Obviously, the Roman Empire was dealt a massive blow after the death of Marcus Aurelius in AD 180. The 12-year reign of Commodus & the 5? 6? emperors in the year following his death wasn't exactly a "happy time." Would you peg this as the beginnign of the end of the Empire? What other events might y'all point to? And yeah, Christianity's rise counts.

------------------
And by the way, I faked all the orgasms.

This, in combination with the now powerful unified barbarian tribes like the Goths and Franks, not to mention the Huns, was the beginnings of a less than all-powerful Empire. Adrianople opened the floodgates allowing the other Goths and such to enter.

The Military was, I believe, the key component to the downfall. Religion & Crazy Emperors surely contributed, but those alone the Empire probably could've withstood.

I think.

And I thought you were talking about Gladiator......

To me Diocletian represents the last great Roman Emperor. Diocletian recognized that the empire was too large and complex to be ruled by only a single emperor and instituted the Tetrarchy, or Rule by Four. At the time of his abdication in 305 AD, he had basicly split the Empire when he selected Maximinus as Caesar in the east and Severus as Caesar in the west. A clear signal that Rome, while still mighty was in decline.

While Constantine represents the transformation to the Byzantine with his legalization and support of Christianity and his foundation of a new capital at Byzantium.

Either way, they represent the last impossible hopes of holding an already crumbling Empire together...the last gasps of the Augustinian Principate.

In a very real way, the death of Augustus signaled the beginning of the end of the Empire. Seriously. None of the other people who followed in the shadow of his purple robe had the skills or the ability to make the office what he intended it to be.

quote:

---

Furthermore, none of his cardinal powers were conferred for life but, rather, for fixed periods of five or (later) ten years. That these powers were never rescinded when they came up for renewal is entirely beside the point: there was the illusion of choice. That is what mattered. The vocabulary Augustus chose to express his power, too, was a model of tact: "leading citizen" (princeps) not dictator, "authoritative influence" (auctoritas) not "command" (imperium). Throw into the equation his modest lifestyle, affable approachability, routine consultation of the senate, and genuinely impressive work ethic, and we have in Augustus one of the greatest and most skillfully manipulative politicians of any nation in any age.

---

Titles like chief priest (pontifex maximus) and "Father of his Country" (pater patriae) were voted by the Senate...even though under the guise of real power.

And yet, all too soon after Augustus, what became a game of tact and influence bacame one of naked ambition, assassinations, and raw military power. Certainly not in keeping with the traditions of the Republic that Augustus had wanted.

He alone of the Emperors preserved the illusion that the Republic might still return. A very important tradition to a people who thrived on tradition. It might be argued that the further that Rome moved away from the ideals of the Republic the closer it came to it's eventual downfall.

------------------
This is a place of business, not a peewee flopphouse!
~C. Montgomery Burns

------------------
"Sweetness, sweetness I was only joking
When I said I'd like to smash every tooth
In your head"
Bigmouth Strikes Again- The Smiths

I ask this because I'm looking at writing an alternate history of the world...where Rome survives, thrives, & rules all. I'm also looking at writing stories based in the Renegade Legion timeline. That was a fun little RPG set in 6830...basically, "Rome in space."

And thanks for the info guys, I'll use it as best I can.
About Hannibal, when I first saw the promos for "Silence Of The Lambs II" I thought it was a "Gladiator"-movie but with Hannibal. Would've been cool...

Was it Sun Tsu or Confucius that said "Imperialism is the last stage of capitalism"? I've always linked that to the romans and Palpatine's Empire.

------------------
And don't forget, I faked all the orgasms.

I read the first book of the WWII-thing with alien interference, "World War: In The Balance" I think. Pretty good, maybe I'll continue.
Loved the detailed info about the German/Russian/Alien Tank-battles.

I share the sentiments Cicero, among other men and great orators at the end of the Republic. A despot, no matter how great or tactful, is still inferior to a republic. Furthermore, with every Caesar comes a Caligula.

It took until who, Mr. Jefferson, for someone to realize this again?

{Salutes his former state flag, which proudly bears "Sic Sempter Tyrannus"}

quote:

---

romans keep supressing Christianity and promoting Jupiter&Co?

---

{Cough, cough!} That's a bunch of hooey propaganda. The Romans alowed free practice of Religion, as long as one pleged allegaince to the Emperor. Any other stories you heard were myth (the infamous Nero fables) or exagerated (many Biblical stories).

Heck, the Romans were about to industrialize when at their peak. Most people don't know they had a crude steam engine device, used as a toy, though.

In other words, it took till the 19th century for civilization to get back to where Rome once was; fully.

Lastly, Magnus, I lvoe the quote. Where did that happen? I haven't been able to get around the boards as much lately.

------------------
-Small Computer Systems Interface "Scuzzy" Emperor

Operator of the Goulag Hotel, maintainer of the workhouses.

Operator of Cargill Conglomerate Publications, http://www.cargillconglomerate.com

"Woman is deprived of rights from lack of education, and the lack of education results from the absence of rights. We must not forget that the subjection of women is so complete, and dates from such distant ages, that we are often unwilling to recognize the gulf that separates them from us."

Tolstoy, on a more objective note.