All Topics
All Topics
Technology
Technology
Design
Design
Programming
Programming
Science
Science
News
News
Gaming
Gaming
Entertainment
Entertainment
Business
Business
Finance
Finance
Sports
Sports
Health
Health
Food
Food
Travel
Travel
Art
Art
Music
Music
Books
Books
Education
Education
Politics
Politics
Personal
Personal
Bluesky
Twitter
No algorithm. No AI slop. No ads. Just RSS. Pro-human. Indie writers. Real journalism. Open web. Chronological. Hand toasted.

The Gradual Decline of Rome: Why 476 AD Was Not the End

By

Fried Kielbasa

6d ago· 7 min readenInsight

Summary

The article explores the author's growing interest in the decline and fall of the Roman Empire, challenging the conventional date of 476 AD as a definitive end. Through investigation, the author finds that Rome continued to function remarkably after 476, with a barbarian heretic keeping the Roman state running for another thirty-three years. The piece argues that the fall of Rome was not a sudden event but a gradual, almost unnoticed transition, and that Roman institutions, culture, and governance persisted long after the official end date.

Source

Hacker NewsThe Gradual Decline of Rome: Why 476 AD Was Not the Endfriedkielbasa.substack.com

Key quotes

· 3 pulled
You always hear the date 476 as the definitive end. As far as dates go, 476 is as good a date as any to mark the end of the official Roman Empire, but it always struck me as a bit weird.
After that date, could it be said that Rome no longer existed? When I investigated what Rome was like after 476, it seemed oddly continuous.
A barbarian heretic kept the Roman state running for thirty-three years
Snippet from the RSS feed
A barbarian heretic kept the Roman state running for thirty-three years

You might also wanna read