Did the Roman Empire really have to fall?

🔴 YOU WANT TO SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL? 🔴
🤗 Join our Patreon community: / maiorianus
Or become an official Maiorianus member on KZbin: / maiorianus461
🤗 One-Time Donation?
PayPal: paypal.me/Maio...
Bitcoin: bc1qv4lsfsplvfecrrgvmfclhga28we7mvh9563xdj
🔗 Share the video with anyone who might be interested (it helps a ton!)
👍 Subscribe to our videos FOR FREE: www.youtube.co...
📚 My favorite novel about the late Roman Empire, "Julian" by Gore Vidal: amzn.to/3mZwOdJ
📚 BEST BOOKS ON ROMAN HISTORY: 📚
1. "History of the City of Rome in the Middle Ages" by Ferdinand Gregorovius amzn.to/3yOvjEd
2. "Rome: Profile of a City, 312-1308" by Richard Krautheimer amzn.to/3yyChgp
3. "Rome: An Urban History from Antiquity to the Present" by Rabun Taylor amzn.to/322ClsZ
These are all excellent books if you are like me, absolutely fascinated by the transition of Rome from late antiquity to the early medieval period.
📚 One of our favorite books about the Fall of the Roman Empire, "The Fall of Rome" by Bryan Ward-Perkins: amzn.to/3FXeDNg
The wonderful background music is by Adrian von Ziegler: • Relaxing Roman Music -...
🎦 FILMING EQUIPMENT WE USE: 🎦
Webcam: amzn.to/3yFSFvu
Microphone: amzn.to/3e2ZFsW
Disclosures: Some links in the description are affiliate links which means that if you purchase something by clicking on one of them, your host Sebastian will receive a small commission at no additional cost to you. In this way you will be supporting the channel to improve the video production quality at no extra cost to you.
📬 Contact us: [e-mail]
#Maiorianus

[@Maiorianus_Sebastian]

A special shout-out to all the people who recently donated to us via Super Thanks 🤗: 🧡 @julius williams 🧡 @Mauro Merali 🧡 @Rank of Master 🧡 @JeffTownUSA 🧡 @Eisenpfosten 🧡 @Squire Waldo 🧡 @Ruufus De Leon 🧡 @David Keane 🧡 @Kevin Gomez 🧡 @scrot 🧡 @Xina Marie Uhl 🧡 @Aaron Flynn 🧡 @Robert 🧡 @Gary Worthington 🧡 @howtorideahorse 🧡 @Franz Nowak 🧡 @(Ἰάσων) Sobek Lord of the Four Corners 🧡 @michael porzio 🧡 @David Batlle Thank you so much for your generous support and for believing in us 🙏 Your host, Sebastian

[@commentfreely5443]

idiots were always civil warring and stabbing their leaders.

[@oisnowy5368]

I know you have plenty ideas for video's, but what about whether or not the constant civil wars induced war weariness and made the profession of legionary less attractive to the Roman civilians. Gathering an army to fight outsiders is far more motivational than one gathered to fight brothers and neighbors.

[@megalodon3655]

I would say that Rome still continued as a civilization through the Byzantine empire or eastern Roman Empire. The eastern Romans did take back Rome they just weren’t able to restore it to its former glory. As the bubonic plague caused them to lose a lot of manpower and the lombards would take advantage of that and take over Italy. I would say to prevent the fall of Rome to the barbarians the Italian peninsula would fall under eastern Roman control including the Italian peninsula and they would fortify those areas and get rid of the corruption that’s there and make Rome a second capital but that’s how I would se it surviving. Anyways good video peace.

[@TetsuShima]

"Go to the rising sun, for I am setting.” -Last words of Marcus Aurelius and the beginning of the decline of the Roman Empire

[@memezoffuckery3207]

BANZAI! 🇯🇵

[@memezoffuckery3207]

“No, not that rising sun” - Marcus Aurelius

[@ClassicalNumismatics]

Rome still exists. In our hearts ❤💔

[@iche9373]

Rome is still there. But how can you be so cynical? It was a slaveholder society.

[@JTL1776]

@@iche9373 I know this argument. Has merit. But dude roman slave's were conquered enemies. Including many Italian and Greek Roman citizens. Not racial slavery. And every empire and civilization has had slavery and or serfdom. So this argument is so one sided and foolish.

[@iche9373]

"every empire and civilization has had slavery and or serfdom" That's simply not true. According to the archaeologist David Wengrow and his groundbreak research there were ancient cities and villages around the world which were led in an egalitarian way, even after the Neolithic Revolution where we supposed to think that inequality should rise, but that's totally wrong. They were ancient Cities and villages in an egalitarian way which existed for several thousand years where they didn't have kings/queens, serfdom or slavery. They were not only egalitarian but also successful and innovative with their technologies at that time like metallurgy, agriculture etc. And the life quality was relatively high, too. If you don't believe me. Just check his Ted Talk "A new understanding of human history and the roots of inequality"

[@Echilibrat]

​@@iche9373Este un lucru absurd să judecăm societățile antice și medievale pornind de la valorile lumii de azi mai ales că nici măcar în zilele noastre aceste valori nu sunt universal acceptate și apreciate.Egalitatea de exemplu nu exista și nici nu poate exista nici în zilele noastre fiindcă evopusa libertății iar oamenii sunt foarte diferiți și nu au cum sa fie egali.Nici măcar regimul totalitar comunist nu a reușit să impună egalitatea .Eu am trăit Intr o țară comunistă și știu despre ce vorbesc .Nici egalitatea de șanse nu funcționează prea bine nicăieri.De ce sa judecăm lumea antică și medievală fiindcă atunci era sclavie și iobăgie,inegalitate ,războaie de cucerire, etc.Un adevărat istoric nu emite judecăți de valoare,nu condamna și nu critica.ce a fost cândva ci caută doar sa explice cum era organizată societatea în acele timpuri ,cum funcționa,ce valori avea,ce contradictii,ce valori artistice a creat,de ce tehnologii dispunea,etc.Nu e cazul să criticam Roma sau Grecia antica fiindcă nu avea valorile noastre de azi( ale unora dintre nou).fiindcă asta e o prostie și nu așa lucrează un istoric obiectiv.Acesta cercetează,analizează,,prezintă,explica și caută să ne facă să înțelegem cum era acea lume demult dispărută.Imi aduc aminte că în timpul regimului comunist istoricii erau obligați să analizeze și să explice trecutul pornind întotdeauna de la așa zisa lupta de clasă care era văzută ca motor al istoriei: lupta dintre sclavi și stăpânii de sclavi,dintre nobili și iobagi,dintre burghezie și nobilime,dintre proletariat și burghezie Instaurarea comunismului pe tot Globul era văzută că victoria finală a celor exploatați in fata exploatatorilor,comunismul fiind socotit că perfect,fara greșeli și nedreptăți și promovând egalitatea absolută..Așa zisa democratie socialistă ( care de fapt nu exista) era socotită mult superioara democrației burgheze..Comuniștii ne spuneau că numai poporul contează nu personalitățile,că poporul a făurit tot ce este bun in societate nu personalitățile.Era viziunea marxist - leninistă despre societate,o viziune primitivă și nerealistă pe care comuniștii o impuneau că obligatorie și singura valabilă.Cine nu accepta asta era persecutat,judecat,condamnat și închis.Nu vreau sa mai am de a face cu o astfel de viziune.Corectitudinea politică vrea sa ne impună o viziune despre societate,despre trecut apropiata și asemănătoare cu a comuniștilor dar eu nu accept și nu voi accepta niciodată așa ceva.

