106 A.D.

We are now entering the Christian era and can henceforth not mention the "before" and "after" the Nativity of Christ, as we have done so far, in order to avoid confusion.

In 106 the emperor Trajan conquered Dacia. This country roughly corresponds to modern Romania. It was located north of the Danube - the border of the empire - and included the Carpathian mountain range.

The bas-reliefs of the "Trajan's Column" in Rome depict the main episodes of this victorious campaign.

New province of Dacia will be partially colonized by immigrants from all parts of the empire, they will take Latin as the language of communication, and it will give rise to Romanian- the only Latin-based language in the eastern half of the empire. And this despite the fact that Greek culture prevailed here.

Critical date

Why did we choose this date?

In the first century AD, the emperors continued the aggressive policy of the Republic, though not on such a scale as before.

Augustus conquered Egypt, completed the conquest of Spain, and conquered the rebellious population of the Alps, making the Danube the frontier of the empire.

To protect Gaul from the invasions of the barbarians, he was going to conquer Germany, the territory between the Rhine and the Elbe. At first, he succeeds thanks to defeating his sons-in-law Drusus and Tiberius.

However, in 9 A.D. the Germans revolted under the leadership of Arminius (Hermann) and destroyed the legions of the legate Var in the Teutoburg forest. This disaster, which greatly agitated Augustus (they say that he cried, repeating: "Var, give me back my legions"), forced him, like his heirs, to abandon the transfer of the border along the Rhine. For more than two centuries, the Rhine and Danube (linked upstream between Mainz and Rotisbon by a fortified wall) formed the border of the empire in continental Europe. In 43 AD, Emperor Claudius annexed Britain (modern England), which became a Roman province.

The conquest of Dacia in 106 was the last major territorial acquisition of the Roman emperors. After this date, the borders remained unchanged for over a century.

Roman world

The first two centuries of the empire, corresponding to approximately the first two centuries AD, were the period inner peace and prosperity.

Limes- systems of border fortifications, along which legions stood, - ensured security, which made it possible to develop trade relations and the economy.

New cities are being built and developed along the lines of Rome: they have an autonomous administration with a senate and elected magistrates. But in reality, as in Rome, power belongs to the rich, not without certain responsibilities on their part. So, they have to build water conduits, public buildings: temples, baths, circuses or theaters at their own expense, as well as pay for circus performances.

This roman world cannot be idealized, the brutally exploited provinces often revolt. We saw this in Judea. But these uprisings are constantly suppressed by the Roman army.

As long as wealth and slaves flock to Rome through conquests or forays at the frontiers, a certain economic and social balance is maintained.

When the conquests ended and more frequent attacks by "barbarians" (those who lived outside the empire's border) on the Roman lands an economic and social crisis is rolling in.

The "middle class" supplies fewer and fewer civilian soldiers, so the Roman army is more and more replenished with mercenaries, they are often barbarian immigrants who receive Roman citizenship or a piece of land at the end of their service life.

After the reign of Augustus, the imperial power becomes a stake in the struggle between located on various borders (on the Rhine, Danube and in the East) and rival armies, too often called to march on Rome in order to elevate their commander to the throne. Due to these internal unrest borders are often left defenseless and attacked by barbarians.

III century crisis

Difficulties begin during the reign of Marcus Aurelius (161-180), the emperor-philosopher, who in his "Thoughts" expounds humanistic philosophy. The peace-loving emperor is forced to spend most of his time repelling attacks on the borders of the state.

After his death, attacks from outside and internal unrest become more frequent.

In the III century. a period called The later empire.

The edict of the emperor Caracalla (212), according to which all free inhabitants of the empire receive Roman citizenship, becomes the starting point in the evolution of the gradual merger of the "provincials" and the Romans.

Between 224 and 228 the Parthian Empire fell under the blows of the Sassanids, the founders of a new dynasty Persian Empire... This state will become a dangerous enemy for the Romans - Emperor Valerian in 260 will be captured by the Persians and will die in captivity.

At the same time, due to internal rebellions and political instability (from 235 to 284, i.e. for 49 years, 22 emperors were replaced) barbarians first penetrate the empire.

In 238 g. goths, Germanic tribe, first crossed the Danube and invaded the Roman provinces of Moesia and Thrace. From 254 to 259 another Germanic tribe, Alemanni, penetrates into Gaul, then into Italy and reaches the gates of Milan. Previously open, Roman cities build defensive walls, including Rome, where the emperor Aurelian begins in 271 the construction of a fortress wall, the first after the one that was once in the Rome of the kings.

The economic crisis manifests itself in a crisis of money circulation: due to a shortage of silver emperors minted low-standard coins, in which the content of the noble metal is sharply reduced. As the value of that kind of money falls, there is price inflation.

Diocletian(284–305) tries to save the empire by reorganizing it. Considering that one person cannot ensure the defense of all borders, he divides the empire into four parts: two emperors appear in Milan and Nicomedia and two of their assistants - "Caesars", they are deputies and heirs of the emperors.

End of the roman empire

In 326 the emperor Konstantin moves to Byzantium - a Greek city that controls the Bosphorus Strait, which connects the Black Sea with the Mediterranean. He gives this city his name by christening Constantinople(the city of Constantine), and makes it a "second Rome".

In 395 the Roman Empire was finally divided into Western Roman empire, which will disappear in 476 under the blows of the barbarians, and Eastern Roman Empire, which will last another thousand years (until the capture of Constantinople by the Turks in 1453). However, the latter will very soon become a country of Greek culture, and they will begin to call it the Byzantine Empire.

This is a kind of phase in the development of Roman statehood at that time. It existed from 27 BC. NS. to 476, and the main language was Latin.

The great Roman Empire for centuries kept many other states of that time in excitement and admiration. And this is no accident. This power did not appear immediately. The empire developed gradually. Consider in the article how it all began, all the main events, emperors, culture, as well as the coat of arms and colors of the flag of the Roman Empire.

Periodization of the Roman Empire

As you know, all states, countries, civilizations in the world had a chronology of events, which can be conditionally divided into several periods. The Roman Empire has several main stages:

• the period of the principate (27 BC - 193 AD);
• crisis of the Roman Empire in the III century. AD (193 - 284 AD);
• Dominate period (284 - 476 AD);
• collapse and division of the Roman Empire into Western and Eastern.

Before the formation of the Roman Empire

Let's turn to history and consider briefly what preceded the formation of the state. In general, the first people on the territory of present-day Rome appeared around the second millennium BC. NS. on the Tiber river. In the VIII century BC. NS. two large tribes united, erected a fortress. Thus, we can assume that April 13, 753 BC. NS. Rome was formed.

First there was the royal, and then the republican periods of government with their events, kings and history. This time span from 753 BC. NS. called Ancient Rome. But in 27 BC. NS. thanks to Octavian Augustus, an empire was formed. A new era has arrived.

Principate

The formation of the Roman Empire was facilitated by civil wars, from which Octavian emerged victorious. The Senate gave him the name Augustus, and the ruler himself established a system of principate, which included a mixture of monarchical and republican forms of government. He also became the founder of the Juliev-Claudian dynasty, but it did not last long. The city of Rome remained the capital of the Roman Empire.

The period of Augustus's reign was considered very favorable for the people. As the nephew of the great commander - Gaius Julius Caesar - it was Octavian who became He carried out reforms: one of the main reforms is considered to be the reform of the army, the essence of which was to form a Roman military force. Each soldier had to serve up to 25 years, could not start a family and lived on welfare. But it helped to finally form a standing army after nearly a century of its formation, when it was notable for its unreliability due to its volatility. Also, the merits of Octavian Augustus are considered the conduct of budgetary policy and, of course, the change in the system of government. Under him, Christianity began to emerge in the empire.

The first emperor was deified, especially outside Rome, but the ruler himself did not want the capital to have a cult of ascension to God. But in the provinces, many temples were erected in his honor and sacred significance was attached to his rule.

August spent most of his life on the road. He wanted to revive the spirituality of the people, thanks to him, dilapidated temples and other structures were restored. During his reign, many slaves were freed, and the ruler himself was a kind of example of ancient Roman valor and lived in a modest possession.

