READ ALL ABOUT IT !

No site can be without it. Now mine informs you too :

WHAT WE WERE TAUGHT

We were always taught at school that it was a ‘Big Bang'. All went well for hundreds of years until the Huns, Vandals and Goths appeared in the beginning of the 5^th century and POW. It was gone. Bye, bye, Roman Empire. Hello Dark Ages ! Of course it was all caused by :

-     Their  decadent way of living (party all the way ... )

-     Their plumbing system (not their inner ...) which was made of lead and made them poison themselves and at last.

-     The rise of Christianity. That last cause was always a vague. Since how could 'our' Christians be the cause of the downfall of (the by then) their own empire?

A MORE REALISTIC VIEW : GOING DOWN - GOING DOWN

Happy life in the 3^rd and 4^th century wasn’t helped much by the following :

-     Recurring waves of plague and other assorted illnesses reducing the population of the Empire considerably, and thus its impetus.

-     Of course neither did it’s interesting way of getting an new emperor on the throne (civil war, slaughter of tens of thousands). 

-     Politically the seen the latter half of the third century was a total mess. Control was limited to keeping barbarians out and killing your current emperor. Average life span wasn't much longer than about 35 years, so a few Roman  generations didn't know better what to expect but burning cities, rape, murder and economic chaos.

-     Money was progressively de-based from the early third century onwards. Causing huge inflation and economic instability.

-     Sources dried up. For example, in the 3^rd and 4^th century, there were years when there was not enough copper to mint coins.

We now know that by the end of the 3^rd century empire's economy revived considerably under the peace brought about by renewed stable government. But things were changing for good :

-     Army wasn’t the army anymore : by then it was absolutely out of fashion for a Roman citizen to 'join up'. More and more barbarian allies were fighting alongside the ever fewer ‘roman’ legions in their own way. 

-     The Roman armies technological advantage wasn’t  an advantage anymore.

-     In the 4^th and 5^th century the opposing armies became larger and better organized. The ‘small’ invading Germanic tribes of the 1^st and 2^nd century were replaced by ‘countries on the move’ (as in Huns and Vandals). These weren’t a haphazard band of idiots on horseback, but large well-developed fighting machines.

Because of the state of many provincia, large masses were needed to repopulate  the emptied countryside. These masses were so large that they tended to become ‘client kingdoms’ instead of assimilating the Roman way of life.

-     Living in the countryside doesn’t become more attractive or productive by dumping tens of thousands of total strangers in them. Specifically if they have a 'barbarian' way of living. And it took them (too) long to take part in the  empire wide economy.

Already early on we read about the countryside becoming the property of a handfull of land'owners' far away. These were of course less interested in the real wellfare of their property. Already by the end of the 2^nd century the countryside was quite depopulated of its free farmers.

-     But since one need free enterpise to keep things really going  by the 4^th & 5^th century ‘peasants’ were legally tied to their plot of land and unable to migrate.

And then money wise :

-     Tax pressure became practically too much to bear. An ever larger defending army needs more and more money.

-     Those able to pay tried to move to a status were they didn’t have too any more. Either by become filthy rich or downgrading themselves to serf or slave status.

-     It is recorded that in the 4^th and 5^th century people were much happier under invaders since these brought a lighter tax regime. Not exactly a 'thumbs up' for being a Roman !

-     Gradually after AD 350 the local (large) landowner became more and more pivotal. As we have seen he had by then bound his serfs to his property. So gaining this landowners allegiance was elementary. Swinging their 'votes', with for example more freedom or less taxes, could gain the new invader large pieces of province without a fight.  

-     Christian lore of the 5^th century tells us the invader came murdering, pillaging etc etc. Through new methods of archeology we have found that this isn't true at all. He usurped power, taxed less and everybody was happier.

There is an interesting anonymous ‘Consolatione Philosophicae’ of the early / middle 5^th  century.  The writer was by birth from a rich family, owning land allover (current) France, Italy and Yougoslavia. In his reflections he laments that 'these days' he doesn't even now if they still exist or not. This tells us a lot about the general state of affairs at that given moment and the chaos areas were in, who had been safe for centuries.