[@patrickgaimari4478]

My name is Gaimari and I've always felt a closeness to the Roman empire ever since I was two or three years old I would draw pictures of Romans. As I've grown to be 75 now I agree with you and I've always felt how close we are to that fallen empire of Rome. And we see that the great empires after have mimicked and taken on the laws and ways of the Romans.

[@perfectplayingplaids]

Based

[@SUDMONEYBAGS]

Sigma elderly man

[@TB-pu9qm]

Me to....29y old

[@legendaryfrolox6285]

Damn you had to have been the greatest 2-3 year old ever

[@iche9373]

The Roman Empire was a slaveholder society, how can you feel so closed to that cynical world of oppression and inequality?

[@c.norbertneumann4986]

A survival of the Western Roman Empire would have demanded a profound change in the mentality of its population to which they were neither willing nor able. The famers and colonists had to pay taxes that ruined them, while the upper class was exempted from taxation. Roman citizens refused to join the army. It was the Roman citizenry that had given up the Western Roman Empire. Some more military victories of the Roman army over the Germanic invaders would not have saved the empire in the long run.

[@hachibidelta4237]

The east have very good chance of surviving, until Basil ii died and have shtty successors.

[@aleksandarstoichev5463]

@@hachibidelta4237 nah they had pretty good chance of surviving until Isaac II Angelos

[@AureliusLaurentius1099]

@@hachibidelta4237 The Komnenos were pretty dece considering how they have to deal with both the Latins and the Turks trying to eat them alive

[@alessandrogini5283]

Well,basically should avoid third century crisis and Murder of Alexander severus

[@0utc4st1985]

@@aleksandarstoichev5463 What really did in the Eastern Empire was the loss of Anatolia. That loss was entirely avoidable as it was a result of a vicious civil war following Manzikert. It would certainly have helped a great deal not to invite Turks to watch over your cities will you run off with the garrison to kill other Romans.

[@RomanHistoryFan476AD]

Funny enough the very fact the Eastern Empire lasted long after the fall of the west shows that the empire did not need to fall. The biggest problem the Romans had was that they were placed in such vital and well traversed areas that everyone wanted a slice off. I think your onto something there Maiorianus, the West needed the East and vice versa in fact it's kind of like How the Eagle of Rome itself has a pair of wings in order to fly. One needs the other to survive.

[@alexzero3736]

Nah. The differences between West and East were only growing. And Constatinople replaced Rome as capital of trade, civilized world, eternal city...

[@RomanHistoryFan476AD]

@@alexzero3736 Yes But the West had the Manpower/tribes to draw from that the East Needed and two powers are better than.

[@septimiusseverus343]

@@RomanHistoryFan476AD As did the East. Anatolia was a prime recruiting ground and formed the backbone of the latter theme system.

[@RomanHistoryFan476AD]

@@septimiusseverus343 Yes true indeed, But relying on one manpower pool can exhaust the source in times of strain, Like seen throughout the Eastern Empire's history. Imagine if they had food of North Africa carthage so if Egypt fell then they could still fall back on Carthage till Egypt was captured again. And the manpower pools of Gaul, Italia. In fact a secure Western empire would allow the East to not worry about attacks from the west and allow them to double efforts on the east.

[@noahjohnson935]

West Rome had man resources at its disposal, but incompetent emperors ended up dooming her. Stilicho, Aetius, and Majorian showed that if emperors had been more competent they could've done a lot to stem the worst of the decline on the military side of things. Honorius being the first ruler of the West though really didn't help

[@TetsuShima]

3:28 Augustus: *Restores stability to Rome, creating a new Golden Age and an Empire that would last 1,500 years and also leave a Legacy impossible to erase* Poisoned figs: "And we took that personally..."

[@nathanpangilinan4397]

Thanks, Livia.

[@thatromanguy1906]

i see you everywhere

[@michaelporzio7384]

Thanks!

[@michaelporzio7384]

Great channel I wish you continued success. I would like to suggest a topic, Britain after 410 until the fall of the Western Empire. Did Roman traditions continue did some Romans legionaries stay and defend their homes, etc. Did Rome actually evacuate Britain or just wave goodbye!

[@Maiorianus_Sebastian]

Thanks a lot Michael for your support :) Excellent topic suggestion ! I am actually working on a video about Londinium around 500 AD, then the state of Britain will also be discussed, but I will make many more videos about Britain after the Romans left :)

[@OfficiallyLost]

Stillicho is so under appreciated in Roman history. There were few generals that genuinely went undefeated until his death through assassination. Sort of the “hidden gem” of a general in Roman history that could have turned things around.

[@robruss62]

If only he'd had a bit more of Sulla, Caesar, Vespasian, Severus, Diocletian, Constantine and Julian in him...

[@ProbusVerus]

It's such sad video...I like to think there is a alternative dimension somewhere where Rome never fell and we are all united under the Eagle banner.

[@mousinius]

where are you from tho?

[@houseplant1016]

@@mousinius Probably a Frenchman

[@thalmoragent9344]

All? I mean, all of Europe, North Africa and a little bit of Middle East, sure But even I don't think a Global Rome would've worked out. Best case scenario it ends up being a purely European Empire plus some North African territory.

[@houseplant1016]

@@thalmoragent9344 Why? North Africa was one of the richest province in the Roman Empire and produced many important works and writers.

[@thalmoragent9344]

@@houseplant1016 I know... that's why I said all of Europe PLUS some North African Territory.

[@josem.garciariquelme4865]

¡Gracias!

