Question

state building: roman empire
history. of course there were all kind of events,
battles, assassinations, political stand - offs, new
initiatives and inventions; and the participants would
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.
another historian might best challenge beards
argument by showing that
choose 1 answer:
a social structures in the first century ce were very
different than in the second century ce
b the same political offices that existed under
augustus still existed at the end of the second
century ce
c there were no \events, battles, assassinations,
political standoffs, new initiatives and inventions\
d the power of roman emperors was not really
absolute

Explanation:

To challenge Beard's argument that there was no fundamental change in Roman politics, empire, or society between the end of the first century BCE and the end of the second century CE, a historian would need to show a significant change. Option A shows a difference in social structures between the first and second centuries CE, which challenges the claim of no fundamental change. Option B supports Beard's argument (same offices exist). Option C is incorrect as the passage says there were such events. Option D is about emperor power, not directly about change over the period.

Answer:

A. social structures in the first century CE were very different than in the second century CE