The Fall of Ancient Rome

What Florus is conveying here is that overexpansion of the empire caused wars that were unnecessary, which would have needlessly dwindled Rome's military numbers, wasted it's already low military funds, and caused deaths of soldiers that could have been put to work elsewhere. Overexpansion is also the reason why Rome was so vulnerable to invasions in the first place – if Rome had kept its territory contained in a smaller area, it wouldn't have to spend money on maintaining more lands, meaning that it would have kept a strong infrastructure and would have made it harder for any invaders to attack.
             As people began to migrate to the Roman Empire from what is now modern-day Scandinavia and Germany, foreign invasions of western Roman territory began at around 300 CE. This period of time was called the Migration Period. Many attempts were made by different groups of people to invade, and eventually overtake, Rome, but the main, and most powerful, effective, and memorable invaders were the Vandals, a tribe of people who came from East Germany and Poland, and the Visigoths, another tribe of people who migrated from the same area. Many attempts were made by the Roman military to stop the advance of the Visigoths, but on August 24th, 410, they successfully arrived at the city of Rome and began to sack it by destroying statues, buildings, and houses, and killing anyone who tried to stop them. The Visigoths then had control over Rome for a long time. In another ancient Roman text, a man who is trying to sail back to his home in Gaul writes: "Since Tuscany and since the Aurelian highway, after suffering the outrages of Goths with fire or sword, can no longer control forest with homestead or river with bridge, it is better to entrust my sails to the wayward sea" (Rutilius). What this person is trying to say is that they would rather set sail away from Rome than having to deal with the Visigoths.