
Rome’s border walls were the beginning of its end - smacktoward
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2012/09/roman-walls/
======
dwheeler
This is a rediculous ahistorical argument.

The Roman empire did not collapse right after Hadrian. Indeed, the next two
emperors after Hadrian are often called "good emperors" (Antoninus Pius and
Marcus Aurelius), and Rome was quite strong then. I don't know of anyone else
who seriously claims that building the border walls in any way led to the
collapse of the Roman Empire. Indeed, the fortifications were specifically
designed to make the empire easier to defend, and given what happened
afterwards, there's decent evidence that these fortifications _did_ help in
the empire's defense.

Anyone interested in the history of the western Roman empire would be well-
served to listen to the excellent "History of Rome" podcast by Mike Duncan:
[https://thehistoryofrome.typepad.com/](https://thehistoryofrome.typepad.com/)
For this purpose, you should listen to episode #179 ("The End") at
[https://thehistoryofrome.typepad.com/the_history_of_rome/201...](https://thehistoryofrome.typepad.com/the_history_of_rome/2012/05/179-the-
end.html) . Duncan says that there isn't just one cause of the fall of the
western Roman empire - instead, they were overwhelmed by a confluence of
multiple factors. Duncan says, "The decline and fall... is not going to be
able to be explained away by 1 or 2 simple causes... (each of the many
problems) played off other in a synergistic orgy of destruction". Episode #179
discusses this in more detail. Indeed, there were efforts near the end that
_might_ have saved it.

The real issues are complicated and don't easily fit into a "left" or "right"
discussion. If anything, the beginning of the end was that the border walls
were penetrated, not that border walls were built, so you could argue that the
border walls were necessary to have allowed the empire to have lasted as long
as it did. On the other hand, part of the reason they were penetrated was
because the Romans didn't let the Germans have real power within their empire
and didn't do a good job integrating Germans into their empire. On the
gripping hand, in many ways the collapse was in part because Rome had become
accustomed to fielding armies by paying mercenaries who were loyal only to
their commanders, instead of having soldiers who saw themselves as Roman
citizens fighting for the Roman government... and as Duncan notes, paying off
an 'other' to not invade is not a lasting solution. ("The empire was no longer
able to raise a national army, it could only pay for protection. And this, I
can assure you, is an unsustainable model of self-defense.")

And of course, only the western Roman empire fell in 476; the eastern Roman
empire continued for about another thousand years.

I'll add my own viewpoint. One of the biggest problems of Roman empire as a
whole (compared to the previous republic) was its failure to have a way to
peacefully select the next ruler. This lack of legitimacy led to occasional
outbreaks of civil war that repeatedly sapped Roman strength. I think that is
a _key_ problem that led to the fall of the western Roman empire when it did.
The eastern Roman empire had same problem as well. For example, legitimacy
issues in the eastern Roman empire led to serious problems after Basil II, and
their civil wars fatally weakened them.

There are definitely lessons to be learned from Rome (and history in general),
but that requires more careful examination of what actually happened.

~~~
ensignro2340
To piggyback this a bit: I highly recommend YouTuber Shaun’s videos on this
topic

[Stefan Molyneux’s Fall of Rome - A Response]
([https://youtu.be/BHW3Y_p2llo](https://youtu.be/BHW3Y_p2llo))

[Immigration and the Fall of Rome]
([https://youtu.be/WqCCx4wj79o](https://youtu.be/WqCCx4wj79o))

------
not_a_cop75
Am I wrong for believing that the author has drastically oversimplified their
argument to make it seem like walls were the downfall of the roman empire?
I've studied the fall of the roman empire for years on and off, and am no
expert, but in decades prior, not once were the existence of walls ever
mentioned as the reason for the downfall of society.

Some societies have over-relied on such defenses, true. But that is not the
same as a pure causation. In those situations the problem is cultural, and
either the people have become lazy and or divided.

~~~
sd_dev
Yes, you are wrong. It's clear you haven't even read the article. The article
is an overview of (semi-)recent* archeological research into Roman frontier
fortifications. The general conclusion that it draws was that the Romans
focused too much on fortifying their frontiers, which provided them with a
sense of complacency. Once the frontiers were breached, it was already over.
Sorta like the Maginot line. It also suggests that fortification-building
towards the end of the empire was a symptom of the decline itself, not a cause
(or cure).

All the off-topic comments here about politics are by people who didn't read
the article.

*It's from 2012.

------
vlehto
Nah.

The real problem was the Marian reforms. With professional army the imperium
was able to expand to a size that was impractical to rule. Also success was so
thorough that there were no strong enemies left to practice your troops
against. And no enemies that would weld the society into single cohesive
nation. War protects from despotism, as Kant said. When you don't have to fear
war, the wannabe despots start to rob what they can.

Hadrian only saved what he could. And giving the empire some 400 years more
life as he did so. And the walls of Constantinople lasted still thousand years
after Hadrian had led the way of wall building.

Now if you wish to connect dots to possible downfall of U.S. Then the critical
things would be instituting selective service after Vietnam war. And then
collapse of soviet union and now U.S. is also lacking credible enemy. With any
luck China will quickly rise as competitor.

------
jsf01
I love reading about Ancient Rome and this article has some really interesting
information I’d never known before. The origin of the word “limits” I found
particularly interesting.

Unfortunately the title and overall aim of the article detract from all the
good information it contains. In particular, the article’s attempt to remain
topical and relevant by linking Rome’s downfall to an issue we face today do
not do justice to the well-documented and well-researched conclusions
historians have drawn to date. If it offered new evidence, that might be a
different story. It feels like a rehashing of “Rome expanded so far its
resources were spread thin” but with the focus being on the wall itself, which
is a little disingenuous. So it’s hard to shake the feeling that this is a
thinly veiled political piece, which is really unfortunate because there is a
lot of great knowledge mixed in.

~~~
pwinnski
The article is from 2012, so hardly aimed at an issue we face "today."

~~~
jsf01
It explicitly references the US-Mexico border. Although I did assume it was
written post-2016, the point should still stand.

------
catominor
"They plunder, they slaughter, and they steal: this they falsely name Empire,
and where they make a desolation, they call it peace." (from Agricola by
Tacitus, a Caledonian chief describing Rome, 98AD)

This is what Rome was doing before it built its limes, brutally and
indiscriminately conquering their frontiers. Feels like this is being
indirectly advocated for.. which is odd, considering its modern comparison.

Can support other comments in this thread from my reading of Adrian
Goldsworthy's whole catalog.. Rome's decline was drawn out and complicated; it
would be simplistic and wrong-headed to say it was because it built walls on
its frontiers.

------
ur-whale
Which of the following two is most likely to have precipitated the fall? The
debasement of the sesterce, or the desire the defend the empire using walls?
Correlation != causation

------
umvi
Is this article implying a US-Mexico border wall would be the the beginning of
the US's end?

As a counter example, why hasn't China crumbled like Rome?

~~~
sd_dev
You should read the article and find out for yourself. Let us know when you're
done!

Edit: Fair enough.

~~~
umvi
I tried but was met with an un-closable modal and I didn't feel like creating
a NG account so I closed it.