Dynasty Juliev-Claudian

The next emperor, as well as the great pontiff and representative of the dynasty, was Tiberius. He was the adopted son of Octavian, who also had a grandson. In fact, the issue of the inheritance of the throne remained unresolved after the death of the first emperor, but Tiberius stood out for his merits and intelligence, so he was to become a sovereign ruler. He himself did not want to be a despot. He ruled with dignity and not cruelty. But after the problems in the family of the emperor, as well as the clash of his interests with the Senate, full of republican attitudes, everything turned into “an unholy war in the Senate.” He ruled only from 14 to 37 years.

The third emperor and representative of the dynasty was the son of Tiberius's nephew - Caligula, who ruled for only 4 years - from 37th to 41st. At first, everyone sympathized with him as a worthy emperor, but his power changed him a lot: he became cruel, caused strong discontent among the people and was killed.

The next emperor was Claudius (41-54), with whose help, in fact, his two wives, Messalina and Agrippina, ruled. Through various manipulations, the second woman managed to make her son Nero ruler (54-68). Under him there was a "great fire" in 64 AD. e., which greatly destroyed Rome. Nero committed suicide, and a civil war broke out, in which the last three representatives of the dynasty died in just one year. 68-69 was named "the year of the four emperors".

The Flavian Dynasty (69 to 96 C.E.)

Vespasian was the main one in the struggle against the rebellious Jews. He became emperor and founded a new dynasty. He managed to suppress the uprisings in Judea, restore the economy, rebuild Rome after the "great fire" and put the empire in order after numerous internal troubles and revolts, improve relations with the Senate. He ruled until 79 A.D. NS. His decent rule was continued by his son Titus, who ruled for only two years. The next emperor was the youngest son of Vespasian - Domitian (81-96). Unlike the first two representatives of the dynasty, he was distinguished by hostility and confrontations with the Senate. He was killed as a result of a conspiracy.

During the reign of the Flavian dynasty, the great amphitheater of the Colosseum was created in Rome. We have been working on its construction for 8 years. Numerous gladiatorial battles were held here.

Dynasty of Antonines

The time fell precisely during the reign of this dynasty. The rulers of this period were called "the five good emperors". The Antonines (Nerva, Trajan, Adrian, Antoninus Pius, Marcus Aurelius) ruled consecutively from 96 to 180 AD. NS. After the conspiracy and assassination of Domitian because of his hostility to the Senate, Nerva, who was just from the senatorial environment, became emperor. He ruled for two years, and the next ruler was his adopted son, Ulpius Trajan, who became one of the the best people that ever ruled during the Roman Empire.

Trajan significantly expanded the territory. 4 famous provinces were formed: Armenia, Mesopotamia, Assyria and Arabia. Colonization of other places was required by Trajan not for conquest purposes, but for protection from attacks by nomads and barbarians. The most remote places were built up with numerous stone towers.

The third emperor of the Roman Empire during the Antonine dynasty and Trajan's successor is Hadrian. He made many reforms in the field of law and education, as well as in the field of finance. He received the nickname "the enrichment of the world." The next ruler was Antoninus, who was nicknamed "the father of the human race" for his concern not only for Rome, but also for the provinces that he improved. Then he ruled who was a very good philosopher, but he had to spend a lot of time in the war on the Danube, where he died in 180. At this point, the era of the "five good emperors", when the empire flourished and democracy reached its peak, ended.

The last emperor to end the dynasty was Commodus. He was fond of gladiatorial battles, and put the management of the empire on the shoulders of other people. He died at the hands of conspirators in 193.

Dynasty of the North

People proclaimed the ruler of a native of Africa - a commander who ruled until his death in 211. He was very militant, which was passed on to his son Caracallus, who became emperor by killing his brother. But it was thanks to him that people from the provinces finally got the right to become. Both rulers did a lot. For example, they returned independence to Alexandria and gave the Alexandrians the right to occupy the state. positions. Then Heliogabalus and Alexander ruled until 235.

Third century crisis

This tipping point had this great importance for the people of that time that historians distinguish it as a separate period in the history of the Roman Empire. This crisis lasted for almost half a century: from 235 after the death of Alexander Sever and up to 284.

The reason was the wars with the tribes on the Danube, which began during the time of Marcus Aurelius, clashes with the people of the Rhine, and the inconstancy of power. People had to fight a lot, and the government spent money, time and effort on these conflicts, which significantly worsened the economy and economy of the empire. And also during the crisis, there were constant conflicts between the armies, which nominated their candidates for the throne. In addition, the Senate fought for the right of its significant influence on the empire, but lost it altogether. Ancient culture after the crisis, it also fell into decay.

Dominate period

The end of the crisis was the elevation of Diocletian to emperor in 285. It was he who initiated the period of dominance, which meant the change of the republican form of government to an absolute monarchy. The era of the Tetrarchy also dates back to this time.

The emperor began to be called "dominatom", which means "lord and god". Domitian called himself that name for the first time. But in the 1st century, such a position of the ruler would have been perceived with hostility, and after 285 - calmly. The Senate as such did not cease to exist, but now did not have as much influence over the monarch, who ultimately made his own decisions.

Under the dominance, when Diocletian ruled, Christianity had already penetrated into the life of the Romans, but all Christians began to be even more persecuted and punished for their faith.

In 305, the emperor relinquished power, a small struggle for the throne began, until Constantine, who ruled from 306 to 337, came to the throne. He was the sole ruler, but there was a division of the empire into provinces and prefectures. Unlike Diocletian, he was not so tough towards Christians and even stopped subjecting them to persecution and persecution. Moreover, Constantine introduced common belief, and made Christianity the state religion. He also moved the capital from Rome to Byzantium, which was later named Constantinople. From 337 to 363 the sons of Constantine ruled. In 363, Julian the Apostate died, which was the end of the dynasty.

The Roman Empire continued to exist, although the transfer of the capital was a very abrupt event for the Romans. After 363, two more families ruled: the dynasty of Valentinian (364-392) and Theodosius (379-457). It is known that a significant event in 378 was the Battle of Adrianople between the Goths and the Romans.

Fall of the Western Roman Empire

Rome actually continued to exist. But the year 476 is considered the end of the empire's history.

Its fall was influenced by the transfer of the capital to Constantinople under Constantine in 395, where the Senate was even recreated. It was in this year that happened to the West and East. The beginning of the history of Byzantium (Eastern Roman Empire) is also considered to be this event in 395. But it should be understood that Byzantium is no longer the Roman Empire.

But why then does the story end only in 476? Because after 395, the Western Roman Empire with its capital in Rome remained to exist. But the rulers could not cope with such a large territory, suffered constant attacks from enemies, and Rome was ruined.

This disintegration was facilitated by the expansion of the lands that had to be monitored, the strengthening of the army of enemies. After the battle with the Goths and the defeat of the Roman army of Flavius ​​Valens in 378, the former became very powerful for the latter, while the inhabitants of the Roman Empire were increasingly inclined towards a peaceful life. Few people wanted to devote themselves to many years of the army, the majority just loved agriculture.

Already with the weakened Western Empire in 410, the Visigoths took Rome, in 455 the capital was already captured by the Vandals, and on September 4, 476, the leader of the Germanic tribes Odoacer forced Romulus Augustus to abdicate. He became the last emperor of the Roman Empire, Rome no longer belonged to the Romans. History great empire was finished. The capital was ruled for a long time different people that have nothing to do with the Romans.

So, in what year did the Roman Empire collapse? Definitely in 476, however, this disintegration, one might say, began long before the events, when the empire began to decline and weaken, and the barbarian Germanic tribes began to inhabit the territory.

History after 476

Nevertheless, even though the overthrow of the Roman emperor took place at the top of the power, and the empire passed into the possession of the Germanic barbarians, the Romans still continued to exist. It continued to exist even for several more centuries after 376 until 630. But on the territory of Rome, only parts of present-day Italy now belonged. At this time, the Middle Ages just began.

Byzantium became the successor of the culture and traditions of the civilization of Ancient Rome. It existed for almost a century after its formation, while the Western Roman Empire fell. Only by 1453 the Ottomans captured Byzantium, and this is where its history ended. Constantinople was renamed Istanbul.

And in 962, thanks to Otto 1 the Great, the Holy Roman Empire was formed - a state. Its core was Germany, in which he was king.

Otto 1 the Great already owned very large territories. The empire of the X century included almost all of Europe, including Italy (the lands of the fallen Western Roman Empire, whose culture they wanted to recreate). Over time, the boundaries of the territory changed. Nevertheless, this empire lasted for almost a millennium until 1806, when Napoleon was able to dissolve it.

