Click this link sponsr.is/Maiorianus and use my code MAIORIANUS to get 25% off your first payment for boot.dev. That’s 25% your first month or your first year, depending on the subscription you choose. Sorry for the Re-Upload, there was as so often a copyright issue, which I needed to fix.
Factionalism in the imperial court was a factor too. Courtiers were constantly bad mouthing each other to the emperor. Ammianus Marcellinus in the late 4th century compares it to the animal-human fights (Venations) in the arena. This was the downfall of generals like Stillicho.
I think you’re spot here. It seems academics give high credit to Diocletian, but his decision to thoroughly cast away the princeps model in favor of an imperial court really damaged the empire long term.
@@ordinaryhuman2511 No, the change was necessary, because it strengthened the emperors legitimacy. You know what is even worse than bickering courtiers? Civil war
@@Joanna-il2ur iirc he was in retirement as civil war was once again heating up. The tetrarchy was also a bad idea. Look he provided stability, but a Probus or Aurelian could’ve done the same imo. Like Constantine he was immensely impactful on history, I just don’t think legacy on Rome was that beneficial
The question is why the Roman Empire lasted so long. It had so many internal problems and external enemies, from the earliest days under Romulus. And even then has it really ended, instead evolved into today's nations and peoples.
Another question might be why Roman resurgences never succeeded, with long periods of decline never fully reversed by short periods of recovery. Its contemporary peer civilizations: China, Persia, Ethiopia, all exist today all far more clearly of lineal descent. For most of 400 years after the Eastern Han Dynasty, China was a lot like the post-collapse Rome, with weak successor states, barbarian kingdoms, and rapid turnover, then the Tang came along and made China greater than ever before. Persia spent nearly 1000 years of disunion and rule by foreigners and barbarians after the Sassanids before pulling itself back together, much changed but still distinctly Iranian.
Ha you don’t get texts like City or God if something wasn’t actually ending. I do like to think they got the last laugh though. Look how much of the world speaks a Romance language.
@@shangrilainxanadu Good point. The West has always had an issue with replacing its political elites. Societies either crumble, or stuff like the French Revolution happens. Likely it has to do with the refusal to keep monarchies, but why this is a recurring feature is the real question. There are rarely events when members of the aristocracy rebel against the incompetent administration with the aid of the commoners to revitalize the society, as has happened like you stated in China and Persia.
@@shangrilainxanadupersia and Ethiopia maybe, but modern Chinas connection to its past is complicated by the cultural revolution, Taiwan has a greater connection to ancient China than Red China.
Great video, I’ve seen many people assume the population was the same at peak as just before the end, probably because that’s what happens in industrialized history where population (and in my opinion imperial possessions as well) keep increasing until just before the end.
One of your best video's, IMHO, is the video about the question *when* did Rome fall. And that arguably ten different answers or more could be provided for that. But yeah, the amount of people working in a pre-industrial civilization should follow the economic productivity of a state. A population decline would therefor also entail an economic decline. Then again population numbers are not simply by themselves a cause; because there is cause behind the mutation of those numbers.
The info says posted 2 hours ago, but I saw this several weeks previous! Did you get in trouble with the delatores or the Kopyright Kops? And I'll ask again what I asked the first time: what was happening to average family size?
Hi Wynn, yes, I had to re-upload due to a copyright issue. What else, hehe. I wish I had data about the average family size, but I couldn't find anything. If you find a good source, pls let me know.
Its a very important reason. Excess population allows a state to make mistakes, the more population you have, the more mistakes and horrible leaders you can have in your nation without collapsing.
What is interesting about the fall of the Roman empire is that it was such a complex interplay between immediately proximate factors such as the betrayals of Ricimer and ultimate forces such as the lack of a succession plan for leadership. And that makes it a question of whether the fall was preventable or ultimately inevitable. I lean toward the inevitable side.
The great plague of 541/2 ravaged the empire and may have reduced the population by up to 30%. Annual revenue, which stood at around 11 million solidi in 540 dropped to just 6 million in 555. The west by this time had collapsed and Italy was being destroyed during the Gothic wars.
Never thought of the greater effects the plagues had on the empire. The economy would shrink less capable workers plus the population density along with the increase of Germanic people. Plus all the boneheaded things that occurred in the 3rd and 4th century.
The Roman Empire fell because the Italians gave up. They lost their taste for empire. They stopped caring about anything that happened outside of Italy. Existential tiredness.
What does it have to do with Italy? Italians were always a minority within the empire. From the third century most emperors were from Moesia, which is in the Serbia- Hungary- Bulgaria area. Most emperors were fairly nobodies picked by army factions. Several never went to Rome or did it only once, such as Constantius II, who visited it for the first time in 353. He’d been emperor since 337. You exaggerate the importance of Italy to the empire. Several primary sources after 476 don’t even mention anything much happening in that year.
wtf are you talking about lmao. italians have nothing common with romans other than place they live in. people that have most similiar genetics to romans are located in corsica which belongs to france.
and rereading this comment its absolute bullshit. i doubt anybody from those 40 likes is human or even ai because they atleast pretend to think even if they do not ( yet i guess), it must be given automatically by youtube to absolute moronic comments so youtube looks more populated than it this
@@Samuel42069National Institutes of Health (.gov) www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov › pmc Ancient Rome: A genetic crossroads of Europe and the Mediterranean - PMC www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_Italy%23:~:text%3D9%2520Further%2520reading-,Overview,were%2520closest%2520to%2520Southern%2520Italians).&ved=2ahUKEwjp66XHxtOCAxXpN-wKHXt1DzoQFnoECBIQBQ&usg=AOvVaw2qYPgCnikQwzZUpFYu-gQS Not exactly
Population loss is a serious issue, which can be from 3 major causes. 1) concentration of people into Urbanized City centers, 2) education of women, 3) less marriages/ a higher percentage of both adultery and singlehood, and general moral decay. Each of these three of these causes can make the other two more frequent, which can create a population debt spiral
For most of history populations regularly fell when diseases or weather patterns interrupted agriculture, only in the last five hundred years has this changed on a global scale.
@@alexzero3736 Asceticism is something that Christianity accepted and propagated, but yes a new religion took it into the hart and borders of the Europe.
