There are dozens (surely more) of theories regarding the decline of the Roman empire, but I would be surprised if any of them would characterize it as "quickly". From the little that I remember possible and depending on interpretation critical events were spread out over one to several centuries.
The fact that it fell "Easily" is a suprise to me... Knowing how they were a superior rawr at their time
Wasn't really much of an Empire to begin with and didn't last very long as a state either because of greed and corruption within its walls. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The history of the fall of the Roman empire covers quite a long period of time. The starting point for the fall could be around 211 (death of Severus) and continuing till 476 (end of the West) and 1453 (end of the East). One common thread for the entire period was that there was no good system of succession and emperors were more concerned about personal survival than the survival of the empire. A recent book by Adrian Goldsworthy "How Rome Fell" is an excellent account (although a bit long).
Care to lay out your theory of what the mistakes were and how long it took? Some economist trace their economic decline as taking 200 or more years, so not exacly sudden. At gthat ratre, America is poinsed to fall in the year 2176.
I think the empire fell for a number of reasons. The main reason being the population lost faith in the empire and its leadership to the point where it could not raise an army or conduct the normal functions of statehood. Because of the recent elections in the US, I don't think we in the US are anywhere near a state of collapse. But had we not been able to throw out the Republicans, all bets would be off.
First, It did NOT fall quickly. It's one of the longest lasting empires. When it did fall, it was largely due to a dependence on so many "outside" (non-Roman) powers/influences/culture. They depended on mercenaries to fight. This is a very telling sign of all "falling" empires. They stopped being a producer of pervading culture and instead imported it. They got fat and lazy and didn't want to do any of the hard jobs (including fighting).
Sounds like many Americans. You know, I was in CA last year and thought - OMG, these people are such greedy little show-off bastards. Only interested in how to make a buck and how to show off new bull shit. Nothing like middle America. If we all slowly turn into Californians then we are DOOOOMED! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
A possible discourse: Man(a): I don't like what you're doing. Your morals are low and you are repugnant, I'm going to kill you and your kind. Boom. Man(b): Well that was bad. I'm going to kill you too, and your people. Boom. Man(a): See, I told you your morals were low. Boom Man(b): No, you started it. Boom. Man(a): No we didn't, you started it centuries before we did. Boom Man(b): Well, we're taking the moral high ground anyway. Boom. Repeat to fade. Another possible discourse: Man(a): I don't like what you're doing. Your morals are low and you are repugnant, I'm going to kill you and your kind. Boom. Man(b): Holy crap, what did you do that for? Put down your weapon and let's talk about this in a civilised way. Man(a): No. Boom. Repeat to fade or Man(a): Okay. I don't like this, this and this. Man(b): I see, well put down that weapon and tell me what you want. Man(a): This and that. Man(b): That's reasonable, some isn't, can't we come to a compromise? Man(a): No, Boom. repeat to fade. or Man(a): Okay, I don't like some bits, I like other bits. Let's talk some more. And some more. And some more.
Depending on your historical viewpoint, Rome took longer to "fall" than America has been in existence since the English decided it might be a nifty place to live. Perspective.
Could you be more specific as to why you think the Celts influenced the fall? At the time of the fall the principal problems for Rome were with various Germanic peoples as well as the Huns. The Celts were in many ways an asset to the empire, since most of the inhabitants of Gaul and Britain were Celts.
I was of the opinion (possibly incorrect) that the many Celtic revolts caused a weakening of the Roman army because of military losses, and also because the Romans had been distracted from other more pressing concerns by the continuous battling with the tribes of their Celtic domains. I stand to be corrected on this...
You are thinking of Picts...which I guess are partially Celts. Celts were actually very romanized by the beginning of the end 300-400 AD for western empire. Germans were a pain in the ass for the Romans from beginning to end.
