15
Decline of the Roman Empire 1 Decline of the Roman Empire The decline of the Roman Empire refers to the societal collapse encompassing both the gradual disintegration of the political, economic, military, and other social institutions of Rome and the barbarian invasions that were its final doom in Western Europe. The English historian Edward Gibbon, author of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (1776) made this concept part of the framework of the English language, but he was not the first to speculate on why and when the Empire collapsed. "From the eighteenth century onward," Glen W. Bowersock has remarked, [1] "we have been obsessed with the fall: it has been valued as an archetype for every perceived decline, and, hence, as a symbol for our own fears." It remains one of the greatest historical questions, and has a tradition rich in scholarly interest. In 1984, German professor Alexander Demandt published a collection of 210 theories on why Rome fell, and new theories have emerged since then. [2] [3] This slow decline occurred over a period of roughly 320 years, culminating on September 4, 476, when Romulus Augustus, the last Emperor of the Western Roman Empire, was deposed by Odoacer, a Germanic chieftain. Some modern historians question the significance of this date, [4] and not simply because Julius Nepos, the legitimate emperor recognized by the East Roman Empire, continued to live in Salona, Dalmatia, until he was assassinated in 480. More importantly, the Ostrogoths who succeeded considered themselves upholders of the direct line of Roman traditions. And as Gibbon observed, the Eastern Roman Empire was going from strength to strength and continued until the Fall of Constantinople on May 29, 1453. Some other notable dates are the Battle of Adrianople in 378; the death of Theodosius I in 395, the last time the Roman Empire was politically unified; the crossing of the Rhine in 406 by Germanic tribes after the withdrawal of Roman troops in order to defend Italy against Alaric I (such invasions had occurred many times previously, but this time it was successful); the death of Stilicho in 408, followed by the disintegration of the western army; the sack of Rome in 410, the first time in almost 800 years that the city of Rome would fall to a foreign enemy; the death of Justinian I, the last Roman Emperor who tried to reconquer the West, in 565; and the coming of Islam after 632. Many scholars maintain that rather than a "fall", the changes can more accurately be described as a complex transformation. [5] Over time many theories have been proposed on why the Empire fell, or whether indeed it fell at all. Overview

Decline of the Roman Empire

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Decline of the Roman Empire

Decline of the Roman Empire 1

Decline of the Roman EmpireThe decline of the Roman Empire refers to the societal collapse encompassing both the gradual disintegration ofthe political, economic, military, and other social institutions of Rome and the barbarian invasions that were its finaldoom in Western Europe. The English historian Edward Gibbon, author of The Decline and Fall of the RomanEmpire (1776) made this concept part of the framework of the English language, but he was not the first to speculateon why and when the Empire collapsed. "From the eighteenth century onward," Glen W. Bowersock hasremarked,[1] "we have been obsessed with the fall: it has been valued as an archetype for every perceived decline,and, hence, as a symbol for our own fears." It remains one of the greatest historical questions, and has a tradition richin scholarly interest. In 1984, German professor Alexander Demandt published a collection of 210 theories on whyRome fell, and new theories have emerged since then.[2] [3]

This slow decline occurred over a period of roughly 320 years, culminating on September 4, 476, when RomulusAugustus, the last Emperor of the Western Roman Empire, was deposed by Odoacer, a Germanic chieftain. Somemodern historians question the significance of this date,[4] and not simply because Julius Nepos, the legitimateemperor recognized by the East Roman Empire, continued to live in Salona, Dalmatia, until he was assassinated in480. More importantly, the Ostrogoths who succeeded considered themselves upholders of the direct line of Romantraditions. And as Gibbon observed, the Eastern Roman Empire was going from strength to strength and continueduntil the Fall of Constantinople on May 29, 1453.Some other notable dates are the Battle of Adrianople in 378; the death of Theodosius I in 395, the last time theRoman Empire was politically unified; the crossing of the Rhine in 406 by Germanic tribes after the withdrawal ofRoman troops in order to defend Italy against Alaric I (such invasions had occurred many times previously, but thistime it was successful); the death of Stilicho in 408, followed by the disintegration of the western army; the sack ofRome in 410, the first time in almost 800 years that the city of Rome would fall to a foreign enemy; the death ofJustinian I, the last Roman Emperor who tried to reconquer the West, in 565; and the coming of Islam after 632.Many scholars maintain that rather than a "fall", the changes can more accurately be described as a complextransformation.[5] Over time many theories have been proposed on why the Empire fell, or whether indeed it fell atall.

Overview

Page 2: Decline of the Roman Empire

Decline of the Roman Empire 2

Romulus Augustus was deposed as Western RomanEmperor in 476 while still young. However, Julius

Nepos continued to claim the title of Western Emperorafter his deposition.

The decline of the Roman Empire is one of the eventstraditionally marking the end of Classical Antiquity and thebeginning of the European Middle Ages. Throughout the fifthcentury, the Empire's territories in western Europe andnorthwestern Africa, including Italy, fell to various invading orindigenous peoples in what is sometimes called the Migrationperiod. Although the eastern half still survived with bordersessentially intact for several centuries (until the Arab expansion),the Empire as a whole had initiated major cultural and politicaltransformations since the Crisis of the Third Century, with theshift towards a more openly autocratic and ritualized form ofgovernment, the adoption of Christianity as the state religion, anda general rejection of the traditions and values of ClassicalAntiquity. While traditional historiography emphasized thisbreak with Antiquity by using the term "Byzantine Empire"instead of Roman Empire, recent schools of history offer a morenuanced view, seeing mostly continuity rather than a sharp break.The Empire of Late Antiquity already looked very different from classical Rome.

The Roman Empire emerged from the Roman Republic when Julius Caesar and Augustus Caesar transformed itfrom a republic into a monarchy. Rome reached its zenith in the second century, then fortunes slowly declined (withmany revivals and restorations along the way). The reasons for the decline of the Empire are still debated today, andlikely multiple. Historians infer that the population appears to have diminished in many provinces—especiallywestern Europe—from the diminishing size of fortifications built to protect the cities from barbarian incursions fromthe 3rd century on. Because these fortifications were restricted to the center of the city only, some have suggestedthat parts of the periphery were no longer inhabited.

