12-27-2018, 09:30 PM
Ave Civitas,
I just finished reading "Corruption and the Decline of Rome" my R. Macmullen.
Mr. Macmullen has a view that it was corruption within the empire and especially the army and its supply system that was the end of the empire.
From the Dust Jacket:
The decline and fall of the Roman Empire is a histroical puzzle that has intrigued scholars for centuries.
Now the prominent historian, Ramsay MacMullen argues that a key factor in the decline of Rome was the steady loss of focus and control over government as it aims were thwarted for private gain my high-ranking bureaucrats and military leaders.
MacMullen begins by arguing that the matter of the empire's decline is much more complex than it seems.
Making a survey of the entire empire, he shows that some regions prospered while others declined, and he proves that deterioration of Roman civilization was far from monolithic.
However,decline in the north and west was an undeniable fact, and according to MacMullen it was due to the growing ineffectiveness of Roman government, adn both obeyed a single ethic that tolerated favors and favoritism, but not hte selling of favors and favoritsm.
As time went by, however, extortion and bribe-taking became routine, encouraged by the ambiguity of law, the greater number and intrusiveness both of laws and of government servants, and the isolation of the emperor.
More and more people in public positions turned their authority to private profit. This led to a decline in power, in honor, in obligation, and ultimately, in military security, as the army became corrupt and the central government ineffective in directing military campaigns.
Has anyone else read this text, and if you did, what are your thoughts.
Tom
I just finished reading "Corruption and the Decline of Rome" my R. Macmullen.
Mr. Macmullen has a view that it was corruption within the empire and especially the army and its supply system that was the end of the empire.
From the Dust Jacket:
The decline and fall of the Roman Empire is a histroical puzzle that has intrigued scholars for centuries.
Now the prominent historian, Ramsay MacMullen argues that a key factor in the decline of Rome was the steady loss of focus and control over government as it aims were thwarted for private gain my high-ranking bureaucrats and military leaders.
MacMullen begins by arguing that the matter of the empire's decline is much more complex than it seems.
Making a survey of the entire empire, he shows that some regions prospered while others declined, and he proves that deterioration of Roman civilization was far from monolithic.
However,decline in the north and west was an undeniable fact, and according to MacMullen it was due to the growing ineffectiveness of Roman government, adn both obeyed a single ethic that tolerated favors and favoritism, but not hte selling of favors and favoritsm.
As time went by, however, extortion and bribe-taking became routine, encouraged by the ambiguity of law, the greater number and intrusiveness both of laws and of government servants, and the isolation of the emperor.
More and more people in public positions turned their authority to private profit. This led to a decline in power, in honor, in obligation, and ultimately, in military security, as the army became corrupt and the central government ineffective in directing military campaigns.
Has anyone else read this text, and if you did, what are your thoughts.
Tom
AKA Tom Chelmowski
Historiae Eruditere (if that is proper Latin)
Historiae Eruditere (if that is proper Latin)
