Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire: Fall and West and Rise of East
How does one describe a decline in a country or an empire? What determines this term
and how do people use this term? There are a variety of ways for anyone to answer this question
especially in terms of the Roman empire which has been a constant fixation for many historians
due to its long history, its connection to the West, as well as the its mysterious/controversial fall.
This is further confused by the fact that the empire of Rome split in two permanently between
the east and the west with diverging histories between the two. The “Roman Decline” is a
“Romanness” or a loss of the order of Roman everyday life in any situation including economics,
politics, religion, and culture. It is anything that causes problems or a decline in lifestyle in any
way with any person who believes themselves to be Roman. This is an appropriate term to
describe the events that have been discussed in class since the midterm as great changes in
lifestyle in both the East and the West occurred especially as time passed as there are many
records of changes occurring in the two empires as a response to what had occurred at that time.
The records show that between the two halves of the empire, more and more differences emerged
and due to the nature of these differences, the Western half of the empire experienced much
more of a decline while the Eastern half mostly experienced a transformation and continuation as
seen through what occurred politically, economically, culturally, and religiously.
Politically, the Western half of the empire experienced a decline due to a combination of
failed rulers, barbarians, and poor policy. The Roman empire had split into two and the western
half shrank over time. The Western half also had much more political problems and was weaker
than its eastern counterpart. This can be seen through maps in which the West continuously
shrank in size in 500s. One example of the decline in political power in the West is from the
“Theodosian Code, Minutes from Senate” in which Anicius Acilius Glabrio Faustus is praised
for simply suggesting that they send a copy of the possible new law to the African states. At this
point, the Roman Senate doesn’t really have a real use. While individuals in there are powerful,
the Senate body itself does not have much power if any. Over time, the power of the Western
empire shifted as the kings were kinder kaisers and failed to truly understand how to run their
side of the empire. Imperial power under Theodosius’s successors was split between the
courtiers, the clergy, and the military leaders. Troubles began for the West when Stilicho, who
was half barbarian so was unable to have the throne, tried to get more power as regent for the
East as well as the west but he failed due to a more pressing problem from the north, Gothic
tribes and other barbarians came down to the south as the Rhine had frozen. Stilicho’s hired help,
Alaric, was put off on his own and he needed to feed his people so he ended up going around
causing trouble and sacking cities in order to feed and provide for his people while trying to
make an agreement with Rome(Sozomen 9.7-9.9). While Alaric doesn’t attempt to attack the
king as that area is hard to get to, he makes a statement by sacking Rome, depicting the declining
power of the West Roman Empire. Clearly this was not a secure place as shown in Paulinus of
Pella’s, “Eucharisticon” as a man’s house was taken and pillaged. Property was not secure and
barbarians ran rampant. Over time, the Western empire conceded more and more land to barbaric
groups as they lacked the power and military to run out the barbarians. The Roman empire
claimed that wince they “gifted” the land, the Romans who live under barbarian reign should still
follow Roman law and taxes. This obviously didn’t happen. Gregory of Tours in his “History of
the Franks” notes that the Franks have no real laws and courts kind of make or follow general
guidelines but it is a pretty lawless area. However, not all Roman provinces did this as seen with
Isidore of Seville’s observation of Euric of the Goths having a written law rather than a tradition
or custom. Many of his laws were similar to those in the Theodosian Code, indicating some
continuation but considering the new kingdoms forming, they grew further and further from the
Roman laws, indicating a decline and fall as more and more territory became fundamentally not
Roman anymore.
The Eastern half faced much less political problems in comparison and it really continued
with many old policies that worked and progressed in many ways in terms of policy. Unlike the
West, the East did not shrink in size until the 700s. Unlike the West, the East had a strong grip
on its military power as shown by what had occurred to Theoderic. This is seen in John
Malamas’s “Chronicle” where after failing in his rebellion, “he left and set off for Rome which
was then controlled by Odovacer, king of the barbarians…After this he was reconciled with the