I don't quite understand why people are so obsessed with finding the single reason Rome fell. As so many events in history there is never only a single reason. Rome fell due to several reasons that come together in that particular circumstance. But in Rome's case things fall apart due to structural weaknesses that is inherent since the days of the republic.
Summary 0:00: 🏛 로마 제국은 인구 감소 등 여러 가지 다른 이유들의 복잡한 상호작용으로 인해 무너졌습니다. 5:02: 📊 이 비디오는 로마 제국의 인구, 추정치 및 안토니우스 역병의 영향에 대해 논의합니다. 8:47: ⚔ 이 비디오는 전염병이 로마 제국의 인구에 미치는 영향과 기독교의 부상에 대해 논의합니다. 13:07: 📉 이 비디오는 로마 제국의 인구 감소가 게르만족의 부상에 미친 영향과 현대에 대한 관련성에 대해 논의합니다. 17:29: 🏛 영상에서는 고도로 발전한 국가들의 인구 감소에 대해 논의하며, 로마 제국의 몰락과 잠재적인 사회적 및 경제적 영향과의 유사성을 빚어냅니다. Recapped using Tammy AI
0:00: 🏛 The Roman Empire collapsed due to a complex interplay of many different reasons, including population decline. 5:02: 📊 This video discusses the population of the Roman Empire, estimates, and the effects of the Antonine Plague. 8:47: ⚔ This video discusses the effects of the plague on the population of the Roman Empire and the rise of Christianity. 13:07: 📉 This video discusses the impact of the Roman Empire's depopulation on the rise of the Germanic tribes and its relevance to modern times. 17:29: 🏛 The video discusses population decline in highly developed countries, drawing parallels with the fall of the Roman Empire and the potential social and economic impacts.
And we can learn so much from what occurred then as an almost direct parallel to what is happening in the west today. The comparison is so obvious and may end in equally disastrous circumstances.
Even under Augustus there was concern over population decline. The 'Lex Julia de maritandis ordinibus' and the 'Lex Julia et Papia Poppaea' both passed or came into effect between 18 BC and 4/9 AD. Population decline was a concern 450 years before the fall of the empire. Migration to the cities, massacres of peoples by generals like Julius Caesar (Plutarch calculated Caesar to have caused the death of one million Gauls and to have enslaved million more. Add constant civil war and plague then the population of Europe except Russia, having apparently reached a high point of some 40-55 million people by the start of the third century [ca.200 C.E.], seems to have fallen by the year 500 to about 30-40 million, bottoming out at about 20-35 million around 600." [i.e. ca.20M] Paul Bairoch. One of the reasons for the shortage of troops provided by Justinian to Belisarius and then Narses was that population decline had denuded the army of men. There was a total collapse of revenue and taxation in kind from the deserted countryside.
Most population decline comes from a lack of children. Energetic and young populations produce more children. Energetic populations can rebound from massive losses in war and disease. Especially as most wars and diseases only affect some areas of the population (front lines villagers and soldiers), which encourages the safety and development of the children.
If the Roman Empire employed the thema system earlier when the Germanic tribes were beginning to settle in, will this change or fix anything? By making them military governors, they have no needed to proclaim themselves as the monarchs who ruled on behalf of the Emperor in Constantinople anymore while also de facto gaining Roman citizenships as well. Sure, rebellions can still happened there and there. But dynasties can also be changed all the times. But the point is that unless these Romanized Germanic tribes started secessionist crises, they can claimed the consuls and become Emperors due to their de facto Roman citizenships as well. P.S: Should polygamy be legalized to help increasing humans' population?
As someone who thinks Diocletian’s administrative reforms are his greatest accomplishment, I disagree. I think the remilitarization of culture, including in italy, like in the peak Roman republic, would have been a better measure. Though this move is definitely hindsight inspired with the recruitment and budgeting problem.
This video introduces new evidence that is of great importance - plagues and the consequences of population decline. This explains better the reasons for the decline and fall of the Roman Empire. It also explains why there was a decline in innovation and building, etc., and the perceived “tiredness” of the Roman people. The current situation in Europe is following a somewhat similar route, where immigration is used to prevent population decline. However, as with the Roman Empire, it will result in unforeseen consequences.
Also the Romans maintained a standing army. This was expensive and it was a good idea to keep the Legions paid (on account of them being armed to the teeth) but it paid for itself (& its pension scheme) by conquering more lands. Until they fetched up against the Atlantic, The Sahara, The Germans & the Parthians. Then they could only be paid by higher taxes (not on the aristocracy who did not pay any) & the Empire began to implode.
Read the Life of St Severinus by Eugippius. Free on the internet. The last soldiers left the Danube to collect the wages of fellow soldiers and never returned. They may have been robbed and killed. The other soldiers just gave up and became farmers. They had to eat.
My speculation would be that the cause was not the population-decline, over-all, but the decline in the numbers of skilled tradesmen & the decline in the number of educated members of the upper class. The infrastructure of the Empire could not be sustained or repaired because of the loss of the special knowledge that was needed. When books had to be made of vellum parchment only, with no paper available, there could not be many books published, & those that were published were mostly Christian prayer-books, not books with practical knowledge. That is the explanation that seems reasonable to me.
Christianity certainly played its part in Romes decline regardless what many people think. I believe Edward Gibbon was at least partially correct in his assessment.
Good example of "Demographics are Destiny" . If the population numbers are correct the decline in Roman population would be less of an issue than the massive growth of population on Rome's borders.
Native American civilizations were never the same after smallpox made its way there. Urban life had to fade away, decentralization, etc. Disease can put a permanent population ceiling on a race.
The pre-christian empire believed that their gods favored the empire, provided the offerings kept coming. The Christian empire stopped the offerings. The empire fell Correlation does not equal causation. Could make a decent plot device
Very True. It was the increased thereat from the replacement of the Parthians with the Persian Sasain Empire. In 636, both empires were so exhausted by mutual war, they failed against the rising the Islamic Empire. A war that even Mairorian' heirs (if he was successful) would have to face. And even if they were succesful, would they have succeed against the Mongols in the 13th Century?
