Asnwer These Questions: Define "Defense In Depth" And "Barbarization." In Your Opinion, What Role Did Both Of These, As Incorporated Into The Roman Army, Have On The Fall Of The Western Roman Empire?

686 words - 3 pages

Defense-in-depth was based upon the assumption that the outer frontiers could not be made impenetrable, and, since they would eventually be penetrated, a small reserve army that traveled to the point of attack would be insufficient should an attacking enemy penetrate more than one frontier area at one time. Such an invasion could only be stopped if the frontier defense was realigned with strong forts that were built in a deep band, that is, staggered not only along the front lines, but behind one another to form a "running" defense, with the strong mobile army to respond (by region) to any attack.As also was previously discussed (last paragraph of answer #1), the ultimate conclusion of the defense-in-depth was the deterioration of the Roman Infantry. The limitanei (frontier troops), were no longer expected to defeat the enemy, and before long, they no longer wished to even engage the enemy. All of the training and expectations of actually defeating the enemy fell on the shoulders of the mobile army, thus, reducing Rome's overall combat manpower effectiveness. This is not to say that these effects were felt instantaneously upon the Empire, in fact, the defeats in Persia and at Adrianople were more from leadership failure than from lack of training or fighting spirit--but, nonetheless, the seeds had been planted from the conception of the defense-in-depth strategy.The limitanei actually maintained some resemblance to their predecessors although up into the fifth century, at which point, they dissolved into a peasant militia, mostly due to the 'federation' of barbarian forces. So, if the limitanei were still somewhat effective, how did the defense-in-depth help cause the fall of the Roman Empire? Simply, it was not the overall concept of the strategy that failed, but rather, the execution of the strategy. For example, the drastic decline in the emperor's ability to conjure and commit military forces to the frontiers and once committed the lack of trained, disciplined, and shock (via psychologically--the Roman armies had been consistently defeated in skirmishes between the late third and early firth centuries)...

Find Another Essay On Asnwer these Questions: Define "defense-in-depth" and "barbarization." In your opinion, what role did both of these, as incorporated into the Roman army, have on the fall of the Western Roman Empire?

Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire

1094 words - 4 pages issues were that because no one took any public interest in government jobs, because there were not looked at as something that was good. The Economic issues were that they had poor harvest. Food was scarce people needed food so they went after it. The Germanic tribes started taking over the western half of the empire. The Roman Empire was a great and big empire that lasted hundreds of years. It had a great impact on a lot of civilizations. The Romans went from a small civilization to one of the greatest empire of all. But then, was ripped apart into pieces until there was nothing left.

The Fall of the Roman Empire Explains the fate of Rome in the West in the course of the 3rd to 5th centuries AD. Accounts for the role of Christianity for both the Roman West and East

1172 words - 5 pages Did the Roman Empire really fall? What would later be known as the Byzantine Empire wasn't just an extension of the Roman Empire; it was part of the empire itself that flourished for nearly another millennia. The Western Roman Empire simply declined into a state of existence that made it vulnerable to invaders and was eventually overran by barbarian tribes. Rome had essentially been declining since 180 AD when civil wars occurred up until 285 AD

The fall of the Roman Empire

1564 words - 6 pages artillery aspect of the army was so they could steal the empires wealth. This behavior would probably lead to the destruction of Roman cities, and destruction of farmlands and economic trade.Civil war also played a negative role in the Fall of the Roman Empire. This was made possible when emperors became afraid of their own troops and the possible rebellion against them. Therefore the emperors to remain on their throne were sometimes obliged to buy the

The Fall of the Roman Empire

1800 words - 8 pages couldn’t field an army to oppose them. Alaric and his Visigoth army overrode Rome itself in 410 ACE, and plunder the city for 3 days. The Huns now also posed a direct threat to the empire. United under Attila the Hun, the huns harassed both sides of the Roman Empire. While, they failed to take the capital of Constantinople they plundered over 70 cities in the Eastern Roman Empire(Beck 176). In 452 ACE, Attila and his army marched into in the Western

The fall of the roman empire

2316 words - 9 pages In the year 476, the last Roman emperor was deposed. Over the previous two centuries, Barbarian invasions had brought the once-mighty Rome to its knees, and this is taken as the final fall of the Roman Empire in Western Europe. What are the political, economical and social implications of this event, and to what extent does it constitute a true turning-point in history?In the period immediately after 476 it is possible to see the structure of

