As you say, military might provided for Rome's ascendance, and for its decent as well. That's the problem with empires. They look good in the short term, but they are only tenable for a few generations. Eventually the artificially skewed economic scheme collapses. Imperial ethics are doomed.
I don't know how we'd test the idea that the stronger military always wins.
I'm not concerned with military victory. I'm concerned with cultural prevalence. For example, even though the Romans conquered Hellenistic society, Hellenistic culture prevailed and dominated Roman society.
no subject
I mean in the longest term measurable.
As you say, military might provided for Rome's ascendance, and for its decent as well. That's the problem with empires. They look good in the short term, but they are only tenable for a few generations. Eventually the artificially skewed economic scheme collapses. Imperial ethics are doomed.
I don't know how we'd test the idea that the stronger military always wins.
I'm not concerned with military victory. I'm concerned with cultural prevalence. For example, even though the Romans conquered Hellenistic society, Hellenistic culture prevailed and dominated Roman society.