state building: roman empire years there is no significant history of change at rome. autocracy represented, in a sense, an end of 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. which of the following evidence supports this claim? choose all answers that apply: a the political structures augustus created changed very little over two centuries b autocratic government always produces stability c there were many events and conflicts that changed the structures of the republic in the first century bce d there continued to be internal events and disputes in rome

Question

Accepted Answer

# Brief Explanations:
- **Option A**: The claim is about no fundamental change in Roman political, imperial, or social structure between the end of the first century BCE and the end of the second century CE. Augustus' political structures changing very little over two centuries supports the idea of no fundamental change in politics.
- **Option B**: The claim is about the Roman Empire's structure, not a general statement about autocratic governments. Also, "always" is an overgeneralization and not relevant to supporting the specific claim about Rome's structure during that period.
- **Option C**: The claim focuses on the period after the first century BCE (up to the second century CE) having no fundamental change. Information about changes in the Republic in the first century BCE is about a different time period and doesn't support the claim about the later period's lack of change.
- **Option D**: The text says there were events, battles, etc., but no fundamental structural change. The fact that there were internal events and disputes but no fundamental change (implied by the claim) is consistent, but more directly, Option A is better. However, the question says "choose all that apply". Wait, re - evaluating: The claim is that there was no fundamental change in structure between end of 1st century BCE and end of 2nd century CE. Option A shows political structures (Augustus' creation) changed little over two centuries (which would be within that time frame), so it supports. Option D: The text says "there were all kind of events... but no fundamental change". So the presence of events and disputes (as in D) along with no fundamental change is part of the claim's context, but does it support? The claim is about no fundamental change, so D is just stating there were events (which the text already says), but not directly supporting the "no fundamental change" part. Wait, maybe I made a mistake. Let's re - read the claim: "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".

Option A: Augustus' political structures (created around end of 1st century BCE) changed very little over two centuries (so within the time frame of the claim), so this shows political structure didn't change, supporting the claim.

Option B: "always" is too absolute, and the claim is about Rome, not all autocratic governments, so B is out.

Option C: Talks about changes in the Republic in the first century BCE, which is before the time frame of the claim (the claim is about after end of 1st century BCE), so C is about a different period and doesn't support the claim about the later period's lack of change.

Option D: The text says "there were all kind of events... but no fundamental change". So D is just restating that there were events, but the claim is about no fundamental change. So D doesn't support the claim's main point (no fundamental change), it just states there were events (which the text already acknowledges but says didn't lead to fundamental change). So only A supports? Wait, maybe I misread. Let's check again. The question is "which of the following evidence supports this claim". The claim is that between end of 1st century BCE and end of 2nd century CE, no fundamental change in structure.

Option A: Augustus' political structures changed very little over two centuries. Augustus was around the end of 1st century BCE, so two centuries would be up to 2nd century CE, so this shows political structure didn't change, supporting the claim.

Option D: "There continued to be internal events and disputes in Rome" – the text says there were events but no fundamental change. So D is just saying events happened, but the claim is about no fundamental change. So D doesn't support the claim's conclusion, it's just a premise the text already gives. So only A? Wait, maybe the question has a different intended answer. Wait, let's re - examine the options:

- A: Supports because it shows political structure (Augustus' creation) had little change over the relevant time period.
- B: Incorrect, as explained.
- C: Incorrect, as it's about a different time period.
- D: The text says "there were all kind of events... but no fundamental change". So D is just stating that events continued, but the claim is about no fundamental change. So D doesn't support the claim that there was no fundamental change, it just says events happened (which the text already says, but the claim is about the lack of fundamental change despite events). So only A is correct? Wait, maybe I made a mistake. Let's think again. The claim is that there was no fundamental change in structure. So evidence that supports this would be something showing structure didn't change. Option A shows political structure (Augustus' work) changed little over two centuries (the time period of the claim), so that's direct evidence. Option D: events and disputes, but no mention of structure, so it doesn't support the "no fundamental change in structure" part. So the correct answer is A.
# Answer:
A. The political structures Augustus created changed very little over two centuries

Sovi.AI - AI Math Tutor

QUESTION IMAGE

Question

Explanation:

Answer: