What happened to Western Rome in the mid fifth century?

It saw the collapse of the Western Roman Empire, which came to an end in 476 AD. This empire had been ruled by a succession of weak emperors, with the real political might being increasingly concentrated among military leaders. Internal instability allowed a Visigoth army to reach and ransack Rome in 410.

Why did Western Rome’s armies become so weak?

Invasions by Barbarian tribes The most straightforward theory for Western Rome’s collapse pins the fall on a string of military losses sustained against outside forces. Rome had tangled with Germanic tribes for centuries, but by the 300s “barbarian” groups like the Goths had encroached beyond the Empire’s borders.

Did the Western Roman Empire have a strong military?

By 476 CE, when Odoacer deposed the Emperor Romulus, the Western Roman Empire wielded negligible military, political, or financial power and had no effective control over the scattered Western domains that could still be described as Roman.

Who invaded Rome in the 5th century?

In the 5th Century, the city of Rome was sacked (attacked and taken over) twice: by the Visigoths in 410 and the Vandals in 455. Rome was nearly attacked by the Huns under the leader Attila in the 450s, but the Pope met him and is said to have convinced him to turn back.

What happened in the 5th century BC?

499 BC: Aristagoras instigates the Ionian Revolt, beginning the Persian Wars between Greece and Persia. 499 BC: Sardis sacked by Athenian and Ionian troops. 498 BC: Leontini subjugated by Hippocrates of Gela. 498 BC: Alexander I succeeds his father Amyntas I as king of Macedon.

Why were the western armies so weak in medieval warfare?

However, the Western armies did not suffer the sorts of crushing defeats that plagued the Eastern armies. Therefore, the army was not uniformly weak, and was, in fact, quite successful on some fronts. For example, Valens’ disaster at Adrianople was an Eastern, not a Western, defeat.

Was the late Roman army really that bad?

The Late Roman army has recently been the subject of much investigation. Earlier opinions that the Roman army of this period was poor in equipment, training and discipline when compared to its earlier counterparts have been overturned – or at least heavily revised. Yet there does remain one problem.

Was the Roman army outmatched by Aetius’ army?

As for the army being outmatched, Aetius clearly showed Western Roman superiority in both Italy and Gaul. If there was any military inferiority, in size or competence, it falls to the East, especially in such disastrous decisions as sending the fleet against Gaiseric in 441.

Did the Germanic tribes destroy Rome?

While it is true that the Germanic tribes ultimately extinguished the Roman rulers, they did not do so with the sword, and the Fall of Rome cannot be fully explained as being the result of military incompetence. A second hypothesis, closely associated with the military, is that the West lacked competent political leaders, although the East did not.