Did the Roman Empire 'decline and fall' or did it evolve into something new?

             During the evolution of the Roman Empire there were many sacrifices that were made. A great amount of art was lost, cities and roads were destroyed, and trade routes became extinct (Shenkman, 1993). But most importantly, all of Europe’s peace was demolished by the invasions from the Germanic tribes (Shenkman, 1993). However, there was also one major favorable event that also took place during this time, which was the abolition of slavery (Shenkman, 1993). Many historians mistake this progression as the Roman Empire completely falling because of all the losses it had to endure. Rather than simply declining and falling, the Roman Empire evolved into a new kind of civilization over a great length of time.     

One historian, Lucien Musset, who studies the barbarian invasions says, “The Roman Empire did not fall, did not decline, it just transformed but so did the Germanic populations which invaded it. (Decline of the Roman Empire, 2011)” Clearly, Musset also agrees that the Roman Empire was not lost. Instead, stating that it transformed. However, he adds to this belief by saying that the other barbarian tribes that did invade the Roman Empire were also influenced somehow. Therefore, this caused not only the Roman Empire to transform but the Germanic tribes too. Also, meaning that the Roman Empire was influential to the barbarian tribes just as much as the tribes were to the empire. This assumption is very logical, and probably did happen over the time of this evolution. Throughout history, more evidence in this influence of the Roman Empire and Germanic tribes is present. Therefore, this could not have happened if the Roman Empire “fell”.

Henri Pirenne, the author of Pirenne Thesis published in the 1920s, states, “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 Roman way of life. (Decline of the Roman Empire, 2011)” By this statement, Pirenne also adds that the evolution of the Roman Empire did not happen right after the barbarians invaded. Instead, he suggests that this progression took time to finally grow and prosper into a new civilization. Another comment is that the barbicans purpose for the Roman Empire was not to demolish the civilization, but instead retain the Roman Empire’s culture. This suggests that the Roman Empire really did not fall at all, but was really an evolution in history. However, if the Roman Empire did become extinct, then how could the Germanic tribes even want to maintain Roman traditions in there new civilization?       

 “The decay of Rome has been frequently ascribed to the translation of the seat of empire; but this history has already shewn that the powers of government were divided rather than removed. (Gibbon, 1996)” Meaning that even though it may seem like the Roman Empire’s main emperors were permanently being removed, they weren’t. Instead, they were just divided into other provinces in Europe. The Roman Empire could therefore be easily confused by the head of power being removed, which is actually an untrue statement. They still claimed an equal amount inheritance of legions and provinces (Gibbon, 1996). But more importantly, they also possessed an equal amount of power as they did before (Gibbon, 1996). And because of this, the barbarian leaders did not have complete control over the new civilization. In reality, they were just as equal to the emperors who came before from the Roman Empire. Since there were still Roman emperors, an assumption can be made that the Roman Empire still did exist even if changes were made by the invasions. 

            Many historians who study the “fall” of the Roman Empire, most likely think it is just that a fall, but really it was a progression. This means that the Roman Empire never really did become extinct. Instead, it evolved into one civilization with the Germanic tribes that invaded. Many reasons support this thesis such as that the barbarians’ main purpose for the invasion was not actually to destroy the empire but to preserve its culture. Another being that after the invasion there were still Roman emperors which actually did possess power over certain provinces just as before. History itself can be interpreted wrongly very easily. Because of this, many historians still believe that the Roman Empire actually did “fall”.     

Bibliography

Decline of the Roman Empire. (2011, April 9). Retrieved April 12, 2011, from Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_the_Roman_Empire#Theories_of_a_fall.2C_decline.2C_transition_and_continuity

Gibbon, E. (1996). General Observations on the Fall of the Roman Empire in the West. Retrieved April 12, 2011, from Internet Medieval Sourcebook: http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/gibbon-fall.html

Shenkman, R. (1993). The Fall of Rome. Retrieved April 12, 2011, from Legends, Lies, & Cherished Myths of World History: http://www.tamos.net/~rhay/romefall.html