[@Maiorianus_Sebastian]

Thanks a lot for your kind donation :)

[@peteregan3862]

Plague was another major factor you have not addressed. It could wipe out a third of the population at one time, and was a big barrier to trade. Aslo volcanic clouds cooled the climate on several occasions causing crop loss and famine.

[@gulliverdeboer5836]

In the sense that each individual catastrophe could have been averted the collapse wasn't inevitable. But IMO it was inevitable in the sense that the empire kept generating new catastrophes and sooner or later its luck would run out. You can't have constant internal strife and obscene levels of inequality without eventually a civil war/rebellion/palace coup coinciding with outside invasions and a plague. And when that happens the survival of the empire is almost entirely down to luck, which is unsustainable in the long run. To survive without relying on luck so much Rome would have to have been transformed in a way that is either highly unrealistic for the time period, or that would make it so different from the Roman Empire we know that we would hardly recognise it as Roman and you might as well argue that modern France or Italy are surviving pieces of Rome.

[@precariousworlds3029]

Also, Rome's success came in part to the fact that their technology and tactics was far superior to their enemies. However, by the 5th century AD, the Germanic tribes had captured and reverse-engineered Roman equipment, so while before they were weak, shirtless barbarians, now they almost matched entire legions in strength. This was one of the reasons they were able to overrun so much of the west. Eventually, Rome grew stagnant. Even if it did survive, it wouldn't have the massive advantage of tactics it once had.

[@gulliverdeboer5836]

@@precariousworlds3029 I'm guessing Rome still had a demographic advantage over the disunited barbarian tribes. But yeah, if the majority of the Roman army is constantly fighting civil wars a barbarian tribe using Roman tactics suddenly becomes a bit of a problem...

[@precariousworlds3029]

@@gulliverdeboer5836 Yep. After hundreds of years of fighting, the barbarians began to use Rome's own technology and tactics against them. Even if the west survived, eventually it's neighbours would've surpassed them, and it would have been minimized to a smaller power, like the east was.

[@Killzoneguy117]

Plus, long lived empires like this inevitably become stagnant. The same tried ideas that worked 1,000 years ago are applied in the present day, even if they may not necessarily be the best idea. I read a very interesting book on the Bronze Age Collapse which pointed out that while the collapse of the Bronze Age civilizations of the Eastern Mediterranean ushered in economic and political turmoil and brought an end to the era of regional trade that marked the Bronze Age, the fact that so many societies were now cut off from the necessary tin and copper to produce bronze led to them having to substitute bronze with iron, which marked the beginning of the iron age. More than that, where trade in the bronze age had largely been conducted through state merchants, employed by the palaces of the major city-states and civilizations of the era, the collapse of the Bronze Age brought an end to the command economy approach to trade and led to a more decentralized international trade order where merchants embarked on trading voyages of their own volition and with their own profit motive in mind, rather than by the orders of their rulers. This created a far more efficient trading order which survives to this date. Similarly, the collapse of the Roman Empire cleared the way for new civilizations, ideas, beliefs, technologies, etc. to come to the forefront. Civilizational collapse is a part of civilizational advancement. The old forest must burn to make room for the new growth.

[@AmericanShia786]

One might think revisiting various topics would become tedious, but that has not been the case on your KZbin channel. You explore these topics from various angles. It never gets old! Keep up the good work. I'm on a fixed income paying off debt. But, perhaps I will be able to support your channel soon.

[@TrevHassy]

Her: "He's thinking of other women" Me: Thinking of the timeline where the ambush of the teutoborg forest didn't happen and the threat of the Vandals and Goths never came to pass.

[@hdufort]

We could easily envision a "rump empire" controlling the Italian peninsula, Sicilia, Sardinia, Corsica, the Adriatic coast (today's Croatia) as well as wheat-producing areas there, maybe most of the Mediterranean coast in southern France and Catalonia. A Gaul state would perhaps stabilize and become an independent ally. Egypt, Africa and the Levant, not sure at all. The big question is, would there be a permanent political divorce with the Greek world (Constantinople, Greece, Anatolia)?

[@hazzmati]

I would say that would be likely. The Greeks were never ''romanised'' like all the other folks that were conquered by the Romans. They largely retained their own language, beliefs and culture. Also wasn't North Africa heavily colonised by Roman settlers? I'd argue they'd want to stay part of the Empire.

[@hdufort]

@@hazzmati It depends on how North Africa was badly hit by Vandals. And also a Persian or Parthian push in the Levant.

[@kimberlyperrotis8962]

I think a rump empire in the east would have been the most likely.

[@hachibidelta4237]

@@hazzmati I'd say very romanized actually when it comes to identity, they consider themself to be Rhomaioi till 20th century

[@henrykkeszenowicz4664]

I really think that Diocletian's reforms were one of the reasons to the empire's fall. Roman Empire had a form of patriotism in it's republican ideas(SPQR, Senatus Populusque Romanus), which were a semi-democratic system which allowed both patricians and plebs run the state, and allowed a simple man to rise from rags to riches. Roman Senate was still somewhat relevant under the Principate, as senators could command armies and become emperors(Pupienus and Balbinus were proclaimed emperors by the Senate), and plebeians were Roman citizens with proper citizen rights. Under the dominate, regular plebs were reduced to being peasants and had nothing to fight for except some money. In the late Roman Empire, neither the senate, nor the people, nor even Rome itself had any importance. Emperor Julian tried to restore the Principate and paganism to emulate the Nerva-Antonine dynasty, and if he succeeded in his reforms(nevermind the paganism, Principate is what really matters), there would simply be more people willing to fight for Rome. Of course, this is just a little detail, a drop in the sea of reasons why Roman Empire really fell, but I had to point it out.

[@alessandrogini5283]

I think that Alexander severus could had gave the empire another century of Life

[@henrykkeszenowicz4664]

@@alessandrogini5283 He could, but he was too young and had a mother who ruined his life and reign.

[@enricomanno8434]

I totally agree with your analysis

[@alessandrogini5283]

@@henrykkeszenowicz4664 he Need a co emperor,or more loyal army/more time/more luck

[@andreiasw1]

patriotism, cultural cohesion, proudness of ones legendary culture, all centered around Rome, the city itself. this together with a decent succesion system a decent social cohesion between plebs and patricians would have been enough for it not only to survive, but to be probably as close to invincible as possible.

