Moments in Human History that changed the World?

Yes it most certanly would have changed many things. The pressure from tribes fleeing from the Huns would be signifigantly lighter had they conquered Germany, then it was in History. Not only that, the Romans would have a whole new population to recruit troops from and the obvious economic benefits from the province. It would have made the Huns(and the other tribes) much easier to deal with.

You are downplaying the role the Germanic tribes played in the downfall of Rome. Besides the various invasions that various tribes launched across the Rhine, you also had Germans not really loyal to Rome inflitrate the administration and military(Odoacer was German). This was obviously a bad thing, and it played a key role in how inefective the Western Roman Army became near the end. None of these problems would have existed had the Romans succeded in annexing Germania.

Again, I refer you to Gaul. Usually, in an area conquered by the Romans, there would be a rebellion after the first generation, but after that, rebellions rarely, if ever occurred. When the Roman Empire was at its height, in the 100's AD, there really was not many places at all that wanted to be free from their rules. Even the Jews in Judae, who only a generation before, had a massive revolt, were content to live under Roman rule. Many provinces rarely, if ever, saw a soldier, much less a legion. Also, Germania had massive forests, and as you could imagine, timber and stone was used for just about anything and everything.

Another thing I hate, is that people tend to make the fall of the roman empire seem inevitable, when that is not the case. Again, many people living in the empire, did not want, nor could even imagine a world without the Roman Empire. Even the Germanic tribes who are credited with bringing about their demise, wanted to live in the empire, and wanted to live with its luxuries, rather than destroy it. Really, the only people in Germania who wanted the ROmans out at the time of Teutoburg, were the nobles and other people who held power. They feared they would lose this power, even though past Roman actions have shown that the Romans usually kept the local leaders in power, as long as they remained loyal to Rome.

Augustus was so distraught about his lost legions in the Teutoburg forest that Roman expansion halted at the Rhine. How can you people not think that as a significant change to history? It's just like saying oh the Germans that got stopped at El Alamein in WWII didn't have any significance. The main reason for the downfall of Rome was it had failed to industrialize it ran solely on a slave based economy. The later incompetent leaders didn't help either especially when the Empire was split in two. Constantine paid the tribes that were fleeing the Huns to leave Byzantium alone and head further West into Rome. The only thing that the Germanic tribes did was move into a crumbling Roman Empire that couldn't defend itself they really didn't have to do much.

Also I think if disease hadn't killed off around 80-90% of the Native populations in the Americas I think being a white person I would still be living in Europe. Europeans tried to colonize Africa and Asia but failed because the peoples who lived there had previous contact with European diseases. That's why Europeans had such an easy time taking the Americas for themselves. The Natives still gave up a pretty good fight imagine if 80-90% of the population hadn't died out? For some context look at what happened to the Vikings (the most badass killers according to many people) they settled in North America and then got the fuck outta there when the Natives kicked their asses.

What? No they didn't.

Ugh. That had little to do with the reason they fell. First of all, we can not verify the claims that agriculture production went down, because we have so little census data left, as well as so little literature written at the time covering the time.

The Roman Empire was far from crumbling. While in the 200's AD, they had their bad stretch of emperoros and murders, when the Goths came in 376, the Roman Empire was far from crumbling. Also, the Goths as well as many of the other Germanic tribes that came into the empire, had no intention of destroying it. They wanted to live the way the Romans did, which they considered luxurious and comforting, where there was not always the ever present danger of raiders and war, or at least not as much as it would be living in their tribes outside the empire. I would go as far as to say, that up until Stilicho's death, and the sacking of Rome, the Roman empire was not crumbling. ALaric, wanted to be a part of the Roman Empire, and was actually chosen as the master general after Stilicho's death. However, Stilicho's daughter took advantage of the anti-german sentiment, and declared him a public enemy, forcing him to march on, and sack Rome.

lmao you know nothing about history the Vikings settled in North America you twat.... I suppose you believe Columbus was the first European to discover the Americas?

and you're totally right an Empire that isn't crumbling lets frontier tribes to sack Rome, when an Empire falls it had to have been crumbling before hand. Also you're totally right they wanted to be Roman and have all the luxuries that's why the Roman Empire still proudly stands today as an example for the world. Oh how the Goths, Vandals and Visigoths had such pleasurable lives and how Roman art, architecture, military style lived on in the Western Empire. The Western Empire changed and could no longer be called Roman when the Germanic leaders took over so it can't be said the Roman Empire of the west survived. It ended when Rome was sacked.