By the late third century, the city of Rome no longer served as an effective capital for the Emperor and various citieswere used as new administrative capitals. Successive emperors, starting with Constantine, privileged the eastern cityof Byzantium, which he had entirely rebuilt after a siege. Later renamed Constantinople, and protected by formidablewalls in the late fourth and early fifth centuries, it was to become the largest and most powerful city of ChristianEurope in the Early Middle Ages. Since the Crisis of the Third Century, the Empire was intermittently ruled by morethan one emperor at once (usually two), presiding over different regions. At first a haphazard form of power sharing,this eventually settled on an East-West administrative division between the Western Roman Empire (centered onRome, but now usually presided from other seats of power such as Trier, Milan, and especially Ravenna), and theEastern Roman Empire (with its capital initially in Nicomedia, and later Constantinople). The Latin-speaking west,under severe demographic crisis, and the wealthier Greek-speaking east, also began to diverge politically andculturally. Although this was a gradual process, still incomplete when Italy came under the rule of barbarianchieftains in the last quarter of the 5th century, it deepened further afterward, and had lasting consequences for themedieval history of Europe.Throughout the fifth century, Western emperors were usually figureheads, while the Eastern emperors maintainedmore independence. For most of the time, the actual rulers in the West were military strongmen who took the titlesof magister militum, patrician, or both, such as Stilicho, Aetius, and Ricimer. Although Rome was no longer thecapital in the West, it remained the West's largest city and its economic center. But the city was sacked by rebelliousVisigoths in 410 and by the Vandals in 455, events that shocked contemporaries and signaled the disintegration ofRoman authority. Saint Augustine wrote The City of God partly as an answer to critics who blamed the sack of Romeby the Visigoths on the abandonment of the traditional pagan religions.

Page 3: Decline of the Roman Empire

Decline of the Roman Empire 3

In June 474, Julius Nepos became Western Emperor but in the next year the magister militum Orestes revolted andmade his son Romulus Augustus emperor. Romulus, however, was not recognized by the Eastern Emperor Zeno andso was technically an usurper, Nepos still being the legal Western Emperor. Nevertheless, Romulus Augustus isoften known as the last Western Roman Emperor. In 476, after being refused lands in Italy, Orestes' Germanicmercenaries under the leadership of the chieftain Odoacer captured and executed Orestes and took Ravenna, theWestern Roman capital at the time, deposing Romulus Augustus. The whole of Italy was quickly conquered, andOdoacer was granted the title of patrician by Zeno, effectively recognizing his rule in the name of the EasternEmpire. Since, as a barbarian, he was not allowed the title of Emperor, Odoacer returned the Imperial insignia toConstantinople and ruled as King in Italy. Following Nepos' death Theodoric the Great, King of the Ostrogoths,conquered Italy with Zeno's approval.Meanwhile, much of the rest of the Western provinces were conquered by waves of Germanic invasions, most ofthem being disconnected politically from the East altogether and continuing a slow decline. Although Romanpolitical authority in the West was lost, Roman culture would last in most parts of the former Western provinces intothe sixth century and beyond.The first invasions disrupted the West to some degree, but it was the Gothic War launched by the Eastern EmperorJustinian in the sixth century, and meant to reunite the Empire, that eventually caused the most damage to Italy, aswell as straining the Eastern Empire militarily. Following these wars, Rome and other Italian cities would fall intosevere decline (Rome itself was almost completely abandoned). Another blow came with the Persian invasion of theEast in the seventh century, immediately followed by the Muslim conquests, especially of Egypt, which curtailedmuch of the key trade in the Mediterranean on which Europe depended.The Empire was to live on in the East for many centuries, and enjoy periods of recovery and cultural brilliance, butits size would remain a fraction of what it had been in classical times. It became an essentially regional power,centered on Greece and Anatolia. Modern historians tend to prefer the term Byzantine Empire for the eastern,medieval stage of the Roman Empire.

HighlightsThe decline of the Roman Empire was a process lasting many centuries. There is no firm consensus when thisprocess may have begun, but many dates and time lines have been proposed by historians.3rd century• The Crisis of the Third Century (234 - 284), a period of political anarchy.• The reign of emperor Diocletian (284 - 305), who attempted substantial political and economic reforms, many of

which would remain in force in the following centuries.4th century• The reign of Constantine I (306 - 337), who built the new eastern capital of Constantinople and converted to

Christianity, legalizing and even favoring to some extent this religion. All Roman emperors after Constantine,except for Julian, would be Christians.

• The first war with the Visigoths (376 - 382), culminating in the Battle of Adrianople (August 9, 378), in which alarge Roman army was defeated by the Visigoths, and emperor Valens was killed. The Visigoths, fleeing amigration of the Huns, had been allowed to settle within the borders of the Empire by Valens, but were mistreatedby the local Roman administrators, and rebelled.

• The reign of Theodosius I (379 - 395), last emperor to reunite under his authority the western and eastern halvesof the Empire. Theodosius continued and intensified the policies against paganism of his predecessors, eventuallyoutlawing it, and making Nicaean Christianity the state religion.

5th century

Page 4: Decline of the Roman Empire

Decline of the Roman Empire 4

• The Crossing of the Rhine: on December 31, 406 (or 405, according to some historians), a mixed band ofVandals, Suebi and Alans crossed the frozen river Rhine at Moguntiacum (modern Mainz), and began to ravageGaul. Some moved on to the regions of Hispania and Africa. The Empire would never regain control over most ofthese lands.

• The second war with the Visigoths, led by king Alaric, in which they raided Greece, and then invaded Italy,culminating in the sack of Rome (410). The Visigoths eventually left Italy and founded the Visigothic Kingdomin southern Gaul and Hispania.

• The rise of the Hunnic Empire under Attila and Bleda (434-453), who raided the Balkans, Gaul, and Italy,threatening both Constantinople and Rome.

• The second sack of Rome, this time by the Vandals (455).• Failed counterstrikes against the Vandals (461 - 468). The Western emperor Majorian planned a naval campaign

against the Vandals to reconquer northern Africa in 461, but word of the preparations got out to the Vandals, whotook the Roman fleet by surprise and destroyed it. A second naval expedition against the Vandals, sent byemperors Leo I and Anthemius, was defeated in 468.

Europe in 476, from Muir's Historical Atlas (1911).

• Deposition of the last Western emperors, Julius Nepos and Romulus Augustus (475 - 480). Julius Nepos, who hadbeen nominated by the Eastern emperor Zeno, was deposed by the rebelled magister militum Orestes, whoinstalled his own son Romulus in the imperial throne. Both Zeno and his rival Basiliscus, in the East, continued toregard Julius Nepos, who fled to Dalmatia, as the legitimate Western emperor, and Romulus as an usurper.Shortly after, Odoacer, magister militum appointed by Julius, invaded Italy, defeated Orestes, and deposed thechild emperor Romulus Augustus on September 4, 476. Odoacer then proclaimed himself ruler of Italy and askedthe Eastern emperor Zeno to become formal emperor of both empires, and in so doing legalize Odoacer's ownposition as imperial viceroy of Italy. Zeno did so, setting aside the claims of Nepos, who was murdered by hisown soldiers in 480.

• Foundation of the Ostrogothic Kingdom in Italy (493). Concerned with the success and popularity of Odoacer, Zeno started a campaign against him, at first with words, then by inciting the Ostrogoths to take back Italy from

Page 5: Decline of the Roman Empire

Decline of the Roman Empire 5

him. They did as much, but then founded an independent kingdom of their own, under the rule of king Theodoric.Italy and the entire west were lost to the Empire.

