I once read an article where the author (an historian) argued that the main reason Rome fell was arrogance. Rome was great, and eternal. It simply could not fall. So why take any corrective measures? Why be concerned?
I kind of think that the United States is in that position day.
The thing is, the entire idea that the Roman empire fell is a 17th and 18th century idea that is wrong.
Now that i got your attention ;) let me explain why.
“Rome” didn’t fall in 476 AD, the Roman empire continued in Constantinople until 1453. It wasn’t the “Byzantine empire “, it never called itself that nor did its contemporaries call it that. It was known as the Roman empire.
Only in the 17th century did northern European writers invent that name to put down the people in Constantinople, long after constantinople had fallen.
In 476 AD when the last “Western Roman” emperor was deposed, what did Odoacer, his deposed do? He sent the imperial robes and crown to Zeno, the emperor in Constantinople, with tye acknowledgement that Zeno was now the sole emperor.
The Ostrogoths, visigoths etc paid lip service that they were still vassals of the emperor. This was kind of like Japan before the Shogunate where different Lords ruled but claimed their vassalage to the powerless emperor.
Or China under the Zhou emperors.
To the ordinary citizen in a city like Lyons, or Cologne, or Milan, the empire didn’t fall in 476 AD. The language, local administration, religion, customs, culture etc remained the same. The taxes went to the Germanic Dux ie warlords. That it didn’t go further wasn’t the local man’s bother.
That is why the Roman’s got so p!$$ed off when Charlemagne was crowned Western Roman emperor. The Roman’s were like “did we say that was okay”??
Odiacer and his successors got Romanized, in culture, language, religion. They kept the administration as it was as it worked.
The first major disruption was the Julian plague that in the 6th century wiped out large chunks of city dwellers, thereby reducing culture, literacy etc.
The next hit was the Arab conquests that immediately ended the empire in north Africa, the Levant and Spain.
The final blow was the black death. After that the concept of Rome died slowly until 1453.
Family may have been corrupted in the 3rd century but then the empire Christianized. When Constantine legalized Christianity in 313 AD, it was already between 10% to 40% of society. After that its numbers exploded.
Christianity became state religion in 378 AD under Emperor Theodosius and family and society was not corrupted, rather the opposite.
The Germanic “barbarians” were hardly barbarian. They were foedorati, who had fought in Roman armies for centuries at that point. They spoke Latin and were not the shaggy barbarians of Augustus era.
The empire had had Spanish (Trajan, Hadrian), Dacian (Aurelian, Galerian, Max Thrax), Berber ie north African (Septimus Severan and his dynasfy), even Arab (Philip the Arab who was allegedly the first Christian emperor, Elgabalus etc), heck Theodosius II was half Germanic.
They didn’t create a pathway for the Goths or Suebians etc to become emperors in their own right, so the Germanic warlords decided to just take over.
I would note that the same happened in the 7th century in the Levant. Arab client states, the Lakhmanids and Ghassanids who were both Christian (but heretical Christian more Ebionite ie that Jesus was a prophet) fought fir Rome and for Persia in the 100 year war between those two superpowers. Rome and Persia mortally wounded each other and the Arabs just walked in and took over.
The Arabs couldn’t believe their luck and so over a century concocted Islam as a way to explain their divine providence.