alt Hacker Newsthey are on point regarding people moving rather than dying, but that kinda proves the point that situations can and do get worse sometimes for a whole generation.
they are on point regarding people moving rather than dying, but that kinda proves the point that situations can and do get worse sometimes for a whole generation.
Historic sources indicate massive workforce (and military force) shortages where once were none, which means that the total population must have dropped significantly.
Rome was able to field huge armies by the 3rd century BC already, originally sourced from the Italian peninsula alone. In contrast, when the Eastern Roman forces finally defeated the Goths in the 540s, they were unable to hold Italy against a relatively minor Langobard invasion in 568, which is estimated to some 20 000 warriors. Why? For the lack of soldiers. They just couldn't put together the necessary garrisons and feed them from local sources.
That would have been unthinkable in 168. Anyone who would seriously want to conquer Italy at that time would have to field at least ten times as many soldiers.
In contrast, the Eastern Roman Empire at home was still able to field massive armies and even send some expeditions overseas, because the more developed civilizational structure was still present there, and with it, much higher population density.