Theories of a fall, decline, transition and continuity

Overexpansion and inflationOne of the most enduring types of evidence left behind by the later Roman Empire is its coinage. A set of coins fromthe later years of the Western Roman Empire shows dramatic evidence of numismatic adulteration, particularly incoins originally minted in silver. In later years, similar coins came to be minted out of base metal, often with only athin cladding or coating of the precious metal.Many historians argue that the rapid growth of the empire over a relatively short time and the economic inflation thatfollowed contributed substantially to the empire's decay. Due to the sheer size of the empire, it required an enormousbudget to maintain the infrastructure necessary for its survival, including roads (essential for communication,transportation, and the moving of armies) and aqueducts (many cities relied on the water thus provided). Moreover,the empire faced enemies on all sides due to its expansion into their territories, and huge sums of silver and goldwere required to keep up its armies. To cope with both problems, the empire was forced to raise taxes frequently, andalso to adulterate its coins, causing inflation to skyrocket into hyperinflation. This in turn caused major economicstresses that some historians regard as central in Rome's decline.

Vegetius on military declineWriting in the 5th century, the Roman historian Vegetius pleaded for reform of what must have been a greatlyweakened army. The historian Arther Ferrill has suggested that the Roman Empire – particularly the military –declined largely as a result of an influx of Germanic mercenaries into the ranks of the legions. This "Germanization"and the resultant cultural dilution or "barbarization" led not only to a decline in the standard of drill and overallmilitary preparedness within the Empire, but also to a decline of loyalty to the Roman government in favor of loyaltyto commanders. Ferrill agrees with other Roman historians such as A.H.M. Jones:

...the decay of trade and industry was not a cause of Rome’s fall. There was a decline in agriculture and landwas withdrawn from cultivation, in some cases on a very large scale, sometimes as a direct result of barbarianinvasions. However, the chief cause of the agricultural decline was high taxation on the marginal land, drivingit out of cultivation. Jones is surely right in saying that taxation was spurred by the huge military budget andwas thus ‘indirectly’ the result of the barbarian invasion.[6]

Edward GibbonIn The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (1776-88), Edward Gibbon famously placed the blameon a loss of civic virtue among the Roman citizens. They gradually entrusted the role of defending the Empire tobarbarian mercenaries who eventually turned on them. Gibbon held that Christianity contributed to this shift bymaking the populace less interested in the worldly here-and-now because it was willing to wait for the rewards ofheaven. "The decline of Rome was the natural and inevitable effect of immoderate greatness. Prosperity ripened theprinciple of decay; the causes of destruction multiplied with the extent of conquest; and as soon as time or accidenthad removed the artificial supports, the stupendous fabric yielded to the pressure of its own weight," he wrote. "Indiscussing Barbarism and Christianity I have actually been discussing the Fall of Rome."

Page 6: Decline of the Roman Empire

Decline of the Roman Empire 6

Henri PirenneIn the second half of the 19th century, some historians focused on the continuities between the Roman Empire andthe post-Roman Germanic kingdoms rather than the rupture. In Histoire des institutions politiques de l'ancienneFrance (1875–89), Fustel de Coulanges argued that the barbarians simply contributed to an on-going process oftransforming Roman institutions.Henri Pirenne continued this idea with the "Pirenne Thesis", published in the 1920s, which remains influential to thisday. It holds that even after the barbarian invasions, the Roman way of doing things did not immediately change;barbarians came to Rome not to destroy it, but to take part in its benefits, and thus they tried to preserve the Romanway of life. The Pirenne Thesis regards the rise of the Frankish realm in Europe as a continuation of the RomanEmpire, and thus validates the crowning of Charlemagne as the first Holy Roman Emperor as a successor of theRoman emperors. According to Pirenne,[4] the real break in Roman history occurred in the 7th and 8th centuries as aresult of Arab expansion. Islamic conquest of the area of today's south-eastern Turkey, Syria, Palestine, NorthAfrica, Spain and Portugal ruptured economic ties to western Europe, cutting the region off from trade and turning itinto a stagnant backwater, with wealth flowing out in the form of raw resources and nothing coming back. Thisbegan a steady decline and impoverishment so that by the time of Charlemagne western Europe had become almostentirely agrarian at a subsistence level, with no long-distance trade. Pirenne's view on the continuity of the RomanEmpire before and after the Germanic invasion has been supported by recent historians such as François Masai,Karl-Ferdinand Werner, and Peter Brown.Some modern critics have argued that the "Pirenne Thesis" erred on two counts: by treating the Carolingian realm asa Roman state and by overemphasizing the effect of the Islamic conquests on the Byzantine or Eastern Empire. Othercritics have argued that while Pirenne was correct in arguing for the the continuity of the Empire beyond the sack ofRome, the Arab conquests in the 7th century may not have disrupted Mediterranean trade routes to the degree thatPirenne argued. Michael McCormick in particular has argued that some recently unearthed sources, such ascollective biographies, describe new trade routes. Moreover, other records and coins document the movement ofIslamic currency into the Carolingian Empire. McCormick has concluded that if money was coming in, some type ofgoods must have been going out – including slaves, timber, weapons, honey, amber, and furs.

J. B. BuryJ. B. Bury's History of the Later Roman Empire (1889/1923) challenged the prevailing "theory of moral decay"established by Gibbon as well as the classic "clash of Christianity vs. paganism" theory, citing the relative success ofthe Eastern Empire, which was resolutely Christian. He held that Gibbon's grand history, though epoch-making in itsresearch and detail, was too monocausal. His main difference from Gibbon lay in his interpretation of facts, ratherthan disputing any facts. He made it clear that he felt that Gibbon's thesis concerning "moral decay" was viable —but incomplete. Bury's judgment was that:[7]

The gradual collapse of the Roman power … was the consequence of a series of contingent events. Nogeneral causes can be assigned that made it inevitable.

Bury held that a number of crises arose simultaneously: economic decline, Germanic expansion, depopulation ofItaly, dependency on Germanic foederati for the military, the disastrous (though Bury believed unknowing) treasonof Stilicho, loss of martial vigor, Aetius' murder, the lack of any leader to replace Aetius — a series of misfortuneswhich, in combination, proved catastrophic:

The Empire had come to depend on the enrollment of barbarians, in large numbers, in the army, and … it was necessary to render the service attractive to them by the prospect of power and wealth. This was, of course, a consequence of the decline in military spirit, and of depopulation, in the old civilised Mediterranean countries. The Germans in high command had been useful, but the dangers involved in the policy had been shown in the cases of Merobaudes and Arbogastes. Yet this policy need not have led to the dismemberment of the Empire, and but for that series of chances its western provinces would not

Page 7: Decline of the Roman Empire

Decline of the Roman Empire 7

have been converted, as and when they were, into German kingdoms. It may be said that a Germanpenetration of western Europe must ultimately have come about. But even if that were certain, it mighthave happened in another way, at a later time, more gradually, and with less violence. The point of thepresent contention is that Rome's loss of her provinces in the fifth century was not an "inevitable effectof any of those features which have been rightly or wrongly described as causes or consequences of hergeneral 'decline'". The central fact that Rome could not dispense with the help of barbarians for her wars(gentium barbararum auxilio indigemus) may be held to be the cause of her calamities, but it was aweakness which might have continued to be far short of fatal but for the sequence of contingenciespointed out above.[7]

Radovan RichtaSome commentators regard the collapse of Rome as beyond the Romans' control. Writing in the 1960s, the Czechhistorian Radovan Richta held that technology drives history. Thus, the invention of the horseshoe in Germania inthe 200s would alter the military equation of pax romana.