I think that in many ways, Rome fell within the Roman empire before it was taken over by the Vandals & Goths... after the civil wars and Tyrants, whilst a Roman disliked "The Barbarian", he would hate his fellow Roman with a vehement hate, for that Roman ruined his life, or the life of friend, or killed and tortured a relative. most families had been on opposite sides at some point in the conflict, and those feuds lingered. The Goths and such tribes on the other hand, they were independent/free, intensely loyal to their leaders, and a military democratic meritocracy of participation with each unit a proud iron fist (based on the Roman model they had seen)... these were people carrying a very Roman Ideology at it's purest. indeed by the end of the Roman empire, in many key ways the Barbarians were more Roman than the Romans... their society was very different, yes... carried by a different faith & a different social structure. but, so many people who would have been Romans of Honor, saw the honor in becoming one of them.
In Gladiator, Caesar asks Maximus what is Rome, then says, “There was once a Dream that was Rome. You could only whisper it … it was so fragile.” Rome had nearly collapsed many times and was restored by Emperor’s with a unifying Vision and people willing to fight and die for it. The Fall of Roman began when Romans lost their foundational Identity, Purpose and Vision. It is the same for all Great Nations throughout History. Caeser continued, “Let us whisper now, together you and I.” Sadly our Weak Leaders have destroyed the American Dream and like Rome, it will take a Great Leader to Restore the Vision.
True, we need stronger leaders who can lead well. Neither of the last two presidents have led with any competence whatsoever. We need a younger, stronger president, in my opinion.
Did you just quote a 2000s film as a legitimate source as to why an empire collapsed centuries ago? Maybe just consider that no empire was built to last forever, at some point there has to be a downfall. This is nothing to be sad about, it's just life. Honestly, your comment is a way better indicator that there is presently a decay than what you're actually trying to claim...
Failure of the water system. The same cause of the loss of the Khmer society. In an era before power equipment, computers, and advanced math, it got too complex. The network depended on a few geniuses, skilled trades and foremen, and efficient workers.
How would invading barbarians have benefited from access to the Empire's food production? Would it have sufficed to feed the added millions, or would the locals' diet have sufferend in oder to make up the balance in calories?
Rome, the old capital city of the many different aspects of the Roman people and their imperial domains, finally 'fell' 1) Because it was no longer relevant (the actual imperial business had moved elsewhere - to be better commercially situated and more defensible for military command. 2) Because, though revered as Disney-type tourist attraction, the old (indeed defunct) attractions no longer really attracted. And 3) Because, in fact, no one really cared to keep the dead-end business project part (the Empire) alive there, other than as a show (with dwindling resources); only one factor kept Rome from disappearing amid its own forlorn desertion .. the one thing that few desire to acknowledge. ;o)
i mean 200 years isnt relative quickly in matter of western part, eastern part had very long descend on the other hand. usa existence for example is that long from creation to fall, decade or so and its over, bit over 200 years.
Hereditary monarchy didn't help, often you ended up with minors as emporer which allowed generals to sideline imperial authority. Who then cared more about power than the empire.
Factors of it's decline: Internal strife, civil wars which stripped frontier forces, this in turn depressed economic activities and trade, as economic was suppressed taxes collection lessen. Then climate shift occurred reducing grain producing regions, and new diseases and the plague killed thousands of citizens. As weather changed, precipitation decreased this affected the barbarians herd animals forage production ( grasses ) which caused them to migrate to feed their herds! Then the education system also broke down which produced " Village idiots" for leadership for the empire. Much like nation and the divineness from radical extremist on the right now!!
How about the sheer incompetence of Late Roman Emperors? Honorius and his successor Valentinian III were howling cretins who held the western throne when the empire desperately needed competent, active and honest leaders. By the time Majorian came along, the rot in the west had progressed too far to turn things around. When Honorius was told that Rome had fallen to the barbarians, he was at first upset because he thought his pet CHICKEN "Roma" was taken by the Goths! He stopped caring when he realized it was the city not his chicken that had fallen victim.
Regarding the demographics - the question of who died is important. If the smallpox victims were all over 60 (say), then that is largely irrelevant to the supply of soldiers. But if they were all young men or boys - that's a big problem. If they are all girls and young women - that's also a big problem, but it would take a little longer for it to be felt. Alas, it is all conjecture.
The plague of Cyprian (probably Ebola) was only 80 years after the Antonine Plague. The population had had no chance to bounce back. Read Kyle Harper Plagues Upon the Earth, recently published. Mortality was around 50%. The Justinianic Plague was Y Pestis- bubonic plague. Similar mortality.
All that parricide in the imperial families contributed to Rome’s downfall, too. After a pair of teenage brothers murdered their parents to get their money, there is now a law here in California that people, including minors, who murder their relatives can’t inherit or benefit financially in any way, like by writing a book about it. It’s high time! Not that such a law would have been respected in the Late Roman Empire, any strongman with enough money to pay big “donatives” to the army could become Emperor, at least until the next, richer man came along. Once the military is controlling the government leadership in this way, it’s all over for a state. In both pagan and Christianity Rome, killing one’s relatives was one of the worst sins and taboos against the Gods, or God, but that didn’t stop anyone, either. The Senate had long before been disabled, there was no other authority, so everyone had to put up with this terrible “succession” by military coup d’etat, nor has this gone from the modern world, unfortunately. I never feared for the stable government of my country, USA, until Trump became President. After how he behaved in office for four years, I thought he would attempt a coup and sure enough, he did. Why they don’t throw that crook in jail forever is beyond me, how can he possibly be allowed to try again? Not that he would get much support, but still. We need a law that felons can’t attain any Federal office, if we don’t already have one (I have no idea if we do or not).
"All normal people are evil and eventually will succeed in fucking up everything." No. That's not really a surprising reason for the fall of Rome. That's kind of implied to be the main reason why Rome fell and why anything goes wrong.
Sorry but we need to start pushing back about this "population decline" media panic - and your vid in a way helps to explore why. When capitalism grows exponentially to the point that the stratisfication between rich and poor is night vs day, then no... People arent gna want kids/be able to afford kids/want to bring lives into a progressively strenuous situation. There's a simple solution that doesnt involve women being farmed for more workers, and it was clearly one that might have benefitted Rome too - fairer wealth distribution. The only way we get to the next stage of humanity is more equality and another step away from our competitive history.
Respectfully, all of your videos are bashing the Roman Empire, that is why your subscription rate is so low. It is okay to tell the truth, but tell the good and the bad
I don't agree. I think it's clear in the tone and content of these videos that Maiorianus deeply mourns the collapse of the western empire and fully acknowledges the positive cultural and intellectual legacies of Rome. I don't see any "bashing" at all.
