The role of Christianity in the decline of the Roman Empire

Did Christianity contribute to the fall of the Roman Empire?

  • Yes, it greatly contributed.

    Votes: 17 14.7%
  • Yes, slightly.

    Votes: 25 21.6%
  • No, it didn't make the slightest difference.

    Votes: 44 37.9%
  • No, it actually helped the empire somewhat.

    Votes: 24 20.7%
  • No, without Christianity the empire would have fallen much earlier.

    Votes: 6 5.2%

  • Total voters
    116
The Empire had been in serious trouble since the early 3C - long before Christianity had any political clout.

Also, the ERE, which was far more thoroughly Christianised then the West, proved also the more durable of the two.

Sounds as though if anything Christianity somewhat strengthened the State rather than weakened it.
 
Not a civil war, but the Coptic leaders welcomed the Muslims as liberators in Egypt.

No persecution of Copts = more Muslim military difficulties in Egypt.

No, they did not. See my points above about Syrian and Coptic responses to Islamic invasion.

Furthermore, "persecution" is a bit dicey. Though the sources are pretty fragmentary, it doesn't seem to have been widespread sectarian brutality- it was more the Imperial state cracking down on troublemaking loudmouths, which it would do equally to Chalcedonian zealots.
 
The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire describes Coptic leaders being rather friendly with the Islamic invaders.

But the D&F, as a piece of historical writing, is now several centuries out of date. I think it's a bit dubious to refer to it as anything other than a masterpiece of English literature.
 
But the D&F, as a piece of historical writing, is now several centuries out of date. I think it's a bit dubious to refer to it as anything other than a masterpiece of English literature.

Have the primary sources Gibbon used for that particular bit been superceded?

Even if new data means some of it is wrong, that doesn't mean everything is wrong.
 
I think it had a major affect in destroying the social order amongst the people from a religious stand point, especially with the End of Times rhetoric in certain parts of the Empire and infighting bweteen the religious sects. In effect we have the Roman Empire then the Christian Empire and Byzantine Empire that came after it. While it certainly wasn't the sole cause it was a contributing factor amongst many.
 
Have the primary sources Gibbon used for that particular bit been superceded?

Even if new data means some of it is wrong, that doesn't mean everything is wrong.

The belief that the Monosphytes in any way contributed to the relative collapse of the Byzantine state in the Orient is a scapegoat. It's very simple, really. The Byzantine state was weak after its war with Iran and Yarmouk.
 
The belief that the Monosphytes in any way contributed to the relative collapse of the Byzantine state in the Orient is a scapegoat. It's very simple, really. The Byzantine state was weak after its war with Iran and Yarmouk.

And geography was against it, once the Arabs started to move.

It survived the 5C because as long as its desert borders were quiescent, it had only two short lines to defend, on the lower Danube and in Eastern Anatolia. Once it had to defend the desert borders as well, it became all but indefensible. The additional commitments with which Justinian had saddled it in Italy and North Africa didn't help either.

Things stabilised once The ERE fell back on Asia Minor and the Balkans, which were still defensible/recoverable. However, it probably did help to some degree that most of the religious minorities had been abandoned, so that the surviving core was a more loyal one.
 
The Empire had been in serious trouble since the early 3C - long before Christianity had any political clout.

Also, the ERE, which was far more thoroughly Christianised then the West, proved also the more durable of the two.

Sounds as though if anything Christianity somewhat strengthened the State rather than weakened it.

Was Christianity the reason why the eastern Roman Empire survived? Or would this have anything to do with the fact that the eastern provinces were wealthier and more densely populated? With the Empire divided, the imperial administration in Constantinople didn't need to concern itself with the dead-weight western provinces.
 
Turn the other cheek?

Just admit it, Christianity made the Romans give up on their empire :rolleyes:

What is the argument for Christianity weakening the Empire again? loss of martial ethos?
 
Was there any preference given to christians over other religions in selection for military or administrative posts? I recall reading that this was the case but cannot remember where or when. If this was the case then chritianity would have been a contributing factor, but only one of many.
 
Was there any preference given to christians over other religions in selection for military or administrative posts? I recall reading that this was the case but cannot remember where or when. If this was the case then chritianity would have been a contributing factor, but only one of many.

Yes, but this was just a continuation of the previous system of patronage-clientage.
 
Was Christianity the reason why the eastern Roman Empire survived? Or would this have anything to do with the fact that the eastern provinces were wealthier and more densely populated? With the Empire divided, the imperial administration in Constantinople didn't need to concern itself with the dead-weight western provinces.

Given that the bigger empire failed from civil war as its succession policy, I don't see where the wealthier, more populous region surviving necessarily follows. Being wealthier and more populous means a greater potential to continue the system that had already collapsed and failed previously.
 
Given that the bigger empire failed from civil war as its succession policy, I don't see where the wealthier, more populous region surviving necessarily follows. Being wealthier and more populous means a greater potential to continue the system that had already collapsed and failed previously.

But encompassing a smaller area, the eastern empire was easier to defend. The west was basically bankrupt, with urban populations diminishing, reducing the tax-base, which was than followed by the Visigoths, Vandals, Suebi, Alans, Burgundians, Franks taking over large chunks of the western empire.
 
But encompassing a smaller area, the eastern empire was easier to defend. The west was basically bankrupt, with urban populations diminishing, reducing the tax-base, which was than followed by the Visigoths, Vandals, Suebi, Alans, Burgundians, Franks taking over large chunks of the western empire.

Again, so? That urban population and wealth would have offered plentiful opportunities to keep waging wars every time a dynasty was in deep shit and to the victor would go the spoils. That policy ruined the wealth of the West, the East changed the policy. There *is* a reason the ERE survived until 1204 with its system of government unbroken and it has nothing to do with Christianity.
 
What is the argument for Christianity weakening the Empire again? loss of martial ethos?

Um, yeah, I'm confused too. Certainly Christianity within the Roman Empire accommodated its social views to its new social status, and supported the Empire, its wars, and even tended toward the crusader mentality. I think Christianity outside the Roman Empire is also worth considering. I think it tended to fragment the Goths north of the Danube, to encourage emigration to south of the Danube before 376, and to unite various groups south of the Danube in 376. That's only one case, but I'm wondering how Christianity affected the relationship between barbarians and provincial Romans in other areas.
 
I have seen so many arguments for and against this idea that it's hard to keep track of them all, but it seems that if I'm likely to get a better grasp of this issue anywhere, it's here.

So, I'm interested in your opinions about the role of Christianity in the political and cultural decline and loss of influence of the Roman Empire. Does Edward Gibbon's theory hold? Did Christianity have anything to do will the fall of Rome? Would a world without widespread Christianity have a longer-lasting Roman Empire and/or a more "romanized" culture?

Byzantium *cough cough*
 
Top