Lucien Musset and the clash of civilizationsIn the spirit of "Pirenne thesis", a school of thought pictured a clash of civilizations between the Roman and theGermanic world, a process taking place roughly between 3rd and 8th century.The French historian Lucien Musset, studying the Barbarian invasions, argues the civilization of Medieval Europeemerged from a synthesis between the Graeco-Roman world and the Germanic civilizations penetrating the RomanEmpire. The Roman Empire did not fall, did not decline, it just transformed but so did the Germanic populationswhich invaded it. To support this conclusion, beside the narrative of the events, he offers linguistic surveys oftoponymy and anthroponymy, analyzes archaeological records, studies the urban and rural society, the institutions,the religion, the art, the technology.

Arnold J. Toynbee and James BurkeIn contrast with the declining empire theories, historians such as Arnold J. Toynbee and James Burke argue that theRoman Empire itself was a rotten system from its inception, and that the entire Imperial era was one of steady decayof institutions founded in Republican times. In their view, the Empire could never have lasted longer than it didwithout radical reforms that no Emperor could implement. The Romans had no budgetary system and thus wastedwhatever resources they had available. The economy of the Empire was a Raubwirtschaft or plunder economy basedon looting existing resources rather than producing anything new. The Empire relied on booty from conqueredterritories (this source of revenue ending, of course, with the end of Roman territorial expansion) or on a pattern oftax collection that drove small-scale farmers into destitution (and onto a dole that required even more exactions uponthose who could not escape taxation), or into dependency upon a landed élite exempt from taxation. With thecessation of tribute from conquered territories, the full cost of their military machine had to be borne by the citizenry.An economy based upon slave labor precluded a middle class with buying power. The Roman Empire produced few exportable goods. Material innovation, whether through entrepreneurialism or technological advancement, all but ended long before the final dissolution of the Empire. Meanwhile the costs of military defense and the pomp of Emperors continued. Financial needs continued to increase, but the means of meeting them steadily eroded. In the end due to economic failure, even the armor of soldiers deteriorated and the weaponry of soldiers became so obsolete that the enemies of the Empire had better armor and weapons as well as larger forces. The decrepit social order offered so little to its subjects that many saw the barbarian invasion as liberation from onerous obligations to the ruling class. By the late fifth century the barbarian conqueror Odoacer had no use for the formality of an Empire upon deposing Romulus Augustus and chose neither to assume the title of Emperor himself nor to select a puppet, although legally he kept the lands as a commander of the Eastern Empire and maintained the Roman institutions

Page 8: Decline of the Roman Empire

Decline of the Roman Empire 8

such as the consulship. The formal end of the Roman Empire corresponds with the time in which the Empire and thetitle Emperor no longer had value.

Michael Rostovtzeff, Ludwig von Mises, and Bruce BartlettHistorian Michael Rostovtzeff and economist Ludwig von Mises both argued that unsound economic policies playeda key role in the impoverishment and decay of the Roman Empire. According to them, by the 2nd century A.D., theRoman Empire had developed a complex market economy in which trade was relatively free. Tariffs were low andlaws controlling the prices of foodstuffs and other commodities had little impact because they did not fix the pricessignificantly below their market levels. After the 3rd century, however, debasement of the currency (i.e., the mintingof coins with diminishing content of gold, silver, and bronze) led to inflation. The price control laws then resulted inprices that were significantly below their free-market equilibrium levels.According to Rostovtzeff and Mises, artificially low prices led to the scarcity of foodstuffs, particularly in cities,whose inhabitants depended on trade to obtain them. Despite laws passed to prevent migration from the cities to thecountryside, urban areas gradually became depopulated and many Roman citizens abandoned their specialized tradesto practice subsistence agriculture. This, coupled with increasingly oppressive and arbitrary taxation, led to a severenet decrease in trade, technical innovation, and the overall wealth of the empire.[8]

Bruce Bartlett traces the beginning of debasement to the reign of Nero. By the third century the monetary economyhad collapsed. Bartlett sees the result as a form of state socialism. Monetary taxation was replaced with directrequisitioning, for example taking food and cattle from farmers. Individuals were forced to work at their given placeof employment and remain in the same occupation. Farmers became tied to the land, as were their children, andsimilar demands were made on all other workers, producers, and artisans as well. Workers were organized intoguilds and businesses into corporations called collegia. Both became de facto organs of the state, controlling anddirecting their members to work and produce for the state. In the countryside people attached themselves to theestates of the wealthy to gain some protection from state officials and tax collectors. These estates, the beginning offeudalism, mostly operated as closed systems, providing for all their own needs and not engaging in trade at all.[9]

William H. McNeillWilliam H. McNeill (b.1917), a world historian, noted in chapter three of his book Plagues and Peoples (1976) thatthe Roman Empire suffered the severe and protracted Antonine Plague starting around 165 A.D. For about twentyyears, waves of one or more diseases, possibly the first epidemics of smallpox and/or measles, swept through theEmpire, ultimately killing about half the population. Similar epidemics also occurred in the third century. McNeillargues that the severe fall in population left the state apparatus and army too large for the population to support,leading to further economic and social decline that eventually killed the Western Empire. The Eastern half surviveddue to its larger population, which even after the plagues was sufficient for an effective state apparatus.This theory can also be extended to the time after the fall of the Western Empire and to other parts of the world.Similar epidemics caused by new diseases may have weakened the Chinese Han empire and contributed to itscollapse. This was followed by the long and chaotic episode known as the Six Dynasties period. Later, the Plague ofJustinian may have been the first instance of bubonic plague. It, and subsequent recurrences, may have been sodevastating that they helped the Arab conquest of most of the Eastern Empire and the whole of the Sassanid Empire.Archaeological evidence is showing that Europe continued to have a steady downward trend in population starting asearly as the 2nd century and continuing through the 7th century. The European recovery may have started only whenthe population, through natural selection, had gained some resistance to the new diseases. See also Medievaldemography.

