We're taught that the Western Roman Empire collapsed in 476 C.E. when the barbarian king Odoacer seized control of Rome — here's why that might be wrong.
PRISMA ARCHIVO/Alamy Stock PhotoThough the Roman Empire once stretched across Europe and into parts of Asia and Africa, a series of unsuccessful rulers, splintering ideologies, and attacks from outside forces eventually brought the empire to its knees.
The Roman Empire was one of the greatest empires in history. Starting in 27 B.C.E. after the fall of the Roman Republic, the impact of the Roman Empire — and its expansion across Europe and beyond — can still be felt to this day. But, as history has proven, nothing lasts forever.
Though it was probably hard for Romans to imagine the end of the Roman Empire, all that remains of it today are incredible artifacts. Most people now cite the year 476 C.E. as the year when Rome fell — but was it, really?
While it’s true that the Western Roman Empire was overtaken by barbarian warrior Odoacer that year, he kept most of the Roman government’s structures largely intact during his rule. Furthermore, it wasn’t until decades later that this alleged fall of Rome first surfaced in historical accounts. The narrative of 476 C.E. marking the end of Western Rome only emerged thanks to the Constantinopolitan chronicler Marcellinus Comes, and, as it turned out, much of what he wrote in his account was a fabrication.
So, if not 476 C.E., when did Rome fall?
The Rise And Peak Of The Roman Empire
Public DomainA depiction of the Roman Senate during the Roman Republic.
According to legend, Rome was first established in 753 B.C.E. by the twin brothers Romulus and Remus, who were the sons of Mars, the god of war. As the city grew in size and power, Rome eventually became a monarchy.
By 509 B.C.E., Rome had become a republic with a political structure designed with a system of checks and balances, distributing power among elected officials — serving as a basis for modern systems of government, including the United States. The Roman Republic was notably different from the direct democracy of the Greeks, as elected officials stood as representatives for the people in Rome, whereas in ancient Greece, individuals represented themselves when voting on laws and politics.
However, by the first century B.C.E., numerous internal conflicts and power struggles had eroded the Roman Republic’s stability.
Julius Caesar, a renowned military leader, had significantly expanded Rome’s territories through his conquests, particularly in Gaul, but when he seized power for himself as a dictator in 44 B.C.E., it proved controversial, to say the least. Even those closest to him in the Roman Senate feared Caesar’s tyrannical nature — and so, they banded together to assassinate him.
Public DomainThe assassination of Julius Caesar by the Roman Senate.
Caesar’s adopted son and heir Octavian ultimately emerged victorious in the ensuing power struggles, and in 27 B.C.E., he took the new name Augustus and became Rome’s first emperor. With that, the Roman Empire was born. Augustus’ reign also initiated the Pax Romana, or the “Roman Peace,” a nearly two-century-long era of relative peace and prosperity.
Augustus implemented countless social reforms, bolstered the arts, and strengthened Rome’s infrastructure. Later emperors such as Trajan, who ruled from 98 to 117 C.E., further expanded the empire, adding regions like Dacia (located in modern-day Romania) and parts of the Middle East.
His successor, Hadrian, who ruled from 117 to 138 C.E., focused on consolidating and securing the empire’s borders and commissioning structures like Hadrian’s Wall in the modern-day United Kingdom.
The death of Marcus Aurelius in 180 C.E., however, marked the end of the Pax Romana, and it was his son and successor Commodus, who ruled until 192 C.E., whose reign is often credited as the beginning of the end. While there were plenty of terrible Roman emperors, Commodus went mad with power — particularly after a failed assassination attempt — executing people with little restraint until his own advisers had him strangled at age 31.
Wikimedia CommonsA bust of the infamous Roman emperor Commodus.
The end result was a period of political instability, frequent changes of emperors, economic challenges, and, eventually, external threats.
Emperor Diocletian, who ruled from 284 to 305 C.E., attempted to restore stability by dividing the empire into eastern and western regions, each with its own ruler — a division aimed at making governance more manageable. Ultimately, though, the now-divided regions drifted further and further apart.
The Eastern Roman Empire, governed out of Byzantium, took on Greek as its official language and managed to thrive and grow stronger. Meanwhile, the Western Roman Empire slowly fell apart. This decline was exacerbated throughout the fourth and fifth centuries, as the Western Roman Empire was subjected to frequent invasion and the rise of Christianity.
How Did The Western Roman Empire Fall Apart?