Even Caesar Augustus, the first Emperor, was quite concerned about the declining birth rate, he made laws to reward those having three or more children, and to penalize those who remained unmarried and/or childless. It wasn’t just the low marriage and birth rates, but the extremely high infant/childhood mortality which caused population growth to stall as early as the turn from BC to AD. It wasn’t really until the 19th and 20th Centuries that these rates substantially declined, at least in Westernized countries. Crib death still remained high for decades because conventional wisdom said it was “fine” to let babies sleep face-down. Of course, now we know that this was the cause of the overwhelming majority of crib deaths. Caesar Augustus wasn’t the most benevolent emperor, he cared mostly about the propertied classes, but there’s no denying that he tried to plan for the future of the empire, once his own power and dominance were firmly established. He wasn’t the last emperor or dictator to encourage higher birth rates as a way to, in time, replenish the high losses of his military forces.
I think the over emphasis of germanic invasions is a problem in thinking of the end of the WRE. These germanic peoples are often portryed in popular culture as hairy long haired barbarians but this isnt exactly true. At least no more so then what we see today with migrants coming into europe and the US from third world countries. You see them today arriving wearing western clothing often speaking their own language but also utilizing western customs and technology. It often makes me laugh seeing these supposed "poor migrants" coming in with their Iphones and expensive clothing. Well it was much the same for the germanic peoples, they had co existed along side the romans for yeara and like brothers and sisters faught like crazy. By the time the goths took over the term "Goth" was more of a ethnic diliniation rather then a race. They spoke a dialect of latin and absorbed latin culture and combined it with their own. They were christians by the mid 5th century and were basically indistinguishable from romans. Thats why the italic peoples accepted a new regime. It was a roman regime by then. Only their names and some linguistic parts were different.
I have to take exception to your demographic parallels and the false alarm over declining birth rates. We are outstripping the earth's carrying capacity, both in terms of arable and natural land, but also of potable water. Rather than Rome, look to the Indus valley or the fate of Babylon and Nineveh. Innovation stops when education does and when socio-economic opportunities are not present owing to rigid social hierarchies.
Slaves do not multiple as good as free ppl hence poulation decline .. only exception black slaves in Americas and it was during industrial revolution... So populatin decline was constant all the time .. cities drained ppl with minus population growth... Rural areas did not produce enough free romans as free farmers were replaced by big villas and slaves those did not have many kids as being slaves and expoited drastically reduced their childbearing potentials ... Slave economy needed to grow extensively by conquest... But after Trajan it was not feasible anymore .. So, yes they died out slowly plus on top succession crisis and civil wars.. regress in the economy output .. they did not go to the industrial Revolution and better manufacturing even though they were on brink of it with water mills and metallurgy... Still puzzling 🤔 if Rome could have another fate and go straight from slavery to new time capitalism ... Freedom and personal rights seem to be such intangible assets amd yet they define the history and rise and fall of the civilizations... So basically slaveowners and slaves need dark ages to get freedom again to jump into the new era of capitalism and enlightenment
The Roman Empire fell from 1. Overreach; extending the border of the empire too far and overspending to maintain it 2. Failure to protect their borders from hordes of millions if people who at best shared nothing in common with Roman culture and had no desire to become Roman and at worst peoples who were open hostile to Rome and its culture and intent on bringing it down. 3. Breakdown of the nuclear family partially due to the huge rise in homosexuality. Not throwing stones. Sound familiar?
This is bs,the Empire ran out of money because of its rulers and their extravagance.Constantly trying to placate its growing population with games ,free bread and a lot of legions to control its vastness as a superpower also required huge sums of money.
important note! 1. In the videos you exaggerate by naming all the barbarians as "Germanic tribes". It is very incorrect. Yes, possibly 60% of the barbarians were Germanic north of Limes, but another large part were Sarmatian tribes (Iazigs, Roxolans, Alans, etc.), Thracians (Carpi, Costoboci, etc.), later Hunnics and let's not forget the Celtic or mixed (orsi, bastards, etc.) 2. Don't forget that the late empire also lost populated territories (Dacia, Agri Decumanes, Tiras, Olbia, regions in Arabia and Mauretania). 3. speaking of external factors, the Sassanid and Celtic attacks in Caledonia (and Ireland) must be taken into account. 4. changing clothes is often an effect of changing climate, not so much culture. however, the influence of the empire on the barbarians was much greater in terms of culture and technology.
Click this link sponsr.is/Maiorianus and use my code MAIORIANUS to get 25% off your first payment for boot.dev. That’s 25% your first month or your first year, depending on the subscription you choose.
Sorry for the Re-Upload, there was as so often a copyright issue, which I needed to fix.
Factionalism in the imperial court was a factor too. Courtiers were constantly bad mouthing each other to the emperor. Ammianus Marcellinus in the late 4th century compares it to the animal-human fights (Venations) in the arena. This was the downfall of generals like Stillicho.
I think you’re spot here. It seems academics give high credit to Diocletian, but his decision to thoroughly cast away the princeps model in favor of an imperial court really damaged the empire long term.
I think you're right.
@@ordinaryhuman2511 No, the change was necessary, because it strengthened the emperors legitimacy.
You know what is even worse than bickering courtiers?
Civil war
@@ordinaryhuman2511But he was the only emperor to retire after the joyous third century when 20 emperors were murdered in 50 years.
@@Joanna-il2ur iirc he was in retirement as civil war was once again heating up. The tetrarchy was also a bad idea.
Look he provided stability, but a Probus or Aurelian could’ve done the same imo.
Like Constantine he was immensely impactful on history, I just don’t think legacy on Rome was that beneficial
The question is why the Roman Empire lasted so long. It had so many internal problems and external enemies, from the earliest days under Romulus. And even then has it really ended, instead evolved into today's nations and peoples.
True I never thought of that
Another question might be why Roman resurgences never succeeded, with long periods of decline never fully reversed by short periods of recovery. Its contemporary peer civilizations: China, Persia, Ethiopia, all exist today all far more clearly of lineal descent. For most of 400 years after the Eastern Han Dynasty, China was a lot like the post-collapse Rome, with weak successor states, barbarian kingdoms, and rapid turnover, then the Tang came along and made China greater than ever before. Persia spent nearly 1000 years of disunion and rule by foreigners and barbarians after the Sassanids before pulling itself back together, much changed but still distinctly Iranian.