Page 9: Decline of the Roman Empire

Decline of the Roman Empire 9

Peter HeatherPeter Heather, in his The Fall of the Roman Empire (2005), maintains the Roman imperial system with its sometimesviolent imperial transitions and problematic communications notwithstanding, was in fairly good shape during thefirst, second, and part of the third centuries A.D. According to Heather, the first real indication of trouble was theemergence in Iran of the Sassanid Persian empire (226–651). Heather says:

The Sassanids were sufficiently powerful and internally cohesive to push back Roman legions from theEuphrates and from much of Armenia and southeast Turkey. Much as modern readers tend to think ofthe "Huns" as the nemesis of the Roman Empire, for the entire period under discussion it was thePersians who held the attention and concern of Rome and Constantinople. Indeed, 20–25% of themilitary might of the Roman Army was addressing the Persian threat from the late third century onward… and upwards of 40% of the troops under the Eastern Emperors.[10]

Heather goes on to state — and he is confirmed by Gibbon and Bury — that it took the Roman Empire about half acentury to cope with the Sassanid threat, which it did by stripping the western provincial towns and cities of theirregional taxation income. The resulting expansion of military forces in the Middle East was finally successful instabilizing the frontiers with the Sassanids, but the reduction of real income in the provinces of the Empire led to twotrends which, Heather says, had a negative long term impact. First, the incentive for local officials to spend their timeand money in the development of local infrastructure disappeared. Public buildings from the 4th century onwardtended to be much more modest and funded from central budgets, as the regional taxes had dried up. Second,Heather says "the landowning provincial literati now shifted their attention to where the money was … away fromprovincial and local politics to the imperial bureaucracies." Having set the scene of an Empire stretched militarily bythe Sassanid threat, Heather then suggests, using archaeological evidence, that the Germanic tribes on the Empire'snorthern border had altered in nature since the 1st century. Contact with the Empire had increased their materialwealth, and that in turn had led to disparities of wealth sufficient to create a ruling class capable of maintainingcontrol over far larger groupings than had previously been possible. Essentially they had become significantly moreformidable foes.Heather then posits what amounts to a domino theory — namely that pressure on peoples very far away from theEmpire could result in sufficient pressure on peoples on the Empire's borders to make them contemplate the risk offull scale immigration to the empire. Thus he links the Gothic invasion of 376 directly to Hunnic movements aroundthe Black Sea in the decade before. In the same way he sees the invasions across the Rhine in 406 as a directconsequence of further Hunnic incursions in Germania; as such he sees the Huns as deeply significant in the fall ofthe Western Empire long before they themselves became a military threat to the Empire. He postulates that theHunnic expansion caused unprecedented immigration in 376 and 406 by barbarian groupings who had becomesignificantly more politically and militarily capable than in previous eras. This impacted an empire already atmaximum stretch due to the Sassanid pressure. Essentially he argues that the external pressures of 376–470 couldhave brought the Western Empire down at any point in its history.He disputes Gibbon's contention that Christianity and moral decay led to the decline. He also rejects the politicalinfighting of the Empire as a reason, considering it was a systemic recurring factor throughout the Empire's historywhich, while it might have contributed to an inability to respond to the circumstances of the 5th century, itconsequently cannot be blamed for them. Instead he places its origin squarely on outside military factors, startingwith the Great Sassanids. Like Bury, he does not believe the fall was inevitable, but rather a series of events whichcame together to shatter the Empire. He differs from Bury, however, in placing the onset of those events far earlier inthe Empire's timeline, with the Sassanid rise.

Page 10: Decline of the Roman Empire

Decline of the Roman Empire 10

Joseph TainterIn his 1988 book "The Collapse of Complex Societies" Tainter presents the view that for given technological levelsthere are implicit declining returns to complexity, in which systems deplete their resource base beyond levels that areultimately sustainable. Tainter argues that societies become more complex as they try to solve problems. Socialcomplexity can include differentiated social and economic roles, reliance on symbolic and abstract communication,and the existence of a class of information producers and analysts who are not involved in primary resourceproduction. Such complexity requires a substantial "energy" subsidy (meaning resources, or other forms of wealth).When a society confronts a "problem," such as a shortage of or difficulty in gaining access to energy, it tends tocreate new layers of bureaucracy, infrastructure, or social class to address the challenge.For example, as Roman agricultural output slowly declined and population increased, per-capita energy availabilitydropped. The Romans solved this problem in the short term by conquering their neighbours to appropriate theirenergy surpluses (metals, grain, slaves, etc). However, this solution merely exacerbated the issue over the long term;as the Empire grew, the cost of maintaining communications, garrisons, civil government, etc., increased.Eventually, this cost grew so great that any new challenges such as invasions and crop failures could not be solvedby the acquisition of more territory. At that point, the empire fragmented into smaller units.We often assume that the collapse of the Roman Empire was a catastrophe for everyone involved. Tainter points outthat it can be seen as a very rational preference of individuals at the time, many of whom were better off (all but theelite, presumably.) Archeological evidence from human bones indicates that average nutrition improved after thecollapse in many parts of the former Roman Empire. Average individuals may have benefited because they no longerhad to invest in the burdensome complexity of empire.In Tainter's view, while invasions, crop failures, disease or environmental degradation may be the apparent causes ofsocietal collapse, the ultimate cause is diminishing returns on investments in social complexity.[11]

Bryan Ward-PerkinsBryan Ward-Perkins's The Fall of Rome and the End of Civilization (2005) takes a traditional view tempered bymodern discoveries, arguing that the empire's demise was caused by a vicious circle of political instability, foreigninvasion, and reduced tax revenue. Essentially, invasions caused long-term damage to the provincial tax base, whichlessened the Empire's medium- to long-term ability to pay and equip the legions, with predictable results. Likewise,constant invasions encouraged provincial rebellion as self-help, further depleting Imperial resources. Contrary to thetrend among some historians of the "there was no fall" school, who view the fall of Rome as not necessarily a "badthing" for the people involved, Ward-Perkins argues that in many parts of the former Empire the archaeologicalrecord indicates that the collapse was truly a disaster.Ward-Perkins' theory, much like Bury's, and Heather's, identifies a series of cyclic events that came together to causea definite decline and fall.

Adrian GoldsworthyIn The Complete Roman Army (2003) Adrian Goldsworthy, a British military historian, sees the causes of thecollapse of the Roman Empire not in any 'decadence' in the make-up of the Roman legions, but in a combination ofendless civil wars between factions of the Roman Army fighting for control of the Empire. This inevitably weakenedthe army and the society upon which it depended, making it less able to defend itself against the growing of numbersof Rome's enemies. The army still remained a superior fighting instrument to its opponents, both civilized andbarbarian; this is shown in the victories over Germanic tribes at the Battle of Strasbourg (357) and in its ability tohold the line against the Sassanid Persians throughout the 4th century. But, says Goldsworthy, "Weakening centralauthority, social and economic problems and, most of all, the continuing grind of civil wars eroded the politicalcapacity to maintain the army at this level."[12]

Page 11: Decline of the Roman Empire

Decline of the Roman Empire 11

Environmental degradationAnother theory is that gradual environmental degradation caused population and economic decline. Deforestationand excessive grazing led to erosion of meadows and cropland. Increased irrigation without suitable drainage causedsalinization, especially in North Africa. These human activities resulted in fertile land becoming nonproductive andeventually increased desertification in some regions. Many animal species become extinct.[13] This theory wasexplored by Jared M. Diamond in Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed. Also, high taxes and heavyslavery are another reason for decline as they forced small farmers out of business and into the cities, which becameoverpopulated. Roman cities were only designed to hold a certain amount of people, and once they passed that,disease, water shortage and food shortage became common.