The capital was formally Rome. The emperors of the Holy Roman Empire ruled and had many vassals in other parts of their large holdings. All rulers claimed supreme power in Christianity, which at that time gained a large-scale influence over the whole of Europe. The crown of the emperors of the Holy Roman Empire was given only by the pope after the coronation in Rome.

A double-headed eagle is depicted on the coat of arms of the Roman Empire. This symbol was found (and still is) in the symbols of many states. Oddly enough, the Byzantine coat of arms also depicts the same symbol as on the coat of arms of the Roman Empire.

The flag of the XIII-XIV centuries depicted a white cross on a red background. However, it changed in 1400 and existed until 1806 until the fall of the Holy Roman Empire.

The flag has a double-headed eagle since 1400. This symbolizes the emperor, while the one-headed bird symbolizes the king. The colors of the flag of the Roman Empire are also interesting: a black eagle on a yellow background.

Nevertheless, it is a very big mistake to attribute the Roman Empire before medieval times to the Holy German Roman Empire, which, although Italy was part of, was in fact a completely different state.

If you follow only numbers and count the events from the time of Julius Caesar to the invasion of the Eternal City of the Visigoths under the leadership of Alaric I, then the Roman Empire lasted a little less than five centuries. And these centuries had such a powerful impact on the consciousness of the peoples of Europe that the phantom of the empire still excites the general imagination. Many works are devoted to the history of this state, in which a variety of versions of its "great fall" are expressed. However, if you put them into one picture, the fall as such does not work. Rather, rebirth.

On August 24, 410, a group of rebellious slaves opened the Salt Gates of Rome to the Goths under the leadership of Alaric. For the first time in 800 years - since the day when the Gallic-Senones of King Brennus laid siege to the Capitol - the Eternal City saw an enemy within its walls.

A little earlier, in the same summer, the authorities tried to save the capital by giving the enemy three thousand pounds of gold (to "get" them, they had to melt the statue of the goddess of valor and virtue), as well as silver, silk, leather, and arabian pepper. As you can see, a lot has changed since the time of Brennus, to whom the townspeople proudly declared that Rome was redeemed not with gold, but with iron. But here even gold did not save: Alaric judged that by capturing the city, he would receive much more.

For three days his soldiers plundered the former "center of the world." Emperor Honorius took refuge behind the walls of the well-fortified Ravenna, and his troops were in no hurry to help the Romans. The best commander of the state, Flavius ​​Stilicho (a vandal by origin) was executed two years earlier on suspicion of conspiracy, and now there was practically no one to send against Alaric. And the Goths, having received their huge booty, simply left without hindrance.

Who is guilty?

"Tears flow from my eyes when I dictate ..." - confessed a few years later from the monastery in Bethlehem, St. Jerome, translator Holy Scripture in Latin. He was echoed by dozens of less significant writers. Less than 20 years before the invasion of Alaric, the historian Ammianus Marcellinus, narrating about current military and political affairs, was still encouraging: “People who are ignorant ... they say that such a hopeless gloom of disasters has never descended on the state; but they are mistaken, struck by the horror of recent misfortunes. " Alas, it was he who was wrong.

The Romans rushed to look for reasons, explanations and guilty ones at once. The population of the humiliated empire, already mostly Christianized, could not help but ask the question: was it because the city fell because it turned its back on the paternal gods? After all, back in 384, Aurelius Symmachus, the last leader of the pagan opposition, Emperor Valentinian II called on - return the altar of Victory to the Senate!

The opposite point of view was held by Bishop Hippo in Africa (now Annaba in Algeria) Augustine, later nicknamed Blessed. “Did you believe,” he asked his contemporaries, “Ammianus when he said: Rome“ is destined to live as long as humanity exists ”? Do you think the world is over now? " Not at all! After all, the domination of Rome in the City of the Earth, in contrast to the City of God, cannot last forever. The Romans conquered world domination by their valor, but she was inspired by the search for mortal glory, and its fruits were therefore transient. But the adoption of Christianity, reminds Augustine, saved many from the fury of Alaric. Indeed, the Goths, also already baptized, spared everyone who took refuge in churches and at the relics of martyrs in the catacombs.

Be that as it may, in those years Rome was no longer a magnificent and impregnable capital, which was remembered by the grandfathers of the townspeople of the 5th century. Increasingly, even emperors chose others as their place of residence. big cities... And the Eternal City itself got a sad lot - the next 60 years, desolate Rome was ravaged by barbarians twice more, and in the summer of 476 a significant event took place. Odoacer, a German commander in the Roman service, deprived the throne of the last monarch - the young Romulus Augustus, after the overthrow of the derisive nicknamed Augustulus ("Augustus"). How can you not believe in the irony of fate - only two ancient rulers of Rome were called Romulus: the first and the last. State regalia were carefully preserved and sent to Constantinople, the eastern emperor Zeno. So the Western Roman Empire ceased to exist, and the Eastern one will hold out for another 1000 years - until the capture of Constantinople by the Turks in 1453.

Why it happened so - historians do not stop judging and shaking up to this day, and this is not surprising. After all, we are talking about an exemplary empire in our retrospective imagination. In the end, the term itself came into modern Romance languages ​​(and into Russian) from the foremother of Latin. In most of Europe, the Middle East and North Africa, there are traces of Roman rule - roads, fortifications, aqueducts. Classical education based on ancient tradition continues to be at the center western culture... Until the 16th-18th centuries, the language of the vanished empire served as the international language of diplomacy, science, medicine; until the 1960s, it was the language of Catholic worship. Jurisprudence in the 21st century is unthinkable without Roman law.

How did it happen that such a civilization collapsed under the blows of the barbarians? Hundreds of papers have been devoted to this fundamental question. Experts have discovered many factors of decline: from the growth of bureaucracy and taxes to climate change in the Mediterranean basin, from the conflict between town and country to the smallpox pandemic ... German historian Alexander Demandt has 210 versions. Let's try to figure it out, too.

	Flavius ​​Romulus Augustus(461 (or 463) - after 511), often referred to as Augustulus, nominally ruled over the Roman Empire from October 31, 475 to September 4, 476. The son of an influential army officer Flavius ​​Orestes, who in the 70s of the 5th century rebelled against Emperor Julius Nepot in Ravenna and soon achieved success by placing his young offspring on the throne. However, soon the rebellion was suppressed by the commander Odoacer on the instructions of the same Nepos, and the unlucky young man was deposed. However, contrary to cruel traditions, the authorities saved his life, the estate in Campania and the state salary, which he received until old age, including from the new ruler of Italy, the Goth Theodoric.
	Charles, nicknamed the Great (747-814) during his lifetime, ruled the Franks from 768, the Lombards from 774, and the Bavarians from 778. In 800 he was officially declared the Roman emperor (princeps). The path to the heights of success of the man, from whose name in the Slavic languages, by the way, the word "king" originated, was long: he spent his youth under the "wing" of his father Pipin Korotky, then fought for dominance in Western Europe with his brother Carloman, but gradually every year he increased his influence, until he finally turned into that powerful ruler of the lands from the Vistula to the Ebro and from Saxony to Italy, the gray-bearded and wise judge of nations, whom the historical legend knows. In 800, having supported Pope Leo III in Rome, whom his fellow countrymen were going to depose, he received a crown from him, with which he was crowned with the words: "Long live and conquer Charles Augustus, God-crowned great and peace-making Roman emperor."
	Otto I, also named by his contemporaries the Great (912-973), Duke of Saxon, King of the Italians and East Franks, Holy Roman Emperor from 962. He consolidated his power in Central Europe, Italy and in the end repeated the “version” of Charlemagne, only in a qualitatively new spirit - it was under him that the term “Holy Roman Empire” came into official political use. In Rome, after a solemn meeting, the pope presented him with a new imperial crown in the church of St. Peter, and the emperor promised to return the former ecclesiastical possessions of the popes.
	Franz Joseph Karl von Habsburg(1768-1835), Austrian Emperor Franz II (1804-1835) and the last emperor of the Holy Roman Empire (1792-1806). A man who remained in history only as a kind family man and an implacable persecutor of revolutionaries, is known mainly for the fact that he reigned in the era of Napoleon, hated him, fought with him. After the next defeat of the Austrians by Napoleonic troops, the Holy Roman Empire was abolished - this time for good, unless, of course, the present European Union (which, by the way, began with a treaty signed in 1957 in Rome), is not considered a peculiar form of Roman power.