Ha you don’t get texts like City or God if something wasn’t actually ending.
I do like to think they got the last laugh though. Look how much of the world speaks a Romance language.
@@shangrilainxanadu Good point. The West has always had an issue with replacing its political elites. Societies either crumble, or stuff like the French Revolution happens. Likely it has to do with the refusal to keep monarchies, but why this is a recurring feature is the real question. There are rarely events when members of the aristocracy rebel against the incompetent administration with the aid of the commoners to revitalize the society, as has happened like you stated in China and Persia.
@@shangrilainxanadupersia and Ethiopia maybe, but modern Chinas connection to its past is complicated by the cultural revolution, Taiwan has a greater connection to ancient China than Red China.
It's a good day when Maiorianus uploads.
Another good episode. Thanks for all your hard work
Great video, I’ve seen many people assume the population was the same at peak as just before the end, probably because that’s what happens in industrialized history where population (and in my opinion imperial possessions as well) keep increasing until just before the end.
What a great video! Thank you for sharing with us
One of your best video's, IMHO, is the video about the question *when* did Rome fall. And that arguably ten different answers or more could be provided for that. But yeah, the amount of people working in a pre-industrial civilization should follow the economic productivity of a state. A population decline would therefor also entail an economic decline. Then again population numbers are not simply by themselves a cause; because there is cause behind the mutation of those numbers.
Wow! The images are outstanding, especially the portraits.
The info says posted 2 hours ago, but I saw this several weeks previous! Did you get in trouble with the delatores or the Kopyright Kops? And I'll ask again what I asked the first time: what was happening to average family size?
I agree he must have deleted and reuploaded, but what has changed I'm not sure
Hi Wynn, yes, I had to re-upload due to a copyright issue. What else, hehe. I wish I had data about the average family size, but I couldn't find anything. If you find a good source, pls let me know.
Its a very important reason. Excess population allows a state to make mistakes, the more population you have, the more mistakes and horrible leaders you can have in your nation without collapsing.
@@RandomGuy-lu1en Rebellion is irrelevant if all the people are your people.
What is interesting about the fall of the Roman empire is that it was such a complex interplay between immediately proximate factors such as the betrayals of Ricimer and ultimate forces such as the lack of a succession plan for leadership. And that makes it a question of whether the fall was preventable or ultimately inevitable. I lean toward the inevitable side.
Inevitable for sure. It’s true nothing lasts forever.
Very interesting. Thank you.
The great plague of 541/2 ravaged the empire and may have reduced the population by up to 30%. Annual revenue, which stood at around 11 million solidi in 540 dropped to just 6 million in 555. The west by this time had collapsed and Italy was being destroyed during the Gothic wars.
Never thought of the greater effects the plagues had on the empire. The economy would shrink less capable workers plus the population density along with the increase of Germanic people. Plus all the boneheaded things that occurred in the 3rd and 4th century.
The Roman Empire fell because the Italians gave up. They lost their taste for empire. They stopped caring about anything that happened outside of Italy. Existential tiredness.
I think the emperors just failed to make reforms.
What does it have to do with Italy? Italians were always a minority within the empire. From the third century most emperors were from Moesia, which is in the Serbia- Hungary- Bulgaria area. Most emperors were fairly nobodies picked by army factions. Several never went to Rome or did it only once, such as Constantius II, who visited it for the first time in 353. He’d been emperor since 337. You exaggerate the importance of Italy to the empire. Several primary sources after 476 don’t even mention anything much happening in that year.
wtf are you talking about lmao. italians have nothing common with romans other than place they live in. people that have most similiar genetics to romans are located in corsica which belongs to france.
and rereading this comment its absolute bullshit. i doubt anybody from those 40 likes is human or even ai because they atleast pretend to think even if they do not ( yet i guess), it must be given automatically by youtube to absolute moronic comments so youtube looks more populated than it this
@@Samuel42069National Institutes of Health (.gov)
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov › pmc
Ancient Rome: A genetic crossroads of Europe and the Mediterranean - PMC
www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_Italy%23:~:text%3D9%2520Further%2520reading-,Overview,were%2520closest%2520to%2520Southern%2520Italians).&ved=2ahUKEwjp66XHxtOCAxXpN-wKHXt1DzoQFnoECBIQBQ&usg=AOvVaw2qYPgCnikQwzZUpFYu-gQS
Not exactly
Is this not a re-upload? Or am i just experiencing a glitch in the matrix?
It is a re-upload
Anyone figure out what if anything changed?
Epic profile picture
Population loss is a serious issue, which can be from 3 major causes. 1) concentration of people into Urbanized City centers, 2) education of women, 3) less marriages/ a higher percentage of both adultery and singlehood, and general moral decay.
Each of these three of these causes can make the other two more frequent, which can create a population debt spiral
For most of history populations regularly fell when diseases or weather patterns interrupted agriculture, only in the last five hundred years has this changed on a global scale.
The last 300 years thanks to potatoes
Thanks to the Industrial Revolution, last 250 years.
Population decline also declined the number of recruits and on that that men didn't want to join in the army, increased number of monks and mystics...
And Christianity came around inviting people to be monks.
@@alexzero3736 Asceticism is something that Christianity accepted and propagated, but yes a new religion took it into the hart and borders of the Europe.
I don't quite understand why people are so obsessed with finding the single reason Rome fell. As so many events in history there is never only a single reason. Rome fell due to several reasons that come together in that particular circumstance. But in Rome's case things fall apart due to structural weaknesses that is inherent since the days of the republic.
Summary
0:00: 🏛 로마 제국은 인구 감소 등 여러 가지 다른 이유들의 복잡한 상호작용으로 인해 무너졌습니다.
5:02: 📊 이 비디오는 로마 제국의 인구, 추정치 및 안토니우스 역병의 영향에 대해 논의합니다.
8:47: ⚔ 이 비디오는 전염병이 로마 제국의 인구에 미치는 영향과 기독교의 부상에 대해 논의합니다.
13:07: 📉 이 비디오는 로마 제국의 인구 감소가 게르만족의 부상에 미친 영향과 현대에 대한 관련성에 대해 논의합니다.