Mining OutputOutput from the silver mine at Rio Tinto peaked in 79,[14] corresponding to the beginning of the era of coindebasement and inflation and over-taxation. The Roman Emperor debased the coinage because Roman mines hadpeaked and output was declining. The thesis is that mines of all commodities were being depleted, including gold,silver, iron and so forth. This led to the decline of Roman technological and economic sophistication.

Late AntiquityHistorians of Late Antiquity, a field pioneered by Peter Brown, have turned away from the idea that the RomanEmpire fell refocusing on Pirenne's thesis. They see a transformation occurring over centuries, with the roots ofMedieval culture contained in Roman culture and focus on the continuities between the classical and Medievalworlds. Thus, it was a gradual process with no clear break. Brown argues in his book that,

Factors we would regard as natural in a 'crisis' - malaise caused by urbanization, public disasters, theintrusion of alien religious ideas, and a consequent heightening of religious hopes and fears--may nothave bulked as large in the minds of the men of the late second and third centuries as we suppose... Thetowns of the Mediterranean were small towns. For all their isolation from the way of life of the villagers,they were fragile excresences in a spreading countryside."[15]

Role of lead poisoningThe ancient Romans, who had few sweeteners besides honey, would boil must in lead pots to produce a reducedsugar syrup called defrutum, concentrated again into sapa. This syrup was used to sweeten wine and food.[16] Thisboiling of acidic must within lead vessels yields a sweet syrup containing Pb(C2H3O2)2 or lead(II) acetate.[16] Leadwas also leached from the glazes on amphora and from pewter drinking vessels.[17]

The main culinary use of defrutum was to sweeten wine, but it was also added to fruit and meat dishes as asweetening and souring agent and even given to food animals such as suckling pig and duck to improve the taste oftheir flesh. Defrutum was mixed with garum to make the popular condiment oenogarum and as such was one ofRome's most popular condiments. Quince and melon were preserved in defrutum and honey through the winter, andsome Roman women used defrutum or sapa as a cosmetic. Defrutum was often used as a food preservative inprovisions for Roman troops.[18]

The following table shows estimated consumption of lead by various classes within the Roman Empire:[17] [19]

Page 12: Decline of the Roman Empire

Decline of the Roman Empire 12

Population Source Lead level in source Daily intake Absorption factor Lead absorbed

Aristocrats

Air 0.05 µg/m3 20 m3 0.4 0.4 µg/day

Water 50 (50-200) µg/l 1.0 liter 0.1 5 (5-20) µg/day

Wines 300 (200-1500) 2.0 liters 0.3 180 (120-900) µg/day

Foods 0.2 (0.1-2.0) µg/g 3 kg 0.1 60 (30-600) µg/day

Other/Misc. 5.0 µg/day

Total 250 (160-1250) µg/day

Plebians

Less food, same wine consumption. 35 (35-320) µg/day

Slaves

Still less food, more water, 0.75 liters wine 15 (15-77) µg/day

Lead is not removed quickly from the body. It tends to form lead phosphate complexes within bone.[20] This isdetectable in preserved bone.[21] Chemical analysis of preserved skeletons found in Herculaneum by Dr. Sara C.Bisel from the University of Minnesota indicated they contained lead in concentrations of 84 parts per million(ppm).[21] Compared to skeletons found in a Greek cave, which had lead concentrations of 3ppm and compared tomodern Americans and Britons, which have concentrations between 20-50ppm, this is considered high.[21]

There is still great controversy regarding the role and importance of lead poisoning in contributing to the fall of theRoman Empire. Some historians still cite other factors as being more significant than lead poisoning.[16]

HistoriographyHistoriographically, the primary issue historians have looked at when analyzing any theory is the continuedexistence of the Eastern Empire or Byzantine Empire, which lasted almost a thousand years after the fall of the West.For example, Gibbon implicates Christianity in the fall of the Western Empire, yet the eastern half of the Empire,which was even more Christian than the west in geographic extent, fervor, penetration and sheer numbers continuedon for a thousand years afterwards (although Gibbon did not consider the Eastern Empire to be much of a success).As another example, environmental or weather changes affected the east as much as the west, yet the east did not"fall."Theories will sometimes reflect the particular concerns that historians might have on cultural, political, or economictrends in their own times. Gibbon's criticism of Christianity reflects the values of the Enlightenment; his ideas on thedecline in martial vigor could have been interpreted by some as a warning to the growing British Empire. In the 19thcentury socialist and anti-socialist theorists tended to blame decadence and other political problems. More recently,environmental concerns have become popular, with deforestation and soil erosion proposed as major factors, anddestabilizing population decreases due to epidemics such as early cases of bubonic plague and malaria also cited.Global climate changes of 535-536 caused by the possible eruption of Krakatoa in 535, as mentioned by David Keysand others,[22] is another example. Ideas about transformation with no distinct fall mirror the rise of the postmoderntradition, which rejects periodization concepts (see metanarrative). What is not new are attempts to diagnose Rome'sparticular problems, with Satire X, written by Juvenal in the early 2nd century at the height of Roman power,criticizing the peoples' obsession with "bread and circuses" and rulers seeking only to gratify these obsessions.One of the primary reasons for the sheer number of theories is the notable lack of surviving evidence from the 4th and 5th centuries. For example there are so few records of an economic nature it is difficult to arrive at even a generalization of the economic conditions. Thus, historians must quickly depart from available evidence and

Page 13: Decline of the Roman Empire

Decline of the Roman Empire 13

comment based on how things ought to have worked, or based on evidence from previous and later periods, oninductive reasoning. As in any field where available evidence is sparse, the historian's ability to imagine the 4th and5th centuries will play as important a part in shaping our understanding as the available evidence, and thus be openfor endless interpretation.The end of the Western Roman Empire traditionally has been seen by historians to mark the end of the Ancient Eraand beginning of the Middle Ages. More recent schools of history, such as Late Antiquity, offer a more nuancedview from the traditional historical narrative.

Notes[1] Bowersock, "The Vanishing Paradigm of the Fall of Rome" Bulletin of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 49.8 (May 1996:29-43) p.