Chronicle/Alamy Stock PhotoOdoacer, the first barbarian king of Italy.
While the Eastern Roman Empire would continue to thrive, ultimately becoming known as the Byzantine Empire (and lasting until 1453, when the forces of Sultan Mehmed II of the Ottoman Empire overtook it), the Western Roman Empire faced seemingly endless setbacks and conflicts.
Internally, the empire grappled with severe economic challenges due to its many wars, overspending, and crushing taxation. The Western Roman Empire also faced a loss of revenue after it lost territories in North Africa.
All of this undermined the empire’s ability to maintain a robust military, leaving it vulnerable, as it lacked the resources to defend its borders effectively. The constant political changes and ascensions of emperors did little to help this, and the rise of Christianity may have also tempered the Romans’ thirst for warfare, since they stopped seeing emperors as divine.
Public DomainAn 1890 painting by Joseph-Noël Sylvestre depicting the sack of Rome by the Visigoths in 410 C.E.
Externally, the west was constantly invaded by various barbarian tribes. While Rome had long contended with Germanic groups, the western half of the empire soon faced additional attacks from the Visigoths and the Vandals. By the fifth century, many of these tribes had already breached the empire’s borders, and in 410 C.E., the Visigoth King Alaric I successfully sacked Rome, delivering a mighty blow to the already weakened empire.
Alaric I’s attack also revealed Rome’s true weakness to the other tribes, revealing how easy it would be to ransack the empire. The growing threat of the Huns across Europe had also strained both halves of the Roman Empire. Despite Attila’s death in 453 C.E., the damage had been done.
Then, in 476 C.E., the Germanic leader Odoacer set his sights on Rome and delivered a final blow that caused the empire to fall — or did he?
When Did Rome Fall? Here’s Why It May Have Happened Later Than Most People Think
Most people today believe that the fall of Rome happened right after Odoacer’s assault, but the truth isn’t quite so simple. After all, Rome didn’t fall in a single moment, so it’s difficult to pinpoint the definite collapse.
And as historian and author Edward J. Watts wrote in a 2021 piece for TIME, even the approximation of 476 isn’t necessarily accurate.
Wikimedia CommonsRomulus Augustus, the last of the Western Roman Emperors, gives up his crown to Odoacer.
After Odoacer seized control of Rome, Watts explained, he kept most of the Roman government’s structures largely intact during his rule. Odoacer’s rule lasted 17 years, during which the Senate continued to meet as they had before. Romans still spoke Latin, and Roman armies continued to fight battles. The people of Rome likely still felt like citizens of the Roman Empire.
So, what changed? When the Gothic ruler Theoderic overthrew Odoacer in 493, curiously, things seemed even better for the Romans. “Rather than imagining that Roman rule had ended in 476, Italians in the late 5th and early 6th centuries spoke about its recovery,” Watts wrote. “Bishop Ennodius of Pavia spoke of the ‘filth’ that Theoderic ‘washed away from the greater part of Italy,’ leaving Rome, as it emerged from ‘the ashes,’ ‘living again.'”
Historisches Auge Ralf Feltz/Alamy Stock PhotoTheoderic the Great, the leader of the Ostrogoths.
Once again, it seemed that the “fall of Rome” hadn’t yet happened. The first mention of such an ending didn’t come until the late 510s, when Marcellinus Comes wrote in his Chronicle that Odoacer, whom he called the “king of the Goths,” had caused the Roman Empire to “perish.” But Odoacer wasn’t a Goth, and Marcellinus’ account notably came at a time of tension between the Western Roman state and Constantinople, in the Eastern Roman Empire.
Marcellinus’ history was effectively a way to signal to his fellow Eastern Romans that their western allies had fallen — and that invasion was a justifiable means of restoring Roman power in the west. Not long after, in 535, Eastern Roman armies invaded Italy, with Emperor Justinian declaring that “the Goths have used force to take Italy, which was ours, and have refused to give it back.” It was, in a sense, propaganda.
Wikimedia CommonsEmperor Justinian is considered a saint by many Orthodox Christians.
Ironically, it was only after Justinian “reclaimed” Italy in 562 that the end of the Western Roman Empire truly began, as much of the empire’s infrastructure crumbled, the population declined, and several cities were all but razed to the ground. Yet for 1,500 years, the story of Odoacer’s coup of Rome has been considered the official end of the empire.
As they say, history is written by the victors.
After reading about when Rome really fell, learn about the rise and fall of the Japanese Empire and the Inca Empire.