17:29: 🏛 영상에서는 고도로 발전한 국가들의 인구 감소에 대해 논의하며, 로마 제국의 몰락과 잠재적인 사회적 및 경제적 영향과의 유사성을 빚어냅니다.
Recapped using Tammy AI
0:00: 🏛 The Roman Empire collapsed due to a complex interplay of many different reasons, including population decline.
5:02: 📊 This video discusses the population of the Roman Empire, estimates, and the effects of the Antonine Plague.
8:47: ⚔ This video discusses the effects of the plague on the population of the Roman Empire and the rise of Christianity.
13:07: 📉 This video discusses the impact of the Roman Empire's depopulation on the rise of the Germanic tribes and its relevance to modern times.
17:29: 🏛 The video discusses population decline in highly developed countries, drawing parallels with the fall of the Roman Empire and the potential social and economic impacts.
And we can learn so much from what occurred then as an almost direct parallel to what is happening in the west today. The comparison is so obvious and may end in equally disastrous circumstances.
Even under Augustus there was concern over population decline. The 'Lex Julia de maritandis ordinibus' and the 'Lex Julia et Papia Poppaea' both passed or came into effect between 18 BC and 4/9 AD. Population decline was a concern 450 years before the fall of the empire. Migration to the cities, massacres of peoples by generals like Julius Caesar (Plutarch calculated Caesar to have caused the death of one million Gauls and to have enslaved million more. Add constant civil war and plague then the population of Europe except Russia, having apparently reached a high point of some 40-55 million people by the start of the third century [ca.200 C.E.], seems to have fallen by the year 500 to about 30-40 million, bottoming out at about 20-35 million around 600." [i.e. ca.20M] Paul Bairoch. One of the reasons for the shortage of troops provided by Justinian to Belisarius and then Narses was that population decline had denuded the army of men. There was a total collapse of revenue and taxation in kind from the deserted countryside.
Most population decline comes from a lack of children. Energetic and young populations produce more children. Energetic populations can rebound from massive losses in war and disease. Especially as most wars and diseases only affect some areas of the population (front lines villagers and soldiers), which encourages the safety and development of the children.
The population of the Easter Roman Empire was much greater than in the West.
If the Roman Empire employed the thema system earlier when the Germanic tribes were beginning to settle in, will this change or fix anything? By making them military governors, they have no needed to proclaim themselves as the monarchs who ruled on behalf of the Emperor in Constantinople anymore while also de facto gaining Roman citizenships as well. Sure, rebellions can still happened there and there. But dynasties can also be changed all the times. But the point is that unless these Romanized Germanic tribes started secessionist crises, they can claimed the consuls and become Emperors due to their de facto Roman citizenships as well.
P.S: Should polygamy be legalized to help increasing humans' population?
As someone who thinks Diocletian’s administrative reforms are his greatest accomplishment, I disagree. I think the remilitarization of culture, including in italy, like in the peak Roman republic, would have been a better measure. Though this move is definitely hindsight inspired with the recruitment and budgeting problem.
Interesting vid!
Coming up to 100 thousand Subs!
love your stuff!
Lmaoooooo that transition was something else
Love the videos.
Can you please do a video on Marcellinus of dalmatia? I want to know more about him.
Did you ever consider the volcano in Indonesia Like 2 years of no crops .Krakatoa
Impressive vídeo.
all of those computer jobs went away years ago to India, Bangladesh, mexico paying a few dollars a day at most.
15:51 turned out diversity wasn’t their strength
Rome never failed
Some bastards failed Rome 🗿
This video introduces new evidence that is of great importance - plagues and the consequences of population decline. This explains better the reasons for the decline and fall of the Roman Empire. It also explains why there was a decline in innovation and building, etc., and the perceived “tiredness” of the Roman people. The current situation in Europe is following a somewhat similar route, where immigration is used to prevent population decline. However, as with the Roman Empire, it will result in unforeseen consequences.
Also the Romans maintained a standing army. This was expensive and it was a good idea to keep the Legions paid (on account of them being armed to the teeth) but it paid for itself (& its pension scheme) by conquering more lands. Until they fetched up against the Atlantic, The Sahara, The Germans & the Parthians. Then they could only be paid by higher taxes (not on the aristocracy who did not pay any) & the Empire began to implode.
Read the Life of St Severinus by Eugippius. Free on the internet. The last soldiers left the Danube to collect the wages of fellow soldiers and never returned. They may have been robbed and killed. The other soldiers just gave up and became farmers. They had to eat.
My speculation would be that the cause was not the population-decline, over-all, but the decline in the numbers of skilled tradesmen & the decline in the number of educated members of the upper class. The infrastructure of the Empire could not be sustained or repaired because of the loss of the special knowledge that was needed. When books had to be made of vellum parchment only, with no paper available, there could not be many books published, & those that were published were mostly Christian prayer-books, not books with practical knowledge. That is the explanation that seems reasonable to me.
Christianity certainly played its part in Romes decline regardless what many people think. I believe Edward Gibbon was at least partially correct in his assessment.
Thanks!
Thanks a lot for your kind donation, I really appreciate it :)
Good example of "Demographics are Destiny" . If the population numbers are correct the decline in Roman population would be less of an issue than the massive growth of population on Rome's borders.
"Where they make a desert, they call it peace." (Galgacus, Caledonian chief, from Tacitus: Agricola, 30)
Invented by Tacitus, of course. He couldn’t have understood Calgarcus and wasn’t there.
Native American civilizations were never the same after smallpox made its way there. Urban life had to fade away, decentralization, etc. Disease can put a permanent population ceiling on a race.
The pre-christian empire believed that their gods favored the empire, provided the offerings kept coming. The Christian empire stopped the offerings. The empire fell
Correlation does not equal causation.
Could make a decent plot device
They were passing Chuckie Cheese tokens as legal dinero
There's a problem with this theory.
Didn't the other people's also suffer from the same disease?
Another reason the Romans may have adopted more Germanic style clothing is the end of the Roman Warm Period.
Very True. It was the increased thereat from the replacement of the Parthians with the Persian Sasain Empire. In 636, both empires were so exhausted by mutual war, they failed against the rising the Islamic Empire. A war that even Mairorian' heirs (if he was successful) would have to face. And even if they were succesful, would they have succeed against the Mongols in the 13th Century?
