1
Based on Document A, What message might these frequent and violent changes in leadership have sent to people living outside the Roman Empire?Is there any connection between Document A and Document B? Explain your thinking.Is there a possible connection between Document C and Document B?Based on Document D, How can you use this document to help explain the decline of the Roman Empire?Based on Document E, How can you use this document to help explain the decline of the Roman Empire?Consider the various causes of decline presented by the six documents in this Mini-Q: political assassinations, military problems like armor and conscription, legal injustice, foreign invasions, and natural disasters. Which of these do you regard as the most important three causes? Explain.
2
The message that might have sent to people of the frequent and violent changes in leadership of the Roman Empire is that the empire doesn’t chose right emperors to rule their empire. In the chart above it states that 2 or more ruler were killed in battle or they have committed suicide.
Document A talks about the weakening of the government. Document B talks about the weakening of the army. That is the connection between Document A and Document B.
Yes, there is a possible connection between document C and document B. There were so many invasions. Another connection is that the soldiers got rid of their protection that means that wouldn’t help with winning the invaders.
I can use this document to help explain the decline of the Roman Empire because they wrote very rude things about the Huns. When they read it they might get really mad, and possibly want to start a war.
A massive movement of a succession of peoples from eastern Europe and Asia came progressively into the empire. The Goths were pushed by Huns and associated peoples, and sought sanctuary on the Roman side of the Rhine. The Romans settled them there, and used them as a shield. The Roman army progressively was based on Gothic manpower and government progressively included the new people's.
Considering the various causes of decline presented by the six documents in this Mini-Q; political assassinations, military problems like armor and conscription, legal injustice, foreign invasions, and naturals disasters. The one I regard as the most important three causes are assassinations, military problems like armor and conscription, and natural disasters. I think that because assassination the governor led to so many governors you did not know what to do. The military problems were little that there wasn’t enough people. They asked the governor to remove their protection. Known as their breastplates and helmets.
3
That the people did not want that ruler so they assassinated them. In the chart most of the Emperors were assassinated s that might mean that they didn't want an emperor or they didn't like that person so they assassinated them.
Document A talks about the weakening of the government but document B talks about the weakening of the army.
Yes there is a connection because if they were so many invasions and the soldiers got rid of their protection that means that that wouldn't help with winning the invaders.
Well because they wrote mean things about the Huns so when they read it they might get really mad so they would start war.
This explains the fall of Rome because the Romans liked being conquered by the Huns so they were going to the huns and their population was getting smaller.
The most important 3 causes are assassinations,military problems like armor and conscription, and natural disasters. I think that because because assassination the governor led to so many governors you didn't know what to do, then the military problems there were very little people and they asked the governor to remove their protection like their breastplates and helmets and then the natural disaster killed some of the people and slowly there there was a fall of the Roman empire.
4
I think the message to this was that most of the rulers, who were killed by their own people, might have been the message that they were not such good leaders, or not many people liked them. I also think that people in Rome, would have feel threatened or frightened that so many of their leaders died in a short period of time, but the ones who wanted those to happen, could have been part of the reason or cause of the leader’s death. I got this information by looking at the time they ruled, because since so many of them died during a short period of time, people would have been frightened. Yes, there is a connection between Document A and Document B, this is because in Document A, it states that the government got weak in Rome, which could have led to loss of money and less armors and even less soldiers. This is also a huge fall for the emperors, because as the government got weak, their power lowered and they got weak, it even stated that many of the emperors were killed, in Document B it said that the soldiers did not have armors, which goes back and connects with Document A and the weakening in the government. Here is my textual evidence; ¨As Rome drifted through the 3rd century, survived the 4th, and staggered into the 5th, one general problem was apparent - life at the top was getting soft. Upper-class Romans were losing their edge. When a country is on the make, when energy and hope are high, leaders and their people are more willing to work hard and to sacrifice. When the goal appears to have been reached, it is easy to get lazy. The evidence for this was a love of luxury, a decline in the quality of literature, even a decision by upper- class Romans to have fewer children because child raising was a bother. But there was more to Rome's decline than developing a soft belly. By the 5th century CE, when the city was sacked by outside invaders, Rome had been badly weakened by a number of problems. Parts of the empire would survive, particularly in Constantinople and the East, but the old heart of the empire - Italy and the West - was shattered.” and in Document B, ¨Therefore, they first asked the emperor to set aside the breastplates . . . and then the helmets. So our soldiers fought the Goths without any protection for chest and head and were often beaten by archers.¨ So they got weak in the government, which resulted in less protection of the army and lazier emperors. Yes, there is a possible connection between Document C and B because in Document B it said that the soldiers were weak and gave up, ran away and left their army hopeless, so as a result the others got killed and the enemies, would take over and invasion of people would fill in. So in Document C, as it shows the people invading, it also shows the Document B is evidence and a reason on why Rome fell apart. Since this document, document D, talks about a historian who wrote about a group of Asians called the Huns, and what he thinks of that group, it does not really have anything to do with the decline of the Roman Empire. So i think that i cannot really use this document to help explain the decline of the Roman Empire unless it talked more about it and or if they had a war or any type of a fight. On the other side, where it says "they are unthinking animals" in the text, the Huns and Romans might have had some type of a war and dislike between one another, or it could have referred for the time after the Huns conquered the land. I could use this document to help explain what caused the decline of the Roman Empire by stating out that a person who lived during the time, complained and even told Priscus about Rome and the horrible things that happened in Rome. Plus to that, it talks about the Huns conquering their lands, and the Roman Empire changed. The governor, the taxes, comparison between wealthy and poor people, and that in order to have peace and justice all these people had to go through trouble. So as a result, Rome got weaker and weaker because people would not pay taxes or poor people would not do what they should have done and it would cause the decline of the Roman Empire. Another reason would be that few Romans themselves wanted to leave Rome. So there are many answers for it, but the main reason is that Rome was conquered by the Huns. I think that i would regard military problems like armor and conscription, foreign invasion and natural disasters as the most important three causes because since the Romans did not have armors and shields to protect themselves, they would be killed and killed over and over again and their government and military would only get worse and never get anymore power. So to the effect of this would most likely cause foreign invasions and enemies to come invade into Rome and conquer over the land, so if the land is conquered, then most likely they would capture the Romans as slaves because they had no more power and Rome would fall apart completely. Lastly, the natural disasters would wipe out millions of people and Rome would have less soldiers and less money and people would suffer. This is basically because the government would have to pay for the people and the money that is not given to them anymore, meaning, since lives were lost, the dead people could not pay for their taxes and if the government could not either, the people would suffer, even this was stated in the text. Overall, people would suffer and their land would be conquered.
5
The violent actions on the emperor's might show that they were unpopular and the people did not like them. This is shown because the emperors only ruled for 2.3 years at a time. More that half of them were assassinated. The people of Rome might be scared that there empire was unsafe, and that the emperors were making bad choices.There is a connection between Document A and B. The connection is that both of talk about why the Roman military fell apart. Document A says how the decline was caused by the laziness of the soldiers. “But when, because of negligence and laziness, parade ground drills were abandoned, the customary armor began to seem heavy since the soldiers rarely ever wore it.” In document B the reason for a weak and empty army because of exempt status of draft. “There can be little doubt that the weaknesses of the late Roman army were largely due to the eventual failure . . . to enforce regular conscription [draft of soldiers] .” There is a connection between the two documents. The connection is that they both have to do with the military. In document B they talk about what caused the military to fall apart. In document C they talk about how 6 tribes invaded Roman. The tribes wouldn’t have been able to invade if the army hadn’t fallen apart.This document helps explain the decline of the Roman Empire because if the Romans hated the Huns so much they would not have let them take over. Since the military was a low Romans were not even able to fight to Huns, who, to them, were disgusting savages. If the text says, “Fired with an overwhelming desire for seizing the property of others, these swift-moving and ungovernable people make their destructive way amid the pillage and slaughter of those who live around them.” If the Huns were to kill anyone around them you’d think the Roman army would be on top of that.This document helps explain the decline of the empire because if the Romans whose towns got conquered by the Huns liked the Huns better that before. The text reads, “He] . . . considered his new life . . . better than his old life among the Romans, and the reasons he gave were as follows: . . . The condition of [Roman] subjects in time of peace [is worse than war] . . . taxes are very severe, and unprincipled men inflict injuries on others .” If Rome changed there ways than maybe Rome would have been able to get back on top. I think the most important three causes were natural disaster, foreign invasions, and political assassination. I choose natural disaster because natural disaster can ruin a lot of things. In Rome the Earthquake wiped out a lot of the population. Romans had to hire Germanic soldiers to guard Rome. The text says, “Economic life worsened in consequence. Recruitment of troops became more difficult, so the empire was increasingly reduced to hiring Germanic soldiers to guard its frontiers. The need to pay troops added to the demands on the state's budget, just as declining production cut into tax revenues.” If they had to pay the troops that’s more money being lost in Rome, which didn’t help. The 2nd cause I chose was foreign invasions. I chose foreign invasions because since Rome was such a strong empire the army had to be at a really low point for 6 tribes to be able to invade. On the map there were 6 different tribes and 18 different routes. A lot of the land was not able to fight back. The last cause a chose was political assassination. I chose it because I thought that is affected Rome a lot. If many of the rulers were assassinated that might send terror through Rome, causing chaos and mayhem. If you notice that the we have had 20 presidents in only fifty years and they were only in office for 2 years at a time you would get scared. Romans would start to feel unsafe and not able to trust their emperor.
6
The message these violent changes might be sending to the people living outside Rome, were that Rome is most likely a harsh empire, with strict, unfair emperors. I got my answer because most of the emperors were assassinated, which shows people that Romans did not like their leaders. That is the evidence I used to help me get my claim.There is a connection the Document A, and B. I know this because they are both talking about two of Rome’s downfalls. In the first one it shows how people did not like or agree with the roman emperors. In the second, it tells about the fall of the Roman army. These two faults of Rome made the empire weaker. Therefore, both of these documents connect.Yes. I say this because in document B and C, it tells about Rome’s decline because of the invaders. In document B, it says how the armies weakened themselves, and in C, it shows the map, and what empires invaded Rome. My evidence is that in B, it says, “ But when, because of negligence and laziness, round drills were abandoned.΅ This evidence shows how lazy the soldiers were. In C, it shows lines, gives names, and dates of Rome's invasions. This evidence led me to my answer.I can use this document to help explain the fall of the roman empire, because it explains some of the events that have happened to Rome, that led to its downfall. For example, in one paragraph it says, “ There can be little doubt that the weaknesses of the late Roman army
were largely due to the eventual failure . . . to enforce regular conscription [draft of soldiers]” This shows that this is just one of the ways the roman empire declined.		I can use this document because it shows what some of the people think of the new laws. I know this because in the article it tells me about the new rules that the Huns made for the romans. The rules made it harder for the less wealthy romans. This shows that most romans do not like these harsh laws.
I think the most important three causes are the plague, earthquake, and tsunami. I say this because the plague wiped out the majority of the Romans, and the earthquake and tsunami damaged many buildings, and took many lives. This event weakened the government. This evidence shows. That the plague, earthquake, and tsunami, are the most important causes.
7
 These frequent and violent changes in leadership may have told people living outside the Roman Empire that maybe they could attack them. They may think about how the Roman Empire is really distracted about all the difficulty with keeping one leader. This thought would make them want to attack the Roman Empire unexpectedly. The Assassinations from the chart also may have told them that they would be distracted by arresting the assassinators. I think the people living outside of Rome saw this as an oppertunity to attack the Roman Empire when they least expected it. I think there is a connection between Document A and Document B because it both explains how some leaders died in battle a lot which could mean that their soldiers were probably taken down easily which allowed them to get to the leader as explained in Document B. I found this information in Doc B and A. If soldiers were being killed and were starting to run away in battle, this meant that they would have to put their leaders at risk of being killed.There is a possible connection between Document C and Document B because they both show a comparison of how Rome weakened with their army. I found this information by searching in Doc B and then noticing how many attacks there were from different countries on Doc C. These documents compare when they talk about Rome soldiers being killed with no armor against so many different countries.I can use this document to help explain the decline of the Roman Empire because I can use it to explain how the Romans may have been slaughtered by the fierce warriors. I am aware of how fierce they are because of reading that they will slaughter of those who lived around them. I think the Roman soldiers may have been scared and might have ran away and have left behind their leaders which may have led to the fall of Rome.I can use this document to show the decline of the Roman Empire because it shows how the Romans preferred the Hun’s rules more than Rome’s Rules. I found this when yet again Priscus was talking about how he liked his new life more than his old life. Most of the Roman people were happy to be under the Hun’s rule because of their rules.I think the foreign invasions, the natural disasters, and the military problems with the soldiers not wearing armor. The reason why I would think that these would be the most important three causes because they all had a major loss of people in each cause. In the foreign invasions, soldiers died and even some Romans were happy to be with the new group called the Huns. I found this in Document E and C. The natural disasters practically wiped out so many people with a tsunami caused by an earthquake and a plague that killed off many people too. Since there were so many people who got killed, the government got barely any taxes than usual. I found this in Document F. Since the Roman soldiers refused to wear the armor, they were afraid at battle and started running instead of fighting which also meant that these soldiers were easily injured while in combat. This would also lead to exposing which is shown in Document A. I found my information in Document A and B.
8
The message that were sent to people because of all the frequent and violent changes in leadership was that they probably lost in a battle or they were bad leaders. I found this in the chart. According to the text many leaders were assassinated and none of them died of natural causes.
I believe that there is a connection between Document A and Document B. They both show the decline in Rome but just in different ways. I found this in both of the Documents. It shows that in Document A the years and causes of death of Roman emperors and how Rome was declining but in Document B it tells you in word rather than the chart.
There is a connection between Document C and B. They both explain and show the decline of the Roman empire but just in different ways. Document B tells you why they were losing in text while C tells you by showing you in a map. This evidence is in both of the Documents. This evidence shows how both of the documents connect
This document helps explain the decline of the Roman Empire because it tell us about one of the battles the Romans lost. It states “Fired with an overwhelming desire for seizing the property of others, these swift-moving and ungovernable people make their destructive way amid the pillage and slaughter of those who live around them”. This evidence prove that this document helps explain the decline of the Roman Empire.
This document helps explain the decline of the Roman Empire by showing the conversation of the Romans wanting to be conquered by the Huns. I found this in the note section and through out the whole text. It states “Priscus is reporting a conversation he had with a former Roman citizen whose land had been conquered by the Huns”. This shows the decline of the Roman Empire.

