This is a great topic. The time surrounding the fall of the West has really been romanticized as a dramatic clash of cultures in which the Roman way of life completely collapsed and gave way to a barbarian dark age. The reality is far more complex.

​

You have to keep in mind that the barbarian groups, Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Franks and others, were not new to the Roman world. They had been active parts of the society for well over a century, interacting in both military and commerce. The main difference between these barbarians and previous groups that had been absorbed into the Roman world was that these newer groups had been able to maintain their societies within the Roman sphere, whereas previous tribes had been disarmed and separated throughout the Empire. One of the main aspects of these new barbarian interactions with the Romans was the Foederati. These were portions of the Roman military apparatus, varying in size, that were entirely consisting of barbarian troops and led by barbarian commanders. The Foederati over the years became a powerful force politically, as well as militarily. Through this influence the commanders were able to achieve high ranking offices within the Empire. For example, Stilicho, a barbarian commander, was essentially the de facto ruler of the West for many years.

​

These factors are important when considering the fall of the West to the barbarians. The West did not fall to barbarians who were entirely foreign to the Roman ways, but instead they were a group of people who were well versed in Roman culture, military and administration.

​

This is clearly evident, not only in the case of Odoacer, but many of the barbarian leaders who had taken over the remains of the West. These leaders, even after the collapse of the Western Empire, attempted to cement their legitimacy through the use of Imperial titles, often sought through the approval of the Eastern Empire. The way to think about these titles is after the fact appointments to Imperial Governor of a province. So in this regard, nominally speaking, after the coup by Odoacer, Italy was under the control of the Eastern Empire. Of course, the East would have had no practical means of exercising this control.

​

Following the coup, Odoacer did his best to maintain the existing power structures of the region. A sign of this is the coins that were produced in the region during his rule. While clearly positioning himself as the one in power, he also made sure to maintain his story that he was ruling under the authority granted to him by the rightful Western Roman Emperor Julius Nepos.

​

Odoacer, like many of the barbarian leaders at the time, was an Arian. Arians were a heretical branch of the mainstream Nicene Christian Church. Though he was an Arian, he was ruling over primarily Nicene Christians. To strengthen his control over the area, he did not suppress the Nicene Christians, but did allow for the expansion of Arian Christianity, which had been suppressed under previous administrations. Following the collapse of Odoacer, Theoderic of the Ostrogoths became famous for his tolerance. Many barbarian leaders throughout the lands that were formerly the Western Empire, were well known for their tolerance of religions, when compared to that of the previous Roman administrators. This is likely due to the fact that their own faith was in the minority. One region where this was not the case was in the Kingdom of the Vandals, but it should be noted that the Vandals were not recognized as legitimate governors by the Eastern Empire. This may show that leaders like Odoacer needed to treat Nicene Christians will benevolence to maintain their Imperial titles.

​

The last point that I would like to make is the legal systems at the time. As I said previously, these barbarians had been a part of the Roman world for some time. Yet, during this time they had maintained the cohesion of their tribes. One aspect of this is that they had maintained the right to judge their members by their own laws. As such there were two legal frameworks in existence, one for Romans and one for Barbarians. This status quo was maintained even after the collapse of the West and the rise of the Barbarians successor kingdoms. Rulers such as Odoacer maintained the Roman laws for Romans. In the land of the Visigoths (the Iberian Peninsula), the King Recceswinth solidified his place in history by the creation of the Liber Iudiciorum, as legal code book in which Romans and Babarians were subject to the same legal codes.

​

All of these facts are evidence that the barbarian leaders who had taken over from the Western Empire did not consider themselves to be strangers to the Roman ways. Many of them wanted to expose their peoples more to Roman life and take on Roman culture. In the cities of Italy, it is likely that life did not change much at all for the residents of the Empire. The name of the ruler changed, but most of the local leaders remained, they were still subject to the same rules and had to pay the same taxes. Even the troops that patrolled their streets were the same. Consider also that the Roman world was primarily an agricultural one. For those in the fields and on the estates, there would have been no change at all.