Does Holla Forums know of any respectable books, websites, videos, etc. that show how Rome fell...

God damn

...

A corrupt greedy aristocracy, a complacent populous, declining morals, rising provincial power, regional divisions, a flawed system for imperial succession, hyper-inflation, and civil war caused the fall of Rome.

After the crisis of the third century Diocletian managed to cobble together his tetrarchy only through a naked eastern-style autocracy and Constantine reunified the empire but the breakdown of urban life especially in the west was never reversed and the collapsed tax system was never repaired. Infrastructure slowly decayed while foreign attacks increased. In the west centralized authority lost its power along with the urban centers while local agrarian based power grew.

Truthfully Rome died with the Republic, it just took a while for its corpse to decompose.

Christianity had little to do with the collapse. If anything it helped prolong Rome's existence especially in the east. Christianity rose because Rome fell not the other way around.

Start with the man who started the whole thing in the first place by answering the "How Rome fell?" question systematically: Edward Gibbon's "The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire".

He made a compelling case on how it was Christianity, as an ideology, planted the seeds necessary to Rome's fall.

It was this ideology that glorified poverty over heroism as the sacred virtue, that replaced the Greco-Roman martial spirit with "Turn the other cheek" submission, and that promises an eternally perfect afterlife so much so that Romans stopped caring about the transient time they have on Earth, which poisoned the very nature of the Romans and destined their downfall.

The problem with gibbon is also that he wrote the books as the British Empire was falling apart so he has that going on for him.

This kind of nonsense might well be true if history had not have happened.

Those wimpy submissive turn-the-other-cheekers certainly would not be the people who conquered the planet. They certainly would not be the people who still have innumerable heroic figures, and those figures certainly would not be religious fellows like Saint George, Richard the Lionheart, King Arthur, Charles Martel, Alfonso XI of Castile or Vlad the Impaler.

Your entire premise, whilst possible if you have only the faintest understanding of Christianity; is immediately undone by taking a cursory glance at history. Quite simply what you've said is foolish and you should feel bad.

No different from how Tacitus wrote his Germania and such as a commentary on Rome in parallel to a historian record on the German tribes.

It's always during times of strife for a historian's own native land that he would write the most insightful records. See also China's Records of the Grand Historian, wrote during the late height of Western Han and before the Han Dynasty civil war.

Also, start listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History to git gud at historical stuff.

Going into full blown nigger tantrums at the any even imagined slights is not better, internet tough guy.

Also there is the fact that the 'Greco-Roman martial spirit' had all but died long before the rise of Christianity.

Gibbon also hated Byzantium because he was an Enlightenment twat and the fact that Byzantium existed and was what it was sinks the Enlightenment's whole "Christianity causes dark ages" slander.

Read Lord Norwich's history of the Byzantine Empire. Fascinating stuff.

Yes, the historian always understands the past in relation to his present. And we must understand Gibbon in relation to his own time. Gibbon was part of the broader enlightenment anti-christian sentiment that created all the 'Dark Ages' crap.

That much is true, but it's silly to dismiss the man's whole central argument as a product of the times.

Again, you can say these things about how great the pre-Christians were and talk about the Peloponnesian War or the Conquest of Gaul; but history did not end there, and what you have said is clearly BS when one actually looks at what happened after. Here are a few examples of Greeks and Italians showing off their 'lack of martial spirit'.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Siege_of_Malta
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sviatoslav's_invasion_of_Bulgaria
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lepanto

By relying on foreign armies

...

I was talking about a lack of martial spirit around the 4th and 5th centuries within late antique culture and I was not blaming Christianity. I was saying the lack of martial spirit that Gibbon saw as arising from Christianity in fact arose from other cultural and societal factors. Of course after hundreds of years and the build up of new kingdoms and societies, the martial spirit would return. I think we are on the same side here…

Also by relying on the concept of the roman legion for too long. Massed horse archers absolutely fucked them.

Many apologies then, in the past I have seen a lot of 'Ancient Greece/Rome worship' and subsequent demonisation of pretty much everything that followed; and it is somewhat infuriating, especially considering that many of these people make out that they are historically knowledgeable.

Christianity was able to thrive because of the empty decadence that was present in the roman republic as well.

wew

I agree. There are a lot of people who distort history to fit current politics and ideology (e.g. kikes) and to an extent that is unavoidable but the study of History should not have any explicit ideological motivation.

