• Obinice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      71
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      You reminded me of something I read from back around when that bloke got elected, regarding amongst other things, the decline in the rule of law mattering to society…

      "The greatness of Rome, brilliant with repeated marks of prosperity, has gradually faded… the ancient glory of military prowess and valour has almost passed away… by the growth of wealth and luxury.

      The Roman world is falling: yet we concern ourselves with trifles… We heap up riches that perish and bury our gold in the earth as if we were piling up treasures in a lifetime of prosperity.

      Rome was great and could tolerate its own vices as long as they were held in check by some degree of virtue; but when our hands ceased to uphold the laws, when avarice and luxury sapped the nation’s strength, the state itself lost control and went its way.

      The finest men were shut out from office by the lowest dregs of society, who, having won the favour of the mob by base means, ventured to grasp at the highest offices.

      The greater her glory, the more incredible it seems that she has been brought so low.

      Empires are mortal. Rome has perished. Though she was built upon such firm foundations, Rome has sunk by her own weight."

      - Ammianus Marcellinus, Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus, Tacitus, Aurelius Ambrosius, Aurelius Augustinus Hipponensis. 56 - 430 AD.

      • baltakatei@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Can you indicate which author is associated with which portion of your quoted text? I’m looking to verify the provenance of these statements. Thank you.

        • Obinice@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 day ago

          Alas no, I saw this a while back and saved it. I believe they’re mostly a mix of direct quotes (or as much as one can be given they weren’t speaking English), and a lot of summations from their published works. So rather than reading a whole book, you get a few sentences carrying their main points.

          At least that’s what I recall :-)

          My suggestion would be to look in to the authors, find their relevant works and give them a read, that’ll give you the same thoughts and opinions but with way more detail :-D

      • acargitz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Yet the Roman Empire survived and thrived for about a millennium afterwards.

          • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            19 hours ago

            Unfair, there is still actual debate amongst historians and scholars about when the Roman empire ended, and if ever, it fell.

            • Shezzagrad@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              17 hours ago

              Among which historians specifically? I’m unaware of any serious debate here other than propagandists using the name second Rome, third Rome, ceaser etc. sorry buddy Roman empire collapsed when the franks, Visigoths, ostrogoths and Huns toppled the west. Wanna know why it ended then? Byzantine had split long before into a separate entity to distance itself from Rome and when it collapsed it chugged along with it’s greek orthodox ideals