The Roman Empire

The Roman Empire fell of multiple reasons. Some say it was because leaders were corrupted or it was economic issues. The reasons that will be talked about further on are, surrounding cities invaded Rome, Christianity spread, and their borders became to hard to control.

They had been pushing since before World War I. The Indians were promised in the 1930’s that they would be granted independence but

Some policies and institutions of the Roman Republic were useful to help them succeed in conquering first Italy and then the Mediterranean world. Before of the institution of the republic, the romans were a monarchy since their beginning and they were basically a pastoral people. Rome suffer several changes and improvements under the control of the Etruscan kings. The Etruscan were civilization settled north of Rome in Etruria, and they once had control over almost all the Italic peninsula. The Etruscans influences in Rome were profound, they transformed Rome from a pastoral community to a city (91). The Etruscan built the street and roads that help the development of temples, markets, shops, streets, and houses. They basically brought urbanization to Rome. It is fairly to say that the Rome republic was a fusion between the elements of the Etruscan civilization and the Rome elements. The combination of the different political institutions and policies made the Romans succeed in their conquest territories.

Upon their return to Palestine after their release from exile, the Jews were struggling to “maintain their religious and social identity” (Wenham & Walton, 2011, p. 7) and found themselves in the midst of great military powers, first the Greeks, and then the Romans. Their influences on the Jews were remarkable. This essay will examine the Roman Empire in the 1st century AD by describing a typical Greco-Roman city, then discuss the various levels of Roman administrative structure, explain where local authority resided in the cities/villages of 1st-century Palestine, and finally support with Scripture the structure of authority within the Gospels and Acts.

For several years, scholars and historians from around the world have been debating about the Roman Republic’s constitution. Many have described their constitution as purely democratic; however, others find aspects of the Roman Republic characterizing despotism or an aristocracy. So, which form of government could best describe the Roman Republic? Currently, there is no exact answer, but because of meticulous studies, observations were recorded and assumptions were made. From a selection of resources, the most common claim inquired that the Roman Republic should not be considered an accurate form of a democracy and there are a collection of reasons as to why this is.

Many events played large roles in the middle ages. The fall of the Western Roman Empire occurred when the invading army named the Visigoths invaded Rome. For three days, they destroyed everything in their paths. Western Rome did not have effective royal progression. They set up officers as rulers, who were immediately removed by adversary petitioners. The reasons why Western Rome fell includes multiple invasions by Barbarian tribes, economic hardship, being too reliant on slave labor, government corruption and political instability, and lastly Christianity became popular and the traditional values of Rome were lost. Another important event was whenever Charlemagne became an emperor in Western Rome. In his quest of becoming an emperor, he became King of the

The fall of the Roman Empire was an ambiguous process that many historians still ponder, and the components that made up the deterioration of the Empire remain obscure. However, what many historians fail to realize that the decline of the Roman Empire was the epitome of cause and effect. Properly analyzing the history behind the process leads historians to realize that it was a chain of circumstances that began with the political corruption of the Western empire. It was the catalyst for many of the other principal reasons for Rome’s decline. Political corruption was a fundamental factor that led to economic failure and superfluous military spending, all which contributed to the fall of Rome. Document 3, Roman ambassador to the Huns, 449 CE, illustrates how political corruption tore apart

From invaders to weak rulers Rome as seen it all, but could they have prevented it? Rome used to have a strong army, and could fight off any invaders, but as time went on everyone in the city became weak. The rulers, army, and citizens all weakened. With basically no ruler and no one to protect Rome, the city had become soft. Some may say that foreign invasion was what caused Rome's decline, but the primary reasons for Rome's decline were their weak military and their political corruption. They made huge mistakes with the military, mistakes such as they got rid of armor and pared drills. Not only did they stop fighting practice, but the emperors didn't care about laws being broken. The ruler and the military were equally weak.