The most causes of decline where foreign invasions, military problems, and legal injustice. The foreign invasions happened the most out of all the causes. I found this document A,C, and D.
9
I think that people that lived outside Rome wouldn’t had want to come, since it was such a violent time, at least I wouldn’t had come.People were killing their emperors their leaders, probably the emperor’s “friends” were killing them, why would anyone from the outside would want to come.Rome was changing emperors almost every 2 years, every time a new leader, new rules new beliefs,it was a lot of changes for a citizen, and knowing that the leader that you maybe liked had just been killed is a lot for this people to handle, and to even make them want to come.Or maybe other empires might had realized that Rome was weak and was declining, so maybe they might thought about attacking, or taking over.In document A it shows you that about 4 emperors were killed in battle, which in my opinion shows that the army wasn’t as strong as it was before this 50 year period. Too it shows you that most of the emperors were assassinated, which I think shows you that the emperor’s trusted people and army were lazy and arrogant, and the only thing they wanted was power, so they killed their emperor so maybe they could come to power,(which in document B talks about that, the army being lazy and not caring anymore);both of the documents talk about the decline of the Roman empire caused by laziness . My estatement can be proved by reading document A & B.Before the year 400 CE foot soldiers wore breastplates and helmets, but when, because of negligence and laziness, parade ground drills were abandoned, the customary armor began to seem heavy since the soldiers rarely ever wore it, this shows you that this was an extreme situation, they didn’t even care to wear protection (for their own safety), during battle or even for practice.

In both document you realize that the laziness of the army and the emperor caused the end of the Roman empire.This can be proved because, in document C you can clearly see the battles and attacks that Rome went through ( because other empires saw Rome’s laziness), and document B talks about how the empire was getting weaker because of the army. People were invading Rome and no one could stop them since Rome’s army was so weak and they hadn’t practice in forever, if they had a strong emperor that pushed them they would had been able to attack back had this would never had happened.