[@ramsybane7968]

Awesome videos

[@michaelstaengl1349]

That's exactly my favorite question. Had the Roman Empire to fall? I asked me the same already in the mid 1990s, so, still without Internet access I came up with my own alternate history in which the Roman Empire never fell. I wanted, to my then best knowledge to figure out how a modern day Imperium Romanum would deal with the modern crisis, the two world wars, climate change, the rise of terrorism. The technological level is the same as in our real world since science and tech underwent the same cycles. The Imperium Romanum only is more advanced in all things space travel with three space stations not much larger than twice the size of the ISS and a small base on Moon. It managed to avoid the downfall of the imperial monarchy in the west in 476 when another emperor rose to the throne thus disposing Odoacar. Back in the mid 1990s I didn't knew much about Maiorianus. If I would have known much more about him back than I probably would have chosen him as the man who made the POD. So, back then, I created two additiona aristocratic families, the Iuliani and the Torquati to allow me my alternate history. Now, I'm writing on a revisited version with more of my much improved knowledge about antiquitiy for instance thanks to your great videos Mr. Maiorianus too. But since my then alternate history POD emperor and the families of the Severi, Iulianu and Torquati are such an integral part of my alternate history, I kept this story intact. In my alternate history scenario, Silvanus Torquatus and his allies from the Gens Iuliani and the Gens Severa (who survived thanks to the Julianians warning Geta about the planned murder by Caracalla) created a strong buccellari force consisting of Romans. Thanks to the charisma of Silvanus Torquatus he managed to convince enough Romans to join his private military and the private militaries of the Iuliani and Severi. With these armies, Silvanus managed to defeat Odoacar in 476 after Odoacar disposed Romulus. Silvanus prior to becoming emperor even avenged the death of Maiorianus at the hand of Ricimer. Silvanus told to the spirit of Maiorianus "I will finish what you have started" (pun on Kylo Ren intended). And he did. He stabilized the western Empire, reconquered some lost territories, formed the first Foederatium Romanum with the Western Empire as the leading power and allied countries like the Wissigothic kingdom or the Vandal Kingdom. Silvanus and his capable and loyal team (a novelty in that time) reestablished religious tolerance and so, without the Gothic wars and an emperor dedicated to preserve the antiquity Rome was able to keep all the palaces, thermae, basilicae and the Amphitheater and other old buildings fully intact even today and this in addition to the Peters-Dome in the Vatican, the splendid churches and other great renaissance- and later buildings. Today, the Roman Empire has an area across the whole globe including provinces like Florida, Honcong et Canton, Hainan, Goa-Magna, Lemures Terra (real world Madagascar), Constantinopolis, Portugal, Castilia, Baetica, Tarraconensis, Narbonensis, California Romanum, Terra Ignium or Hispaniola and not to forget the Insulae Sundae Minor including Bali and Flores and Pacifica Romanum. So, the Roman Empire excluding the contested Antarctica territory has an area of 7.5 million square kilometers which is more than the 5 million square kilometers in its first largest extend in the antiquity under Traianus. In its greatest extend in the 1880s, the Roman Empire in my alternate history ruled over more than 33.5 million square kilometers of territores and in my alternate history, thus Rome managed to create the largest empire in all history. The British Empire came second after Rome in my scenario. Normally the Romans are speaking Italian and modern Greek and Latin is being kept alive in the military, at the imperial court in states-authorities and in educated circles. The Romans are a multi-religious society with the two strongest religions the similar in share Roman Catholic Church and the community of the Cultus Deorum (Romana) and on a smaller scale the Eastern Roman Orthodoxy, the Isisi-cult, the Mithras cult, Judaism and a bit of Islam. The city of Rome has 23.5 million inhabitants. In its downtown (the Municipio Uno) most of the ancient buildings are still intact like all ten largest baths (like the Thermae Caracalla), the old Imperial Fori and in the outer regions Rome has a new emperors palace in addition to the old one on Mons Palatinus, a second large Forum Romanum with additional Imperial Fori, high rise buildings of glass and steel and all the modern things too. The main railway station is the Stazioi Termini di Roma next to the fully intact Thermae Diocletiani and the rione Sallustiani on the other side of the Thermae Diocletiani became a noble quarter for the super rich. Since 1981 the Empire is ruled by the highly capable Imperator Caesar Octavius Secundus Augustus Felix fili Divi Augustus (or Imperatore Caesare Ottavio Secundo Augusto il meglio figlio del dio Augusto). In 2021 he announced his upcomming retreat from power in the year 2036 when he will be 80 1/2 years old. He needs the remaining time to fully stabilize the empire, make it fit for the next centuries and by resigning from power he wants his equally capable son Flavius Torquatus Iulianus to have enough time to shine as a full emperor and not "just" as his co-regent and vice-imperator and Octavius Secundus under no circumstances wants to end as a salivating, bumbling stuttering frail old man on the throne. On my Word-Files on which I create my world building, I have 200 pages about the present day state of the empire, more than 140 pages of history overview, tech files, perons files and some pictures. So, you can imagine how extremely brief my overview about my alternate history scenario was. (Edited for typos and improved the clarity of some things I mentioned)

[@Marco-1997]

You might like the ucronia wrote by an Italian channel called “la biblioteca di Alessandria” if the Roman Empire never fell and what would have happened in ww2

[@kimberlyperrotis8962]

This is one of the very best history channels on YT. I love the straightforward and serious delivery; I get so sick of all that juvenile, idiotic content on other channels, cutesy cartoons, explanations of history through video games (!), bathroom humor attempts, etc. Also, most other channels just rehash the basic information they got from Wikipedia, it’s not at all scholarly, and we already know the basics they just keep restating over and over. This is the channel for the thinking adults who are reallyinterested in history!

[@Maiorianus_Sebastian]

Thanks a lot Kimberly, I really appreciate your kind words. Yes indeed, I wanted to make a more serious channel, because for me, the Fall of the Roman Empire is a topic that makes me sad. So therefore, I cannot be too cheerful when discussing how an entire civilization fell. So I really appreciate when other people feel the same, thanks again !

[@lyricofwise6894]

This is a great channel because it analyzes implications, meaning... actually Thinks about the period, and as you said, rather than just reciting history and opposed to using just the most general of sources like wikipedia.

[@chrisparsons2791]

I'm a new subscriber; will be supporting on Patreon soon, I've always been fascinated with the longevity of Rome's empire and it's lasting influences. Your hypothetical timelines are quite provocative and well researched. Your channel has a great vibe and your personal touches like speaking in Latin, and discussing plans for making new videos are heartfelt and honest. My Latin studies are in their infancy, so I shall wish you and your channel long life and prosperity in English for now. 😀

[@ecurewitz]

You’d think that the whole crisis of the third century would have been avoided if an earlier emperor had instituted a doge type system like they had in Medieval Venice, where the senate would appoint a new emperor for life

[@alexzero3736]

There is another way - establish ruling dynasty, transform to monarchy.