The Roman government was democratic when it came to the citizens. The citizens could elect their own officials, and the officials were supposed to represent every level of Roman society. There were many types of officials. The two consuls were the chief officials of Rome. Once elected, they served for two years (Trueman, Chris). One of their most important powers was controlling the army (Government under Roman Republic). When they were unsure of a course of action, they were advised by the Senate, a council of around six hundred male citizens (Trueman, Chris). Those six hundred men were usually from wealthy patrician families and were the ones in charge of making the laws and controlling the spending. Contrary to the election of the other officials, the Senate was appointed by the current Consuls. Once they were appointed, they served for life. When one member died, another was chosen in their place (Government).

The Roman Republic was a “democratic” republic, which allowed first citizens to vote, and to choose their governors in the senate (Hence, their consuls). However, it was a nation ruled by its aristocracy, and, consequently, the entire Republic`s power was concentrated in a few individuals. Furthermore, the Senate was controlled by Patricians, which directed the government by using wealth to buy control and power over the decisions of the senate and the consuls. This situation aroused the inconformity of the people; as result, a civil war took place in the Republic (destroying it), and then the Roman Empire was born.

The principle of the Roman government was to function for the people, hence classifying them as a republic (Res Publica or the Thing or Matter of the People). Before the commencement of the Republic, Rome was ruled by a line of Etruscan kings called Tarquins. The

After the fall of Tarquinius Superbus’ reign of Rome, the Brutus and Collatinus led patrician revolution leads to the beginning of a new era in Roman history: the republic. The early republic is mostly a patrician favoring institute and created it in order “to restore power and privileges that popular royal tyrants had usurped from them” and to make it “difficult for any one aristocrat to acquire too much power at the expense of the rest” (Ward 59). Greek historian, Polybius, in his book, Histories, talks about the greatness of this Roman republic and its constitution by claiming: “Now the elements by which the Roman constitution was controlled were three in number, … and all aspects of the administration were, taken separately, so fairly

What kind of technology in the Roman Empire affect its growth the most? I will be investigating from the start of the Roman Empire in 753 BCE to when the Western Roman Empire fell in 476 CE. This investigation will have a broad scope while investigating and include things from the Roman Legion to aqueducts and concrete. This investigation will not include technology that was not widely used to better the Roman Empire. The research question will answer my question by conducting research on how different groups of technology made the Roman Empire better based off of their potential uses and different contributions to Roman society.

Francis Schaeffer (n.d.) believes that the Roman Empire collapsed because it’s governing style lacked core fundamental standards. The empires growth was based on winning battles, seizing a great portion of the adversary’s land, turning them into slave workers, and military personnel (Rawls, 2016, p. 163). Indisputably, Rome’s expansionism techniques, inhumane treatment to others, and disregard to humankind eventually led to its decline. Unfortunately, the governmental body and citizens were not unified in their moral or ethical cultural values. Rome became a chaotic, every man for themselves society which made it difficult for the State to control undesirable behavior. In addition, Christianity also had an influence of Rome’s culmination, there was religious toleration by the emperor and the state, under one condition, that

Augustus is arguably the single most important figure in Roman history. In the course of his long and spectacular career, he put an end to the advancing decay of the Republic and established a new basis for Roman government that was to stand for three centuries. This system, termed the "Principate," was far from flawless, but it provided the Roman Empire with a series of rulers who presided over the longest period of unity, peace, and prosperity that Western Europe, the Middle East and the North African seaboard have known in their entire recorded history. Even if the rulers themselves on occasion left much to be desired, the scale of Augustus 's achievement in establishing the system cannot be overstated. Aside from the immense importance of Augustus 's reign from the broad historical perspective, he himself is an intriguing figure: at once tolerant and implacable, ruthless and forgiving, brazen and tactful. Clearly a man of many facets, he underwent three major political reinventions in his lifetime and negotiated the stormy and dangerous seas of the last phase of the Roman Revolution with skill and foresight. With Augustus established in power and with the Principate firmly rooted, the internal machinations of the imperial household provide a fascinating glimpse into the one issue that painted this otherwise gifted organizer and politician into a corner from which he could find no easy exit: the problem of the succession. [[1]]