Anatomy of Decline

By the 5th century, apparently, living in an empire that stretched from Gibraltar to Crimea had become noticeably harder. The decline of cities is especially noticeable to archaeologists. For example, in the III-IV centuries, about a million people lived in Rome (centers with such a large number of inhabitants in Europe did not appear until the 1700s). But soon the city's population declines sharply. How is this known? From time to time, the townspeople were handed out bread, olive oil and pork at public expense, and from the surviving registers with the exact number of recipients, historians figured out when the decline began. So: the year 367 - the Romans are about 1,000,000, the 452nd - there are 400,000 of them, after Justinian's war with the Goths - less than 300,000, in the 10th century - 30,000. A similar picture can be seen in all western provinces of the empire. It has long been noted that the walls of medieval cities that grew up on the site of the ancients cover only about a third of the former territory. The immediate causes are on the surface. For example: barbarians invade and settle on imperial lands, cities now have to be constantly defended - the shorter the walls, the easier it is to defend. Or - barbarians invade and settle on imperial lands, it becomes more and more difficult to trade, large cities lack food. What's the way out? The former townspeople of necessity become farmers, and behind the fortress walls they only hide from endless raids.

Well, where cities fall into decay, crafts also wither. Disappearing from everyday life - which is noticeable during excavations - high-quality ceramics, which during the Roman heyday was produced literally on an industrial scale and was widespread in the villages. The pots that peasants use during the period of decline cannot be compared with it, they are molded by hand. In many provinces, the potter's wheel is forgotten, and it will not be remembered for another 300 years! The manufacture of tiles almost ceases - roofs made of this material are replaced by easily rotting planks. How much less ore is mined and metal products are smelted is known from the analysis of lead traces in the Greenland ice (it is known that the glacier absorbs human waste products for thousands of kilometers around), carried out in the 1990s by French scientists: the level of sediments, modern to early Rome, remains unrivaled until the industrial revolution at the beginning of modern times. And the end of the 5th century - at the prehistoric level ... The silver coin continues to be minted for some time, but it is clearly not enough, the Byzantine and Arab gold money is found more and more, and small copper pennies disappear from circulation altogether. This means that buying and selling has disappeared from everyday life. common man... There is nothing more to trade regularly and there is no need.

True, it is worth noting that changes in material culture are often taken for signs of decline. A typical example: in Antiquity, grain, oil, and other bulk and liquid products were always transported in huge amphoras. Many of them have been found by archaeologists: in Rome, fragments of 58 million discarded vessels made up the whole hill of Monte Testaccio ("Pot Mountain"). They are perfectly preserved in the water - they are usually used to find sunken ancient ships at the bottom of the sea. All the paths of Roman trade are traced by the stamps on the amphorae. But since the 3rd century, large earthen vessels are gradually replaced by barrels, from which, of course, almost no traces remain - it's good if you can identify an iron rim somewhere. It is clear that assessing the volume of such new trade is much more difficult than the old one. The same is with wooden houses: in most cases only their foundations are found, and it is impossible to understand what once stood here: a pitiful shack or a mighty building?

Are these reservations serious? Quite. Are they enough to question the decline as such? Still no. The political events of that time make it clear that it happened, but it is not clear how and when did it start? Was it a consequence of the defeats from the barbarians or, on the contrary, the cause of these defeats?

"The number of parasites is growing"

To this day, he enjoys success in science economic theory: the decline began when at the end of the III century taxes "suddenly" increased sharply. If initially the Roman Empire was actually a "state without bureaucracy" even by ancient standards (a country with a population of 60 million inhabitants kept only a few hundred officials on allowance) and allowed widespread local self-government, now, with an expanded economy, it became necessary to "strengthen the vertical authorities". There are already 25,000-30,000 officials in the service of the empire.

In addition, almost all monarchs, starting with Constantine the Great, spend funds from the treasury on christian church, - priests and monks are exempt from taxes. And to the inhabitants of Rome, who received free food from the authorities (for votes in the elections or simply so that they do not riot), the residents of Constantinople are added. "The number of parasites is growing," the English historian Arnold Jones writes sarcastically about these times.

It is logical to assume that the tax burden has grown unbearably as a result. In fact, the texts of that time are full of complaints about large taxes, and the imperial decrees, on the contrary, are full of threats to defaulters. This is especially true of curials - members of municipal councils. They were personally responsible for making payments from their cities and, naturally, constantly tried to evade the onerous duty. Sometimes they even fled, and the central government, in turn, threateningly forbade them to leave their post even for the sake of joining the army, which was always considered a sacred deed for a Roman citizen.

All these constructions are obviously quite convincing. Of course, people have grumbled about taxes since they first appeared, but in late Rome this indignation sounded much louder than in early Rome, and for good reason. True, charity, which spread along with Christianity (helping the poor, shelters at churches and monasteries), gave some relief, but at that time it had not yet managed to go beyond the walls of cities.

In addition, there is evidence that in the 4th century it was difficult to find soldiers for a growing army, even with a serious threat to the homeland. And many combat units, in turn, had to engage in farming in places of long-term deployment using the artel method - the authorities no longer fed them. Well, since the legionnaires are plowing, and the rear rats do not go to serve, what can the residents of the border provinces do? Naturally, they spontaneously arm themselves without "registering" their units with the imperial bodies, and they themselves begin to guard the border along its entire enormous perimeter. As the American scientist Ramsey McMullen aptly remarked: "The common people became soldiers, and the soldiers became commoners." It is logical that the official authorities could not rely on the anarchist self-defense detachments. That is why they begin to invite barbarians into the empire - first individual mercenaries, then whole tribes. Many were worried. Bishop Sinesius of Cyrene stated in his speech "On the Kingdom": "We hired wolves instead of watchdogs." But it was too late, and although many barbarians served faithfully and brought much benefit to Rome, it all ended in disaster. Approximately the following scenario. In 375, Emperor Valens allowed the Goths to cross the Danube and settle in Roman territory, who were retreating westward under the onslaught of the Hunnic hordes. Soon, due to the greed of the officials responsible for the provision of food, famine breaks out among the barbarians, and they revolt. In 378, the Roman army was utterly defeated by them at Adrianople (now Edirne in European Turkey). Valens himself fell in battle.

Similar stories of a smaller scale have occurred in abundance. In addition, the poor people from among the citizens of the empire itself began to show more and more dissatisfaction: what, they say, is this homeland, which not only strangles with taxes, but also invites its own destroyers to itself. The richer and more cultured people, of course, remained patriots longer. And the detachments of the rebellious poor peasants - Bagaud ("militant") in Gaul, scamars ("shipping") in the Danube, Bucola ("shepherds") in Egypt - easily entered into alliances with barbarians against the authorities. Even those who did not openly rebel were passive during incursions and did not offer much resistance if they were promised not to be too robbed.

	The denarius, first issued in the 3rd century BC, remained the main currency throughout most of the imperial history. NS. Its denomination was equal to 10 (later 16) smaller coins - Assam. At first, even under the Republic, denarii were minted from 4 grams of silver, then the content of the precious metal dropped to 3.5 grams, under Nero they began to be produced altogether in an alloy with copper, and in the 3rd century inflation reached such enormous proportions that this money was completely lost meaning to release.
	In the Eastern Roman Empire, which far outlived the Western and used in official use more often the Greek language than Latin, in Greek, of course, money was also called. The basic unit of calculation was the liter, which, depending on the sample and the metal, was equal to 72 (gold liters), 96 (silver) or 128 (copper) drachmas. At the same time, the purity of all these metals in the coin, as usual, decreased over time. In circulation there were also old Roman solidi, which are usually called nomism, or besants, or, in Slavic, goldsmiths, and silver miliary, making up one thousandth of a liter. All of them were minted until the XIII century, and were in use even later.
	The Holy Roman Empire of the German nation, and especially that era when Maria Theresa ruled, was most famous for the thaler in monetary terms. They are famous even now, they are popular with numismatists, and in some places in Africa they are said to be used by shamans. This large silver coin, minted in the 16th-19th centuries, was approved by a special Eslingen imperial monetary charter in 1524 according to the standard of 27.41 grams of pure precious metal. (From it, by the way, comes the name of the dollar in the English pronunciation - this is the continuity of empires in history.) Soon, the new financial unit took the leading place in international trade. In Russia they were called efimki. Moreover, money of the same standard was widely used: ecu and piastres are only variants and modifications of the thaler. He himself existed in Germany until the 1930s, when the three-mark coin was still called the thaler. Thus, he survived the empire that gave birth to him for a long time.