[@alessandrogini5283]

Third century crisis could be avoided if Alexander severus wasn't murdered,had more time/luck/more loyal army,or a co emperor

[@explorer1968]

Also, the alarming overincrease of Germanic warriors into the Roman army led to indiference of the Roman society towards their own legions. Without the loyal backing of the army, no one could trust the military for the defence of the Empire...

[@jasonpalacios1363]

Despite of what happened to the ERE it was amazing how it lasted until the mid-15th century especially the 1204 ransack by Christian Crusaders.

[@Blaqjaqshellaq]

1204 was the New Roman Empire's true end. (Crucially, the Crusaders were incapable of creating a new regime to control all Neo-Roman territory, instead letting it be divided among various conquerors.) The Palaiologos revival was essentially just a kingdom, and after a century just a city-state!

[@Артём-х8ф]

Thanks for your work, legatus!

[@OnsetOfPutrefaction]

Fantastic video as per usual, and the points made here are seldom summarized in concise manner as are presented on your channel. However, I may be the Minorian here in thinking that Majorian wasn’t as great at military dealings as he was a politician. Yes, he was Great, but did he really distinguish himself from many other patriots attempting to restore the empire in the 5th century? Visigoths weren’t really dealt with, they were just temporarily pacified through political maneuvers and excessive leniency. And the Sueves were never really conquered- any lull in insurgency at the time was really due to their infighting and unwillingness to unite under a single banner; they were still a persisting menace and thorn at the side of the empire and their gothic allies (Allie’s of changing allegiance at best). Also, the positioning of the mostly transport fleet so close to Vandal dominated Ibiza/Majorca, along with a small amount of available defender warships being manned by hastily assembled skeleton crews/mercenaries at Elche was just an epic strategic blunder- to risk an entire invasion by leaving an invading fleet (that cost the Empire its last coin of revenue) just about totally defenseless and at the mercy of time and hope of Vandal negligence was highly reckless. (I don’t quite see the “traitor” argument here either - operation was not a secret and Vandals were much more skilled mariners at this point and were in a much better position to intercept the fleet, etc). Then the hastily signed peace was a total blow to the remainder of the prestige and pride of the empire and its last few true patriots (I don’t have a solution here- but he seemed to have just given up on hopes Geiseric will die soon). These are all very vaguely summarized thoughts with much more to be added - and I know you’ve read/studied this subject so much more than I have, but idk who else to share these “points of discourse with”…Love your channel man. Vincas.

[@ThalesGMota]

Thanks For The Video.

[@mattclements1348]

I havnt bn keeping up with ur videos, they are outstanding!!

[@SobekLOTFC]

Great work, Sebastian! 👍

[@Maiorianus_Sebastian]

Thanks a lot Sobek, I really appreciate it :)

[@alexjohna1]

another excellent thought provoking video history as a whole is full of what ifs usually down to the actions of one man at that precise moment in time

[@paulprice1705]

The Roman empire fell by self inflicted wounds more than anything else. The barbarians were easy to deal with, IF: succession and cival war was averted.

[@lyricofwise6894]

Exactly

[@badgamemaster]

Sometimes the greatest moments in history just came down to good or bad luck.

[@AlexVictorianus]

The Empire ceased to exist. But not Rome. It became center of the Papal States and managed to defend itself against Germanic kingdoms after the Eastern Roman Empire failed it. This Roman state existed with interruptions until the Capture of Rome in 1870. Its successor is Italy, whose culture is deeply Latin, with its language being the closest to Latin among state languages. Also the church is still the same as in late antiquity. The Roman self-awareness continued at least to 1870, and partly later, on local level even today.

[@AndreaMoletta-s3c]

The modern italian state is technically more Lombardo-Frankish than Roman.

[@dvrsify1]

Great video as usual

[@pawelciurys4287]

Love this video, keep up the great quality content. Btw what are the live action clips of the soldiers fighting in the background? At 6.50

[@6XenYang9]

The first and never solved problem of the roman empire that eclipse any other was the lack of a sucession policy. The romans so deeply concerned with the rule of law betrayed their own convictions for a system that had no solution for the rule "might makes right". It was not a question of if or how just of when it would have fallen.

[@richardsmith579]

Well, it left behind law, language(s) and art and architecture, so not a bad legacy. However, I agree with everything you say.

[@williamdukeofnormandy1403]

You forgot that it left the Roman Catholic Church. Why do you leave this out ?

[@siluda9255]

@@williamdukeofnormandy1403 because thats not really a good thing tbh

[@AallthewaytoZ2]

15:05 Amorica is listed as part of the Germanic Kingdoms but wasn't it _de facto_ independent? I think around this time the Frankish field army was destroyed by one of the Breton Dukes.

[@thomaseubank1503]

3:37 Now that puts things into perspective.

[@mohammedsaysrashid3587]

Excellent Introducing With accurate Evaluation of This History-Political Issue in the world ..also it was informative Video about Rome Empire History allot thanks

[@sudetenrider-pili6637]

I am really glad I found your chanel. You have the same feeling and love for Romans as I do.

[@stevejohnson3357]

Had Gratian not been assassinated there would have been no Honorius. Gratian may have had 'weaknesses' but still would have been better. Emperor had become the most valuable position and the most dangerous as a result. Tacitus, writing earlier, said that bad emperors were only noticed in the capital but by Honorius' time the government of the empire had become one of personal power.

[@wiseone1013]

It takes only a little poison to sow the seeds for the downfall of an Empire. A few cracks untreated over time leads to decay and destruction. This is the way of life.

[@thatromanguy1906]

Roma wasn't meant to fall in the first place

[@marsaeternum1003]

Maiorian was hated by the Senatorial class who wanted to pay less taxes if he had their support, he could do that, and Ricimer would have a really hard time killing him

[@alexzero3736]

Majorian should be more brutal and arrest or punish those very Senators and close disfunctional Senate

[@alessandrogini5283]

In the third century crisis,senate saved the empire, and also the seeds of caracalla and Alexander severus..in the fifth century,senate didn't want rule, pay taxes and lead army

[@marsaeternum1003]

@@alexzero3736 that was why AVGVSTVS kept the façade of the republic, yes they thought they had power in the government but in reality they were just glorified bench seaters but influential and filthy rich bench seaters that could raise 15 legions just by paying his year taxes

[@Diogolindir]

What is the documentary's footage that shows late roman republic civil wars?

[@andyt7295]

Paraphrasing a well-known quote in criminology, systemic factors load the gun, while luck and individual abilities (or lack thereof) pull the trigger.

[@halsnyder296]

I think there is a new, technology based, stage. The age (stage) of ignorance. We’re there.