Again that's a meme. Most of the Roman army of the late empire was technically foreign. Hell most EMPERORS were foreign. Rome long since stop being the capital by the time it fell.

As for foreigners in the armies they fought just as well for the Empire. Look at Stilicho, who is literally known as the last Roman General, was a vandal and rather than fight for survival chose to die so that the army was left in tact for the coming invasions.

The bigger problem was the bueracracy that made the Army bigger than what it was. It had a paper strength of half a million yet armies of 10-15 thousand were recking it.

Came here to post this. This is the only correct answer to the question OP posed.

OP here. Wow, thanks guys. I was honestly expecting the "let me google that for you" response that you would usually get when you ask for something. As much as I'm for getting information from searching google, topics like politics, history, religion, and philosophy are often tainted by the jews. It's good to know that Holla Forums has some good sources. Perhaps you should consider making a Holla Forums history course for people that want to learn what they don't teach you in school or college.

Gibbon and Goldsworthy are the two best books and are already mentioned here. Ignore the autists fighting over the christcuckery. There was more than that which killed the empire, but it played as big a role then as liberalism today.

kat.cr/ttc-tms-complete-the-teaching-company-history-ancient-medieval-t10273747.html

Thanks user. How do I torrent individual files and folders? I don't have 800 GB to spare.

It's funny how Rome had a refugee crisis in the decades before the collapse of the WRE.

East Germanic tribes were fleeing the Huns. Emperor Valens allowed the Visigoths to cross the Danube and settle within Roman territory.

Want to know how Emperor Valens died? Killed by the Visigoths at the battle of Andrianople two years after allowing the Visigoths to settle

Afterward the Visigoths went on to sack Rome and many more tribes came and carved out kingdoms within Roman territory and sacking the remnants of the WRE until there was nothing left.

Just tick the folders you want in your torrent client under the "files" tab.

Soldiers and Ghosts by J.E. Lendon

Lendon explains how the roman culture slowly succumbed to collectivism as it romanticized the greek past, surrendering it's modern cultural institutions for less advanced social conventions of old.

He specifically goes over the illiad and other texts, explaining how each affected the roman predisposition of mind at key points. It's an extraordinary read with citations included. It covers so much more than I anticipated, it might be right at or just above /pol reading level.

At that point, he really had no choice. The frontier was depleted of soldiers and this way he thought he could use those same tribes as buffers/extra boots on the ground.

I believe that was even one of the stipulations that those new immigrants had to provide men for war. To be fair, the immigrants had put themselves under the care of rome and even laid down their arms.

What really caused shit to go south was that while they opened the borders they didn't have enough food and stuff to go around for the winter which, after a failed attempt to kill off the immigrants, they eventually went on to rebel.

So if anything, this says to us that it's all fun and games until the gravy train stops. Maybe we should be focusing more on the health of welfare institutions as those may be canary in the coalmines that we're overlooking.

I don't buy that. Scipio was a HUUGE greekaboo and him and his friends were what really made Rome come of age.

Doesn't that sound similar to modern times? The immigrants pay for the welfare state so they have to be let in. He had a choice and that was to not let them cross the Danube. He made the wrong choice and it cost him his life. Had he not let the Visigoths cross he'd have lived longer than two years most likely. In hindsight clearly not letting them cross was the better option.

The death of Emperor Valens was the tipping point of the collapse. Not only was his legion defeated but his death started a race war in Roman territory. Roman backlash was to start killing Germanic immigrants and those Germanics went to join the Visigoths bolstering their numbers.

meant for

The point was that even if he had denied them entry there is no guarantee that he could've held the frontier. This way he tried to make the best of the situation, he even denied a second group later on that DID break through forcefully.

I agree with the second part. If and when we reach a tipping point it will not be slow. It will be hard and it will be fast and will leave everyone that is not prepared very disoriented.

I'm tempted to join the military sometimes just so that I'm with a group that most likely to survive.

From what we know what happened allowing them led to his death and the bolstering of the Visigoth's numbers.

Not allowing them in has better odds than certain death. Anything but what he did has better odds. He could have not let them cross or let them cross then slaughtered them.

