PLAGIARISM FREE WRITING SERVICE
We accept
MONEY BACK GUARANTEE
100%
QUALITY

The Eastern Roman Empire WITHIN THE Fifth Century Record Essay

This article will explore the reason why behind the Eastern Roman Empire's survival and appearance at the quarrels to why it didn't come to an end through the fifth Century. When studying the history books it's difficult to acquire many that matter the east, most books are compiled by western historians and focus on the demise of the Western Roman Empire. A German scholar had written that there were 210 explanations why the West dropped! Therefore backwards there are 210 explanations why the east survived. Historian's quarrels can be put into two main areas, external threats and interior threats. This essay will explore the exterior threats which can be mainly the barbarian migrations and the way the Eastern Roman Empire could survive this menace. Internal instabilities enjoyed a significant part in the decline of the West so a look at how the Eastern Roman Empire's condition, military and current economic climate functioned.

When researching this era there are six main traditional historians of which Zosimus's histories supplies the most satisfactory work available. Other documents also make it through in fragments and partly intact, included in these are Notita Dignitatum and Theodosian Codex to name but two. Archaeology, Papyrology and many other disciplines also offer priceless information concerning this period ever sold. The works of Zosimus and others like him give an invaluable information the lives of Romans in the Fifth century, although it must always be appreciated the inherent biased involved.

Guy Halsall in his book wrote that one of the primary risks to the Eastern Roman Empire in the early 5th Century, was unruly settlements of equipped barbarian federates. Goths had been resolved in Eastern Roman lands including the Balkans and the areas of the empire credited to a treaty in 382. The gothic federates were commanded by their own market leaders and although theoretically were paid soldiers, it could be argued this is more of a bribe to avoid these Barbarians from ravaging the lands as acquired took place in the Western. Alaric the commander of the Visigoths was guaranteed the name magister militum but this promise was made when the Romans needed his help however the promise of campaign failed to materialise Alaric ravaged the Balkans and Greece. Gainus another Gothic commander murdered the Praetorian Prefect Rufinus in what serves as a an attempted coup to get the mentioned name above. When he was outmanoeuvred by Eutropius a eunuch of the bedchamber he waited and then rebelled with another Gothic innovator Tribigild which ended in servings of Asia Slight being terrorized and Gainus himself taking control of Constantinople as a armed forces dictator. These problems were simple what now ? with a large number of armed barbarian, promise them everything and use them to fight your wars. But then what, give then land and wish they become farmers put down roots this problem could have been fateful if Alaric hadn't been directed West to retake Rome in sort of hint that he could rule in the name of the emperor of course but still be the effective ruler. Gainus hadn't been completely aware of the sentiment of Constantinople's aristocracy and people until it was too past due. Gainus of course came to a bloody end his mind being cut off by a hunnic main and a large part of his army practically tore to bits by the mob in Constantinople. Within the aftermath many Gothic commanders including Fravitta who acquired fought and defeated some of Gainus's army were killed so that they can remove future dangers. Historians like Ward-Perkins argue that through fortune more than anything the eastern Roman Empire survived these start. Although the threat of external and inside pressure's from barbarians still been around the Hunnic invasions of the mid 5th Century were discontinued by a mixture of gold and the actual fact that Constantinople was a near impregnable fortress unassailable by land or sea.

Ward-Perkins wrote a thin music group of water, strengthened by sea vitality played a major part in the eastern empire's capacity to make it through these risks. Attila thought we would go west he wasn't in a position to take Constantinople by drive and if he had he attacked the city he then got the issue of engaging the powerful Imperial fleet. The Isaurian's a barbarian folks from the Taurus Mountains establish a danger after being found in an attempted coup by Zeno's sibling the Isaurian threat was annulled by a huge military marketing campaign that ended their vitality and the survivors resolved much less federate but as farmers. The senate and Emperors needed to tread a careful path the Ostrogoths in Illyricum and Thrace acquired huge armies at their removal. Through the 5th Century commander's like Asper the Alan had ties to both his own people and the through relationship the ruling elite of Constantinople. This reality could itself be argued worked in creating a fresh sense of belonging too many barbarian commanders, and severing ties with their own people. The Eastern Roman Empire became more important to the commanders than when barbarian commanders simply lived with their soldiers. Military force together wasn't able to protect the Eastern Roman Empire but rare metal and astute politics leaders also enjoyed an integral part, and the ability through whatever methods to send the unwanted federates like Alaric and Theodoric Western world helped rid the East of problematic barbarians. The geography of Constantinople and the Fleet protecting the ocean lanes and yes it could be argued enjoyed a part in the success of the Eastern Roman Empire.

The Eastern Roman Empire could weather barbarian dangers and internal threats; Guy Halsall argues that the state was able to able to withstand various threats as a result of bureaucratic nature of the state. Rulers and minister changed however the civil service remained the same and the effective way the state of hawaii ran definitely helped in its success. The structure of rule in the Eastern Roman Empire was much centralised and structured at the very top was the Emperor who possessed absolute electricity praetorian prefect and then the ministers and below was a bureaucratic administration that kept their state machine working. These civil servants were headhunted from within the Empire for his or her ability although it has been argued performed result in a lack of skill in provincial metropolitan areas. The success of their state in dealing with various threats seems to vindicate your choice. The senate which differed from Rome's senate for the reason that participants were recruited from influential family members, as well from leading legal professionals and indeed service within their state as civil servants also meant elevation to the senate. There were four levels in the senate that was broken up into how wealthy senator were. The state of hawaii also had an integral communication system in the form of the Roman Post and geography meant fast ships could be delivered to anywhere in the empire. This infrastructure got failed in the Western world but in the East this communication ability was paramount within an Empire's ability to regulate provincial areas and be able to counter any threats with temerity. The overseas insurance policies of the Eastern Roman empire also could be argued was an integral factor Heather argued that the serenity with Persia was a major element in the survival of the East. Minor conflicts were fought between your two superpowers no changes in territory occurred and diplomacy and reasonable thoughts bought both says to the desk to negotiate calmness. Both empires were being threatened by barbarian incursions and even both empires helped to guard the Caspian Gates to avoid barbarian invasions. Jones argues that the Eastern Point out was no better that the European talk about in its efficiency but Wickham argues that the primary reason the Eastern Roman Empire survived was an effective duty system this in itself argues that for there to be an efficient tax system there must be a means of collecting taxes, this could be argued means that the eastern Roman empire have indeed have a strong state.

Wickham argument on economy is based on the Western duty system faltering. The East's taxation system alone was paramount in its capacity to survive the fifth century. The Eastern Roman Empire lands have been farmed for one thousand years and there have been far more urbanised areas 92 percent of fees came from land tax that was collected twice each year. The collection of the taxes usually twice annually to coincide with harvests supposed there was a more elaborate network set up in the form of civil servants to oversee the process. The post system and effective road network all combined meant that taxes could easily be accumulated. Goods could easily be carried to other areas with quickness this capability to convert produce into cash and move easily surrounding the empire was one cause of Wickham's argument. Fees themselves could then be used in public works defence as well as perhaps the main keeping an efficient military existence.

The Eastern Roman empire's military played a major part in its success. A quarter of the Amy was barbarian in origin. The rest of the military was recruited from the empire itself and was split into main areas the Limitana which was a border force and was two thirds of the entire Eastern army around 195. 000 men and fifty percent was cavalry. All of those other army was put into five mobile field armies numbering around 100. 000 men. The armed service during the fifth century were used when needed and usually after diplomacy acquired failed. Although the invasion of North Africa was disastrous for the East the military recovered but this was partly due to the fact the Vandals couldn't follow-up on their increases as they could not beat the Imperial fleet. The effectiveness of the Imperial Fleet was shown when Gainus brought up earlier tried to mix the Hellespont, his military was smashed by the fleet this demonstrates the fleet was very capable of being deployed in defence of the empire.

The Eastern Roman Empire didn't come to a finish in the fifth century for many reasons historians claim that we now have one or two main points but when looking at the reality there are many reasons yes location, the fortified strength of Constantinople and the remove of water encompassing it helped to avoid gothic and hunnic armies crossing into Asia Small but Gainus and his military was allowed into the town only the fact that he wasn't very political astute led to his failure. Their state economy and military services all played a part in the survival but if Attila had been allowed to go into the heartland of empire would it of survived the armies of the east got no real chance defeating large barbarian armies at this time the eastern army was there simply to keep the status quo between Persia and itself. The simple fact is the Eastern Roman empire improved to meet different issues. The geography helped in the survival however the navy was one's teeth that avoided successions of opponents enter into the heartlands of the East this effective armed service and an astute overseas policy coupled with a strong economy and express were the primary reasons for its success.

More than 7 000 students trust us to do their work
90% of customers place more than 5 orders with us
Special price $5 /page
PLACE AN ORDER
Check the price
for your assignment
FREE