third century crises

[Goffredo]

I think there is merit to the simplistic theory, if one keeps in mind, as you point out, that anticipations and returns were there through out. The merit is that it shows a temporal evolution, a tendency to go in a direction. Inspite of contingencies that in various periods made the Romans behave as they did in other periods (there aren't many options so we shouldn't be suprised we recognise them in different eras), the tendency was towards a growing incapacity to project a positive pressure outside the Limes. In the fourth century there were still attacks into enemy territory. But it was definitely lost by the beginning of the fifth when the Romans gave up destroying the barbarians that had settled in roman territory. <p></p><i></i>