The best thing he could have done was slaughter them then line up the Danube and Rhine with their crucified corpses which is what the Romans used to do to invaders.

this

the claims that christianity is inherently weak don't really hold up when you consider that all western countries were extremely christian until maybe the 1960s - and I don't think one can reasonably argue that european nations over the last 2000 or so years were generally weak minded

ridiculous analysis

I bet you think the holy roman empire was anti tradition and followed a slave equality cult too

"Plutarchs Lives"
"The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire"

nice, thanks for the recommendation

I can't believe there are people on Holla Forums who actually still buy (((enlightenment))) rhetoric

I hope I don't run into anyone here defending Rousseau or something

The bulk of Valens' forces were in the East preparing for a Persian campaign due to things heating up in Armenia over succession, a common casus belli, when suddenly the Visigoths appeared on the Danube. He had no other choice but to let them in since he had no troops in the region to deal with them. However, since he didn't have many troops in the region, he was ultimately unable to subjugate and contain the refugees, as was Roman modus operandi for accepting refugees.

He was essentially completely screwed when this unforeseen Gothic horde appeared. We shouldn't be too hard on him. Our main source for Valens was Ammianus Marcellinus who had a massive hate boner for him.

You sound like Black Lives Matter

how exactly does that sound like BLM?

How accurate was Agora? It was nice seeing a movie set in the Hellenistic world, but the Faith Militant esque Christians seemed over-the-top. It was popular among fedora circles (pic related: archive.is/eIAGq) which raises some red-flags. I've heard that the early Hellenistic Christians were radically peaceful.

...

...

you might find some good shit on
>>>/pdfs/
and also the monthly Holla Forums reading packs

next pack pls hurry

There are multiple reasons, but christcuckery had an important role in the downfall. Remember that any man who calls himself a christian and doesn't give away all his possessions to the poor and doesn't help his enemies isn't a christian. That's like a muslim not killing nonbelievers. Christcuckery is at its core a literal cuck cult. Also it demands racial equality.

I looked in the old card catalog at my library once and saw this in there. It taunted me for years after because they had thrown it out along with lots of older books when they remodeled. But if you need a sue grafton book, my library will have it.

A kind of vicious cycle

As a side view; Joseph Tainter's Collapse of Complex Societies for a more "organic" explanation. Spengler would approve.

christianity is NOT about equality.

hello Cuban spy who got permission to post on chinese noodles. or crypto soviet kike.

If Christianity killed Rome, why did Eastern Roman Empire live for 1000 years more? USA is not that old yet for example.

I always get a misterious silence on this one.

The Eastern Roman Empire was a continuation of Rome in the same sense the Holy Roman Empire was, i.e: in name alone. They were also constantly buttfucked by the Arabs, then the Turks, then the westerners who didn't take Christianity seriously because of their Christianity. The warrior-emperors like Justinian were the exception to the general rule of bitchy pacifism.

Honestly you can give like 60% of that due solely to how amazing the defensive features were for Constantinople.

correct. gibbons or gtfo.

ccel.org/g/gibbon/decline/home.html

But the US went from it's foundation to Sodom and Gomorrah in less than 300 years kek

Nope, WRE =/= East Rome. In fact, do you think it's coincidence Renaissance happened on West Europe after people fled remnaments of Easter Roman Empire?

Yes, but that's one single city, not an Empire. If all Empire had such walls then maybe, but such was not the case.

Precisely. 1000 years is a lot of time even civilization wise.

*eastern

"Christianity is not about equality!"
"Islam is not about war!"
"Judaism is not about Jewish supremacy!"

From our limited knowledge pool it actually makes more sense to say that non-Christian Europeans are 'all about equality'.

When Europe was Christian, Europe was fine. Now that Europe is atheist, it is an absolute mess.

The other two points you make are true. If you were honest, and looked at the history of each group; you could quickly verify such things. By the actions taken by jews and muslims you can be assured that they are 'racist jew supremacists' and 'war-mongerers'; but if you look at Christianity's history, you most certainly do not see ANYTHING to do with equality. The only time it really enters in is when Christianity actually disappears and a nation becomes 'secular'. I cannot really see how you can blame the fruits of the absence of Christianity on the presence of Christianity.

Great societies always fall when sex with with little boys becomes mainstream.

After the renaissance Europe was led in large part like the roman Empire: by atheists/agnostics who held pagan morals but had a healthy respect for Christianity as means of holding the populace together.

Looks like 1-4 are uploaded on jewtube. Do you know how many episodes total there are?

I'll give you a short summary. Jews create and use an empire. It's peoples threaten Jew supremacy. Empire is destroyed by the enemies it first tried to subjugate. New empires form. Christianity was a way to make Romans stupid enough to allow non-ethnic and overall Jew subverted, subjugated rule.