31.[2] Alexander Demandt: 210 Theories (http:/ / crookedtimber. org/ 2003/ 08/ 25/ decline-and-fall), from Crooked Timber weblog entry August

25, 2003. Retrieved June 2005.[3] Alexander Demandt: 210 Theories (http:/ / www. utexas. edu/ courses/ rome/ 210reasons. html), Source: A. Demandt, Der Fall Roms (1984)

695. See also: Karl Galinsky in Classical and Modern Interactions (1992) 53-73.[4] Arnaldo Momigliano, echoing the trope of the sound a tree falling in the forest, titled an article in 1973, "La caduta senza rumore di un

impero nel 476 d.C." ("The noiseless fall of an empire in 476 AD").[5] Hunt, Lynn; Thomas R. Martin, Barbara H. Rosenwein, R. Po-chia Hsia, Bonnie G. Smith (2001). The Making of the West, Peoples and

Cultures, Volume A: To 1500. Bedford / St. Martins. p. 256. ISBN 0-312-18365-8.[6] Arther Ferrill, The Fall of the Roman Empire: The Military Explanation (New York: Thames and Hudson Ltd., 1986),[7] Bury, J.B. History of the Later Roman Empire • Vol. I Chap. IX (http:/ / penelope. uchicago. edu/ Thayer/ E/ Roman/ Texts/ secondary/

BURLAT/ 9*. html#7)[8] See, for instance, "How Excessive Government Killed Ancient Rome" (http:/ / www. cato. org/ pubs/ journal/ cjv14n2-7. html), by Bruce

Bartlett, and "The Rise and Decline of Civilization" (http:/ / www. capmag. com/ article. asp?ID=3015), by Ludwig von Mises[9] "How Excessive Government Killed Ancient Rome" (http:/ / www. cato. org/ pubs/ journal/ cjv14n2-7. html), by Bruce Bartlett[10] Albion's Seedlings: Heather - The Fall of the Roman Empire (http:/ / anglosphere. com/ weblog/ archives/ 000350. html)[11] Tainter, Joseph (1988) "The Collapse of Complex Societies" (Princeton Uni Press)[12] The Complete Roman Army (2003) p. 214 Adrian Goldsworthy[13] Lunds universitet (http:/ / www. humecol. lu. se/ woshglec/ papers/ hughes. doc)[14] Borrowne, Malcolm W. Ice Cap Shows Ancient Mines Polluted the Globe (http:/ / query. nytimes. com/ gst/ fullpage.

html?res=9901E1DF173CF93AA35751C1A961958260), The New York Times, December 9, 1997. Accessed May 23, 2008.[15] Peter Brown, "The Making of Late Antiquity" (Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1978), 2-3[16] Milton A. Lessler. "Lead and Lead Poisoning from Antiquity to Modern Times" (https:/ / kb. osu. edu/ dspace/ bitstream/ 1811/ 23252/ 1/

V088N3_078. pdf). . Retrieved 11 JAN 2009.[17] Nriagu JO; Fernandez, P. L.; Alonso, P. L. (March 1983). "Saturnine gout among Roman aristocrats. Did lead poisoning contribute to the

fall of the Empire?" (http:/ / content. nejm. org/ cgi/ content/ extract/ 355/ 18/ 1935-a). N. Engl. J. Med. 308 (11): 660–3.doi:10.1056/NEJMc062352. PMID 17079773. .

[18] Director: Chris Warren. (2004). Tales of the Living Dead: Poisoned Roman Babies. [television]. Brighton TV for National Geographic.[19] Mark E. Anderson MD FAAP (22 AUG 2007). "Children’s Environmental Health: Tribal Nations CEH Summit" (ftp:/ / ftp. epa. gov/ r8/

ceh/ 2007/ Anderson. pdf). . Retrieved 11 JAN 2009.[20] "Metabolism of Lead" (http:/ / www. trace-elements. org. uk/ leadmet. htm). . Retrieved 11 JAN 2009.[21] "A Clue to the Decline of Rome" (http:/ / query. nytimes. com/ gst/ fullpage. html?sec=health&

res=9D04E3DE163BF932A05756C0A965948260). The New York Times. 31 MAY 1983. . Retrieved 11 JAN 2009.[22] Winchester, Simon (2003). Krakatoa: The Day the World Exploded, August 27, 1883. HarperCollins. ISBN 0-06-621285-5.

Page 14: Decline of the Roman Empire

Decline of the Roman Empire 14

References• Alexander Demandt (1984). Der Fall Roms: Die Auflösung des römischen Reiches im Urteil der Nachwelt. ISBN

3-406-09598-4• Edward Gibbon,[1] "General Observations on the Fall of the Roman Empire in the West", from the Internet

Medieval Sourcebook. Brief excerpts of Gibbon's theories.• William Carroll Bark (1958). Origins of the Medieval World. ISBN 0-8047-0514-3[1] Fordham.edu (http:/ / www. fordham. edu/ halsall/ source/ gibbon-fall. html)

Further reading• Peter Heather, The Fall of the Roman Empire, 2005, ISBN 0-19-515954-3, offers a narrative of the final years, in

the tradition of Gibson or Bury, plus incorporates latest archaeological evidence and other recent findings.• Peter Heather, Empires and Barbarians: The Fall of Rome and the Birth of Europe (Oxford University Press;

2010); 734 pages; Examines the migrations, trade, and other phenomena that shaped a recognizable entity ofEurope in the first millennium.

• Donald Kagan, The End of the Roman Empire: Decline or Transformation?, ISBN 0-669-21520-1 (3rd edition1992) – a survey of theories.

• Arther Ferrill The Fall of the Roman Empire: The Military Explanation" 0500274959 (1998) supports Vegetius'theory.

• "The Fall of Rome – an author dialogue" (http:/ / blog. oup. com/ oupblog/ 2005/ 12/ the_fall_of_rom. html),Oxford professors Bryan Ward-Perkins and Heather discuss The Fall of Rome: And the End of Civilization andThe Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians.

• Adrian Goldsworthy The Complete Roman Army, Thames & Hudson (2003); Chapter V 'The Army of LateAntiquity' p. 200-215.

• Fall of Rome – Decline of the Roman Empire (http:/ / ancienthistory. about. com/ cs/ romefallarticles/ a/fallofrome. htm) – Lists many possible causes with references

• The Ancient Suicide of the West (http:/ / www. lewrockwell. com/ orig5/ davidson1. html) – A libertarian theoryabout the decline and fall of Rome.

• Lucien Musset, Les Invasions : Les vagues germaniques, Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 1965 (3rd ed.1994, ISBN 2130467156)

• Waiting for the Barbarians (http:/ / cavafis. compupress. gr/ kave_32. htm) a poem by Cavafy

Page 15: Decline of the Roman Empire

Article Sources and Contributors 15

Article Sources and ContributorsDecline of the Roman Empire  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=397764076  Contributors: 2D, ASteadyDecline, AVand, Abou Ben Adhem, Aigos100, Aitias, Ajeezy123,Alansohn, Alexander Domanda, Alpha 4615, Amin0303, AnonMoos, Anonymous Dissident, Antandrus, Aprogressivist, Aquillion, Arg, Aristides, Attilios, Aua, Badgernet, BanyanTree,Barbatus, Bart133, Beland, Belligero, Berig, Bhadani, Bidgee, Bigbluefish, Bigturtle, BillyBreen, Birty2k, Bloodofox, Bobblehead, Bobo the Talking Clown, Bobo192, Bobster111, Bonadea,Bostonfan123123, Burnt-sienna, Businessmouse, C.Fred, CALR, CBM, CWY2190, Cactusframe, Caknuck, Calabraxthis, Calaminh, Calm, Can't sleep, clown will eat me, Canadian-Bacon,CanadianLinuxUser, Candyroks987, Capecodeph, Capricorn42, Carl.bunderson, Carlosfigara, Catalographer, Charles Matthews, Chino, Choster, Chris the speller, Ckenniss, Clintville, Coinmanj,Coldfire136, Coppertopolo, Corpx, Crimson30, Cst17, Cthuljew, Cuchullain, CyrilleDunant, Cyrus Andiron, DGG, DH85868993, Daizus, Dalliance, Dan 9111, DanielCD, Danilot, Darth Panda,Dausuul, Dave Lohran, Davewild, David Schaich, Delirium, Demeter, DerHexer, Dincher, Discospinster, DougsTech, Dppowell, DrSprite, Dreadstar, Drgilberto, Drosdaf, Durova, Dylan Lake,Eb.hoop, Edison, Ekksel, El C, ElTyrant, EliasAlucard, Epbr123, Eternal Pink, Evangeline, Evecon12, Ewulp, Exacerbation, Excirial, Fenice, Ferkelparade, FilipeS, Fingy, Firsfron, Fl, Flix2000,Fratrep, Fred Condo, FullMetal Falcon, Fuzzform, G.W., GWhitewood, Gaelen S., Gaius Cornelius, Garion96, Gay Cdn, Geoffspear, GeorgeStepanek, Gerbrant, Gilliam, Giov9, Girld22,Glasperlenspiel, Gman124, Godzilla Awoken, Gomm, Green Cardamom, Gregfitzy, Grimhelm, Grokmoo, Gun Powder Ma, Gunslinger1812, Gurch, Gwen Gale, Gwernol, HDCase, Hadrian89,HairyDan, Hannaranae, HexaChord, Hgger, Hiberniantears, Hippalus, Hne123, Howa0082, Husond, IRP, IW.HG, Igoldste, Ilikepie2221, InsufficientData, Iridescent, IrishParadox, IronDuke,Isaac Rabinovitch, J.delanoy, J04n, JW1805, JaGa, Jackol, Jamie M Hayes, January2007, Jasuena, Javier Arambel, Jdsteakley, Jeff G., JesseGarrett, Jgeddes, Jitse Niesen, Jmacwiki, Joel7687,John D. Croft, John254, Jonjames1986, Juicifer, Julesd, Juppiter, Kaihsu, Kaiser matias, Kalt wie stahl, Kauffner, Keepfrozen, Kendrick7, Kesac, Kessler, Knarf-bz, Knight45, Kordle69, Kozuch,Krydolf, Kuralyov, Kuru, KyraVixen, La goutte de pluie, Lacrimosus, Lan360, Lara11, Law, Legendkillere, Leonard^Bloom, Lesath, Leszek Jańczuk, LightSpectra, Llort, Lmcelhiney,Loren.wilton, Lotje, Lugnuts, Luk, Luvya4lifex3, Lycurgus, M1ss1ontomars2k4, MBisanz, MCiura, MKleid, Mac Davis, Mackant1, Madesfuga, Malo, Manuel Anastácio, Marauder40,Martin451, Master of Puppets, Matt Gies, Matticus78, Maxis ftw, McSly, Mcorazao, Meamemg, MeltBanana, Mervyn, Mets501, Migukin, Mihoshi, Mike Doughney, Minna Sora no Shita,Miquonranger03, Mkamensek, Mlouns, Mmcadam, Moltebær, Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg, Moxfyre, MrMalax, Mrld, Mschel, Msridhar, Mu301, Mufka, Mygerardromance, Nakon,NawlinWiki, Nbatra, Neddyseagoon, Nehwyn, Netsnipe, Neutrality, Newtown11, Nichlok, Nick C, Nick209, Nilfanion, Nn123645, Nubbin, Nydas, Obli, Oldwindybear, Olorin28, Onevalefan,Owen, PJM, Panairjdde, Pascal.Tesson, Pasta Salad, Paul from Michigan, Pbrower2a, Pharaoh of the Wizards, Philip Trueman, Plasticbadge, Pmanderson, Pokrajac, Postdlf, Prestonmag,Pyrospirit, Pyrotec, QuaziK, Quebec99, R'n'B, RafaelG, RainbowOfLight, RedRabbit1983, Reddi, Redfarmer, Redquark, RekishiEJ, Rex Germanus, RexNL, Reywas92, Rgoodermote, RichFarmbrough, Richard Keatinge, Rjensen, Rjwilmsi, Rklawton, Robindch, Rogerson9, Roland Kaufmann, Ronald King, Rorschach, Rougher07, Rummank, Ryanmcdaniel, SCRA5071, SGGH,SJP, SMC, SaaHc2B, Sam Hocevar, Sardanaphalus, Sceptre, Sdornan, Sean William, Sethdoe92, Sharkface217, SheepNotGoats, Shinmawa, Silence, Singinglemon, Sintaku, Sionus, Skurrkrow,Smiller933, SmokeyTheCat, Snigbrook, Soliloquial, Someguy13DL, Sonicsuns, Sottolacqua, SouthernNights, Space Cadet, Sparkssc, Spearhead, Spider Jerusalem, Spiekier, Spliffy, Srnec,Ssolbergj, Star sage0, Stbalbach, Stephenb, Stephenchou0722, SteveNash11, Steven Zhang, Stormie, Stp22, Strebe, Student7, Swf120, Sylent, Taco325i, Tannin, Teedo, Textor, The Evil Spartan,TheCheeseManCan, TheDJ, TheMadBaron, Thesevenseas, Thingg, Tmorrisey, Toh, Tousy, True Pagan Warrior, Trugster, Tulocci, Tycho, Ubardak, Ugur Basak, Ukexpat, Ultramarine,Unschool, Useight, Usrnme h8er, V-squared, Victorgrigas, Viriditas, Vivio Testarossa, WBardwin, WGee, WadeSimMiser, Waggers, Wavelength, Wayward, WeniWidiWiki, Wetman, WilliamS. Saturn, Wimt, Winer0031, Wolfkeeper, Woodfootball17, Xaliqen, Xarr, Yamamoto Ichiro, Yosy, Zealous mission, 1043 anonymous edits

Image Sources, Licenses and ContributorsImage:RomulusAugustus.jpg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:RomulusAugustus.jpg  License: unknown  Contributors: Gryffindor, Paradoctor, Saperaud, 1 anonymouseditsImage:476eur.jpg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:476eur.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Electionworld, Roke, Ulamm, 1 anonymous edits

LicenseCreative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unportedhttp:/ / creativecommons. org/ licenses/ by-sa/ 3. 0/