Is moving the capital away from Rome why?
You are see one happen in real time. The US is collapsing.
It would be interesting to see the similarities between the two
Re-upload?
I think that in many ways, Rome fell within the Roman empire before it was taken over by the Vandals & Goths...
after the civil wars and Tyrants, whilst a Roman disliked "The Barbarian", he would hate his fellow Roman with a vehement hate, for that Roman ruined his life, or the life of friend, or killed and tortured a relative. most families had been on opposite sides at some point in the conflict, and those feuds lingered.
The Goths and such tribes on the other hand, they were independent/free, intensely loyal to their leaders, and a military democratic meritocracy of participation with each unit a proud iron fist (based on the Roman model they had seen)... these were people carrying a very Roman Ideology at it's purest.
indeed by the end of the Roman empire, in many key ways the Barbarians were more Roman than the Romans...
their society was very different, yes... carried by a different faith & a different social structure. but, so many people who would have been Romans of Honor, saw the honor in becoming one of them.
yea
In Gladiator, Caesar asks Maximus what is Rome, then says, “There was once a Dream that was Rome. You could only whisper it … it was so fragile.” Rome had nearly collapsed many times and was restored by Emperor’s with a unifying Vision and people willing to fight and die for it. The Fall of Roman began when Romans lost their foundational Identity, Purpose and Vision. It is the same for all Great Nations throughout History. Caeser continued, “Let us whisper now, together you and I.” Sadly our Weak Leaders have destroyed the American Dream and like Rome, it will take a Great Leader to Restore the Vision.
True, we need stronger leaders who can lead well. Neither of the last two presidents have led with any competence whatsoever. We need a younger, stronger president, in my opinion.
Did you just quote a 2000s film as a legitimate source as to why an empire collapsed centuries ago? Maybe just consider that no empire was built to last forever, at some point there has to be a downfall. This is nothing to be sad about, it's just life. Honestly, your comment is a way better indicator that there is presently a decay than what you're actually trying to claim...
Failure of the water system. The same cause of the loss of the Khmer society.
In an era before power equipment, computers, and advanced math, it got too complex. The network depended on a few geniuses, skilled trades and foremen, and efficient workers.
How would invading barbarians have benefited from access to the Empire's food production? Would it have sufficed to feed the added millions, or would the locals' diet have sufferend in oder to make up the balance in calories?
Rome, the old capital city of the many different aspects of the Roman people and their imperial domains, finally 'fell' 1) Because it was no longer relevant (the actual imperial business had moved elsewhere - to be better commercially situated and more defensible for military command. 2) Because, though revered as Disney-type tourist attraction, the old (indeed defunct) attractions no longer really attracted. And 3) Because, in fact, no one really cared to keep the dead-end business project part (the Empire) alive there, other than as a show (with dwindling resources); only one factor kept Rome from disappearing amid its own forlorn desertion .. the one thing that few desire to acknowledge.
;o)
Saying it without saying it 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Goooooo
Starship!!!
i mean 200 years isnt relative quickly in matter of western part, eastern part had very long descend on the other hand. usa existence for example is that long from creation to fall, decade or so and its over, bit over 200 years.
Hereditary monarchy didn't help, often you ended up with minors as emporer which allowed generals to sideline imperial authority. Who then cared more about power than the empire.
why did the german pop go up while Rome went down
I like this vid :D
Pure speculations, there is no hard facts for any of that.
they ran out of stuff to steal
Why is your voice so familiar to me?
Didn't I just watch this a few days ago? Says it's new as of 8 hours ago.
Overpopulatoion seems to also bring some problems with it.
Factors of it's decline:
Internal strife, civil wars which stripped frontier forces, this in turn depressed economic activities and trade, as economic was suppressed taxes collection lessen. Then climate shift occurred reducing grain producing regions, and new diseases and the plague killed thousands of citizens. As weather changed, precipitation decreased this affected the barbarians herd animals forage production ( grasses ) which caused them to migrate to feed their herds! Then the education system also broke down which produced
" Village idiots" for leadership for the empire. Much like nation and the divineness from radical extremist on the right now!!
How about the sheer incompetence of Late Roman Emperors? Honorius and his successor Valentinian III were howling cretins who held the western throne when the empire desperately needed competent, active and honest leaders. By the time Majorian came along, the rot in the west had progressed too far to turn things around. When Honorius was told that Rome had fallen to the barbarians, he was at first upset because he thought his pet CHICKEN "Roma" was taken by the Goths! He stopped caring when he realized it was the city not his chicken that had fallen victim.
Honorius
Born September 384
Constantinople
He was a Non Roman so why should he care about Rome?
@@kompo1012 Ne Kadar aptalca bir düşünce
Regarding the demographics - the question of who died is important. If the smallpox victims were all over 60 (say), then that is largely irrelevant to the supply of soldiers. But if they were all young men or boys - that's a big problem. If they are all girls and young women - that's also a big problem, but it would take a little longer for it to be felt. Alas, it is all conjecture.
The plague of Cyprian (probably Ebola) was only 80 years after the Antonine Plague. The population had had no chance to bounce back. Read Kyle Harper Plagues Upon the Earth, recently published. Mortality was around 50%. The Justinianic Plague was Y Pestis- bubonic plague. Similar mortality.
And that is why Rome lost the Dacian wars?? I can´t stand this knowledge gap, please continue your series :)
All that parricide in the imperial families contributed to Rome’s downfall, too. After a pair of teenage brothers murdered their parents to get their money, there is now a law here in California that people, including minors, who murder their relatives can’t inherit or benefit financially in any way, like by writing a book about it. It’s high time! Not that such a law would have been respected in the Late Roman Empire, any strongman with enough money to pay big “donatives” to the army could become Emperor, at least until the next, richer man came along. Once the military is controlling the government leadership in this way, it’s all over for a state. In both pagan and Christianity Rome, killing one’s relatives was one of the worst sins and taboos against the Gods, or God, but that didn’t stop anyone, either. The Senate had long before been disabled, there was no other authority, so everyone had to put up with this terrible “succession” by military coup d’etat, nor has this gone from the modern world, unfortunately. I never feared for the stable government of my country, USA, until Trump became President. After how he behaved in office for four years, I thought he would attempt a coup and sure enough, he did. Why they don’t throw that crook in jail forever is beyond me, how can he possibly be allowed to try again? Not that he would get much support, but still. We need a law that felons can’t attain any Federal office, if we don’t already have one (I have no idea if we do or not).