I think that you can use this document to help explain the decline of the Roman Empire, because in the document Arminiaus says that the Huns were always taking others property, so I guess that they were kind of taking over Rome, and because they were always minding others people's business and never their own, so I don’t get how they got time to worry about their own. This can be proves by reading the document above. Romans just worried about what they thought about other people, so they stopped worrying about what was happening around them, so it was probably impossible for them to know what was going on, too you can see (by reading this document) that the Huns were taking over, so this shows you that Rome was being taking over. You can use this document to help explain what caused the decline of the Roman Empire, because the document says that the Romans were happy to be invaded and didn’t want to follow the rules of the Roman Empire, they wanted to be part of the Huns. This information/statement can be proven by paragraph 1, sentence 1-3. Rome was losing control over their citizens, since they had a weak army and a lazy government, and couldn't do anything about it.In my opinion natural disasters, invasions, and military problems were the three most important causes,because from military problems they couldn’t prevent the invasions, so people’s territories were invaded, but they (the citizens) didn’t end up minding because they knew that Rome was declining and because they knew that no one was going to do anything about it. And natural disasters, because those were the ones that killed the most people, and if the people die, no one pays taxes, or you get a smaller amount, so then the taxes rise and are harder to pay, too because as consequence of natural causes crops were lost, houses were lost,etc. My statement can be proven by all of the documents above. I don’t think that the natural causes could have been prevented in any way, but i do think that the military problems and the invasions could had been, they could had been prevented if they had a strong leader or someone who would had push them.
10
To try and avoid any political ties at all. Most of the citizens in the council probably quit because they thought that they would be next. The government slowly and slowly got worse and worse as more people were being killed.Both documents explain the fall of rome because of certain reasons. In document A it talks about political fall. In document B it talks about the fall of rome because of the lazy armor.
I think this map would be battle routes. This map could depict the fall of empires from battle, or big wins or losses in battles. If this map is depicting battle routes, then document C and B have a connection. I also think they have a connection because they both talk about the different empires and ones that were destroyed, and ones that thrived.
 I think that the Huns could’ve been people that the romans fought which I think would’ve led to a terrible loss. I think this because the roman army had become really lazy, and the Huns were very aggressive. I also think the Huns would win because the roman army wouldn’t be wearing armor.
 If people were more happy about being concured rather than living in their native empire, this has to mean that the empire in question ( the roman empire ) has to be declining. When they were concured they had better living conditions than before. They also didn’t have to pay as much taxes if they payed them at all.
I think that the absent government was the biggest downfall of the Roman empire. I think this because if no-one was ruling the empire, no one could control what happened in rome, so that’s why I think the downfall of rome was because of the absent Government control. Another reason of the downfall of the roman empire was The tsunami that hit. It killed almost 50,000 people in the city of Alexandria, and 750,000 people in rome. This caused a great economic fall for the empire. Another big thing to blame for the downfall were the Vandals sacking the city. I think that this caused lots of fear in the city, and with no government control, no one could stop it.
11
The frequent and violent changes showed the people outside of the village that the rulers didn’t know about them which made it easier to sneak in and do whatever they want. According to the chart is shows the amount of assassinations which I think is because of the people outside of Rome. The evidence proves what the message to the outsiders made them do and think.In document A and B they are both talking about the decline of Rome. In Document A it talks about the decline of the Roman emperor and in Document B it talks about the decline in the Roman army. As stated in Document A, Rome drifted through the 3rd century, survived the 4th, and staggered into the 5th and in Document B, So our soldiers fought the Goths without any protection for chest and head and were often beaten by archers. Although there were many disasters, which led to the loss of great cities, no one tried to restore breastplates and helmets to the infantry. Thus it happens that troops in battle, exposed to wounds because they have no armor, think about running and not about fighting.¨ This shows what Document A and B have in common.
Document C and B have a connection because they both talk about the invasions in Rome and why they got invaded. In the text it states,” [Before the year 400 CE] foot soldiers wore breastplates and helmets. But when, because of negligence and laziness, (parade ground drills were abandoned,) the customary armor began to seem heavy since the soldiers rarely ever wore it. Therefore, they first asked the emperor to set aside the breastplates . . . and then the helmets.,” and the map shows the different invasions of Rome. This evidence shows what Document C and B have in common.
You can use this document, because it shows how the Huns declined the Roman Empire. The Huns invaded rome which is a form of decline for the Roman Empire and it shows how the Rome thought of the Huns. In the text it says,” The Huns exceed any definition of savagery. They have compact, sturdy limbs and thick necks . . . . Although they have the shape . . . of human beings, they are so wild in their way of life that they have no need of fire or pleasant tasting foods, but eat the roots of uncultivated plants and the half-raw flesh of all sorts of animals. This they place between their thighs and the backs of their horses and so warm it a little . . . . Huns are never sheltered by buildings, but . . . roam freely in the mountains and woods, learning from their earliest childhood to endure freezing cold, hunger and thirst . . . . Huns are not well adapted to battle on foot, but are almost glued to their horses, which are certainly hardy, but also ugly . . . . Like refugees - all without permanent settlements, homes, law, or a fixed way of life - they are always on the move with their wagons, in which they leave . . . . Like unthinking animals, they are completely ignorant of the difference between right and wrong. Fired with an overwhelming desire for seizing the property of others, these swift-moving and ungovernable people make their destructive way amid the pillage and slaughter of those who live around them.”, which is what the Rome thought of the Huns. This evidence shows what the Rome thought about the Huns. You can use this document because the Romans were conquered and captured that is a form of decline since Rome is no longer an empire. It also shows how people felt being captured by the Huns and how their lives have changed. As written in this document, a man captured by the Huns feels his life is better.I think the three causes that were most important were military problems, foreign invasions, and natural disasters. I think military problems is one of the most important because they were defeated in battle by archors. As stated in the text,¨ So our soldiers fought the Goths without any protection for chest and head and were often beaten by archers.¨ I also think foreign invasions is one of the most important because due to a major invasion Rome was declining. According to the map, the Carthage's invaded the Roman Empire in 439 CE. Natural disasters is one of the most important, as well, because they wipe out millions of people. As stated in the text,¨ Fifty thousand persons had lost their lives in the flood [in the city of Alexandria alone]¨ This evidence shows why I think these are the three most important.
12
That they are increasing power, they have imperial wealth, they have relative stability, and they are a powerful empire. I know this because they have went from being a republic to an empire, and they have gained lots of power. My evidence supports my claim because Rome started to conquer different landmassess.
Yes because Doc. A talks about which soldiers and how many of them died from what and Doc. B talks about how the failure to enforce the conscription weakened Rome. I know this because both Doc. talks about how the soldiers got weak/died. My evidence supports my claim because these Doc. explains how Rome got weak.
Yes because they both show how Rome was getting weak. I know this because Doc. B talks about how Rome got weakened from the failure to enforce conscription which made Rome weak, and Doc. C shows how Rome got weak from invasions. My evidence supports my claim because both Doc. explain how some of The Fall of Rome happened.
I can use this document because some of the decline of the Roman Empire happened from invasions and maybe The Huns attacked them. I know this because The Huns are a crazy and savage group of soldiers and Rome got invaded by groups of soldiers from different religions. My evidence supports my claim because Rome got weak from invasions, disasters, and more, and that caused the decline of Rome.
I can use this document because this was a problem in Rome, and some of the decline happened by problems like this. I know this because the text states that Rome had been badly weakened by a number of problems. My evidence supports my claim because when the city was sacked by invaders, Rome got badly weakened by a number of problems.
I would regard Natural Disasters, Foreign Invasions, and Military Problems as the most important three causes of the decline of Rome because, Natural Disasters would make Rome weak, Foreign Invasions would cause some disasters, and the Military Problems made the soldiers weak because they didn’t want to wear their heavy armor, so in war, they were weak and would often get beaten by archers, and instead of the soldiers thinking about fighting, they thought about running. These were the three main reasons in my opinion that caused the decline of Rome. I know this because weakness, disasters, and a really lazy and weak army can make yourself an easy target to get taken over by. This caused the decline of Rome. My evidence supports my claim because the decline of Rome started off when Rome was sacked by invaders, which made them weak by a number of problems such as the Military Problem about the armor, helmets, and conscription.
13
The frequent and violent changes showed the people outside of the village that the rulers didn’t know about them which made it easier to sneak in and do whatever they want. According to the chart is shows the amount of assassinations which I think is because of the people outside of Rome. The evidence proves what the message to the outsiders made them do and think.In document A and B they are both talking about the decline of Rome. In Document A it talks about the decline of the Roman emperor and in Document B it talks about the decline in the Roman army. As stated in Document A, Rome drifted through the 3rd century, survived the 4th, and staggered into the 5th and in Document B, So our soldiers fought the Goths without any protection for chest and head and were often beaten by archers. Although there were many disasters, which led to the loss of great cities, no one tried to restore breastplates and helmets to the infantry. Thus it happens that troops in battle, exposed to wounds because they have no armor, think about running and not about fighting.¨ This shows what Document A and B have in common.Document C and B have a connection because they both talk about the invasions in Rome and why they got invaded. In the text it states,” [Before the year 400 CE] foot soldiers wore breastplates and helmets. But when, because of negligence and laziness, (parade ground drills were abandoned,) the customary armor began to seem heavy since the soldiers rarely ever wore it. Therefore, they first asked the emperor to set aside the breastplates . . . and then the helmets.,” and the map shows the different invasions of Rome. This evidence shows what Document C and B have in common.
You can use this document, because it shows how the Huns declined the Roman Empire. The Huns invaded rome which is a form of decline for the Roman Empire and it shows how the Rome thought of the Huns. In the text it says,” The Huns exceed any definition of savagery. They have compact, sturdy limbs and thick necks . . . . Although they have the shape . . . of human beings, they are so wild in their way of life that they have no need of fire or pleasant tasting foods, but eat the roots of uncultivated plants and the half-raw flesh of all sorts of animals. This they place between their thighs and the backs of their horses and so warm it a little . . . . Huns are never sheltered by buildings, but . . . roam freely in the mountains and woods, learning from their earliest childhood to endure freezing cold, hunger and thirst . . . . Huns are not well adapted to battle on foot, but are almost glued to their horses, which are certainly hardy, but also ugly . . . . Like refugees - all without permanent settlements, homes, law, or a fixed way of life - they are always on the move with their wagons, in which they leave . . . . Like unthinking animals, they are completely ignorant of the difference between right and wrong. Fired with an overwhelming desire for seizing the property of others, these swift-moving and ungovernable people make their destructive way amid the pillage and slaughter of those who live around them.”, which is what the Rome thought of the Huns. This evidence shows what the Rome thought about the Huns. You can use this document because the Romans were conquered and captured that is a form of decline since Rome is no longer an empire. It also shows how people felt being captured by the Huns and how their lives have changed. As written in this document, a man captured by the Huns feels his life is better.
I think the three causes that were most important were military problems, foreign invasions, and natural disasters. I think military problems is one of the most important because they were defeated in battle by archors. As stated in the text,¨ So our soldiers fought the Goths without any protection for chest and head and were often beaten by archers.¨ I also think foreign invasions is one of the most important because due to a major invasion Rome was declining. According to the map, the Carthage's invaded the Roman Empire in 439 CE. Natural disasters is one of the most important, as well, because they wipe out millions of people. As stated in the text,¨ Fifty thousand persons had lost their lives in the flood [in the city of Alexandria alone]¨ This evidence shows why I think these are the three most important.
14
That they are increasing power, they have imperial wealth, they have relative stability, and they are a powerful empire. I know this because they have went from being a republic to an empire, and they have gained lots of power. My evidence supports my claim because Rome started to conquer different landmassess.
Yes because Doc. A talks about which soldiers and how many of them died from what and Doc. B talks about how the failure to enforce the conscription weakened Rome. I know this because both Doc. talks about how the soldiers got weak/died. My evidence supports my claim because these Doc. explains how Rome got weak.
Yes because they both show how Rome was getting weak. I know this because Doc. B talks about how Rome got weakened from the failure to enforce conscription which made Rome weak, and Doc. C shows how Rome got weak from invasions. My evidence supports my claim because both Doc. explain how some of The Fall of Rome happened.
I can use this document because some of the decline of the Roman Empire happened from invasions and maybe The Huns attacked them. I know this because The Huns are a crazy and savage group of soldiers and Rome got invaded by groups of soldiers from different religions. My evidence supports my claim because Rome got weak from invasions, disasters, and more, and that caused the decline of Rome.
I can use this document because this was a problem in Rome, and some of the decline happened by problems like this. I know this because the text states that Rome had been badly weakened by a number of problems. My evidence supports my claim because when the city was sacked by invaders, Rome got badly weakened by a number of problems.
I would regard Natural Disasters, Foreign Invasions, and Military Problems as the most important three causes of the decline of Rome because, Natural Disasters would make Rome weak, Foreign Invasions would cause some disasters, and the Military Problems made the soldiers weak because they didn’t want to wear their heavy armor, so in war, they were weak and would often get beaten by archers, and instead of the soldiers thinking about fighting, they thought about running. These were the three main reasons in my opinion that caused the decline of Rome. I know this because weakness, disasters, and a really lazy and weak army can make yourself an easy target to get taken over by. This caused the decline of Rome. My evidence supports my claim because the decline of Rome started off when Rome was sacked by invaders, which made them weak by a number of problems such as the Military Problem about the armor, helmets, and conscription.
15
The frequent and violent changes in leadership might’ve made the people of the empire to think that their empire wasn’t very peaceful. According to the chart, many died from assassination which might make the Romans think that their empire isn't the safest.There is a connection between Document A and Document B because most of it was about Roman military. For example, Document A has the reasons why emperors died and some died in battle. Document B tells you why the Roman Empire started to decline (because of the lazy soldiers) which leads me to conclude that both tell you reasons why the empire was declining.There can be a connection between these two documents because they give reasons how the Roman Empire could’ve declined. For example, Document B tells you why the Roman military became weaker and Document C shows the invasions which weakened Rome.This document can help explain the decline of the empire because it tells you the invasion of Rome. The text says the Huns “seized the property of others” which means the land has been invaded by them. Since the Roman Empire wasn't doing so well, an invasion would affect the decline.You can use this document to help explain the decline of the empire because the person was a Roman citizen and their land was conquered by the Huns. The text says that Rome was going through a lot of bad things. That basically implies that the empire is starting to fall. I would consider the military problems, foreign invasion, and natural disasters are the three most important factors to the decline of the Roman Empire because military problems would make invasions easier, invasions may be successful and Rome would be destroyed, and the natural disasters wiped out three-quarters of the population which would cause less people paying taxes which also causes it to rise. Some examples from the text are that natural disasters wiped out a lot of the population, there were many invaders, and laziness of the soldiers made Rome easier to defeat which all are big factors of a decline in an empire.
16
It may have suggested to other peoples believed that Rome was weak and unstable. This was true, and led to many invasions. This is what outside people's thought of of the late, unstable Roman empire.
There is a connection between the two documents. The connection is that Rome is getting continuously weaker. This is for military and government reasons.
There is a possible connection between documents B and C. The connection is that if Romans were being invaded, that is where they were defending. Exempt, document b says, that due to loss of armor soldiers thought more of running, and less of fighting.
It helps explain the decline of the empire by stating how tough the enemy was. In this time of weakness, the last thing the Romans needed were invaders. This is how this document explains the decline of the Roman empire.
This document says that former Romans were getting a better life under the Huns. This is because Romans were not able to help their people. This is how this helped the fall of the Roman empire.
I believe government problems were the worst thing to happen. If people are against the government, a society cannot get anywhere. This is what I believe to have been the greatest threat to the Roman empire.
17
These frequent changes in leadership must have sent people the message that is was not a peaceful time in the Roman Empire at that time.There is a connection between Doc A and Doc B which is basically their main idea, which is reasons that rome weakened. In doc A it says that Rome weakened because people kept on killing the emperors. In doc B it says that Rome weakened because the emperor allowed the soldiers to get rid of their armor which caused them to die or get beaten up badly. This is my reason for why document A and B are alike.Yes, there might be a connection between doc C and doc B. Because in doc B it says that the Roman army wasn’t able to protect Rome because they didn’t have their armor, but they never tell us what exactly they are trying to protect people from. In doc C it shows invaders heading to Rome, so those invaders could possible have gotten to Rome and destroyed it. I can use document D to explain the decline of the Roman Empire because in the text it says that the Huns liked to destroy and rob people. Also the Romans really hate the Huns. The reason for this is because the Huns might have robbed and destroyed the homes of Romans. This could add to the decline of Rome. I can use this document to help explain what caused the decline of the Roman Empire because it is saying that the Roman life is kind of terrible. It says that people’s taxes are getting higher, rich people can get away with breaking the law, and in all the top point of it all is that people have to pay in order to maintain justice.The three most important causes to me are the natural disasters, foreign invasion, and military armor problems. I think that these were the most important because, natural disasters like earthquakes, tsunamis, plagues and other supernatural events, are dangerous and cannot be stopped so the population starts decreasing and so do the tax incomes, so the taxes get higher for the people who aren’t killed. Military armor problems are a problem because the soldiers get killed in battle and then there’s no one to defend the Romans. Lastly, the foreign invasions are a huge problem because, again the soldiers don’t want to put on their “needed” because it’s heavy so the invaders can attack Rome easily. To me, these are the three most important reasons for the decline of Rome.
18
To the people outside of Rome these violent changes in leadership could show that they do not have good emperors because the people of Rome have decided to assassinate them. Most of the people on the chart were assassinated so I could assume that they did it because the emperors were bad. The people outside of the Roman Empire would probably not want to live their because of how many of their emperors were assassinated which could mean that the emperors that were assassinated were bad.
The connection between Document A and B are how they both talk about the Roman soldiers. In Document A they said how the army got weaker by not wearing the armor and Document B said how the Roman military weakened by how there were not enough soldiers being drafted because of how a lot of people could get out of drafting. They are similar because they both explain how the Roman military got weaker and how that changes in the Roman military affected Rome.