Unhappy coincidences

But why did the empire suddenly find itself in such a position that it had to take unpopular measures - to invite mercenaries, raise taxes, inflate the bureaucratic apparatus? After all, the first two centuries of our era, Rome successfully held a huge territory and even seized new lands, without resorting to the help of foreigners. Why was it necessary to suddenly divide the power between the co-rulers and build a new capital on the Bosphorus? Something went wrong? And why, again, the eastern half of the state, in contrast to the western one, resisted? After all, the invasion of the Goths began precisely from the Byzantine Balkans. Here some historians see an explanation in pure geography - the barbarians could not overcome the Bosphorus and penetrate into Asia Minor, therefore, vast and not devastated lands remained in the rear of Constantinople. But it can be argued that the same vandals, heading to North Africa, for some reason easily crossed the wider Gibraltar.

In general, as the famous historian of Antiquity Mikhail Rostovtsev said, great events do not happen because of one thing, they always mix demography, culture, strategy ...

Here are just some of the points of contact that were so disastrous for the Roman Empire, in addition to those already discussed above.

First, the empire, most likely, really suffered from a large-scale epidemic of smallpox at the end of the 2nd century - it, according to the most conservative estimates, reduced the population by 7-10%. Meanwhile, the Germans north of the border were experiencing a fertility boom.

Secondly, in the III century, the gold and silver mines in Spain dried up, and the new, Dacian (Romanian) ones, the state lost by 270. Apparently, there are no more significant deposits of precious metals left at his disposal. But it was necessary to mint coins and in huge quantities. In this regard, it remains a mystery how Constantine the Great (312-337) managed to restore the solidus standard, and the emperor's successors - to keep the solidus very stable: the gold content in it did not decrease in Byzantium until 1070. The English scientist Timothy Garrard put forward an ingenious guess: it is possible that in the 4th century the Romans received yellow metal along caravan routes from trans-Saharan Africa (however, chemical analysis of the solidi that have come down to us does not yet confirm this hypothesis). Nevertheless, inflation in the state is becoming more and more monstrous, and it is in no way possible to cope with it.

It also fails because the government turned out to be psychologically unprepared for the challenges of the time. Neighbors and foreign subjects have changed their combat tactics and lifestyle quite a lot since the founding of the empire, and upbringing and education taught governors and generals to look for management models in the past. Flavius ​​Vegetius wrote a characteristic treatise on military affairs at this time: he thinks that all the troubles can be dealt with if the classic legion of the model of the eras of Augustus and Trajan is restored. This was obviously a delusion.

Finally - and this is perhaps the most important reason - the onslaught on the empire from the outside objectively intensified. Military organization the state created under Octavian at the turn of the era could not cope with the simultaneous war on multiple borders. For a long time, the empire was simply lucky, but already under Marcus Aurelius (161-180) fighting were performed simultaneously in many theaters ranging from the Euphrates to the Danube. The resources of the state experienced a terrible strain - the emperor was forced to sell even personal jewelry in order to finance the troops. If in the 1st-2nd centuries on the most open border - the eastern - Rome was opposed by the not so powerful at that time Parthia, then from the beginning of the 3rd century it was replaced by the young and aggressive Persian kingdom of the Sassanids. In 626, shortly before this power itself fell under the blows of the Arabs, the Persians still managed to approach Constantinople itself, and the Emperor Heraclius drove them away literally by a miracle (it was in honor of this miracle that the akathist was composed to the Most Holy Theotokos - "The Climbed Voivode ...") ... And in Europe, in the last period of Rome, the onslaught of the Huns, who migrated to the west along the Great Steppe, set in motion the whole process of the Great Migration of Nations.

Over the long centuries of conflict and trade with the bearers of a high civilization, barbarians have learned a lot from them. Prohibitions on the sale of Roman weapons to them and the teaching of their maritime affairs appear in the laws too late, in the 5th century, when they no longer make practical sense.

The list of factors can be continued. But on the whole, Rome apparently did not have a chance to resist, although no one will probably ever answer this question exactly. As for different destinies Western and Eastern empires, then the East was originally richer and more powerful economically. The old Roman province of Asia (the "left" part of Asia Minor) was said to have 500 cities. In the west, such indicators were not available anywhere except in Italy itself. Accordingly, the strongest positions were occupied by large farmers, who beat out tax breaks for themselves and their tenants. The burden of taxes and management fell on the shoulders of city councils, and the nobility spent their leisure time on country estates. At critical moments, Western emperors lacked people and money. The authorities of Constantinople have not yet faced such a threat. They had so many resources that they even had enough to launch a counteroffensive.

Together again?

Indeed, a little time passed, and a significant part of the West returned under the direct rule of the emperors. Under Justinian (527-565), Italy with Sicily, Sardinia and Corsica, Dalmatia, the entire coast of North Africa, southern Spain (including Cartagena and Cordoba), and the Balearic Islands were conquered. Only the Franks did not cede any territories and even received Provence for maintaining neutrality.

In those years, the biographies of many Romans (Byzantines) could serve as a clear illustration of the newly triumphant unity. Here, for example, is the life of the military leader Peter Marcellinus of Liberia, who conquered Spain for Justinian. He was born in Italy around 465 into a noble family. He began his service under Odoacer, but the Ostrogoths Theodoric kept him in their service - someone educated had to collect taxes and keep the treasury. Around 493, Liberius became prefect of Italy - head of the civil administration of the entire peninsula - and in this position showed zealous concern for the overthrown Romulus Augustulus and his mother. The son of a worthy prefect took the post of consul in Rome, and his father soon received a military command in Gaul, which the German leaders usually did not trust the Latins. He was friends with the Arelate bishop Saint Caesar, founded a Catholic monastery in Rome, continuing to serve the Arianine Theodoric. And after his death, he went to Justinian on behalf of the new king of the Ostrogothic Theodohad (he had to convince the emperor that he justly overthrew and imprisoned his wife Amalasunta). In Constantinople, Liberius remained to serve the emperor-co-religionist and first received control over Egypt, and then in 550 conquered Sicily. Finally, in 552, when the commander and the politician were already over 80, he managed to see the triumph of his dream - the return of Rome to the general imperial power. Then, having conquered southern Spain, the old man returned to Italy, where he died at the age of 90. He was buried in his native Arimina (Rimini) with the greatest honors - with eagles, lictors and timpani.

Gradually, the conquests of Justinian were lost, but far from immediately - part of Italy recognized the power of Constantinople even in the XII century. Heraclius I, pressed by the Persians and Avars in the east in the 7th century, was still thinking of moving the capital to Carthage. Constant II (630-668) spent last years reign in Syracuse. By the way, he turned out to be the first Roman emperor after Augustulus to personally visit Rome, where, however, he became famous only for stripping the gilded bronze from the roof of the Pantheon and sending it to Constantinople.

	Ravenna rose at a later stage of the Western Roman Empire due to its very convenient for those times geographic location... Unlike “shapeless” Rome, which had grown over the centuries and spread far beyond the seven hills, this city was surrounded by swampy creeks on all sides - only a specially constructed embankment road, which at the moment of danger could be easily destroyed, led to the walls of the new capital. The emperor Honorius was the first to choose this former Etruscan settlement as his place of permanent residence in 402; It was in Ravenna that Romulus Augustulus was crowned and deposed by Odoacer.
	Constantinople, as its name clearly indicates, was founded by the largest Roman statesman the era of the late empire, a kind of "sunset Augustus" and the founder of Christianity as a state religion - Constantine the Great on the site of the ancient Bosphorus settlement of Byzantium. After the division of the empire into Western and Eastern, it turned out to be the center of the latter, which it remained until May 29, 1453, when the Turks burst into its streets. A characteristic detail: already under the Ottoman rule, being the capital of the empire of the same name, the city formally retained its main name - Constantinople (in Turkish - Constantinino). Only in 1930, by order of Kemal Ataturk, it finally became Istanbul.
	Aachen, founded by the Roman legionaries near the source of mineral waters during the reign of Alexander Sever (222-235), "got" to the Roman capitals actually by accident - Charlemagne settled in it for permanent residence. Accordingly, the city received from the new ruler great trade and craft privileges, its splendor, fame and size began to grow steadily. In the XII-XIII centuries, the population of the city reached 100,000 people - a rare case at that time. In 1306, Aachen, decorated with a powerful cathedral, finally received the status of a free city of the Holy Roman throne, and until very late the congresses of the imperial princes were held here. The gradual decline began only in the 16th century, when the procedure for the wedding of sovereigns began to take place in Frankfurt.
	Vein it was never officially considered the capital of the Holy Roman Empire, however, since from the 16th century the imperial title, which was gradually depreciating even then, belonged almost invariably to the Austrian Habsburg dynasty, the status of the main center of Europe automatically passed to the city on the Danube. At the end of the last era, the Celtic camp of Vindobona was located here, which already in 15 BC was conquered by legionaries and turned into an outpost of the Roman state in the north. The new fortified camp defended itself from the barbarians for a long time - until the 5th century, when the whole state around was already blazing and falling apart. In the Middle Ages, the Austrian margrave was gradually formed around Vienna, then it was she who consolidated the empire, and it was there that in 1806 its abolition was announced.

Was it the fall?

So why, in school textbooks, 476 ends the history of Antiquity and serves as the beginning of the Middle Ages? Did some kind of radical fracture happen at this moment? In general, no. Long before that, most of the imperial territory was occupied by "barbarian kingdoms", the names of which often still appear in one form or another on the map of Europe: Frankish in the north of Gaul, Burgundy a little southeast, Visigoths - on the Iberian Peninsula, Vandals - in North Africa (from their short stay in Spain the name Andalusia remained) and, finally, in Northern Italy - the Ostrogoths. Only in some places at the time of the formal collapse of the empire was the old patrician aristocracy still in power: the former emperor Julius Nepos in Dalmatia, Siagrius in Gaul, for example, Aurelius Ambrosius in Britain. Julius Nepos would remain emperor for his supporters until his death in 480, and Syagrius would soon be defeated by the Franks of Clovis. And the Ostrogoth Theodoric, who will unite Italy under his rule in 493, will behave as an equal partner of the Emperor of Constantinople and heir to the Western Roman Empire. Only when, in the 520s, Justinian needed an excuse to conquer the Apennines, his secretary would pay attention to 476 - the cornerstone of Byzantine propaganda would be that the Roman state in the West had collapsed and it was necessary to restore it.

So it turns out that the empire did not fall? Wouldn't it be more correct, in agreement with many researchers (of whom the most prestigious today is the Princeton professor Peter Brown), to believe that she was simply reborn? After all, even the date of her death, if you look closely, is conditional. Odoacer, although born a barbarian, in all his upbringing and outlook belonged to the Roman world and, sending the imperial regalia to the East, symbolically restored unity great country... A contemporary of the commander, the historian Malchus from Philadelphia, attests that the Senate of Rome continued to meet both under him and under Theodoric. The pundit even wrote to Constantinople that "there is no more need for the division of the empire, one emperor will be enough for both of its parts." Recall that the division of the state into two almost equal halves took place back in 395 due to military necessity, but it was not considered as the formation of two independent states. Laws were issued on behalf of two emperors throughout the territory, and of the two consuls, whose names were designated the year, one was elected on the Tiber, the other on the Bosphorus.

So much has changed in August 476 for the residents of the city? Perhaps it became harder for them to live, but the psychological breakdown in their minds did not happen overnight. Even at the beginning of the 8th century in distant England, Bede the Venerable wrote that "while the Colosseum stands, Rome will stand, but when the Colosseum collapses and Rome falls, the end of the world will come": therefore, Rome has not yet fallen for Bede. The inhabitants of the Eastern Empire found it all the easier to continue to consider themselves Romans - the self-name "Romei" survived even after the collapse of Byzantium and survived until the twentieth century. True, they spoke Greek here, but it has always been that way. And the kings in the West recognized the theoretical supremacy of Constantinople - just as before 476 they formally swore allegiance to Rome (more precisely, to Ravenna). After all, most of the tribes did not seize the lands in the vast empire by force, but once received them under a contract for military service. A characteristic detail: few of the barbarian leaders dared to mint their own coins, and Siagrius in Soissons even did it on behalf of Zeno. Roman titles remained honorable and desirable for the Germans: Clovis was very proud when, after a successful war with the Visigoths, he received the post of consul from Emperor Anastasius I. What can I say if in these countries the status of a Roman citizen remained in force, and its owners had the right to live according to Roman law, and not according to new codes of law like the well-known Frankish "Salic truth".

Finally, the most powerful institution of the era, the Church, also lived in unity; it was still far from the demarcation of Catholics and Orthodox after the era of the seven Ecumenical Councils. In the meantime, the primacy of honor was firmly recognized for the bishop of Rome, the governor of St. Peter, and the papal chancellery, in turn, dated its documents to the 9th century according to the years of the rule of the Byzantine monarchs. The old Latin aristocracy retained its influence and connections - although the new barbarian masters did not feel real confidence in it, in the absence of others, they had to take its enlightened representatives as advisers. Charlemagne, as you know, did not know how to write his name. There is a lot of evidence of this: for example, just about 476 Sidonius Apollinarius, Bishop of Arverne (or Auverne) was thrown into prison by the Visigothic king Evrych for urging the cities of Auvergne not to change direct Roman power and to resist the newcomers. And he was saved from captivity by Leon, a Latin writer, at that time one of the main dignitaries of the Visigothic court.

Regular communication within the disintegrated empire, commercial and private, also remained so far, only the Arab conquest of the Levant in the 7th century put an end to intensive Mediterranean trade.

Eternal rome

When Byzantium, bogged down in wars with the Arabs, nevertheless lost control over the West ... the Roman Empire was reborn there again, like a phoenix! On the day of the Nativity of Christ 800, Pope Leo III placed her crown on the Frankish king Charlemagne, who united most of Europe under his dominion. And although under Charles's grandchildren this large state disintegrated again, the title was preserved and far outlived the Carolingian dynasty. The Holy Roman Empire of the German nation lasted until modern times, and many of its sovereigns, up to Charles V of Habsburg in the 16th century, tried to unite the entire continent again. To explain the shift of the imperial "mission" from the Romans to the Germans, the concept of "transfer" (translatio imperii) was even specially created, owing much to the ideas of Augustine: the state as a "kingdom that will never collapse" (the expression of the prophet Daniel) always abides, but nations worthy of it are changing, as if picking up the baton from each other. The German emperors had grounds for such claims, so that formally they can be recognized as the heirs of Octavian Augustus - all the way down to the good-natured Franz II of Austria, who was forced to lay down the ancient crown only by Napoleon after Austerlitz, in 1806. The same Bonaparte finally abolished the name itself, which had been hovering over Europe for so long.

And the well-known classifier of civilizations, Arnold Toynbee, generally suggested ending the history of Rome in 1970, when the prayer for the health of the emperor was finally excluded from Catholic liturgical books. But still, let's not go too far. The disintegration of the state really turned out to be stretched in time - as it usually happens at the end of great eras - the very way of life and thoughts gradually and imperceptibly changed. In general, the empire died, but the promise of the ancient gods and Virgil is fulfilled - the Eternal City stands to this day. The past is perhaps more alive in him than anywhere else in Europe. Moreover, he combined what remained of the classical Latin era with Christianity. A miracle has happened, as millions of pilgrims and tourists can testify. Rome is still not just the capital of Italy. May it be so - history (or providence) is always wiser than people.

A number of factors are needed to build an empire. First, we need a “connecting center” that will unite people of different nationalities and religions. The role of such a center can be played by a strong leader who has the ability to convince and subordinate to his will, an idea, a religion, or any people - even if not numerous, but energetic. Secondly, at the initial stage of building an empire, people need to be willing to overcome difficulties, trials, and even risk their lives. Third, there should be a large group (class) of people for whom the constant presence of a strong government capable of ensuring their interests is vitally important.

Let's consider this with a specific example. The mighty Roman Empire once began as a small land on the banks of the Tiber River. There lived a tribe of Latins who founded the city of Rome. They first gradually subjugated the neighboring tribes, and then the entire territory of the Apennine Peninsula. Latins (Romans) were helped not only by their belligerence, but also wise policy... They did not ruin the conquered peoples, did not oppress them. The power of Rome was quite soft and based on strict observance of the law. This is how the beginnings of the famous "Roman Law" appeared.

The Romans combined democratic traditions in government with the strictest military discipline. The order of the superior was the law for the subordinate. If the soldiers fled in battle, they could execute every tenth. Largely due to this, Rome defeated a powerful rival - Carthage, and annexed its lands to itself. And 2 centuries later, after new victories and territorial acquisitions, the Roman Octavian proclaimed himself Emperor Augustus. So is the Roman Republic.

How empires collapse

For several centuries, no one could challenge the power of Rome. As a result, many Romans, accustomed to a carefree life, abandoned military service, pampered, began to indulge in a variety of vices. Roman governors shamelessly plundered the provinces they governed. Naturally, indignation was growing among the local residents. Approximate emperors intrigued, making them a toy in the hands of the warring parties. The empire grew weaker and weaker. And in the end, unable to withstand internal contradictions, she fell under the onslaught of external enemies. All other empires were destroyed in approximately the same way.

The Roman Empire ( Ancient Rome) left an imperishable mark in all European lands, where only his victorious legions set foot. The stone ligature of Roman architecture has survived to this day: walls that protected citizens, along which troops moved, aqueducts that brought fresh water to the townspeople, and bridges thrown over turbulent rivers. As if all this was not enough, the legionaries erected more and more structures - even as the borders of the empire began to retreat. In the era of Hadrian when Rome was much more concerned with the consolidation of lands than with new conquests, the unclaimed combat prowess of the soldiers, for a long time cut off from home and family, was wisely directed into another creative - channel. In a sense, the entire European owes its birth to the Roman builders who introduced many innovations both in Rome itself and beyond. The most important achievements of urban planning aimed at the public good were sewerage and water pipes, which created healthy living conditions and contributed to the increase in population and the growth of cities themselves. But all this would have been impossible if the Romans had not invented concrete and did not begin to use the arch as the main architectural element. It was these two innovations that were spread by the Roman army throughout the empire.

Since the stone arches withstood a huge weight and could be built very high - sometimes two or three tiers - the engineers who worked in the provinces easily overcame any rivers and gorges and reached the farthest edges, leaving behind strong bridges and powerful water pipes (aqueducts). Like many other structures built with the help of Roman troops, the bridge in the Spanish city of Segovia, through which the water supply passes, is gigantic in size: 27.5 meters high and about 823 meters long. The unusually tall and slender pillars made of roughly hewn and unattached granite boulders and 128 graceful arches leave an impression not only of unprecedented power, but also of imperial self-confidence. It is a miracle of engineering, built about 100 tons and. e., has steadfastly stood the test of time: until recently, the bridge served as the water supply system of Segovia.

How it all began?

Early settlements on the site of the future city of Rome emerged on the Apennine Peninsula, in the valley of the Tiber River, at the beginning of the 1st millennium BC. NS. According to legend, the Romans descended from Trojan refugees who founded the city of Alba Longu in Italy. Rome itself, according to legend, was founded by Romulus, the grandson of King Alba Longa, in 753 BC. NS. As in the Greek city-states, in the early period of the history of Rome it was ruled by kings who enjoyed virtually the same power as the Greeks. Under the tyrant king Tarquinius Gordom, a popular uprising took place, during which the royal power was destroyed and Rome turned into an aristocratic republic. Its population was clearly divided into two groups - the privileged patrician class and the plebeian class, which had much less rights. A member of the oldest Roman family was considered a patrician, only the senate (the main government body) was elected from the patricians. A significant part of its early history is the struggle of the plebeians to expand their rights and turn members of their class into full-fledged Roman citizens.

Ancient Rome differed from the Greek city-states, since it was located in completely different geographic conditions- a single Apennine peninsula with vast plains. Therefore, starting from the very early period its history its citizens were forced to rival and fight with neighboring Italic tribes. The conquered peoples obeyed this great empire either as allies, or simply included in the republic, and the conquered population did not receive the rights of Roman citizens, often turning into slaves. The most powerful opponents of Rome in the IV century. BC NS. there were Etruscans and Samnites, as well as individual Greek colonies in southern Italy (Great Greece). And yet, despite the fact that the Romans were often at odds with the Greek colonists, the more developed Hellenic culture had a noticeable impact on the culture of the Romans. It got to the point that the ancient Roman deities began to be identified with their Greek counterparts: Jupiter with Zeus, Mars with Ares, Venus with Aphrodite, etc.

Wars of the Roman Empire

The most tense moment in the confrontation between the Romans and the southern Italians and Greeks was the war of 280-272. BC e., when Pyrrhus, the king of the state of Epirus, located in the Balkans, intervened in the course of hostilities. In the end, Pyrrhus and his allies were defeated, and by 265 BC. NS. The Roman Republic united under its rule all of Central and Southern Italy.

Continuing the wars with the Greek colonists, the Romans clashed in Sicily with the Carthaginian (Punic) state. In 265 BC. NS. the so-called Punic Wars began, which lasted until 146 BC. e., almost 120 years. At first, the Romans fought against the Greek colonies in the east of Sicily, primarily against the largest of them, the city of Syracuse. Then the capture of the Carthaginian lands in the east of the island began, which led to the fact that the Carthaginians, who had a strong fleet, attacked the Romans. After the first defeats, the Romans managed to create their own fleet and defeat the Carthaginian ships in the battle of the Aegates Islands. A peace was signed, according to which in 241 BC. NS. all of Sicily, considered the breadbasket of the Western Mediterranean, became the property of the Roman Republic.

Carthaginian dissatisfaction with the results First Punic War, as well as the gradual penetration of the Romans into the territory of the Iberian Peninsula, which was owned by Carthage, led to a second military clash between the powers. In 219 BC. NS. The Carthaginian commander Hannibal Barca captured the Spanish city of Sagunt, an ally of the Romans, then passed through southern Gaul and, having overcome the Alps, invaded the territory of the Roman Republic proper. Hannibal supported part of the Italic tribes, dissatisfied with the rule of Rome. In 216 BC. NS. in Apulia, in a bloody battle at Cannes, Hannibal surrounded and almost completely destroyed the Roman army, commanded by Guy Terentius Varro and Aemilius Paul. However, Hannibal could not take the heavily fortified city and was eventually forced to leave the Apennine Peninsula.

The war was moved to northern Africa, where Carthage and other Punian settlements were located. In 202 BC. NS. the Roman general Scipio defeated Hannibal's army at the town of Zama, south of Carthage, after which a peace was signed on terms dictated by the Romans. The Carthaginians were deprived of all their possessions outside Africa, they were obliged to transfer all warships and war elephants to the Romans. After winning the Second Punic War, the Roman Republic became the most powerful state in the Western Mediterranean. Third Punic War, which took place from 149 to 146 BC. e., was reduced to finishing off an already defeated enemy. In the spring of 14b BC. NS. Carthage was taken and destroyed, and its inhabitants.

Defensive walls of the Roman Empire

The relief from Trajan's Column depicts a scene (see left) from the Dacian Wars; legionnaires (they are without helmets) are building a marching camp from rectangular pieces of turf. When Roman soldiers found themselves in enemy lands, the construction of such fortifications was common.

"Fear gave birth to beauty, and ancient Rome was miraculously transformed, changing the old - peaceful - policy and began to hastily erect towers, so that soon all seven of its hills sparkled with the armor of a continuous wall"- this is how one Roman wrote about the powerful fortifications built around Rome in 275 to protect against the Goths. Following the example of the capital, large cities throughout the Roman Empire, many of which have long "stepped over" the boundaries of the former walls, hastened to strengthen their defensive lines.

Building the city walls was an extremely laborious job. Usually, two deep ditches were dug around the settlement, and between them a high earthen rampart was piled up. It served as a kind of interlayer between two concentric walls. External the wall went into the ground by 9 m so that the enemy could not make a tunnel, and at the top was equipped with a wide road for the sentinels. The inner wall was raised a few more meters to make it more difficult to shell the city. Such fortifications almost did not succumb to destruction: their thickness reached 6 m, and the boulders were fitted together with metal braces - for greater strength.

When the walls were completed, the gates could be erected. A temporary wooden arch - formwork - was built over the opening in the wall. On top of it, skillful masons, moving from both sides to the middle, laid wedge-shaped slabs, forming a bend in the arch. When the last - the castle, or key - stone was inserted, the formwork was removed, and next to the first arch they began to build the second. And so on until the entire passage to the city was under a semicircular roof - the Korobov vault.

The guard posts on the gates, guarding the peace of the city, were often real small fortresses: there were military barracks, stocks of weapons and food. In Germany, the so-called (see below) is perfectly preserved. On its lower slopes instead of windows there were loopholes, and round towers towered on both sides - so that it would be more convenient to fire at the enemy. During the siege, a powerful lattice was lowered onto the gate.

The wall, built in the 3rd century around Rome (19 km long, 3.5 m thick and 18 m high), consisted of 381 towers and 18 gates with drooping bars. The wall was constantly renovated and strengthened, so that it served the City until the 19th century, that is, until the improvement of artillery. Two-thirds of this wall is still standing today.

The majestic Porta Nigra (that is, the Black Gate), towering 30 meters in height, personifies the power of imperial Rome. The fortified gate is flanked by two towers, one of which is significantly damaged. Once the gate served as the entrance to the city walls of the 2nd century AD. NS. in August Trevirorum (later Trier), northern capital empire.

Aqueducts of the Roman Empire. Imperial City Life Road

The famous three-tiered aqueduct in southern France (see above), which crosses the Gard River and its low-lying valley - the so-called Garda Bridge - is as beautiful as it is functional. This construction, which stretches for 244 m in length, daily supplies from a distance of 48 km about 22 tons of water to the city of Nemaus (now Nîmes). The Garda Bridge is still one of the finest works of Roman engineering.

For the Romans, famous for their achievements in engineering, they were especially proud of aqueducts... They brought about 250 million gallons of fresh water to ancient Rome every day. In 97 A.D. NS. Sextus Julius Frontinus, the superintendent of the water supply system of Rome, rhetorically asked: "Who dares to compare our water pipes with idle pyramids or some worthless - albeit famous - creations of the Greeks - these great structures, without which human life is inconceivable?" At the end of its greatness, the city acquired eleven aqueducts, along which water ran from the southern and eastern hills. Engineering turned into real art: it seemed that graceful arches easily jumped over obstacles, moreover, decorating the landscape. The Romans quickly "shared" their achievements with the rest of the Roman Empire, and you can still see the remnants of numerous aqueducts in France, Spain, Greece, North Africa and Asia Minor.

To provide water to provincial cities, whose population had already depleted local reserves, and to build baths and fountains there, Roman engineers laid canals to rivers and springs, often tens of miles away. Flowing at a slight slope (Vitruvius recommended a minimum slope of 1: 200), precious moisture ran through stone pipes that ran through the countryside (and were mostly hidden into underground tunnels or ditches that repeated the outlines of the landscape) and eventually reached the boundaries of the city. There, water was safely supplied to public reservoirs. When rivers or gorges crossed the path of the pipeline, the builders threw arches across them, allowing them to maintain the same gentle slope and maintain a continuous flow of water.

To keep the angle of water falling constant, surveyors again resorted to thunder and chorobat, as well as a diopter, which measured horizontal angles. Again, the main burden of the work fell on the shoulders of the troops. In the middle of the 2nd century A.D. one military engineer was asked to sort out the difficulties encountered during the construction of an aqueduct in Saldy (in present-day Algeria). Two squads of workers began to dig a tunnel in the hill, moving towards each other from opposite sides. The engineer soon realized what was the matter. "I measured both tunnels," he wrote later, "and found that the sum of their lengths was greater than the width of the hill." The tunnels just didn't meet. He found a way out by drilling a well between the tunnels and connecting them, so that the water began to flow as it should. The city honored the engineer with a monument.

Internal situation of the Roman Empire

The further strengthening of the external power of the Roman Republic was simultaneously accompanied by a deep internal crisis. Such a large territory could no longer be governed in the old way, that is, with the organization of power characteristic of the city-state. In the ranks of the Roman generals, commanders advanced who claimed to have full power, like the ancient Greek tyrants or the Hellenic rulers in the Middle East. The first of these rulers was Lucius Cornelius Sulla, who captured in 82 BC. NS. Rome and became a sovereign dictator. Sulla's enemies were mercilessly killed according to the lists (proscriptions) prepared by the dictator himself. In 79 BC. NS. Sulla voluntarily relinquished power, but this could no longer return him to his former government. A long period has begun civil wars in the Roman Republic.

External situation of the Roman Empire

Meanwhile, the stable development of the empire was threatened not only by external enemies and ambitious politicians who fought for power. Periodically, slave uprisings broke out on the territory of the republic. The largest such rebellion was a performance led by the Thracian Spartacus, which lasted almost three years (from 73 to 71 BC). The rebels were defeated only by the combined efforts of the three most skillful commanders of Rome at that time - Mark Licinius Crassus, Mark Licinius Lucullus and Gnaeus Pompey.

Later, Pompeii, famous for his victories in the East over the Armenians and the Pontic king Mithridates VI, fought for supreme power in the republic with another famous military leader - Gaius Julius Caesar. Caesar 58 to 49 BC NS. managed to seize the territories of the northern neighbors of the Roman Republic - the Gauls and even carried out the first invasion of the British Isles. In 49 BC. NS. Caesar entered Rome, where he was declared a dictator - a military ruler with unlimited rights. In 46 BC. NS. at the Battle of Pharsalus (Greece), he defeated Pompey, his main rival. And in 45 BC. NS. in Spain, under Mund, he crushed the last obvious political opponents - the sons of Pompey, Gnaeus the Younger and Sextus. At the same time, Caesar managed to enter into an alliance with the Egyptian queen Cleopatra, effectively subjugating her vast country to power.

However, in 44 BC. NS. Guy Julius Caesar was killed by a group of Republican conspirators, led by Marcus Junius Brutus and Guy Cassius Longinus. Civil wars in the republic continued. Now their main participants were Caesar's closest associates - Mark Antony and Guy Octavian. First, they together destroyed the killers of Caesar, and only later entered into a fight with each other. Antony was supported by the Egyptian queen Cleopatra during this last phase of the civil wars in Rome. However, in 31 BC. NS. at the Battle of Cape Aktium, the fleet of Antony and Cleopatra was defeated by the ships of Octavian. The Queen of Egypt and her ally committed suicide, and Octavian, finally to the Roman Republic, became the unrestricted ruler of a giant power that united almost the entire Mediterranean under his rule.

Octavian, in 27 BC NS. who took the name Augustus "blessed", is considered the first emperor of the Roman Empire, although the title itself at that time meant only the supreme commander, who won a significant victory. Nobody officially abolished the Roman Republic, and Augustus preferred to be called the princeps, that is, the first among the senators. And yet, under the successors of Octavian, the republic began to acquire more and more the features of a monarchy, closer in organization to the eastern despotic states.

The empire reached its highest foreign policy power under the emperor Trajan, who in 117 AD. NS. conquered part of the lands of the most powerful enemy of Rome in the east - the Parthian state. However, after the death of Trajan, the Parthians managed to return the captured territories and soon went on the offensive. Already under Trajan's successor, Emperor Hadrian, the empire was forced to switch to defensive tactics, building powerful defensive ramparts on its borders.

The Parthians were not the only ones who troubled the Roman Empire; the raids of barbarian tribes from the north and east became more and more frequent, in the battles with which the Roman army often suffered sensitive defeats. Later, the Roman emperors even allowed certain groups of barbarians to settle on the territory of the empire, provided that they would guard the borders from other hostile tribes.

In 284, the Roman emperor Diocletian made an important reform that finally transformed the former Roman Republic into an imperial state. From now on, even the emperor began to be called differently - "dominus" ("lord"), and a complex ritual borrowed from the eastern rulers was introduced at the court. title of Augustus. He was assisted by a deputy called Caesar. After a while, Augustus had to transfer power to Caesar, and he himself had to retire. This more flexible system, along with improved provincial governance, led this great state to last another 200 years.

In the IV century. Christianity became the dominant religion in the empire, which also contributed to the consolidation of the internal unity of the state. Since 394, Christianity is already the only permitted religion in the empire. However, if the Eastern Roman Empire remained a fairly strong state, the Western one weakened under the blows of the barbarians. Several times (410 and 455) barbarian tribes conquered and ruined Rome, and in 476 the leader of the German mercenaries Odoacer overthrew the last western emperor Romulus Augustulus and declared himself the ruler of Italy.

And although the Eastern Roman Empire survived as a single country, and in 553 even annexed the entire territory of Italy, it was still a completely different state. It is no coincidence that historians prefer to call him and consider his fate separately from history of ancient Rome.