The Fall of the Roman Empire

1933 words - 8 pages Roman armies. From that time on the Roman Empire in the west passed out of existence.Did the Roman Empire Fall?In my opinion, the Roman Empire transitioned rather than fell. The empire of the west became a decentralized state of quasi-Romanized Germanic fiefdoms each ruled by a warlord and his army. The Roman Empire in the east continued with more of a Greek influence than Latin until 1453 when the Ottomans conquered it. The barbarian invasions

The Fall of the Roman Empire

1091 words - 4 pages SegrestThe Fall of the Roman EmpireThough it started as a Republic, Rome quickly grew into one of the largest empires the world has ever seen. It flourished for over a thousand years, with a population of over seventy million people at its peak. The Roman Empire conquered over forty modern-day countries; this included the majority of Europe, small portions of North Africa, and the Middle East. However, even Rome had its issues. In 476 CE, the

The Fall of the Roman Empire - 1147 words

1147 words - 5 pages in the Eastern Empire provided continuing support while cities in the Western Empire were newer and weaker. When these cities came under pressure, much of the population fled to the countryside. (Microsoft 5)Germanic tribes also played a big role in the downfall of the Roman Empire. They were strong enough that through successive attacks they forced the people of Rome to fall further and further back. Microsoft states this by saying, "As Germanic

The Fall of the Roman Empire

1290 words - 5 pages The fall of the Roman Empire in the West is seen as one of the most pivotal points in all of human history. This event traditionally marks the transition from classical civilization to the birth of Europe. There is an absolutely tremendous scholarly interest in this subject; thousands of books have been published and endless numbers of essays and theories, as to the cause, have been written. Why did the Roman Empire in the West fall? It

The Fall of the Roman Empire - 819 words

819 words - 4 pages Empire fell. The reasons the Roman Empire fell are that Christianity became the religion in Rome, the empire became too big, and overtime the empire decayed. When Christianity became the religion in Rome, some people accepted the change and some people did not. Christianity was brought into the Roman Empire by Emperor Constantine during his reforms after a period of crisis in the late Roman Empire. The change in Religion was too big of a

The Fall Of The Roman Empire

902 words - 4 pages :// which was submitted by Luis Hernandez) In conclusion, I feel these three reasons: foreign invasions, economic problems, and Christianity made Rome fall. After searching through many websites and a few books, it has become clear that these reasons are the three most abundant as to why the Roman Empire collapsed. If these three situations had not occurred, things might have been different and maybe the Western Roman Empire would still be standing and prospering today.

Similar Essays

The Fall Of The Western Roman Empire

1560 words - 6 pages thousands of soldiers. This natural rebelliousness could possibly explain why the Roman government became so dysfunctional when it split into the East and the West. This unsatisfactory government was especially apparent in the west, as the Eastern Emperor managed/was forced to become leader of the whole Empire three times, while the Western Emperor did not step up once. This circumstance, besides indicating a frightful lack of strong leadership in the

Fall Of The Roman Empire Essay

1420 words - 6 pages fall of the Roman Empire as from 410 C.E is regarded as one of the largest and pivotal events in the history of the world. As from the time Edward Gibbon finished his works in 1788 on the Decline and Fall of the Roman empire, there has been large debates on the cause of the of the fall of the roman empire. However, it should be noted that despite the roman empire might have fallen politically, their culture and heritage still persisted in the west

Fall Of The Roman Empire Essay

1786 words - 8 pages second factor of its demise. The strategies of the Roman military were quite poor. All soldiers were kept on the frontier of the Empire and civil war was becoming a very dangerous risk. As battles broke-out more manpower was taken from the frontier, which weakened the fortress and made it easier for other armies, such as the barbarians to attack. When Emperor Constantine was appointed, he changed the military's tactics and divided the army into the

Fall Of The Roman Empire Essay

551 words - 2 pages that had it not been for these out side forces than Romes inner political state would not have become so destabilized, and there for would have been able to stay in control. This is what the scholars argue, and this is why I formulated my opinion as a combination of both of theirs. This is because I believe that the downfall of Rome had to do with both the inner and outer forces acting upon the situation. When you look at the example of the