In Document B the text shows that the Visigoths attacked Rome and won since the text says that the Roman soldiers were killed by the Visigoth archers because they were not wearing much armor. I found this in the text in Document B where it says the Visigoth archers killed the Roman soldiers and I also found it in the map where it shows a line to the Roman Empire showing that the Visigoths invaded them. The Visigoths then sacked Rome and won. Since both documents mention the Visigoths and how they invaded Rome and won against the military which had minimal armor on there is a connection which shows how the Visigoths won against Rome.
This document can help explain the decline of the Roman Empire because maybe people who know that that is not true about the Huns would talk badly about Rome and people would see that the Huns are not that bad and that the romans were lying. You can find this because the Huns are most likely no where near as bad as he describes them as especially since he was a Roman Historian who was most likely trying to portray how bad their enemy the Huns are.Him lying about the Huns and how bad they were even when they weren't could help explain the decline of the Roman Empire.
You can use this document to help explain the decline of Rome because some people of Rome were actually happy to be conquered by the Huns because it provided them with a better life than they would have in Rome. I found this in the text where it says that the person who talked to Priscus was happier living with the Huns because it was more fair. He also talked about how wealthy people can break the law and not be punished while being poor would mean that you would be punished. Since people liked living better with the Huns then that could help explain the decline of the Roman Empire.
I think that the natural disasters, foreign invasions, and assassinations were the 3 most important causes of the decline of the Roman Empire. I think that natural disasters is one because the earthquake, tsunami, and plague, killed hundreds of thousands of Romans which weakened the army because there were less soldiers, it increased the taxes because most of the people who paid taxes are dead, and it made the Empire hire other people to protect them which all cost money which they did not have. I think assassination is another one because the Roman Empire did not have many good emperors which resulted in a lot of them being assassinated which could explain the decline of the Roman Empire because they did not have good emperors which caused people to want to assassinate the emperors which showed just how bad they were and just how bad and corrupt the Roman Empire actually was. I think that foreign invasions was another because the people of Rome were treated so badly and they hated living there enough to where having their land captured and to have to live with the Huns was better than living in Rome. If that is true then that can explain the decline of the Roman Empire.
19
The frequent and violent changes might have send messages that the Rome was weakening. From the outside of Rome people could just see that Rome was falling apart because Emperors just started dying. In only 50 years 22 Emperors died for a few reasons. This was not good for Rome because they kept having to find new rulers. Yes, there is a connection between Document A and Document B. In both documents it states reasons why the Roman empire fell. They also talk about how and when the emperors died and what the soldiers did to weaken Rome. These two sources are great for getting information on the fall of Rome. Yes, there is a connection between Document C and B and it is that in these two documents there is examples of why the empire was declined. It states that Rome went through many invasions and the lazy soldiers not wanting to wear their armor because it was too heavy. I think that these examples have changed Rome and were a big part of Rome’s decline. I can use this document to explain the decline of Rome because the author explains it in the source. It states that when the Huns invaded they really ruined Rome. Since the Huns were so savage they didn’t let anything get in their way, especially not the Romans. This document helps me understand the decline of Rome because it explains another reason Rome declined. The source tells me that Rome was becoming terrible and everyone was misreble. They would rather have the Huns takeover then have Rome continue to be like this. I think the three most important causes were the military problems, the foreign invasions, and the natural disasters. All of these reasons were great because they explained thoroughly why this happened and what the result was. I now understand the decline of Rome because of the helpful sources of information.
20
People living outside of Rome might have thought that the government was weak, emperors were weak in leading, and that the army was also weak and lazy since they wouldn’t protect the emperors very well. This might’ve told outsiders that if they invade, no one would notice and they could get away with it.Yes, there is a connection between Document A and B because in Document A, it shows you a chart of how the emperors died, which most died of assassination, and in Document B, it talks about how the army was lazy because they didn’t want to wear armor since it was too heavy which meant that the emperor was also in fact weak and lazy for not telling them the right thing to do.
There could be a possible connection between Document B and C because in Document B, it talks about how the army is lazy and doesn’t want to wear their armor because it is too heavy, and in Document C, it shows you a map of foreign invasions that soon led to the fall of Rome. These invasions wouldn’t have occurred if the army was strong, dedicated, and protective.Document D helps you more understand that the Huns were the exceeded definition of savagery and at the time, the Roman government and politics was very weak and strict, so most Romans actually wanted to live with the Huns instead.
In document E, Priscus says that the Roman government and laws were very weak and unfair to the poor people and in fact all people because all of them had to pay very high taxes and most were punished.
I believe that the most important three causes that led to the decline of the Roman Empire was that one, there were many political assassinations which meant that the Roman army was very weak, two, foreign invasions affected the decline a lot because at the time the laws and government were very weak and unfair, and lastly, there were many natural disasters which killed many people and this led to less money in the government since not many people were around to pay taxes anymore.
21
What these frequent and violent changes in leadership shown to the people living outside of the Roman Empire that it was a mess. In a 50 year period 22 rulers died. They mostly did die by assassinations which is horrible. They could of heard that the Roman empire rulers were dying very often so people in the Roman Empire were very weak and did not want to listen to the ruler as they were new. What they could of done is that they would go in when they just got a new ruler because no rules were made when there is a new ruler. There is no connections between Document A and Document B. Why I think that is because in Document A it has a graph where it talks about who the rulers were, and when and how they died. Document B talks about how the military wanted to not where armor to war as it was too heavy to wear so they asked the ruler if they could take off one piece of armor and then there helmet and well they went into war with no armor. There is a difference between both documents as one is about how rulers died and one is about how the military weakened the Roman empire.There is a possible connection between Document C and Document B. In document C it is showing a map and a trail of enemies and when they came in to attack Rome. In Document B it talks about how the Roman empire was getting weaker by the military because they were weak. So when the enemies came in and attacked they had no military to protect them because they had no armor. C connects with B because C shows a trail on how they got to the Roman Empire and how they got inside because the enemies and armor and Romans had nothing on because they were lazy. How Document D helps explain the decline of the Roman Empire is that they had a person from the Roman empire go their to see how the Huns did things. Well he wrote about it and gave information on what they did as savagery. So then when a Roman ambassador wrote about how the Huns were better then the Romans as the Huns did these fair things while Romans did usually nothing fair so now they are in trouble as a Roman ambassador said how they did these horrible things and how they Huns are better. How document E explains the decline of the Roman Empire is that Priscus Roman ambassador wrote an article and talked about how the how the Roman Empire was worse than the Huns. He said that the Romans were unfair and did these horrible things which you could believe from a person who lived in Rome themselves. So how it declined the Roman Empire it made them look worse as they were powerful but others wanted them destroyed. What is the most important cause is Natural disasters. Why natural causes is the most important disaster is that there was a huge Earthquake and it destroyed and killed people but after a huge flood had happened and destroyed Rome. Since they had no protection from diseases they had a huge plaque and killed many. They went from 1 million people to 250,000. That is 75% of the population and is a huge chunk of people that died. Political assassinations were very important. Second since everyone had died they had no political tax revenues. Finally, military problems were not as important. it was a big problem yes but natural disasters killed everyone so if everyone was dead how could you have an army or an empire at the most. Natural disasters are in my opinion are the main reason why the Roman empire fell.
22
The message to people living outside of the Empire was not to move to Rome because it was corrupt. For example it said that “13 out of the 22 Emperors were killed by assassination.” So the message might be that the Romans kill to get into office or that the Empire’s stability was so horrible.Yes because Document A talks about the decline of Rome because of the death of the Emperors and document B talks about the decline of Rome because of war and soldiers. For example, document B says, ¨ But when, because of negligence and laziness, parade ground drills were abandoned¨ and document A is about the deaths of Emperors. So regardless both documents talk about the decline of Rome.Yes because they both tell the decline of Rome because document B is war and soldier wise and Document C is about the invasions of Rome. For example, in document B says, "exposed to wounds because they have no armor, think about running and not about fighting.” and document C’s title says, “Foreign invasions of the Roman Empire”. So if the Roman Empire was still around by the time of the invasions, the army would have been able to fight them off, but they were to busy running away.I think that this helps explain the decline of Rome because they say that the Huns are savages and I think they could attack Rome. For example, document D says, “The Huns exceed any definition of savagery.” So conclusion, the Huns probably invaded Rome after the Empire was gone.I can use this, because the Huns took over Rome, so Rome no longer belonged to the Romans. For instance, document E states, “considered his new life . . . better than his old life among the Romans”. So a lot of people among the Romans considered this new life better than the old one, and Rome no longer belonged to the RomansI would say that Document B explains it well because the soldiers were not fighting. I also think that document E because, it explains why legally, justice was not right in Rome. Lastly, I think that document A explains it well because, it tells us what emperors were dead at different times of Rome. For example Document B states, “exposed to wounds because they have no armor, think about running and not about fighting.” and document E states, “the climax of misery is to have to pay in order to obtain justice” and what I got out of Document A was, 13 out of the 22 Emperors died from assassination. So in conclusion all of these documents tell us why Rome was declining from the inside.
23
The people outside of Rome might want to invade because it is a weak empire. If Rome is a weak empire then people are going to want to invade. I found this information in the chart. Yes, there is a connection. There is a connection because they are both talking about the Roman Army and the soldiers. Document A is saying that the soldiers are lazy and won’t wear armor, and Document B is saying that there are not much soldiers because most people were either cooks, bakers, or slaves. I found this information in Document A and B.No, there is not a possible connection. There is not a possible connection because Document C is a map that shows foreign people invading Rome. Document B is saying that there are not much soldiers.I can use this document because the Huns invaded Rome and have good survival skills, therefore, it would be easy for them to invade Rome. The Roman army wasn’t very strong, but the Huns live in the wild and know how to fight. I found this information in the document.I can use this document because the Huns invaded Rome. But the governors were ruining the state, so some of the people were happy. I found this in the document.I think the most important three causes are, the foreign invasions, natural disasters, and the political assassinations. I think that these are the most important because, the Huns invaded Rome, 75% of the population died from the flood and the government didn’t respond to the crisis, and mostly all of the emperors were assassinated. Those three causes stood out to me the most.
24
They were not very good leaders and they were not fit to rule. According to the text, Julius Caesar killed many people for power in the hands of the emperor and the military. This supports my claim because if the power is only in the hands of the emperor and the military, they are greedy, and selfish. People like that are not fit to rule an entire kingdom.Yes, because they both explain how the empire was slowly weakening by their weak emperors and lazy army. According to the text, Quintillus was either killed by assassination or suicide which shows a sign of weakness or dislike by the public (Document A). The text also suggests “Before the year 400 CE, foot soldiers wore breastplates and helmets. But when, because of negligence and laziness, parade ground drills were abandoned, the customary armor began to seem heavy since the soldiers rarely ever wore it.” Which shows laziness (Document B). These pieces of evidence support my claim because both sources explain how the empire slowly weakened from weak emperors and lazy armies.Yes, because they both describe the fall of Rome. According to both documents B and C, the fall of Rome resulted in foreign armies in their borders, and a weak military. Therefore, this evidence supports my claim by explaining where the connection was between the two documents.It explains which groups, like the Huns, tried (and succeeded) in the fall of Rome. According to the map, the Huns, the Vandals, the Ostrogoths, and the Visigoths tried to conquer Rome. But only the Huns succeeded. It describes how the corrupt government caused the empire to fall into the hands of the Huns. According to the text, the laws and constitution were fair and Rome, but the governors were ruining the state. This evidence supports my claim because it explains how the government relates to the fall of the Roman empire.Political assassinations, military problems, and legal injustice are the three most important causes. According to the chart in Document A, 13 out of 22 emperors were assassinated. That suggests that those emperors were not very effective with their ruling strategies. According from the text from Document B, “[Before the year 400 CE] foot soldiers wore breastplates and helmets. But when, because of negligence and laziness, parade ground drills were abandoned, the customary armor began to seem heavy since the soldiers rarely ever wore it. Therefore, they first asked the emperor to set aside the breastplates . . . and then the helmets.” This suggests that the armies became lazy and unloyal. Finally, according to the text in Document E “ The condition of [Roman] subjects in time of peace [is worse than war] . . . taxes are very severe, and unprincipled men inflict injuries on others . .. A [wealthy lawbreaker] . . . is not punished for his injustice, while a poor man . . . undergoes the legal penalty . . . [He said] that the laws and constitution of the Romans were fair, but deplored that the governors, not possessing the spirit of former generations, were ruining the state.” This evidence suggests that the government was not doing a very good job.
25

