3 ms·

I find it funny that a blog taking it's name from the Roman empire would make the claim decline must be faster than growth. The growth of the Roman commonwealt

I find it funny that a blog taking it's name from the Roman empire would make the claim decline must be faster than growth. The growth of the Roman commonwealth was largely completed over the course of the republic's 482 year lifetime. The empire that followed was established in 27 BC and ended with the fall of Constantinople in 1453. Even the fall of the western part took slightly more than 500 years.

Beijinger 3y ago
Rome ended around 500. "ended with the fall of Constantinople in 1453" Then you can claim it never ended. "Up until about one century ago, the Roman Empire was popular enough that the rulers of Russia still used the title of “Czars” derived from the name of the first Roman Emperor and they called Moscow “The Third Rome,” with the first two being Rome and Constantinople." (don't underestimte this claim for Russians self identity!) This graph gives a pretty good description: https://davidgalbraith.org/trivia/graph-of-the-population-of-rome-through-history/2189/ https://davidgalbraith.org/trivia/graph-of-the-population-of... Rome had a population of around 1MM (some claim 3MM) and ralaitvly quick declined to 0.1MM. NYC has 8MM Inhabitants. Imagine it would collapse quickly to 0.8 MM with many houses not occupied, broken and the infrastructure rotten. Non functioning cars on the street and if you were to ask one what these cars are they would tell you: No idea. Some kind of horse carriage but much to heavy, we don't use it anymore, because they lost most of their knowledge in technology.