rd century Rome was divided between wars. This greatly weakened the Roman army. They were attempting to fight off the Germans and Persians simultaneously. The great Roman military was spread too thin and started losing battles. They managed to keep the Persians out but the 1 Marylou Ruud, "Edward Gibbon-Decline and Fall of Rome" (University of West Florida: HIS 3121, Fall of Rome, Birth of Europe) January 9, 2007.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Germanic tribes continued to filter into the empire with little effort. The invasion of Germanic tribes actually started early in the common era. This invasion should
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/07/2008 for the course HIST EUH3121 taught by Professor Ruud during the Spring '07 term at W. Florida.

Page1 / 4

rome - Dear Dr. Marylou Ruud, I am very excited to hear...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online