Question

have have all kinds of exciting stories to tell and disputes to argue. but unlike the story of the development of the republic and the growth of imperial power, which revolutionised almost every aspect of the world of rome, there was no fundamental change in the structure of roman politics, empire, or society between the end of the first century bce and the end of the second century ce. from mary beard, spqr: a history of ancient rome (new york: liveright publishing corporation, 2015), 335-336. what is beard’s claim about how the creation of the roman empire affected continuity and change in rome? choose 1 answer: a the late republic was a period of revolutionary political and social change; the early empire was a period of political and social stability b both the late republic and the early empire were periods of revolutionary political and social change c the late republic was a period of political and social stability; the early empire was a period of revolutionary political and social change d both the late republic and early empire were periods of political and social stability

Explanation:

To determine Beard's claim, we analyze the text: It says the development of the Republic and growth of imperial power (late Republic) revolutionized Rome, while between the end of the first century BCE (start of early empire) and end of second century CE, there was no fundamental change (stability).

• Option A: Matches the analysis (late Republic: revolutionary change; early empire: stability).
• Option B: Incorrect, as the early empire had no fundamental change (not revolutionary).
• Option C: Incorrect, as late Republic was revolutionary, early empire was stable (opposite of this option).
• Option D: Incorrect, as late Republic was revolutionary (not stable).

Answer:

A. The late Republic was a period of revolutionary political and social change; the early empire was a period of political and social stability