The message might be that the Emperors lost because the leaders was killed, etc. If the leaders is killed then that means that the whole team lost whatever they were doing. I found this answer in the text.		Yes, there is because in document A it's all about the Emperors. Then in document B it’s saying stuff about the Emperor but then adding on the what is happening in the Emperor. I found this answer in the text for document A and B.Yes, there is a possible connection between document C and B because they both have to do with Emperors. Also they have to do with what they do and have to do in the Emperor. I found this answer in the texts.I can use this document to help explain the decline of the Roman Empire because it has a lot of evidence for me to learn about it. I know that because this article has a lot of evidence. I found this answer in the text in document D.Because: a wealthy lawbreaker is not punished for his injustice, while a poor man undergoes the legal penalty. This is a very bad thing to do, so people might not like to do it anymore. I found this answer in the text in document E. The 3 causes were: Rome was sinking. Rome was being destroyed. Also then Rome is all done! I found these answer in the text from the document F. The need to pay troops added to the demands on the state's budget, just as declining production cut into tax revenues. These documents were interesting and really fun to learn about.
26
It sent to the people of the Roman Empire of how on different Emperors of how long they were there for and how they died. My evidence is I found this in the text. My interpretation is I found this in each of the columns that said Emperor, Reign, and Cause of Death.
No, there is no connection because in Document A it talks about death etc., but in Document B it just talks about how it happens that troops in battle, exposed to wounds because they have no armor, think about running and not about fighting. My evidence is I found this in the text. My interpretation is I found this in Documents A and B.
Yes, there is a possible connection because they both talk about Rome. My evidence is I found this in the text. My interpretation is I found this in Document B and C.
I can use this document because it talks about some the bad I wild things that they did in Rome. My evidence is I found this in the text in Document D. My interpretation is it says that the Huns exceed any definition of savagery. They have compact, sturdy limbs and thick necks Although they have the shape of human beings, they are so wild in their way of life that they have no need of fire or pleasant tasting foods, but eat the roots of uncultivated plants and the half-raw flesh of all sorts of animals. This they place between their thighs and the backs of their horses and so warm it a little .
I can use this document because it talks about The condition of [Roman] subject. A [wealthy lawbreaker] is not punished for his injustice, while a poor man undergoes the legal penalty. The climax of misery is to have to pay in order to obtain justice [He said] that the laws and constitution of the Romans were fair, but deplored that the governors, not possessing the spirit of former generations, were ruining the state. My evidence is I found this in the text. My interpretation is I found this in Document E and before [He] considered his new life better than his old life among the Romans, and the reasons he gave were as follows: The condition of [Roman] subjects in time of peace [is worse than war] taxes are very severe, and unprincipled men inflict injuries on others .

I regard the natural disasters because so many bad thing were happening such as t in initiating the process of decline was a series of plagues that swept over the empire which brought diseases [from] southern Asia to new areas like the Mediterranean, where no resistance had been established even to contagions such as the measles. The resulting diseases decimated the population. The population of Rome decreased from a million people to 250,000. Economic life worsened in consequence. Recruitment of troops became more difficult, so the empire was increasingly reduced to hiring Germanic soldiers to guard its frontiers. The need to pay troops added to the demands on the state's budget, just as declining production cut into tax revenues. My evidence is I found this in the text . My interpretation is I found this information in Document F.


27
The message might tell people outside of Rome that things like assassination happens even though you weren’t expecting it. Since 13 people died from assassination ,which was given in the text, that might give the people a message that Rome isn’t such a good place to live because people kill one another. They probably would start thinking that Rome and a bad place to live and be.There is a connection in Document A and Document B. I got this from the chart in Document A because it says" killed in battle" so maybe the soldiers weren’t wearing armor during the fighting. So this might be the reason they died in the battle. In Document B, it said that soldiers didn't want to put armor on to protect themselves and so maybe the reason they died in a battle was because they weren't wearing anything for protection.There is a connection with Document B and Document C because in Document C it shows that there are different places that are attacking Rome. And Document B said that the Roman soldiers weren’t wearing any armor which means more soldiers are dying and there aren’t much soldiers who can defend Rome. With this happening, the armies won't have soldiers to fight in battles and defend them.The Huns may have given the Romans a hard time because they were like wild animals who didn’t understand anything. In the text it says that they would eat people they saw and they would stay in the wild and not live inside. That’s probably how they had the decline. When the Huns acted like this which was all the time, they didn't have control basically which meant more and more people were dying.The former Romans wanting to stay with the Huns explains why, more and more Romans weren’t complaining being with the reasons that were given in the text. The Huns didn’t have these much laws and rules but this was the reason why the Roman Empire decreased and declined. People thought, well if the Huns don't have this much rules and laws to consider, then why not just stay with the Huns instead of the Romans.I think the 3 most important causes were the political assassinations, the military problems like armor and conscription, and natural disasters. I think these were the most important ones because all of them had a lot of declines to the Roman Empire and people decreased because of these causes. A lot of people lost their lives because of these 3 thing that happened from the documents. All three of these have something to do with death and they end up killing people with these events that occur.
28
This might make the people outside of rome think that rome was weakening. In the Essay it states by the 5th century CE, when the city was sacked by outside invaders. This means more people started attacking rome.
More of the emperors are becoming more corrupt and spending all of there money on personal finances and personal parties. corrupt may mean rebellion rebellion means the empire will fall faster.
Yes, because the army is weaker they have a soft bellies. That is why there outside invaders invading rome. That means these two documents relate to each other document b shows how romans were becoming weaker and in document c they were invaded in document be in 400 CE they stopped wearing chest plates and helmets in 401 CE they were starting to get invaded.
The Huns may have had no mercy on rome. In the text it states, “Fired with an overwhelming desire for seizing the property of others, these swift-moving and ungovernable people make their destructive way amid the pillage and slaughter of those who live around them.”

People were becoming happier with the choice of becoming a Hun. That means they may join Hun forces. That means more forces will join the Huns and the military is weak which means there is a fall of Rome
 Military problem, legal injustice, foreign invasion. Military problems are very severe which means a military that is weak leaves you open to attack. Legal injustice is also terrible it may makes people very unhappy and want to switch sides and maybe join enemies. Foreign invasion is the worst out of all of them. If too many foreigners are invading you at once your empire will easily fall.
29
A message that these frequent and violent changes in leadership have sent to people of the Roman Empire is that their emperors are weak. I got this information because of all of the emperor deaths that have occurred. I also would have thought the same thing. This information is important to the question because the question asks what message that these frequent and violent changes in leadership have sent to the people of Rome.
Yes, there is a connection between document A and B. Both documents A and B explains the decline of Rome. This information is important to the question because the question asks if there is any connection between doc A and B.
Yes, there is a connection between docs B and C. Both documents B and C explains the decline of Rome. This information is important to the question because the question asks if there is any connection between docs B and C.
I can’t use this document to help explain the fall of Rome. This document only gives information on the Huns. This information is important to the question because the question asks how you can use the document to help explain the decline of Rome.
You can use this document to help explain the decline of Rome because of the harsh conditions and rules of Rome. The harsh ways of Rome could cause rebellion which then causes a decline in the Roman government, leading to the fall of Rome. This information is important to the question because the question asks how you can use the document to explain the decline of the Roman Empire.
I would say that the three most important causes are military problems, legal injustice, and natural disasters. My reasoning is that without a military and no one to fight for your country, you appeal as weak, leading to more attacks on your country causing a decline in your living area. And legal injustice may lead to rebellion and decline among the people. And natural disasters lead to destruction on everything where it occurs, which causes a decline in many things.
30
They would notice and wonder how weak the government is and if the people they trust would kill them then they could defeat them too. I think this, because if Rome defeated all competition, then they would try to get them back. It would also show what weaknesses they can use against them.
The connection both explains the reason why important people like government and military died. They also find ways to not only hurt people who are helping and fighting for the country, but to also find a way to get themselves killed for the way they act. The only difference would be that doc B is more detailed and most likely unreliable, because of the facts it states.
There isn’t a possible connection, because Doc B talks about the Romans point of view and how they fought. Doc C shows which armies attacked Rome, whereas Doc B talks about the condition that the Roman army was in.

I can use this as an example of the decline of Rome, because the document shows one of the Roman’s enemies description and thoughts about them. They also say how savage and tough they are which could say that they are trying to make them look wild and show that the Romans are better than the Huns out of spite. If they wrote this out of anger that probably means that the Huns had something to do with the decline of Rome.
I can use this to show that even Romans thought life with Huns were better and Rome was not in a stable position. I found this when he said “considered his new life . . . better than his old life among the Romans”. This explains that Rome wasn’t in a stable condition.
I think the natural disasters, military problems, and political assassinations were the 3 most important causes. I think the natural disasters destroyed buildings and killed many Romans which caused the government to use more money to rebuild and not have enough people to pay taxes. The military problems were a big cause, because they wouldn’t be able to protect their own people, so how they prevent intruders killing the rest of the military, since they did not have armor. The assassinations were also bad, because how would the Romans be safe if after a few years each emperor died.
31
they might have thought that the roman empire was week. They might have thought this because when people switch all the time it looks like they cant even keep a ruler. This makes them seem very week . It also makes them feel like rome would be under a lot of stress right now so it would be a good time to attack. It helps explain how rome was always looking for somethong better. They always wanted to improve. I think there is no connection betweeen doc a and doc b. ONe is talking about all of the empereors that lived in a certain time range and how they died. Doc b is talking about war and weather or not the soldiers asked for no armor. The only connection i could see was them both mentioning emperors and war. I found all of my evidence in doc a and doc b. Looking at doc a and doc b, i dont really see a conection.There could be a possible conection between doc c and doc b. I thinjk this because both were talking about the decline of the roman empire. They are both talking about war and armys. I found this in the map and the second exerpt from doc b. They both state stuff about the decline of rome witch conects them.I can use this document to explain because it tells me how the huns attacked the romans. It also talk about how thw romans were tought to hate the huns. I think it tells them that they were only prepared for the huns and not the vandals. I found this in the first part of the exerpt.
I can use this document to help explain what caused the decline of the roman empire. Fist of all , people were liking there life as huns, so some people might be leaving rome to go to the huns. The life was fairer and eaier so that life seemed perfect to the other romans. When they prbably left, there was less and less peoplei n the roman empire. This means less soldiers and less taxes.
The most impoertant three causes for the decline in my oppinion are, natural disastors, political assassinations, and military problems. Natural disasters were the worst, they killed almost every one, the gov had not money and peopl ehad to leave. With all of the political assasianations, they werent ever safe and they lost the pride and confidence in their government. Millitary problems was also a big isue. The emporer didnt want to pay for the armor for the military so they went to war without armer. This cuased their troops to get smaller and smaller , and also weaker. They had no one to defend them. I found all of my evidence from the documents. Because i found all of thease in the documents and they are what i think are the most important, This answers my question.
32
They might have thought that Rome was a very bad place to live.One says that it was the army that ended Rome, and the other says that it was the government was terrible. They both talked about how Rome might have ended.Document b was about the government and document c was about the route the attackers took, so being attacked from all directions with a government that ruined Rome, it semes that these reasons ended the once powerful city of Rome.The savage Huns attacked and claimed territory from Rome, and Romans were happy to be claimed from the harsh government to be a Hun.People were happy to be claimed by the Huns to be Huns. This is because of the harsh government in Rome in which you could get away with murder simply by paying the greedy government.The most important 3 causes were the natural disasters (which killed 75% of the population), the harsh government (who didn't support people from natural disasters and let people get away with murder by paying), and foreign invasions (in which people were claimed like the territory and were happy to be claimed from such a harsh and cruel government).
33

