Needed: Expert on Romans

[Nihonius Legio]

I'm still hoping to hear from someone soon, my essay is stuck

[Praefectusclassis]

I think Carlton has a good point. If you look for the influence of Rome throughout history, it IS going to be mostly cultural. Think, for example, of good ol' Vegetius who was read well into the Renaissance for advice on how to recruit, train and use your army. And guess which structures of state the Framers looked at when they had to come up with a Constitution?
The obvious one is of course that the relative peace and safe communications within the Roman empire allowed Christianity to spread until it got the 'stamp of approval' that made it the official religion for the Roman empire. Not really influence of the Roman Empire itself, but it was certainly an 'enabler'. Perhaps the most important justification for its continued importance is the fascination it still holds for thousands of people? I mean, if you can have an industry publishing books, magazines, movies, producing models, weapons and reenactment equipment and all that about a society, it means something (well, it means that it's at least as interesting as completely made up civilizations...)

[Nihonius Legio]

Very true, our languages, cultures, and religion for some peeps were all greatly influenced by the Romans. It's an interesting thought to think how history and the world would be different without them.

[Robert Vermaat]

The city of Rome fell in 410

No it didn't! Twas but a scratch... 8)

Seriously, Rome did not 'fall' in 410, it was plundered by an army of disgruntled soldiers who by all legal accounts were in Roman service at the time. Sure, the main language of that army was probably not Latin, but then this would not have been strickingly odd at the time, it had happened before. They did not even take the city in a military action. Rome survived and continued to be a major city, it was not even the worst hit by the severe economic crisis that really ended the empire. It was sacked again in 455 and 472, apparently being rich enough to be sacked. Both occasions, btw, the general in question being a pretender for supreme Roman power (Gaiseric and Ricimer).

and its last Emperor was deposed in 476.

No he wasn't. Julius Nepos, deposed but legally the last western emperor, died in 480 when he prepaired to return to Italy.

The last Roman Emperor in direct succession was deposed in 1453.

I guess that by 'direct succession' you mean that after one guy was killed, died or left the throne, another was there to take the job? In that case the empire ended much sooner. How about in 1204 when the crusade took Constantinople?

[Praefectusclassis]

after one guy was killed, died or left the throne, another was there to take the job?

By that standard, you might say it ended waaaaay earlier. It's all a matter of legitimizing power. 8)

[Nihonius Legio]

This is a little off topic, but I have some (what I think is) good news. Through my college I was able to have a copy of The Armour of Imperial Rome, by Robinson, shipped to my school for me to borrow until mid April. Though I'm sure it's probably (ok, is) illegal, I'm planning on making a photocopy of the book. A $500 price tag is outragious for a book that ought to still be in print. This book is AWESOME! I'm also thinking of seeing if I can actually by the book from the library at a much lower price, if they have no idea what it is now worth. I doubt they would have let me borrow it if they knew it was worth $500. I wonder, is it illegal for me to post some pics from it on here? It might be really useful.