Fresh air and clean water in Germany. Pollution in urban empire.😂
Thanks. The whole Roman population was literally decimated! Yikes. tavi.
"All normal people are evil and eventually will succeed in fucking up everything."
No. That's not really a surprising reason for the fall of Rome. That's kind of implied to be the main reason why Rome fell and why anything goes wrong.
Deja vu
I blame the Jews, the Christians and the Muslims, in that order,
it stepped on a banana
Sorry but we need to start pushing back about this "population decline" media panic - and your vid in a way helps to explore why.
When capitalism grows exponentially to the point that the stratisfication between rich and poor is night vs day, then no... People arent gna want kids/be able to afford kids/want to bring lives into a progressively strenuous situation.
There's a simple solution that doesnt involve women being farmed for more workers, and it was clearly one that might have benefitted Rome too - fairer wealth distribution.
The only way we get to the next stage of humanity is more equality and another step away from our competitive history.
Stop using ai pictures, a blank screen would be better if you can't find a good picture
Rome didn't fall in a day, or in one generation.
Respectfully, all of your videos are bashing the Roman Empire, that is why your subscription rate is so low. It is okay to tell the truth, but tell the good and the bad
I don't agree. I think it's clear in the tone and content of these videos that Maiorianus deeply mourns the collapse of the western empire and fully acknowledges the positive cultural and intellectual legacies of Rome. I don't see any "bashing" at all.
Even Caesar Augustus, the first Emperor, was quite concerned about the declining birth rate, he made laws to reward those having three or more children, and to penalize those who remained unmarried and/or childless. It wasn’t just the low marriage and birth rates, but the extremely high infant/childhood mortality which caused population growth to stall as early as the turn from BC to AD. It wasn’t really until the 19th and 20th Centuries that these rates substantially declined, at least in Westernized countries. Crib death still remained high for decades because conventional wisdom said it was “fine” to let babies sleep face-down. Of course, now we know that this was the cause of the overwhelming majority of crib deaths. Caesar Augustus wasn’t the most benevolent emperor, he cared mostly about the propertied classes, but there’s no denying that he tried to plan for the future of the empire, once his own power and dominance were firmly established. He wasn’t the last emperor or dictator to encourage higher birth rates as a way to, in time, replenish the high losses of his military forces.
I think the over emphasis of germanic invasions is a problem in thinking of the end of the WRE. These germanic peoples are often portryed in popular culture as hairy long haired barbarians but this isnt exactly true. At least no more so then what we see today with migrants coming into europe and the US from third world countries. You see them today arriving wearing western clothing often speaking their own language but also utilizing western customs and technology. It often makes me laugh seeing these supposed "poor migrants" coming in with their Iphones and expensive clothing. Well it was much the same for the germanic peoples, they had co existed along side the romans for yeara and like brothers and sisters faught like crazy. By the time the goths took over the term "Goth" was more of a ethnic diliniation rather then a race. They spoke a dialect of latin and absorbed latin culture and combined it with their own. They were christians by the mid 5th century and were basically indistinguishable from romans. Thats why the italic peoples accepted a new regime. It was a roman regime by then. Only their names and some linguistic parts were different.
Late Antiquity is so depressing. Why couldn’t Rome regenerate itself? Was Christianity a poison for Rome?
Christianity was the attempt of Roman emperors to stop the decline and prevent the fall
So Rome was already falling
Yes. Like what Wokism is to the West today..
I have to take exception to your demographic parallels and the false alarm over declining birth rates. We are outstripping the earth's carrying capacity, both in terms of arable and natural land, but also of potable water. Rather than Rome, look to the Indus valley or the fate of Babylon and Nineveh. Innovation stops when education does and when socio-economic opportunities are not present owing to rigid social hierarchies.
🪖🫡
Slaves do not multiple as good as free ppl hence poulation decline .. only exception black slaves in Americas and it was during industrial revolution...
So populatin decline was constant all the time .. cities drained ppl with minus population growth... Rural areas did not produce enough free romans as free farmers were replaced by big villas and slaves those did not have many kids as being slaves and expoited drastically reduced their childbearing potentials ...
Slave economy needed to grow extensively by conquest...
But after Trajan it was not feasible anymore ..
So, yes they died out slowly plus on top succession crisis and civil wars.. regress in the economy output .. they did not go to the industrial Revolution and better manufacturing even though they were on brink of it with water mills and metallurgy...
Still puzzling 🤔 if Rome could have another fate and go straight from slavery to new time capitalism ...
Freedom and personal rights seem to be such intangible assets amd yet they define the history and rise and fall of the civilizations...
So basically slaveowners and slaves need dark ages to get freedom again to jump into the new era of capitalism and enlightenment
These AI thumbails are terrible my friend...
maybe they became to moke😂
The Roman Empire fell from
1. Overreach; extending the border of the empire too far and overspending to maintain it
2. Failure to protect their borders from hordes of millions if people who at best shared nothing in common with Roman culture and had no desire to become Roman and at worst peoples who were open hostile to Rome and its culture and intent on bringing it down.
3. Breakdown of the nuclear family partially due to the huge rise in homosexuality. Not throwing stones.
Sound familiar?
This is bs,the Empire ran out of money because of its rulers and their extravagance.Constantly trying to placate its growing population with games ,free bread and a lot of legions to control its vastness as a superpower also required huge sums of money.
TRUMP 2024
important note!
1. In the videos you exaggerate by naming all the barbarians as "Germanic tribes". It is very incorrect.
Yes, possibly 60% of the barbarians were Germanic north of Limes, but another large part were Sarmatian tribes (Iazigs, Roxolans, Alans, etc.), Thracians (Carpi, Costoboci, etc.), later Hunnics and let's not forget the Celtic or mixed (orsi, bastards, etc.)
2. Don't forget that the late empire also lost populated territories (Dacia, Agri Decumanes, Tiras, Olbia, regions in Arabia and Mauretania).
3. speaking of external factors, the Sassanid and Celtic attacks in Caledonia (and Ireland) must be taken into account.
4. changing clothes is often an effect of changing climate, not so much culture. however, the influence of the empire on the barbarians was much greater in terms of culture and technology.