These frequent and violent changes in leadership might have sent the message to people living outside the Roman empire that they didn’t have a leader which means they are powerless. The outsiders could have invaded the Roman Empire when they did not have a leader.		There is a connection between Doc A and Doc B. Document A is a chart showing how many emperors have died, while Doc B is telling us how the soldiers are dying. Both are showing the decline of the empire. From Doc B “no one tried to restore breastplates and helmets to the infantry.”, which means they didn’t have armor. Doc A is showing how many emperors died from assassination and other reasons. Doc A and Doc B show how many people in the empire are dying. Which can lead to the decline.There is a possible connection between Document C and B. In Doc B it states how the soldiers did not have any armor. Not having any armor made the soldiers weak. Since they were weak, many outside armies attacked. Document B states “soldiers fought the Goths without any protection for chest and head and were often beaten by archers”. Document C is showing how many outside tribes that have came to Rome and attacked them and the soldiers were weak with no armor.This document helps explain the decline of the the Roman Empire because since the Huns found many ways to make take care of themselves without shelter. According to the text “roam freely in the mountains and woods”. They did not know between right or wrong, which might mean they would just fight the army.You can use this document to help explain what caused the decline of the Roman Empire because this is the point of view of a Roman. He states how he likes his new life with the Huns than his old life with the Romans. The text states “[He said] that the laws and constitution of the Romans were fair, but deplored that the governors, not possessing the spirit of former generations, were ruining the state.” He thought that they had a bad life style and he didn’t like that.From the documents about the decline of Rome, I think that the three main causes of the decline was the military problems, natural disasters, and legal injustice. The military problems about the armor made the soldiers weak. They were exposed to the enemy and could have been killed easily. If there was no soldiers fighting that meant no safety. From Doc B it states that “ exposed to wounds because they have no armor, think about running and not about fighting.” Another reason for the decline is the natural disasters. From Doc F “The population of Rome decreased from a million people to 250,000”. About 75% of the population died because of the disease passing through the empire. The last reason is because of the legal injustice. From Doc E it states “The climax of misery is to have to pay in order to obtain justice”. Rich people can do something bad and just pay their way out of it. I think these were the most important causes for the decline of the Roman Empire.
34
It shows that the outsiders all hated the Roman emperors for what they have done to them so they assassinated most of the Emperors. Only the ones they hated. This supports my claim because in the Document A 13 people died from assassination and being hated.No because Document A is all about the emperors and how they died but Document B is about the Military and the army. The text proves my claim because document A is a chart and talks about emperors but document B doesn’t. Also Document B is primary and Document A is not.No because Document C talks about the invasions of Rome not the army. This is proven in both Documents and C talks about the Huns and their foreign invasions against Rome. Document B talks about their military and how it was very weak and they had negligence and laziness.A I can use this document to explain the decline of Rome because when the Romans came to kill the Huns, the huns captured them and made them to obey their god and be a Hun not a Roman. This is proven when Amrnianus Marcellinus proves that the Huns exceeded to make Rome fall down and lose.I think this is a very trustworthy document. This was written pretty close to the time Rome has fallen so it is very trustworthy. This means that the decline of Rome was falling down because of those animal-like Huns.The most important are the natural disasters, military problems and how the military is weak, and the foreign invasions. These were the worst because they slowly made Rome weaker and weaker. This proves my answer because since Rome has lost power from the Huns and their military was very weak. This is said in Document B.
35
The message might have been to tell them that their Emperor’s reign was almost over, or that their civilization was going to be destroyed.There is not a connection between these two documents. I think this because Document A is about the weakening of the government and Document A is about the weakening of the army.Yes, there is a connection. That connection is armies falling. I could use the CEI method with this document.You can look for evidence in this document.I think the most important ones are natural causes, political assassinations, and foreign invasions because there were bound to happen the most.
36
This text explains to some people in the Roman Empire that the violence in the Roman Empire is really bad with people dying. According to the text 22 have been through violence in the Roman Empire. This leads to 50% change of u having a chance to live if u are in the Roman Empire.Yes there is because A explains which people died in Rome because of what they were suffering. According to the text this document explains how they would have to deal with the suffers they had not having all the soldiers they used to had before. Because of this they had to deal with all these things happening.
No not really because Document C is a map and Document B is a text based document. You might find some information that each place on the map is and what they would do there. Because of this the Document C and B do not have a connection between them.It can help me explain the decline of the Roman Empire because it explains what suffers they had and what the Amrnianus thought about the Huns. According to the text they had many suffers and many struggles with the Huns. Because of that it helps me explain the decline of the Roman Empire.
You can use this document because it explains what Priscus thought about the Romans and gives specific reasons why. According to the text it explains what he thought the Romans were. Because of this it is a good document to use. I think they are the military problems like armor and conscription, foreign invasions and natural disasters. I think those caused the most because the military issue was because of all the armor they would wear and people didn’t want to be responsible for that job. For the foreign invasions they caused lots to move from the Roman Empire because of the lost of supplies to live. The natural disasters was caused by all the diseases that spread around the Roman Empire that caused people to get sick and die. Because of this these it caused the most lost of people.
37
A message that has been sent to the people living outside of the Roman Empire could make them not want to be near that empire. They wouldn’t want to be in that empire because it could be unsafe. It would be unsafe because there could be someone that a killed a leader or thinking about it near you and you wouldn’t know. Yes because, both don’t really relate to each other. Document a is a table of Roman emperors. Document B is about the failure of Roman soldiers. There is no connection between Document C and Document B. Document B talks about the bad protection of the foot soldiers and the weakness of the Roman Empire. Document C is a map- that shows where they went and the dates but does not show anything about the foot soldiers protection.I can use this document to explain the decline of the Roman Empire because of how the Huns acted. The Huns were savages and made everything fall apart. The Romans thought of them as uncivilized and lawless.This document can help explain what caused the decline of the Roman Empire because its basically an interview of a Hun. The taxes were severe and sometimes peace was worse than war. That says a lot and people had miserable lives.I think the political assassinations is an important cause. People would do anything to get to the top and assassination was one of them. This could have affected the Empire every time this happened because it makes people feel unsafe and it’s just cruel. This can strongly affect the decline of the Roman Empire.
38
People outside of the Roman Empire can conclude that these violent changes in leadership mean that the Roman Empire is in a violent period. These people would not want to get involved with the crazy assassinations. Both of these documents are talking about the fall of the roman army and emperors. These two sources are giving a few examples that made the Roman Empire fall.Yes there is a connection between document B and C. They both show that the Roman army was weak and what that contributed to the fall of the Roman Empire. This document helps explain the decline of Rome because since the Huns are “savages,” they will destroy the Roman Empire for hating them and saying all these mean things about them. In the text it says, “Fired with an overwhelming desire for seizing the property of others…” This leads me to conclude that if the Romans get on the wrong side of the Huns, the Huns will take over their land making the Roman Empire fall.You can use this document to help explain the decline of the Roman Empire because the people are miserable in the Empire that they would rather be ruled by the Huns. In the text it says, “The condition of [Roman] subjects in time of peace [is worse than war].” This leads me to conclude that Rome was very violent and that the subjects hated living there.I think the most important causes that led to the fall of Rome are millitary problems, foreign invasions, and natural disasters. I think these made the most damage for many reasons. First of all, when the military stopped using their protection to battle, they started to get wounded very easily so they would run away from their fights instead of fighting back. Also, foreign invasions made the Romans lose their land. Lastly, the natural disasters like the tsunami and the plague made many people die which led to even more problems. All of these problems in my opinion infected Rome the most.
39
These changes in the in leadership may have sent the message to the Roman people that the guards of the emperors are weak, because they could not keep the leaders safe from harm. Which could signify to the people that rome was not a safe place for them to be. 60% of the leaders in a fifty year period were killed of assassination, and that could cause people to think that Rome is unsafe.


I do not think there is any connection between document A and B because they are talking about two different things completely. Document A talks about how many leaders Rome went thought in a fifty year period, and their causes of death. Document B talks about the failure to enforce regular conscription, and about how the army was weakened because of heaviness of their armor, which caused them to discard breastplates and helmets. There is no relation between them because the death of leaders and failure to conscribe are two different things.
I do think there is a connection between document c and document b because the failure to conscribe and draft people into the army might have caused some invasions. If the Visigoths started to invade Rome, the failure to draft people into the army would have made the army weaker, and Rome very easy to invade and sack.This Document can help explain the fall of Rome because it explains an enemy tribe from the point of view of a Roman citizen. It shows how much the Romans hated the huns, and how they thought the Huns lived. The huns played a part in the fall of Rome, and this article shows how much the Romans hated them.
I can use this document to help explain the fall of Rome because it tells us how a former Roman citizen feels about their rules. This document is from the point of view of an ex-Roman citizen, and he explains the unfair rules and taxes that were required to be a roman. He said he would rather live under the huns than the romans, and he probably wasn’t the only one.
I think the most important of the three things that caused the fall of Rome is the natural disasters. The natural disasters wiped out hundreds of thousands of people in Rome, and that caused higher taxes and less people to join the army. The higher taxes could cause people to leave, and the decrease of people in the army would make Rome weaker. Because the army was much smaller, it was hard to protect Rome from invasions, and getting sacked.
40
I think the message that this might have sent to people outside of the Roman Empire is that it would be a great idea to attack them because they are constantly on and off with leaders so half the time they had no one to go to when they were in trouble.Document A and B both show how the the roman empire is falling.document a shows how there has been 22 leaders within a 50 year period because they kept dieing wich ment that they had no one to go to i time of need.document b talks about how there army was getting weak and they had trouble finding new recruits.Both of these things could not only hert the army but it coul easily tear it apart.There is no document c in my document.This document helps me explain the fall of the roman empire because it tells me how the Huns took over and was described to be better at making laws then the Romans were.You can use this document as a way to explain the fall of Rome because it talks about how Rome has been taken over by the Huns and now there is less rights then there were before.
i believe the causes that matter most are military problems,foreign invasions,and political assassinations. The military needs to be able to protect Rome and assassinations decrease the population of Rome also foreign invasions disrupt the flow of Rome.
41
it might have told them that Rome is dangerous, that they should not interfere or that Rome is an easy target to attack.Doc A is all the emperors who died protecting Rome and Doc B is about the soldiers wearing no armor and how they died.Doc C is the map of how the invaders got into Rome and Doc B is how the soldiers wore no armor and failed to protect it.The Huns were the ones who invaded Rome and Doc D is about the Huns (from a roman POV).Life with the Huns was better than life with the Roman government. The Huns had fair laws that you couldn't buy your way out of, and Romans were opposite.the most important three causes in my opinion are legal injustice,political assassinations and military problems.
42
The message sent to the people outside the Roman empire is that the leadership is very unstable. There are too many people who want to have great power, and it makes them do bad things to gain it. I can infer this because 10 rulers (on the list) out of the 50 year ruling were assassinated. Each emperor ruled for 7 years at the most. Yes, there is a connection. They both talk about the fall of Rome. Document A talks about how most early emperors were assassinated. It also told how the wasn’t ruling at times during those days. Document B tells how the soldiers were being lazy and gave up their armor. This tells that the soldiers never felt like fighting or being in a war. This was very dangerous for them. The last sentence says that they thought more about running than fighting. Yes, there is a connection. They both talk about the fall of Rome. Document A talks about how most early emperors were assassinated. It also told how the wasn’t ruling at times during those days. Document B tells how the soldiers were being lazy and gave up their armor. This tells that the soldiers never felt like fighting or being in a war. This was very dangerous for them. The last sentence says that they thought more about running than fighting. I can use the document by using all of the author’s humor. Amrnianus made jokes about the Huns. Some phrases and words he used were “thick necks”, “ugly”, “completely ignorant”, and more. The humor and jokes explain how this Roman and maybe more Romans feel about the Huns. The point of view is from a mean Roman. The document says that Priscus talked to an old Roman citizen whos land was conquered by the Huns. He is talking about how they destroyed everything and took everything away. It isn’t normal at all to just come and do that. I think that the political assassinations, military problems, and foreign invasions were the most important. The political assassinations weren’t good because each emperor didn’t rule for a long time. Then times while there were no emperor, you never knew what could happen. Involving the military problems, the soldiers became lazy and set their armor aside. When there was a fight, they all thought about running away instead of fighting. This is very dangerous because they could mist likely be killed. The foreign invasions were terrible because foreign people shouldn’t come on to other people from other country’s property and destroy it. This leads to more danger and more deaths.
43
A messenger might have come to all the villages to tell everyone the emperor has died. I got this info from document A. i don't think the info is reliable because i doesn't tell you really any info.i think they are not alike because in document A, they talk about emperors getting killed, and in document B, they talk about soldiers not wearing and losing in battles. I got this info in document A, and B. I think this info is reliable because it tells you about soldiers not using armor, and emperors getting assassinated.There is a connection because in document B it tells you that the soldiers don't wear any armor and lose battles, and in document C tells you rome is being invaded a lot, and it's because they keep losing battles. I got this info from document C and B. I think this info is reliable because at first it shows you the romans are losing, and in the aftermath they get raided by many armies and lose power.I can help explain the decline of rome from using this document because it tells you about this army called the huns they exeed savagery in any way possible, and later on they take over rome, not only gaining power but wiping out the whole roman government. I got this info from document D. I think this info is reliable because it tells you about the people who later take over Rome. I can also use this document to explain the decline of rome because it full on talks about the huns taking over the roman empire and how they did it. I got this info from document E. I think this info is reliable because it tells you about how the huns took over Rome.I think the three main disasters of rome were the natural disasters, the soldiers without armor, and the invasions, I think these were the three main disasters, because first the soldiers don't have armor and lose battles, and the natural disasters happen weakening rome, and thats when the armies raid rome. I got all this information from the document. I think all of this is reliable information, because it tells you how rome fell.
44
The message that would be sent is that the government is unstable. In the chart above it shows that there were 13 assassinations. This meant that the empire was open to attack. This was bad because others outside of the Roman Empire could takeover.No, I do not think there is any connection between Document A and Document B because they are talking about 2 separate things. Document A is talking about the time periods the Emperors lived in and how they died. For example, Maximinus lived in the time between 235-38 CE and he died because he was murdered. Then in Document B it is talking about how the soldiers did not want any armor and how the Emperor was lazy to actually give permission to the soldiers to do that. In paragraph one and two it states, “Therefore, they first asked the emperor to set aside the breastplates . . . and then the helmets. So our soldiers fought the Goths without any protection for chest and head and were often beaten by archers.” That is why the two documents have no connection.I don’t think there is any connection between the 2 docs because again they are talking about two different things. Doc C is showing who led to the cause of the fall, but Doc B is talking about how the army became weak because of their emperor and the lack of protection, and it’s also talking about how if the draft isn’t working then there’s less soldiers. Evidence from Doc C is that the Vandals were the last to go to Rome which could only lead to the assumption that they were the ones to cause Rome to fall. Then from Doc B the evidence is that they say, “ Therefore, they first asked the emperor to set aside the breastplates . . . and then the helmets. So our soldiers fought the Goths without any protection for chest and head and were often beaten by archers.” later down it says, “There can be little doubt that the weaknesses of the late Roman army were largely due to the eventual failure . . . to enforce regular conscription [draft of soldiers]”. This prove my point that these two documents are different.I can use this document to explain the decline of the Roman Empire because the Huns were uncivilized, lawless, and strong. So the Romans couldn't beat them because the Huns were stronger than them. In the text it is stated that, “Fired with an overwhelming desire for seizing the property of others, these swift-moving and ungovernable people make their destructive way amid the pillage and slaughter of those who live around them.” This is why I think that the Romans could not win against the Huns if the Huns were to come and takeover. I can use this doc to explain what caused the decline of the Roman Empire because the other Romans are now saying that they are happy that the Huns have conquered them. In the end of that paragraph it says, “[He said] that the laws and constitution of the Romans were fair, but deplored that the governors, not possessing the spirit of former generations, were ruining the state.” This tells me that Rome is corrupting. Between all of these I think the 3 most important causes are political assassination, military problems like armor and conscription, and natural disasters. I chose these three because they show that the Roman Empire declined because the emperors were not good leaders, they were lazy, they were unwanted and unpopular, so that would leave a very easy opening for outsiders to attack. But other than that the fall was caused by natural disasters like tsunamis. Not being good leaders and being lazy and be found in Document B. Then being unpopular and getting attacked is from Document A. Then the natural disasters can be found in Document F in the first paragraph. This is why I think these causes are the most important.
45
They're probably sending like "warning" people Yes there is because they both talk about The Roman EmpireYes there is because both of them talk about misunderstanding the ChristiansI can see it because it talks about the Roman Empire I can see it because the Christian did their work but were mistreatedI think Invasions and natrual disasters because people may of lost their homes//shelter and maybe have no food
46
This sends a message to emperors outside the Roman Empire not to treat their people poorly. This is my evidence from a site. This states that people outside the empire can mistreat other people as well.In document A, it show a chart that tells us how all of the emperors died, what this means is that those emperors died because of BAD LEADERSHIP. In document B, it is talking about how weak the army was because of bad leadership. This is document A and B’s connections.Document B and C have a connection because the bad army does not have any armour and can’t protect anything, in document C, the foreign armies can’t protect anything either. These things are stated in the document. This states that both the armies are really really bad and can’t protect anything at all.The Romans killed other romans during the Huns and maybe the other Romans killed the army so the population decreases. This is stated in the document. This states that the Romans are destroying the Empire.The document states that Romans think war is better than peace because during a time for peace the taxes and paying for things grow larger by the minute and unprincipled men inflict harm on other people. This is stated in the document above. This states that peace is worse than war in the Roman Empire.I think my three would be natural disasters, assassinations, and legal injustice because these three are reasons why the human population is going down. This is stated in all the documents above. This states that many people have died during these three events of murder.
47
It sent to the people of the Roman Empire of how on different Emperors of how long they were there for and how they died. My evidence is I found this in the text. My interpretation is I found this in each of the columns that said Emperor, Reign, and Cause of Death.
No, there is no connection because in Document A it talks about death etc., but in Document B it just talks about how it happens that troops in battle, exposed to wounds because they have no armor, think about running and not about fighting. My evidence is I found this in the text. My interpretation is I found this in Documents A and B.
Yes, there is a possible connection because they both talk about Rome. My evidence is I found this in the text. My interpretation is I found this in Document B and C.

I can use this document because it talks about some the bad I wild things that they did in Rome. My evidence is I found this in the text in Document D. My interpretation is it says that the Huns exceed any definition of savagery. They have compact, sturdy limbs and thick necks Although they have the shape of human beings, they are so wild in their way of life that they have no need of fire or pleasant tasting foods, but eat the roots of uncultivated plants and the half-raw flesh of all sorts of animals. This they place between their thighs and the backs of their horses and so warm it a little .

I can use this document because it talks about The condition of [Roman] subject. A [wealthy lawbreaker] is not punished for his injustice, while a poor man undergoes the legal penalty. The climax of misery is to have to pay in order to obtain justice [He said] that the laws and constitution of the Romans were fair, but deplored that the governors, not possessing the spirit of former generations, were ruining the state. My evidence is I found this in the text. My interpretation is I found this in Document E and before [He] considered his new life better than his old life among the Romans, and the reasons he gave were as follows: The condition of [Roman] subjects in time of peace [is worse than war] taxes are very severe, and unprincipled men inflict injuries on others .
I regard the natural disasters because so many bad thing were happening such as t in initiating the process of decline was a series of plagues that swept over the empire which brought diseases [from] southern Asia to new areas like the Mediterranean, where no resistance had been established even
to contagions such as the measles. The resulting diseases decimated the population. The population of Rome decreased from a million people to 250,000. Economic life worsened in consequence. Recruitment of troops became more difficult, so the empire was increasingly reduced to hiring Germanic soldiers to guard its frontiers. The need to pay troops added to the demands on the state's budget, just as declining production cut into tax revenues. My evidence is I found this in the text . My interpretation is I found this information in Document F.

48
Based on Doc A the message these frequent and violent changes might have sent to the people living outside of the Roman Empire is they might think that the empire is growing weaker and they could invade or nice neighbors might think they need help or other people might think this is a very violent place we should leave so nothing happens to our empire.
There is a connection in Doc A and Doc B in my opinion because in Doc A it is talking about how the emperors are dying leading to weakness in the government, and in Doc B it is talking about how the soldiers didn’t want to wear armor which led to a lot of deaths meaning weakness in the government.
There is a possible connection between Doc C and Doc B because in Doc C it is showing who and where the invaders are coming from and in Doc B it is talking about why the invaders decided why to start invading the soldiers decided they didn't want armor and a lot of them died allowing invaders in because Rome had a week army.

How I can use Doc D to help explain the decline of the Roman Empire is it talks about the Huns who are the people who end up invading the Roman Empire and end up taking over.
How I can use Doc E to help explain the decline of the Roman Empire is, it is an interview with someone who experienced the Huns invading stating that the Huns invaded. In this interview the person being interviewed said that the taxes were so high and the governors were ruining the state (this is when the Romans were in charge). This person being interviewed said he liked the Huns ruiling better than the Romans.
Which problem I thinks is the worst is military problems. The reason why I think this is because with a weak military all the bad things stated will happen. Like political assassinations, if there was a stronger military they could protect their leaders but since they are weak they can't. Also foreign invasions if the military was stronger they could stop these people from invading since they are weak they can't. Those are two examples of what I mean.
49
People living outside of the Roman Empire may have seen Rome to be an empire with poor government. the document states most of the emperors being assassinated. Therefore Rome had an unstable government and the emperors may have been tyrants to usually be killed purposely.There is no connection between doc. A and doc.B. They talk of the emperors in doc. A and of the military in doc. B. the text states in doc. A the emperors and their deaths, while doc. B states the military and how they failed Rome. So, the two document have no relation to each other due to their topics.The possible connection in doc. C and B is how they both talk of invasions or of the military. The writing states in doc. B how they military couldn't fight back to the invasions, and in doc. C they talk of the invasions that had happened. In conclusion the two document have a small connection.This document explains the decline of the Roman empire by talking of the Huns, one of the invaders of the Roman Empire. According to the text ''Like unthinking animals, they are completely ignorant of the difference between right and wrong." Therefore the learning of the Huns helps explain what the Huns were like and what it may have been like during the time they took over Rome.Doc. E explains life after the Huns' invasion, this helps explain how one of the citizens in Rome felt and went through. the text states "[He] . . . considered his new life . . . better than his old life among the Romans, and the reasons he gave were as follows: . . . The condition of [Roman] subjects in time of peace [is worse than war] ''. This shows that the Roman felt better after the invasion of the Huns.I find political assassinations, military problems, and foreign invasions to be the three most important causes due to how much they changed Rome. the documents state most of the emperors had been assassinated, the military was lazy and could not protect Rome, and people considered the time during foreign invasions to be better than their old life among Romans. So, I find these to be the three most important causes due to how much they change they caused Rome.
50

