Yuku free message boards

That's an interesting set of thoughts concerning Rome etc. and the U.S. today. I've got this Western Civ book I keep on my shelf. I bought it for a course in junior college and ended up keeping it. I can read about certain periods and eras by just turning to them in the book. But one section has always remained with me. It pertained to the condiditions in Rome at the time of the end of the Roman empire and I still find it interesting. I'm not a historian and don't know how relevant it is for today but your post reminded me of it. I just offer it for what it may be worth and don't want to take anything away from your thoughts.

- While wanting to cut back on the expense of a large military caution was urged because of external menaces and much political inifghting took place because of this - cut back or enlarge the military. More taxes were always needed to support it.

- The supremacy of the absolutist, military and bureaucratic state depressed the economy and impoverished certain segments of the population.

- Economic recovery became impossible in segments of the empire.

- From rural strongholds there was an increasing defiance of the government's effort to compel them to bear their share of the public burden.

- The taxation policies of the government drained the morale and dedication to the public spirit.

- Because of poor recruitment the frontier garrisons of the military became undermanned and made the empire more open to foreign attack.

- While the cost of sustaining the state increased, the quality of the government deteriorated. Corruption and inefficiency emerged in a bureaucracy no longer responsible to anyone except the emperor whom the bureaucracy served.

- The increasing burden of growing taxation brought about a decline in the public spirit and sapped it of energy.

- The imperial policy of favoring Christianity alienated large numbers of Romans who still placed trust in the pagan religious tradition.

- Large numbers of Christians were alienated when Julian, (A.D 361-363) called the "Apostate" by the Christians because he repudiated Christianity, tried to restore a pagan "church."

- The reaction to Julian pointed up the fact that Christianity did not fulfill the role Constantine expected of it in unifying the state and arousing patriotic fervor.

Then it says, "Christianity did continue its triumphant march to dominance, culminating when Theodosius made it the state religion and outlawed all others."

But even during the reign of Constantine the Christians had divided into warring factions. The Arians and the Orthodox fought over the question of the Trinity. The Arians made God the Son subordiante to the Father, denying the absolute divinity of Christ. The Orthodox insisted that the Son was coequal with the Father and that the two persons, plus the Holy Spirit, formed a unity. An attempt to settle this quarrel was made at the Council of Nicea in A.D 325.

So, amidst all the secular and poiticial turmoil there were theoligical conflicts going on also. Later the German invaders finished things. I knew all this off the top of my head. I just checked to see if the book was still right. I wonder if Theodosius making the religion of Christ the official religion was really a triumph. But I may be thinking in terms of what a modern "democracy" means. Some interesting parallels though I think although I'm not saying the U.S. is near an end. Changes in art have reflected our national movement also. Whatever. FWIW.