Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
Good question, when would you say the trip was, "Let them eat cake" or something?
Uh, that was France. Or maybe I'm missing what you mean there.
Anyway, I'll copy in what I replied with, as well:
Basically, you'd have to be more specific about what measure you're using. If you go by population they peaked in the 100's, and infrastructure construction peaked around the same time IIRC. Territorial expansion was actually slower in the Empire than the Republic from the start.
It's not clear what caused Rome to decline, either, to complicate things.
Edit: Sorry about the non-answer. I can't even give a date by which it was definitely in decline, because of the split into western and eastern halves with wildly divergent fates. The 400s would be the answer for Western Rome, since they had at least nominal influence all the way from Britain to Libya until then. It would be the 1200s for Eastern Rome.