Module: II: 5th Century Europe
Decay of Western Roman Empire-Barbarian Invasions-Visigoths-Ostrogoths-
Vandals-Huns-Rise of Christian Church.
Decay of Western Roman Empire
Causes for the decline of the Roman Empire
1. Roman Empire had the fate of all empires. In an empire, the government is
despotism where the common people are denied freedom. So the common men
were looking for an opportunity to overthrow despotism and so when barbarians
like Germanic tribes and Huns invaded Rome, most of the people welcomed
them.
2. In the later days of the Roman Empire, most of the emperors were inefficient and
pleasure- seeking monarchs who never cared for their subjects.
3. Another cause for the decline was the transformation happened in the
composition of the Roman army. At first the army was composed of patriotic
men who pursued agriculture and other peaceful jobs in times of peace and in
times of war, fought for their country. But later the army became professional
and the soldiers cared only for material benefits rather than protecting the
empire.
4. The empire was very vast and the rulers and administrators became unable to
manage it efficiently. This hastened the disintegration of the empire.
5. Degeneration happened in the lives of Romans was another reason for their
decline. Slave labour made the Romans idle and they became fond of luxurious
life. Rich became richer and the poor became poorer.
6. The terrible plague originated in Asia broke out in the Roman Empire in 166 AD
and 252 AD depopulated Italy.
7. Terrible decline in the population of Rome due to abortion, internal revolution,
war, and diseases like Malaria contributed to the decline of the Roman Empire.
So the empire had to depend on the barbarians to work in the farms and in the
army which resulted in the increase in their population.
8. Among the economic causes, dependence on provincial grains, deterioration of
transport and disorganization of trade, excessive imports over exports and the
consequent drain of precious metals from the empire, war between the rich and
the poor, huge expenditure on the expanding bureaucracy and debasement of
Roman currency etc were the major ones.
9. According to famous historian, Edward Gibbon (author of the book The Decline
and Fall of the Roman Empire (6 vols.), Christianity was the chief cause of
Rome’s fall. He says that, Christianity through its ideal of asceticism, payer and
the ethics of non-resistance and peace destructed the unity of the empire. But it
can be seen that the decay of Rome had already set in before the advent of
Christianity.
Fall of the Western Roman Empire
To many historians, the fall of the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century CE has
always been viewed as the end of the ancient world and the onset of the Middle Ages,
often improperly called the Dark Ages, despite Petrarch's assertion. Since much of the
west had already fallen by the middle of the 5th century CE, when a writer speaks of the
fall of the empire, he or she generally refers to the fall of the city of Rome. Although
historians generally agree on the year of the fall, 476 CE, and its consequences for
western civilization, they often disagree on its causes. English historian Edward Gibbon,
who wrote in the late 18th century CE, points to the rise of Christianity and its effect on
the Roman psyche while others believe the decline and fall were due, in part, to the influx
of 'barbarians' from the north and west.
Whatever the cause, whether it was religion, external attack, or the internal decay of the
city itself, the debate continues to the present day; however, one significant point must
be established before a discussion of the roots of the fall can continue: the decline and fall
were only in the west. The eastern half - that which would eventually be called
the Byzantine Empire - would continue for several centuries, and, in many ways, it
retained a unique Roman identity.
External Causes
One of the most widely accepted causes - the influx of a barbarian tribes - is discounted
by some who feel that mighty Rome, the eternal city, could not have so easily fallen victim
to a culture that possessed little or nothing in the way of a political, social or economic
foundation. They believe the fall of Rome simply came because the barbarians took
advantage of difficulties already existing in Rome - problems that included a decaying
city (both physically and morally), little to no tax revenue, overpopulation, poor
leadership, and, most importantly, inadequate defense. To some the fall was inevitable.
Unlike the fall of earlier empires such as the Assyrian and Persian, Rome did not succumb
to either war or revolution. On the last day of the empire, a barbarian member of the
Germanic tribe Siri and former commander in the Roman army entered the city
unopposed. The one-time military and financial power of the Mediterranean was unable
to resist. Odovacar easily dethroned the sixteen-year-old emperor Romulus Augustalus,
a person he viewed as posing no threat. With his entrance into the city, Odovacar became
the head of the only part that remained of the once great west: the peninsula of Italy. By
the time he entered the city, the Roman control of Britain, Spain, Gaul, and
North Africa had already been lost, in the latter three cases to the Goths and Vandals.
Odovacar immediately contacted the eastern emperor Zeno and informed him that he
would not accept that title of emperor. Zeno could do little but accept this decision. In
fact, to ensure there would be no confusion, Odovacar returned to Constantinople the
imperial vestments, diadem, and purple cloak of the emperor.
Internal Causes
There are some who believe, like Gibbon, that the fall was due to the fabric of the Roman
citizen. If one accepts the idea that the cause of the fall was due, in part, to the possible
moral decay of the city, its fall is reminiscent of the “decline” of the Republic centuries
earlier. Historian Polybius, a 2nd century BCE writer, pointed to a dying republic (years
before it actually fell) - a victim of its declining moral virtue and the rise of vice within.
Edward Gibbon reiterated this sentiment (he diminished the importance of the barbaric
threat) when he claimed the rise of Christianity as a factor in the “tale of woe” for the
empire. He held the religion sowed internal division and encouraged a “turn-the-other-
cheek mentality” which ultimately condemned the war machine, leaving it in the hands
of the invading barbarians. Those who discount Gibbon's claim point to the existence of
the same religious zealots in the east and the fact that many of the barbarians were
Christian themselves.
To Gibbon the Christian religion valued idle and unproductive people. Gibbon wrote in
his book The History of Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
A candid but rational inquiry into the progress and establishment of Christianity, may be
considered as a very essential part of the history of the Roman empire. While this great
body was invaded by open violence, or undermined by slow decay, a pure and humble
religion greatly insinuated itself into the minds of men, grew up in silence and obscurity,
derived new vigour from opposition, and finally erected the triumphant banner of the
cross on the ruins of the Capitol.”
He added that the Roman government appeared to be “odious and oppressive to its
subjects” and therefore no serious threat to the barbarians.
Gibbon, however, does not single out Christianity as the only culprit. It was only one in
a series that brought the empire to its knees. In the end, the fall was inevitable:
…the decline of Rome was the natural and inevitable effect of immoderate greatness.
Prosperity ripened the principle of decay; the causes of destruction multiplied with the
extent of conquest, and as soon as time or accident has removed artificial supports, the
stupendous fabric yielded to the pressure of its own weight.
A Divided Empire
Although Gibbon points to the rise of Christianity as a fundamental cause, the actual fall
or decline could be seen decades earlier. By the 3rd century CE, the city of Rome was no
longer the center of the empire - an empire that extended from the British Isles to the
Tigris and Euphrates Rivers and into Africa. This massive size presented a problem and
called for a quick solution, and it came with the reign of Emperor Diocletian. The empire
was divided into two with one capital remaining at Rome and another in the Eastern
Empire at Nicomedia; the eastern capital would later be moved to Constantinople,
old Byzantium, by Emperor Constantine. The Senate, long-serving in an advisory
capacity to the emperor, would be mostly ignored; instead, the power centered on a
strong military. Some emperors would never step foot in Rome. In time Constantinople,
Nova Roma or New Rome, would become the economic and cultural center that had once
been Rome.
Despite the renewed strength that the division provided (the empire would be divided
and united several times), the empire remained vulnerable to attack, especially on the
Danube-Rhine border to the north. The presence of barbarians along the northern border
of the empire was nothing new and had existed for years - the army had met with them
on and off since the time of Julius Caesar. Some emperors had tried to buy them off,
while others invited them to settle on Roman land and even join the army. However,
many of these new settlers never truly became Roman even after citizenship was granted,
retaining much of their old culture.
This vulnerability became more obvious as a significant number of Germanic tribes, the
Goths, gathered along the northern border. They did not want to invade; they wanted to
be part of the empire, not its conqueror. The empire's great wealth was a draw to this
diverse population. They sought a better life, and despite their numbers, they appeared
to be no immediate threat, at first. However, as Rome failed to act to their requests,
tensions grew. This anxiety on the part of the Goths was due to a new menace further to
the east, the Huns.
