Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

who did it?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 11 2004 @ 06:30 PM
link   
okay so my English teacher is trying to say im wrong but i sware im not, so tell me who defeated the roman empire, atilla the hun right, tell me im wrong.




posted on May, 11 2004 @ 06:35 PM
link   
Attila the Hun did not defeat the Roman empire. He did play a part though.

ancienthistory.about.com...



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 06:47 PM
link   
I will say Hannibal played a more important role than Attila because it was Hannibal that paved the way for people like Attila.

Remember, Hannibal almost DEFEATED the Roman Empire when the Roman Empire was at its peak and he WOULD'VE done so had he not been called back to Spain and then ultimately Carthage where he died.

His victory in Northern Italy was perfect and it was Hannibal that let the world know the Roman Empire could be defeated.

EDIT: I CAN'T TYPE.





[Edited on 5-11-2004 by Illmatic67]



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 06:51 PM
link   
well if atilla did play a part then im right, right, ill have to show my english teacher and prove him wrong, he tried to say atilla had nothing to do with it. instead of arguing my point to prove me wrong he just yells at me and threatens to send me to the office . because he knows he is wrong. lol hahah



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 06:53 PM
link   
From what I understand, the population to land mass ratio was dismal; the people of the Roman Empire were spread much too wide. Internal political decay due to the lack of confidence in the Empire was the primary cause, and because the legionnaires were spread so thinly, barbarians and other groups of the north tore them apart and forced Rome to retreat to its capital and Italian cities.



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Carvador
From what I understand, the population to land mass ratio was dismal; the people of the Roman Empire were spread much too wide. Internal political decay due to the lack of confidence in the Empire was the primary cause, and because the legionnaires were spread so thinly, barbarians and other groups of the north tore them apart and forced Rome to retreat to its capital and Italian cities.


Very true.

A single person didn't single handedly crush the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire did themselves also.

The whole western part of the Empire was captured by tribes and they became independant from them because Rome couldn't dispatch enough soldiers to fight in Spain, France, North Africa, etc....



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 06:58 PM
link   
yea i tried telling him something like that, but he wouldnt have that he just cut me off and told me he was smarter than i will ever be (i doubt it) and he was going to sned me to the office and blahblah you know the drill. ill, but hannibal and atilla existed at different time periods daddio but i see wat u are saying



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 07:03 PM
link   
The Visigoths attacked Rome during the reign of Emperor Honorius.
The real reason the Roman Empire collapsed was their wine was so bad and they couldn't handle the mental Scots (they had to build 3 walls to contain the Scots)



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 07:05 PM
link   
the visi goths and atilla were allies, imhotep you are a crazy dude, because of their wine
and you are reffering to hadrians wall which was built in britannia

[Edited on 11-5-2004 by machinegunjordan]

[Edited on 11-5-2004 by machinegunjordan]



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 08:52 PM
link   
he knew i was right to that is why he couldnt say who did it.



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 08:54 PM
link   
i hate to say this machinegunjordan but.....



U JUST GOT SERVED.......BY UR TEACHER!

F'D IN THE A!!!!!!

woohoo! i put the FU in fun!



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 08:56 PM
link   
silQ u know nothing i am right he did play apart in the roman defeat. besides u should be workin on the project you slacker


[Edited on 11-5-2004 by machinegunjordan]



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 09:18 PM
link   
Nice, concise link about Attila, which you may have already read:

www.realm-of-shade.com...



posted on May, 12 2004 @ 07:37 AM
link   
He was a factor, one of several it seems. Some short articles on the fall and reasons for it at the links below..

www.republic.k12.mo.us... t/romemp-7.htm

home.rochester.rr.com...

www.acs.ohio-state.edu... me1.html



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 04:52 PM
link   
As far as I know, the real cause for the fall of the roman empire as we know it, was due to politics...
The politicians in the empire wanted more and more power for tehmselfes, so that the empire actually turned inward on itself, and fell apart..?



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 04:59 PM
link   
The Atlas lion, played a part to.

In fact, many nations fighted the roman domination, but the real fall of Rome came from his own way of life... Decadence...

ancienthistory.about.com...

[Edited on 13-5-2004 by Nans DESMICHELS]



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 05:00 PM
link   
Cleopatra! And then Jesus came along.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 05:04 PM
link   
The fall of Rome came with the coming of the Messiah.

The byzantine empire have stayed longer.

But NERO have also played a big part in the fall of Rome...

A link about the roman empire division (AD 365) : The most realistic date of the dead of the great roman empire :

myron.sjsu.edu...

[Edited on 13-5-2004 by Nans DESMICHELS]



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 05:08 PM
link   
that makes no sense rome was around way after jesus even though not much longer after the death os christ the empire bacme christian with constanine, it became the holy roman empire



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 05:29 PM
link   
With reference to your edit,Tony,it has just been recently dicovered that there were 3 defensive barriers erected by the romans in north Britain.
The most northerly is Gask ridge ,it's a roman road with signal stations and forts running the length of it.
Then further south there is the Antonine wall (made mostly of turf & wood .
And last there is Hadrians wall (the most famous).
The Roman campaigns in Brittania were largely unsuccessful and very expensive both politically and financially ,they expected hoards of gold and lush fields of grain ,but all they ended up with was mostly slaves and less precious metals.
Anyway, I think the expansionist designs of the Romans helped lead to their downfall.






top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join