The Rise and Fall of Rome
The Roman Empire remains one of the key historical figures that existed years ago, its civilisation is considered as one of the greatest and so are its rulers who until today are still referred to in numerous occasions. Although the Roman Empire does not exist today, traces of the empire still remain in different areas. The rise and fall of the Roman Empire revolves around a strong army, civilisation and its huge populace.
The rise of the Roman Empire remains one of the most debated issues in history. Most scholars argue that the empire rose slowly from the Roman Republic, which over the years was growing weak. Rome had a constitution that guided most of the people, and once it had suitable rulers, there was no power stopping its rise. The empire rose as a result of due to the good political structure that was already in place. Unlike other regions of the world, Rome remained one of the empires that had a structured political system comprising of the Senate and an emperor who led them in many war[1]. The Senate was mandated in running the daily activities of Rome while the empire took the soldiers to war expanding its territories. Since most of its neighbors were weak, Rome conquered the majority of them and expanded its territory to nearly the whole of Europe and some parts of Africa such as Egypt [2].
The Roman army remains a significant force in the building of the empire. It defeated the likes of Samnites, Greeks, Gauls and even the Carthaginians as well as Macedon and Syrians [3]. By defeating nearly all the powers surrounding them, the empire remained the only force in the region[4]. The country had enough food supplies to feed its people and within its structures was a peaceful realm that housed millions of people. Also, Rome was the earliest cities of civilization n the whole world meaning the rate of development of their empire was faster as compared to the others.
The destruction of Rome started when mass movements of people outside the fortified city started occurring. Movement of millions of people meant that the support enjoyed by the rulers was decreasing over time and since the development of Rome mostly depended on the taxes being paid by individuals it was an indicator that everything was not running according to plan [5]. The major reasons as to why people moved out of the city was due to poor leadership by their emperors. The most commonly used examples of such empires included Commodus Aurelius, Caligula, and Nero though there were also some good emperors that ensured that everything went according to plan[6].
Some of the best generals in the Roman Empire were assassinated at the command of the empires who feared that they might one day take away their position. Civilization also had a negative effect on Rome. As more people became civilized, there was less interest among the people in going to wars. This made the country vulnerable to numerous attacks from other areas across the world. Previously more societies were defined by how strong they were. Rome had stood in the past years as one of the most powerful united countries with one empire being in charge of the whole state.[7] Nonetheless, when crack began to appear, divisions resulted in more than one empire. Historically, Rome and Constantinople were ruled with one empire, but after the divisions, two empires lay claim to the different states further weakening Rome. This was an indicator that it was only a matter of time before everything came crumbling down on one of the earliest civilization of man. The final blow was a disease outbreak that wiped out most of its citizens in the process killing more than half of the populace that was heavily relied on for taxes and in running affairs of the empire. All in all, a decline in the same factors that seem to have built a strong Rome, were largely affected by divisions around the top leadership positions and the emergence of strong kingdoms.
References
Crossley, Pamela Kyle. “The Imaginal Bond of “Empire” and “Civilization” in Euras History.” Verge: Studies in Global Asias 2, no. 2 (2016): 84-114.
Halsall, Guy. “Two Worlds Become One: A ‘Counter-Intuitive’ View of the Roman Empire and ‘Germanic’ Migration.” German History, 2014. doi:10.1093/gerhis/ghu107.
Medushevsky, A. “Empire: The Russian Empire and Its Rivals.” Social Sciences, 2008. doi:10.1086/377798.
[1] Guy Halsall, “Two Worlds Become One: A ‘Counter-Intuitive’ View of the Roman Empire and ‘Germanic’ Migration,” German History, 2014, doi:10.1093/gerhis/ghu107.
[2] Crossley, Pamela Kyle. “The Imaginal Bond of “Empire” and “Civilization” in Eurasian History.” Verge: Studies in Global Asias 2, no. 2 (2016): 84-114.
[3] Crossley, Pamela Kyle. “The Imaginal Bond of “Empire” and “Civilization” in Eurasian History.” Verge: Studies in Global Asias 2, no. 2 (2016): 84-114.
[4] Guy Halsall, “Two Worlds Become One: A ‘Counter-Intuitive’ View of the Roman Empire and ‘Germanic’ Migration,” German History, 2014, doi:10.1093/gerhis/ghu107.
[5] Guy Halsall, “Two Worlds Become One: A ‘Counter-Intuitive’ View of the Roman Empire and ‘Germanic’ Migration,” German History, 2014, doi:10.1093/gerhis/ghu107.
[6] A. Medushevsky, “Empire: The Russian Empire and Its Rivals,” Social Sciences, 2008, doi:10.1086/377798.
[7] A. Medushevsky, “Empire: The Russian Empire and Its Rivals,” Social Sciences, 2008, doi:10.1086/377798.