[@Maiorianus_Sebastian]

Unfortunately, ignorance will always be part of humanity, sometimes more, sometimes less. But people always choose what they want to believe based on their own biases.

[@matthewvicendese1896]

The age of intellectualism was after WW2 until the 70s ... then neo liberalism Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama was the age of decadence ... MAGA movement and its complete lack of connection to reality is the decline.

[@danielchequer5842]

If you talk ignorance meaning the unawereness of one's lack of knowledge then I can see why. In one side the ammount of people unwilling to learn with the obscene ammount of information that we have access to for free is really sad. We live in time where people celebrate ignorance, specially history is beeing oversimplified by newer generations because of historical revisionism. That said, anything related to said revisioned periods is labelled as negative in one way or another (once I've heard someone say they refuse to study roman history because it's an empire of "evil white people", no joke). But my answer to this is: we live in an age where weakness is tolerated, very often encourajed. And strength and perseverance is often easily labeled negatively

[@fredhercmaricaubang1883]

AVE, Frater Maiorianus! I share your views on this channel! May your channel LOOONG outlive me! May your channel enlighten & educate as well as entertain many of the younger generations as it did me! Once again, AVE!

[@valorwarrior7628]

speaking about the survival of empires - we often forgot to cite and mention China which has existed for about 4000 years since its foundation as the Xia empire in 2070 B.C. even up to this day and forward - the only thing about China is that they have repetitively experienced the cycles of regionalization, decadence, prowess, overexpansion, decline, and collapse - and then start again as it repetitively changes its cycles of succession but no demise.

[@snax_4820]

To many speculations. The trade routes from Egypt to Rome were more and more compromised. Papyrus became a rare commodity already at the beginning of the 3rd century. The capital was transferred to Constantinople due to supply reasons. Constantinople could be reached by ship or land from Egypt. In the 3rd century society in the west changed. Cities became fortified what indicates that state authority was on decline and the incursions became more frequent. Rome was already on the back-foot by then. The question is not if the could have survived but how they survived a decline of 1200 years.

[@ivanvarela-pan4682]

If Commodus was a good emperor and he lived 70 years and died between the years 225-245 ( aproximately when started 3 century crisis), what would have happened? Would the Crisis of the 3 century have happened later?

[@thalmoragent9344]

I'm a sucker for Architecture of all sorts and fancy, traditional civilizations. So a modern Roman Empire in Europe (maybe in place of the EU as a whole, basically) would be very interesting to think about.

[@mousinius]

basically vienna

[@thalmoragent9344]

@@mousinius Vienna?

[@mousinius]

@@thalmoragent9344 yep, vienna, think about it

[@LV-426...]

But thinking more broadly, isn't the EU the modern reincarnation of the Roman empire?

[@williamdukeofnormandy1403]

You have the Vatican. lol

[@blazejdrazkowski1608]

Great video :)

[@belindaquinn4189]

Individual influence, such as Caesar etc etc has not been mentioned

[@Eazy-ERyder]

AURELIAN THE GREAT! Such an absolutely AMAZING and UNsung hero.

[@micha2909]

7:25 "barbarian invasions like the Goths, the Alemannii and the *Persians* ".... Bruh 😳 If Rome had one neighbor who certainly wasn't "barbarian" but equal to Rome then it was Persia.

[@agrippa5643]

We can all agree on that.

[@hemidas]

A response video to Tominus Maximus?

[@mikecoolwind7039]

What is your background music?

[@mattstakeontheancients7594]

Majorian what is your thoughts on the sassanid/Byzantine war that occurred due to Maurice being killed. Believe that 28 year long war destroyed the armies needed to prevent the Islamic conquest as the majority of the early solders that started it were from the client kingdoms of the Arabian peninsula.

[@paulgaskins7713]

I have a coin from the age of recovery during the reign of Aurelian, it is a vassal king on the stamp but still it was minted from the orders of Aurelian and why it’s so special to me besides it’s age is the fact the coin itself was made from silver drawn from coins that were cut with other metals therefore inflating the price and the new coins brought the inflation down and it’s a reminder that the west has been through this before

[@thewewefox2267]

Such a cool video

[@islamicschoolofmemestudies]

For me this quote might gonna apply : "You might die a hero or live long enough to become a villain" So idk...for me, Rome died a hero. But if Roman true values and True system would still be applied today....we might gonna villainize the Romans.

[@ORELIANVS]

i have an alt history scenario where both empires survived in a rump state.

[@joshuam7957]

Rome still lives on through the Vatican and it's religion.

[@elbapo7]

I entirely agree with this argument, but might come at it from another angle (as I have a geopolitics/International political economy background). The way historians always tend to attack questions is by focusing on major events and characters. However IPE looks at the fundamentals/ bigger picture to see why those events and characters appear so pivotal. Essentially, ricimer being so awful would not have mattered so fundamentally if the roman economy and taxation base and trade situation was in good health versus competitors. As essentially whatever crisis followed, the empire would have the resources to recover. Anyway, to my point : for me, the key problem was the east/west division at all. This led to an asymmetrical political and economic division which would inevitably lead to the withering of one half versus the other. And in particular a less strategic view of priorities for retention of territory across the board. Decline in the west was inevitable, leading to overall decline, particualy once Africa was gone. This is clear if you look at the map of the roman empires gdp at its height. Albeit just a snapshot, this makes clear the economic activity predominantly taking place at key locations in the east, namely constantinople and Egypt. This is no coincidence. These locations are at the intersections of the trade routes east, with the dardanelles, nile and red sea. It is no coincidence the gdp of Britain, for example was lower than anatolia. There was simply nowhere for further trade to come from west. So to split the empire east/west left Italy and Rome out on the periphery of its own sphere of influence, and the west became peripheral to the wider fight for economic 'meat' between persia and the byzantines(sorry eastern romans)/ and later Arabs. The wests withering on the vine was inevitable in this context. But not necessarily.To me, the biggest factors which could have prevented this would be a) no east west split, perhaps with some other approach to overcoming overstretch b) a continued strategic prioritisation of Africa as a collective to maintain the east west trade network with Rome in the centre. And finally, and perhaps most importantly, c) if this empire had looked west and discovered the new world, this would have extended the trade network and really placed the western (or west of) roman empire at the centre of the global trade network generating untold wealth and innovations. Imagine if a new age of roman exploration was ushered in? I beleive the empire would have gone from strength to strength, and we would be living in a very different world right now

[@erostheelder6831]

4:14 Japan not conquered? 🤔 "The land of rising sun" actually had two miniature suns dropped of their country which directly lead to them conceding in armed conflict...lol love the channel* bless the algorithm * for once

[@MBP1918]

Very interesting video

[@michaelrexrode3759]

So read the Roma Eterna series of novels by Robert Silverberg and see an American science fiction writer's take on this subject. I was especially amused by his story "Tales From The Venia Woods", based in his Roma Eterna universe. Alternate history master Harry Turtledove, PhD. in Byzantine history and a scholar in both Greek and Latin, also touched on a virtually immortal Roman Empire in his Crosstime Traffic novels.