Barbarian Invasions
In the 300s CE, Rome faced serious internal problems and also struggled to control its
empire. Germanic tribes began rising up against Rome in the 200s, and threatened Rome
in the 300s. The “Germans” (Visigoths, Ostrogoths, Vandals, Lombards, Goths, Franks,
etc.) were farmers who had been incorporated into Rome’s empire since the late
Republic. In the 300s CE, Rome’s relationship with the Germanic tribes was
complex. Rome depended on the Germans to serve in its army and encouraged them to
settle and farm land on the empire's north-eastern borders. But the Germanic tribes
resented Roman rule and wanted rich Roman-controlled farming regions.
It was the Huns who precipitated the Great Migrations into the Western Roman Empire
in the form they took in the late fourth and fifth centuries. They were a confederation of
Central Asian tribes, who came to spread out across a large area of Eurasia. They
established control over a large area of Eastern Europe under Attila’s rule (434-453), they
never settled in large numbers within the Roman Empire itself: they preferred to raid it
and leave its government to others. Instead, they pushed first the Goths, and then other
Germanic peoples, to invade the Roman Empire to escape from them.
The Goth Invasion
Visigoths
During the reign of the 4th century eastern emperor Valens (364 -378 CE), the Thervingi
Goths had congregated along the Danube-Rhine border - again, not as a threat, but with
a desire only to receive permission to settle. This request was made in urgency, for the
“savage” Huns threatened their homeland. Emperor Valens panicked and delayed an
answer - a delay that brought increased concern among the Goths as winter was
approaching. In anger, the Goths crossed the river with or without permission, and when
a Roman commander planned an ambush, war soon followed. It was a war that would
last for five years.
Although the Goths were mostly Christian many who joined them were not. Their
presence had caused a substantial crisis for the emperor; he couldn't provide sufficient
food and housing. This impatience, combined with the corruption and extortion by
several Roman commanders, complicated matters. Valens prayed for help from the west.
Unfortunately, in battle, the Romans were completely outmatched and ill-prepared, and
the Battle of Adrianople proved this when two-thirds of the Roman army was killed.
This death toll included the emperor himself. It would take Emperor Theodosius to bring
peace.
Enmity of Alaric
The Goths remained on Roman land and would ally themselves with the Roman army.
Later, however, one man, a Goth and former Roman commander, rose up against Rome
- a man who would do what no other had done for eight centuries: sack Rome. His name
was Alaric, and while he was a Goth, he had also been trained in the Roman army. He
was intelligent, Christian, and very determined. He sought land in the Balkans for his
people, land that they had been promised. Later, as the western emperor delayed his
response, Alaric increased his demands, not only grain for his people but also recognition
as citizens of the empire; however, the emperor, Honorius, continually refused. With no
other course, Alaric gathered together an army of Goths, Huns and freed slaves and
crossed the Alps into Italy. His army was well-organized, not a mob. Honorius was
incompetent and completely out of touch, another in a long line of so-called “shadow
emperors” - emperors who ruled in the shadow of the military. Strangely enough, he
didn't even live in Rome but had a villa in nearby Ravenna.
Alaric sat outside the city, and over time, as the food and water in the city became
increasingly scarce, Rome began to weaken. The time was now. While he had never
wanted war but only land and recognition for his people Alaric, with the supposed help
of a Gothic slave who opened the gates from within, entered Rome in August of 410 CE.
He would stay for three days and completely sack the city; although he would leave
St. Paul and St Peters alone. Honorius remained totally blind to the seriousness of the
situation. While temporarily agreeing to Alaric's demands - something he never intended
to honor - 6,000 Roman soldiers were sent to defend the city, but they were quickly
defeated. Even though the city's coffers were nearly empty, the Senate finally
relinquished; Alaric left with, among other items, two tons of gold and thirteen tons
of silver.
Some people at the time viewed the sacking of the city as a sign from their pagan gods.