The Roman Empire was falling before the tribes came and finished the job however. It was like a wounded animal and the Germans came in for the final slit of the throat. Who was the Emperor that lead the Romans when Rome was sacked? If he was such a competent leader why is it that he's not famous like Augustus or Hadrian? They had shitty leadership which did a shitty job at ruling. Hence the constant moving of the capital from Rome to Mediolanium to Ravenna. They were weak and could not properly defend themselves. You cannot say that the Roman Empire was not crumbling before Alaric sacked Rome.

I didn't mean to say the main reason but a big reason, you got me there. But how can you completely ignore their slave labour economy? In industrialization I don't mean by inventing the steam engine. I just meant that slave labour was only good as long as you had slaves coming in from conquered territories which slowed down significantly when Rome wasn't conquering as much.They didn't innovate which lead to decay and inflation. The wealth of Rome dried up when Constantine moved to the Eastern capital.
(Double post merged by Bart. You're welcome.)

I'll read the rest later I have to go to school now. But yes, I know the Vikings got there before Columbus. I even think the Polynesians got to South America before the Europeans as well.

Meh, Pathfinder was an okay movie.

Lol. The Germanic tribes that entered Rome, namely the Goths, did not want to destroy the Roman Empire. Again, they came because they wanted to be a part of the Roman Empire. However, the Romans did not want them, and basically said fuck you to them, so they fought their way in by force. They continued to raid and plunder for what they needed, until the Romans agreed to settle them on some land. Time and time again however, the Roman emperors broke their promises of land, and tried to crush the Germanic tribes (again, mainly the Goths) and failed miserably every time, getting their land plundered and raided, until they gave the barbarians more favorable terms. What people don't know, is up until the very end, Alaric wanted to be a Roman, and considered himself one. If it wasn't for Stilicho's daughter, he would have picked up where Stilicho left off, as master general of the Western Roman Empire.

The Roman Empire fell in 1453 AD, when the Ottoman Turks took over Constantinople. The Western Roman Empire came to an end in 476 AD when Romulus Augustulus was disposed of and sent off into retirement by Odoaecer.

What everyone forgets is, Stilicho was very close to getting rid of the major problems facing the empire at the time. (At least specific ones, not the overral structural problems, but the actual physical problems facing the empire). All he had to do was beat Constantine, and all the major problems he had faced when he assumed power as master general (the son of Valentinian was technically the emperor but he held effective control of everything). He had brought Alaric over to his side, and Alaric was supposed to succeed him as master general. But again, due to the anti-german sentiment raised up by his daughter and some other enemies of his (he was part Vandal), the Romans tried and had him killed. Alaric was chosen as the new master general, and was supposed to pick up where Stilicho left off and finish off Constantine. However, again, due to the anti german sentiment, Stilicho's daughter convinced Rome to declare him an enemy of Rome, and despite his best efforts to negotiate, he was forced into marching on, and sacking Rome. That's when the Western ROman Empire really started to go down hill.

Didn't innovate? Mind you, the Romans had the most effective sanitation system and road network that ever existed up until the 19th-20th century. An aqueduct in Spain built by the Romans was used up until the 20th century. The carriages the Romans used were just as good as the ones used up until the 19th century. And the Romans when they did not conquer groups of people and make them slaves, traded for slaves from Germanic and Dacian chieftans across the Rhine.

not necessarily in chronological order
the discovery of fire
the rise of the roman empire
Julius Cesar's death
the fall of the roman empire
the rise of christianity
the crusades
the rise of islam
the jihads
printing press
the invention and use of guns
the 7 year war (the war that Britain got control over new France)
Britain getting control over india
the industrial revolution
the Napoleonic wars
the discovery of the new world
the colonization of the new world
american revolution
the British north america act
world war 1
world war 2
the rise of the soviet union
the Korean war
the space race
the fall of the soviet union

You just named almost every signifigant event in human history. Bravo.

And significant events in human history changed the world, did they not?

I know, I said bravo for him being able to think of all those off the top of his head.

Seems legit.

Actually, the birth of Jesus Christ. I dare anybody to claim something has had a larger impact than that bad boy right there.

What about Muhammad?

Yes, you are correct; Muhammad is the most influential person in the world, if you're in doubt, search it up.

The only reason Muhammed was so "influential" was due to the percieved threat to Christendom. Without Christ there was no perception of such a threat.