[@DANTHETUBEMAN]

did you do a video on the loss of Africa from Rome?

[@hurryhussar]

It HAD TO fall

[@kimberlyperrotis8962]

If not for the Arab/Muslim conquest, I think the Eastern Empire might well have lasted into modern times, perhaps until the rise of Nationalism in the mid-19th C, or WWI. It’s ironic that it was westerners, the “Frank”, or Crusaders, really were the ones who dealt the death blow in the sack of Constantinople in 1204, which began its long, agonizing death that culminated in 1453. With the advent of modern military technology in the 14th and 15th C., the East might have been able to regain the Western Empire, if not for 1204.

[@Maiorianus_Sebastian]

Absolutely correct, I completely agree that the real death blow to the Eastern Roman Empire was inflicted ironically by the West in 1204. I am actually planning a video about this sack and the consequences for the Empire and for Constantinople. The city and the state never really recovered, it's just such a sad story again. Yes, the Eastern Roman Empire could have easily survived until modern times, if some events would have gone differently, and the sack of 1204 is one such point of divergence.

[@johnconnor8206]

4:34 they are completely different Ethiopia was a small kingdom within geographical boundaries well rome was a heavily overextended empire

[@tmuet3653]

Have you considered doing a collab with Monsieur Z?

[@NelsonDiscovery]

17:08 Or the unfair humiliation and terrorizing of people with psychological or mental disabilities, which is a problem that is still prevalent today all over the world.

[@johnconnor8206]

4:15 but they have been fractured and split and they weren’t as big as an empire

[@ragael1024]

love the video. tbf, i also believe that the Empire did not need to fall. however, it would have suffered a lot of changes, in territory, in religion, in culture. most importantly, the divide between East and West was inevitable. Latin West, greek East. the differences would have become bigger with each century. a schism would have been inevitable as well. after all, the Great Schism was just the bigger one, but many schisms took place before and after. and with the rise of nationalism, the empires would have consumed themselves from within. it's a 50-50% chance with these romans, either way. they always ended up killing each other :)) cheers mate

[@michalchik]

There are several physical reasons why Rome became less and less viable as the center of a great Empire I and never really recovered after it fell. There was lead contamination from the Plumbing and aqueducts and foundries. There was salination and erosion of the close by farmland which made food production worse and required more and more importation, there was the silting and erosion of the harbors that made shipping progressively less and less practical, there was also climate change, natural global warming which decreased the fertility and habitability of not only southern Italy but many of the regions that they had conquered, and increased the our ability of land to the north of Rome strengthening their enemies.

[@ziomudru]

Stilico could really have achieved all what you hypothesize. I believe his murder was really the beginning of the end. Until then, there was always hope

[@Finn_553]

The right man in the wrong place can make all the difference in the world

[@johnconnor8206]

KZbin updated when I was googling about aqueducts why can I not just google something with out KZbin updating. Anyway ill summarize my arguments 1 the survival of Rome to 1453 is very lucky and contrived making the luck to survive to now almost impossible. 2 the timeline lumps so many periods and dynasties together that it’s almost meaningless. 3. If the Roman Empire after nikea was so small that it barely would influence the world that Much on a prosperity level as it’s influence was so low. 4. Roman ideas somewhat impeded innovations and their stuff is mostly improvements modifications and merging a of other things like the Julian calendar being based off the egyptian one or aqueducts being Assyrian their have been many things that Rome took that others made first. 5. Other nations were equally or more advanced than Rome. Persia China or the Islamic calphites were all prosperous advance and had rich cultures. The reason Rome is so liked is because the western audience overly focuses on western stud and us culture has spread everywhere.

[@xk1390]

Interesting topic, but there's no need to feel sorry for its fall because like all empires, it was created through brutal conquest of very different peoples who otherwise would have wanted to stay independent.

[@Skyman08]

I recently discovered this channel and I am loving the content. I have always found the era of late antiquity to be fascinating. The battle of the Catalaunian plains, and naval attempt to retake Carthage from the vandals weakened the west so badly it is so interesting to think about Rome spanning a much longer timeline even into the modern era.

[@kamilnowakowski3917]

Problem with your video is that you are basically showing countless moments when a stroke of luck could have given like 10 or 20 more years while not showing how thwy could have solved systemic problems in the first place. Except luck is never 20/20 and Romans already have been incredibly lucky through history. We can make same What Ifs in opposite directions : What if Hannibal conquered Rome? What if by sheer luck Spartacus managed to suprise atack the city? What if year of 4 emperors ended up with long civil war and 4 empires? I agree that Romans could have lasted one, two, maybe three decades longer. Problem is that if your system keeps generating bad emperors, civil wars, overtaxation and weak army - it is only matter of time until it fells. If it didn't fall by era of Romulus Augustulus, it would fall by time of Honorius II in 496 or Kaligula II in 501. Byzantine empire survived longer due to variety of reasons - wealthier provinces, theodosian walls, better borders- but first and foremost due to reforms. While they did not fix succession which doomed them, they managed to solve other issues e.i they really modernised the army and somewhat fixed the economy. And while people like to present byzantine empire as roman empire because it is technically true ( succession , law etc) practically speaking it is like calling human an ape. They evolved to the point of being completely different state in all but name. It was ,,roman empire" without Rome, roman gods, roman language, roman customs or roman army.

[@alexzero3736]

Quite ironically, but Spartacus attack on Rome could start a positive chain reaction, guys at the Senate would wake up and see that slavery is A Problem.

[@septimiusseverus343]

Define "Roman."

[@agrippa5643]

You have a point. I also like your last phrase. Some time ago, i realised how not roman the Eastern Roman Empire was. They spoke greek, they left the roman values, and they worship different gods. Even the culture changed, one of them being not giving up no matter the odds. The byzantines fled so many times, even when they outnumbered the opponent. Anyway, the greeks we re adaptive that s for sure. But i think the romans never had the chance to do so aswell. They would, and i don t see that they would fall not even till today. If only the would improve their system, and remain true to the foundation values. Imagine seeing competent leaders, lots of money and army, a system that prevents civil war and crisis, and a culture that refuses to collapse.

[@mrmarmellow555]

Pleaz DO VIDEO ON IONOAN ROMAN'Z IN THE CRUSADER TIMES 💖 WOULD BE GREAT 👍 I Would become High Patreon AUG. FOR THIS PROJECT ❣️🇨🇰👍🍵🛡️

[@petebyron1957]

Have you done research on Rome,s industrial sectors? where they were? what regions made specialized products? and did the Industrial revolution actually start in Rome not England?

[@SanjayKumar-jd3bv]

Huh london itself roman city .every Britain roads itself roman made you silly anglo saxon ,Norman's

[@petebyron1957]

@@SanjayKumar-jd3bv I'm just asking about Rome,s industrial capabilities. I have no Idea what you are saying. lol

[@SanjayKumar-jd3bv]

@@petebyron1957 oh sorry I misunderstood

[@SanjayKumar-jd3bv]

@@petebyron1957 oh sorry bro for poor

[@petebyron1957]

@@SanjayKumar-jd3bv If you're saying without Rome, England would not have developed the way they did. I agree.

[@oliviermosimann6931]

4:12 Do you count 1945 as invasion of Japan by the USA (& partly the USSR) ?

[@ikengaspirit3063]

4:32 You're wrong on Vietnam, just search "Chinese/Northern domination of Vietnam" The actual last time was under Tang, I think and even after then they often paid tribute to pacify China away 4:39 The Ethiopia comparison doesn't land as well when you remember the thing collapsed completely two times and the 2nd time with Barbarians ruling over it. Now, Ethiopian identity did survive but in that case it is kinda more like China in that regard. Thus, if Greeks continued to call themselves Roman and named their modern state Romania would that be Rome surviving?. Of course not. So Ethiopia is a civilization that is divided into Dmt, Aksum and the Solomonic dynasty eras of like 500 - 1000 years each. Ethiopia is also ethnically diverse not homogenous even among the Habasha tribes and have undergone conquest under Adal and Gudit/Semien 8:00 You kinda forgot Gallienus

[@AnsgarBeowulf]

There have been several Great Resets. That was one of those and they are made by man on command.

[@dylanvanbree896]

hello everyone here i have a what if scenario question for everyone here the what if scenario question is can somebody here tell how the future could have look like for the people of rome in the western roman empire if the western roman emperor majorian was never deposed by ricimer and still remain western roman emperor until majorian died of old age

[@Copeman9999]

I think Julius Nepos had a better chance than most people give him credit for. If he wasn’t deposed, and then later assassinated I think he could have bought the empire more time for another Majorian to come around.

[@Copeman9999]

An Aurelian he was not, but I’ll never count a Julian out.

[@jacksonbrown1174]

well put together and loved the video, I'd be happy to help write a alternate history for the Roman Empire with you I know a fair bit on it that may help and have a few idea's!

[@williamdukeofnormandy1403]

Be sure you add the Roman Catholic Church, to be fair.

[@nikhtose]

Your argument depends far too heavily on the "great man" theory of history, that Rome could have survived longer had exceptional leaders showed up more often or made better decisions. But you contradict yourself by also noting that even these moments of brilliantly led revival were quickly succeeded by more decline. What else to conclude but that these revivals amounted to little more than speed bumps in the accelerating decline, historically insignificant in the long run?

[@johnconnor8206]

4:25 your comparing kingdoms to empires well a big reason empires fall is overextestion which isn’t really possible for a kingdom of that size

[@josephpercente8377]

The roman empire is still with us. Look how many people worldwide speak Latin based languages. Much of our laws and customs come from Rome. How many Senate's are there in the world? Many people worldwide belong to a church based in Rome. Its still here and bigger than ever.

[@ralfjansen9118]

The Roman empire didn't end abruptly in 476 (west). The people just lived on as they were used to do, although they had no own but "foreign" rulers, besides the pope. As an idea, it continued via Charlemagne (Franconian Empire) and Otto the Great (Holy Roman Empire of German Nation) until 1806 when Napoleon ended this empire and took the crown, for a few years, for himself. (There could be only one emperor each in east and west). After the victory over Constantinople the title of the emperor of the east was void (the muslims hat no ambitions to fulfill the role of the "protector of the holy church") and was taken by the Russian Empire (Szar = Caesar) and lived on until 1917, not too far from today.

[@DISTurbedwaffle918]

Simple, I go back in time and provide the recipe for gunpowder to the Romans after Saint Emperor Constantine the Great finishes consolidating power. He was Invictus, and I'd like to see anyone try to beat him after he begins deploying musketmen against the foul barbarians.

[@photon4076]

Yeah, I don't buy it. Once is a happenstance, twice is a coincidence, three times is a pattern. If Stilicho could have saved the Empire, and Majorian could have saved the Empire, and Anthemius could have saved the Empire, but all of them were prevented from doing it by one failure/mistake/betrayal, then something else is going on. One plausible explanation I have heard is that the barbarians surrounding the Roman Empire over time adopted more and more of Rome's form of organization and tactics and technologies etc., and were thus able to compete with Rome on a more equal footing.

[@domaxltv]

That is sort of true, and the west was simply too poor to keep up with the barbarians

[@agrippa5643]

What i believe in is, due to incompetence from leaders and corruption and betrayals Rome fell. If Rome had no enemies within, there would be no barbarian to even move it. The Huns its a solid proof of what i m saying. But that s how life works, life takes you down no matter how great you are. Caesar likely had epilepsy, yet he was never decisively defeated in battle, Rome had no other empire to challenge its existence, yet it fell due to the same sickness.

[@shenzhendrake2429]

you forgot China, who is more older than Rome and lasted longer than Rome or any empire you mentioned

[@marsaeternum1003]

Japan has not been conquered yes but have been subjugated by Korean kingdoms of Goguryeo in 4th and 5th Centuries and was a tributary of Bakjae in 2nd and 3rd and a Tributary of Unified Silla from 7th to 11th Centuries So i would not say uninterrupted

[@abcdedfg8340]

Not true, unfortunately, thats a story that was pushed by modern day korean nationalism. The relationship was more equal. Intermarriage and alliances. After the fall of baekje, japan pretty much stopped its involvement in the korean peninsula. Might want to read more on that. Japan wasnt even a vassal of baekje or the tang to be honest. They pretty much did their own thing till the mongols decided to try and subjugate them lol. The proof is in the wording. The japanese wanted their emperor treated officially as an equal, not a subject king. Mongols didnt like that.

[@marsaeternum1003]

@@abcdedfg8340 No japan was nothing more than a vassal of Korea