St. Augustine, who died in 430 CE, said in his City of God that the fall of Rome was not
a result of the people's abandonment of their pagan gods (gods they believed protected
the city) but as a reminder to the city's Christians why they needed to suffer. There was
good, for the world was created by good, but it was flawed by human sin; however, he
still believed the empire was a force for peace and unity. To St. Augustine there existed
two cities: one of this worlds and one of God.
Ostrogoths
The Ostrogoths were a second wave of Goths from the around the Crimean, who had
been a subject part of Attila's kingdom, but rebelled in the early 450s. They settled within
the Roman Empire and were sent by the Byzantine emperor Zeno to take back Italy from
Odoacer, who had deposed the last nominal Roman emperor of the West, Romulus
Augustulus, in 476. Theodoric, the great Ostrogothic general, did so, inviting Odoacer to
a formal meal in 493 and killing him at the table. Theodoric ruled from Ravenna, where
his mausoleum survives, together with several churches he had decorated with beautiful
mosaics.
The Huns
From Mongolia in the Far East, the Huns began encroaching on Europe sometime after
350 CE. Toughened by decades of crossing the Russian steppes on small ponies, these
raiding Asiatic nomads spread terror far and wide, developing a reputation for
insurmountable ferocity. That led easily to exaggerated reports of their speed and
numbers.
The Huns were marching through and enslaving Eastern Europe, inflicting their own
brand of terror on the barbarian tribes there. Oppressing peoples like the Ostrogoths,
these Mongol nomads, occupied for several decades. Empires like the Huns are run on
conquest and collecting tribute from terrified populaces. Fear, in fact, played a large part
in maintaining such people, so when the Huns' new, powerful, European-born
leader Attila learned that Christians in Rome had pronounced him, in traditional Old-
Testament fashion, "the Scourge of God"—meaning God's whip as a moralizing force to
impose better behavior—he was very pleased and added it to his litany of royal titles. No
doubt, the whip image appealed to him more than the moralizing part.
Sweeping west across the Rhine River into Gaul, Attila's forces met a Roman army
near Châlons (central Gaul) in 451 CE and the Huns were defeated. Infuriated and
apparently under-educated in military protocol, the Hunnic general took the loss as an
insult and a challenge and wheeled south heading for Italy. The Romans in panic fled at
his approach. Even the Emperor Valentinian III abandoned the capital—but the leader
of the Church, Pope Leo I, not only stood his ground but went to face down Attila in
person. In one of the most remarkable moments in history (452 CE), they actually did meet
and speak, but only in private. In the wake of their discussion, Attila wheeled about yet
again, this time leaving Italy never to return. Leo's words must have contained some
powerful magic.
Shortly thereafter, Attila died of uncertain causes. The Huns army contracted due to some
type of epidemic during their brief stay on the Italian peninsula and soon after their
departure they disappeared completely, from Europe and history.
The Vandals
Following their expulsion from Spain at the hands of the Visigoths and Romans, the
Vandals fled to the northwest corner of Africa (modern Morocco). Once there, their crafty
and double-dealing leader Gaiseric helped them expand their domain by uprooting
Roman control over the rich provinces of North Africa, but their devastation to Rome was
more than economic. Quite a few Christians living in this area were slain by the Vandals
who ironically belonged to the same faith but as Arian Christians were strongly opposed
to those who swore allegiance to the Pope.
Next, moving to sea, the Vandals took up piracy and severely disrupted trade in the
western Mediterranean. The devastating Vandalic Sack of Rome happened in 455 CE.
Unlike the Visigoths' earlier siege, the Vandals' attack involved prolonged, physical ruin,
a destruction so complete and indiscriminate, so symbolic of unjustifiable atrocity, that
these barbarians' very name made its way into common parlance, and ultimately English,
as a by-word for "the malicious destruction of property," vandalism.
Other barbarians also did not stop after the sack of the city. The old empire was ravaged,
among others, by Burgundians, Angles, Saxons, Lombards, and Magyars. By 475 CE
Spain, Britain, and parts of Gaul had been lost to various Germanic people and only Italy
remained as the “empire” in the west. The Roman army abandoned all hope of recovering
the area and moved out. The loss of Africa to the Vandals meant a loss of revenue, and
the loss of revenue meant there was less money to support an army to defend the city.
Despite these considerable losses, there was some success for the Romans. The threat
from Attila the Hun was finally stopped at the Battle of Chalons by Roman commander
Aelius who had created an army of Goths, Franks, Celts and Burgundians. Even Gibbon
recognized Attila as one “who urged the rapid downfall of the Roman empire.” While
Attila would recover and sack several Italian cities, he and the Hun threat ended with his
death due to a nosebleed on his wedding night. Thus, the invasions of non-Roman
outsiders had so badly disrupted the region.
Constantine and the Rise of Christianity
One of the many factors that contributed to the fall of the Roman Empire was the rise of
a new religion, Christianity. The Christian religion, which was monotheistic, ran counter
to the traditional Roman religion, which was polytheistic (many gods). At different times,
the Romans persecuted the Christians because of their beliefs, which were popular
among the poor.
In 313 C.E., Roman emperor Constantine the Great ended all persecution and declared
toleration for Christianity. Later that century, Christianity became the official state
religion of the Empire. This drastic change in policy spread this relatively new religion to
every corner of the Empire.
By approving Christianity, the Roman state directly undermined its religious traditions.
Finally, by this time, Romans considered their emperor a god. But the Christian belief in
one god — who was not the emperor — weakened the authority and credibility of the
emperor.
Constantine enacted another change that helped accelerate the fall of the Roman Empire.
In 330 C.E., he split the empire into two parts: the western half centered in Rome and the
eastern half centered in Constantinople, a city he named after himself.
In 324, Constantine's army defeated the forces of Licinius, the emperor of the east.
Constantine became emperor of the entire empire and founded a new capital city in the
eastern half at Byzantium. The city was his New Rome and was later named
Constantinople (the "city of Constantine").
Constantinople was advantageously situated for two reasons. First, it was on a peninsula
that could be fortified and defended easily. Further, because Constantinople was located
on the frontiers of the empire, imperial armies could respond more easily to external
attacks or threats.
Some scholars also believe that Constantine established a new city in order to provide a
place for the young religion of Christianity to grow in an environment purer than that of
corrupt Rome.
The western Empire spoke Latin and was Roman Catholic. The eastern Empire spoke
Greek and worshipped under the Eastern Orthodox branch of the Christian church. Over
time, the east thrived, while the west declined. In fact, after the western part of the Roman
Empire fell, the eastern half continued to exist as the Byzantine Empire for hundreds of
years. Therefore, the "fall of Rome" really refers only to the fall of the western half of the
Empire.
Conclusion: Multiple Factors
One could make a sound case for a multitude of reasons for the fall of Rome. However,
its fall was not due to one cause, although many search for one. Most of the causes,
initially, point to one place: the city of Rome itself. The loss of revenue for the western
half of the empire could not support an army - an army that was necessary for defending
the already vulnerable borders. Continual warfare meant trade was disrupted; invading
armies caused crops to be laid to waste, poor technology made for low food production,
the city was overcrowded, unemployment was high, and lastly, there were always the
epidemics. Added to these was an incompetent and untrustworthy government.
The presence of the barbarians in and around the empire added to a crisis not only
externally but internally. These factors helped bring an empire from “a state of health
into non-existence.” The Roman army lacked both proper training and equipment. The
government itself was unstable. Peter Heather in his The Fall of the Roman Empire states
that it “fell not because of its 'stupendous fabric' but because its German neighbors
responded to its power in ways that the Romans could not ever have foreseen… By virtue
of its unbounded aggression, Roman imperialism was responsible for its own
destruction.”
Rome's fall ended the ancient world and the Middle Ages were borne. These “Dark Ages”
brought the end to much that was Roman. The West fell into turmoil. However, while
much was lost, western civilization still owes a debt to the Romans. Although only a few
today can speak Latin, it is part of our language and the foundation of the Romance
languages of French, Italian, and Spanish. Our legal system is based on Roman law.
Many present day European cities were founded by Rome. Our knowledge
of Greece comes though Rome and many other lasting effects besides. Rome had fallen
but it had been for so long one of the history's truly world cities.