The message these violent changes send to other people is that the Roman Empire is falling and it's a good time to invade because they are vulnerable. I know this because in the document it says that more than half of the emperors died in battle. So I think what the document is trying to tell is that Rome was in peril and that's the message this document probably gave the people who lived outside the Roman Empire.		The only connection I see between document a and document b is the emperors. In document b it says that in order to get rid of the extra armor they had to ask emperors for permission and in document a it shows that most emperors died in battle. I think what they have to do with one another is that the emperors said yes to less armor which caused them to not be as protectant and maybe that's why so many emperors were assassinatedThe connection I see between document c and b is the Visigoths and the ostrogoths, also known as the goths. In document c it shows the Visigoths and the ostrogoths passed through Rome at one point in time and in document c it says “So our soldiers fought the Goths without any  protection for chest and head and were often beaten by archers.” This means that the goths invaded Rome and that's what these document agree on.You can use document d to explain the decline of the Roman empire because it shows how strong, organized and focused the Huns are. In the text it says “Fired with an overwhelming desire for seizing the property of others, these swift-moving and ungovernable people make their destructive way amid the pillage and slaughter of those who live around them” I think this document shows how powerful the Huns were and how Rome would struggle to fight them.
Document e helps explain the decline of the Roman empire because it shows how some people wanted the Huns to invade because life was unfair in Rome. In the text it says "taxes are very severe, and unprincipled men inflict injuries on others . .. A [wealthy lawbreaker] . . . is not punished for his injustice, while a poor man . . . undergoes the legal penalty." This explains that maybe Rome fell to the Huns because people let it to fall and some wanted it to be taken over.
I think the most important 3 causes are assassination, military problems, and foreign Invaders. I think that assassination is an important cause because after an important person is assassinated it takes a while for the empire to get back on track. They have to find a replacement, find out who did it, how they got in, and enforce security which makes it a vulnerable time during that process. I think military problems is a it's important because if soldiers don't have enough armor more soldiers will die and without conscription then they don't have enough soldiers to replace the ones that died in battle because they didn't have enough armor. Foreign invasions is an important cause because this causes panic in the empire and many people die when Invaders come.
51
The people living outside of Rome may take this the same way. They may believe it is not safe to go to Rome because there are dangerous people. The short reigns of these emperors and their deaths may influence both peoples.
My connection is that they are both talking about a very similar issue. Document A is talking about the laziness of the soldiers and Document B is about the failure to recruit as many soldiers. This document could lead to Document A’s dilemma. In document B, it is talking about how the Romans discarded their armor due to laziness. In this document it is describing the invasions of Rome. This is saying that all of the Roman soldiers who were fighting the invaders on this map were fighting armorless as previously stated.The Huns invaded Rome. This document describes how they fight and probably act. This may have been how they took over Rome.This document helps to explain the fall of Rome. This explains the opinions of someone under the rule of Rome and being unhappy about it. This shows the dislike of Rome coming from the citizens.I think the military and legal system were the main cause. The government became weak and so did the military. This was why they lost to so many of the invaders and the other things worsened in damage because of the weak government.
52
The message of the frequent and violent changes in leadership caused was that they were not safe. Since most of the rulers were assassinated, they most likely felt that the rulers were not good enough, so then that would mean that they did not know how to lead properly. So all in all, I say that the people of the Roman Empire were not really feeling that safe.I don’t think that there is a connection between document A & B because while Document A shows a chart of how the rulers all died, Document B shows how lazy the soldiers are being. I feel like there is no connection between the reason of the rulers death and the lazy soldiers. There is nothing related about it.Yes, I feel like there is a connection between Document C and Document B. Document C is a map of the invasions and document B is about the lazy soldiers and how they didn’t wear the armor for protection. So in conclusion, due to the lack of protection and laziness from the soldiers, the outsiders invaded easily because the soldiers were weak, leaving the city vulnerable. Over-time, invaders came more frequently.This document can help explain the decline of the Roman Empire because it tells us what they thought of the Huns, meaning that they might have seen their ways. If the Huns were not close to Rome, then how would they have seen the Huns. I don’t believe that the people of Rome would just go out there and start searching for the Huns.It can help explain the fall of Rome because it talks about the point of view of that man. The text indicates that the man likes his life better with the conquering of the Huns than of under the Roman Rule. So is conclusion, the former people of Rome that have been conquered by the Huns may have not wanted to go back to Roman rule.I consider the military problems, plagues, and the tsunamis the most important causes. I feel like they were the most important the military problems made it hard for the empire to protect itself. The military problems made Rome become vulnerable for attack and invasion. The tsunamis destroyed the coasts of Sicily, Greece, and Egypt. Last, but not least, plagues. Plagues wiped out 75% of the population and damaged the crops leaving Romans starving. These 3 causes are what I think are most important.
53
That their emperor is ruthless.13 out of 22 of the emperors were assassinated or possibly assassinated. Their leaders are ruthless and violent to their citizens the leadership was so bad the citizens if the roman empire killed their leader because they hated him so much.There is a major connection between document a and b. Document a talks about each emperor how long they ruled and how they were killed.document b talks about how the roman empire was weakened by the soldiers behavior.both talk about the roman empire and how week it was over time.Yes there is a connection. Document b was about b was about how the government was week. Document c was about how the reasons for the decline of the roman empire.both documents were about the fall of rome. How the huns conquered the roman empire.How the romans all prefered and considered the start of a new beginning when the huns conquered the roman empire. The romans were all happy to be conquered by the huns.Legal injustice natural disasters and military problems.Over the last several years, there has been a noticeable uptick in terribly confused thinking about military matters that extends to understanding the nature of conflict, the role of military forces, and general thinking about military affairs.An adverse event will not rise to the level of a disaster if it occurs in an area without vulnerable population.Running through the history of jurisprudence and legal theory is a recurring concern about the connections between law and justice and about the ways law is implicated in injustice.
54
That it is dangerous to live there. According to the text, after Julius Caesar became emperor, Rome became a powerhouse. Julius Caesar killed many people to gain political power. This evidence supports my claim because Julius may have seen you as a threat, and beaten you or worse.
Yes, because they both explain how the empire was slowly weakening by their weak emperors and lazy army. According to the text, Quintillus was either killed by assassination or suicide which shows a sign of weakness or dislike by the public (Document A). The text also suggests “Before the year 400 CE, foot soldiers wore breastplates and helmets. But when, because of negligence and laziness, parade ground drills were abandoned, the customary armor began to seem heavy since the soldiers rarely ever wore it.” Which shows laziness (Document B). These pieces of evidence support my claim because both sources explain how the empire slowly weakened from weak emperors and lazy armies.Yes, because they both describe the fall of Rome. According to both documents B and C, the fall of Rome resulted in foreign armies in their borders, and a weak military. Therefore, this evidence supports my claim by explaining where the connection was between the two documents.It explains which groups, like the Huns, tried (and succeeded) in the fall of Rome. According to the map, the Huns, the Vandals, the Ostrogoths, and the Visigoths tried to conquer Rome. But only the Huns succeededIt describes how the corrupt government caused the empire to fall into the hands of the Huns. According to the text, the laws and constitution were fair and Rome, but the governors were ruining the state. This evidence supports my claim because it explains how the government relates to the fall of the Roman empire.Political assassinations, military problems, and legal injustice are the three most important causes. According to the chart in Document A, 13 out of 22 emperors were assassinated. That suggests that those emperors were not very effective with their ruling strategies. According from the text from Document B, “[Before the year 400 CE] foot soldiers wore breastplates and helmets. But when, because of negligence and laziness, parade ground drills were abandoned, the customary armor began to seem heavy since the soldiers rarely ever wore it. Therefore, they first asked the emperor to set aside the breastplates . . . and then the helmets.” This suggests that the armies became lazy and unloyal. Finally, according to the text in Document E “ The condition of [Roman] subjects in time of peace [is worse than war] . . . taxes are very severe, and unprincipled men inflict injuries on others . .. A [wealthy lawbreaker] . . . is not punished for his injustice, while a poor man . . . undergoes the legal penalty . . . [He said] that the laws and constitution of the Romans were fair, but deplored that the governors, not possessing the spirit of former generations, were ruining the state.” This evidence suggests that the government was not doing a very good job.
55
I think that it could have make them feel uneasy and nervous about their government. Because according to the text it says that 60% of them died of assassinations. This probably means that the people do not like the emperor's. I think there is some connection because there both stating how the roman empire is falling apart. But in 2 different ways this one states that the army is lazy and the other one stated that the government was falling apart. I found this info in both documents. I Think there’s a connection because Doc B and C are both stating how the empire was falling apart with war. So this means that rome was really bad. I found this in the document above.It can explain it because the huns were such a fighting force that the romans couldn't withstand them. This is stated in document above. If it is true that the romans were lazy hey couldn't stand a chance against the hunsThis explains how rome was getting destroyed and how their government was corrupt. So nobody went to jail. I found this in the doc above.
I think the three most important are natural disasters, military problems and foreign invasion. Because if there is no military the the foreigners are going to take over. Also if there is no money to help people the tehre all going to die.
56
These frequent and violent changes might have sent the message that the Roman empire was declining and the peace was going away. My evidence is that in the chart, most of the deaths were by assassination. This means that the rulers weren’t favored by the Romans and that there was no stability which led to their decline.They are related because they both talk about the events that led to the Roman Empire’s fall. Document A showed us that the emperors weren’t successful in leading Rome. Document B showed us that citizens became lazy which also led to their decline.There is possible connection between Document C and B. They are connected because they both show the decline of the Roman Empire. Document B tells about the army getting weaker and Document C shows us Rome being invaded by germanic tribes. You can use this document to help explain the decline of the Roman Empire because this document explains that the Roman thinks the Huns are savages. That tells us that the Huns were a major part in the decline because if the Huns didn’t help destroy their empire, then why say all these “unkind” things? So we can make the inference that the Huns invaded Rome.
I can use this document to help explain the decline of Rome because it tells us from a Roman’s subject point of view. They tell us how it’s like to live in Rome. According to the text, “ [He said] that the laws and constitution of the Romans were fair, but deplored that the governors, not possessing the spirit of former generations, were ruining the state.” This tells us how the government was not successful in helping the Roman Empire.
I think the 3 most important causes were the military problems and consumption, the foreign invasions, and the natural disasters. I think these three are the most important because it impacted the most. The military problems were important in the fall of Rome because the army became weak so they weren’t able to protect themselves. The foreign invasions were also important because the empire was considered by historians to have fallen at that time. The natural disasters were important because it caused a major tax issue. These are the events I think are most important in the fall of Rome.
57
That it was not peaceful time for them. Many, Roman Emperors were being assassinated, which is oviously not good. They can tell that the roman empire started to weaken. And that could have been a sign that they could, invade.Yes because they both talk about how the empires weaken. In document a, it weakens because there being killked, assasinated. And in document b, there weakening because they didnt wear amor and that lead to ingurgy which lead to them not wanting to fight anymore. This shows that they both weakened.Yes, there both about the wekening on rome. In document c, it shows the invasions. In document b, it shows how the roman army didnt want to wear armor anymore, which lead to them not wanted to fight. This could help explain the decline of the Roman Empire. Because, the romans thought they were uncivilized and lawless. Also because they weren't liked by the romans so that could have triggered something.This docuent could help because, the roman goverment wasnt good enough. Evidence, that the laws and constitution of the Romans were fair, but deplored that the governors, not possessing the spirit of former generations, were ruining the state. I regard the natural disasters to be the most important because that killed so many people, and it was super tradjeic. Evidence, the Roman world was shaken by a violent and destructive earthquake . . . . The shores of the Mediterranean were left dry by the sudden retreat of the sea . . . but the tide soon returned with the weight of an immense [flood] which was severely felt on the coasts of Sicily, . . . Greece, and of Egypt . . .. Fifty thousand persons had lost their lives in the flood [in the city of Alexandria alone. This was a terrible time for them.
58
The message that these frequent and violent changes in leadership have sent to people living outside the Roman Empire is that Rome's Empire has weakened and has become dangerous. According to the chart, there has been 22 emperors in 50 years. Therefore, Rome has become vulnerable and weak.

The connection between Document A and B is that they both talk about the fall of the government including the all of the emperors. In Document A, the chart shows the 22 emperors that died in 50 years and Document B shows how the government and the army had declined and lost interest in each other.
Yes there is, because Document C and B both talk about the decline of the Roman Empire. Document C has a map that shows us the route of the foreign invasions. Document B talks about how the government was careless about the soldiers.

This document helps explain the decline of the Roman Empire by talking about the enemies and how they slaughtered the Romans. “Fired with an overwhelming desire for seizing the property of others, these swift-moving and ungovernable people make their destructive way amid the pillage and slaughter of those who live around them.” The Romans classified them as savages and lawless.

I can use this document to help explain the decline of the Roman Empire by its corruptions. “ . . . The condition of [Roman] subjects in time of peace [is worse than war] . . . taxes are very severe, and unprincipled men inflict injuries on others . .. A [wealthy lawbreaker] . . . is not punished for his injustice, while a poor man . . . undergoes the legal penalty . . .” Based on Document E, the decline of Rome also had fair laws but unfair governors who execute the laws. I believe that the military problems, the foreign invasions, and the natural disasters are the three most important causes. I believe that they are the most important three clauses because the natural disasters can’t be stopped, the foreign invasions, for example the Huns have slaughtered the Romans, and the military problems because now they are very vulnerable without a well fit army to protect them.
59
I think that people outside of Rome who noticed this would think that this would be an easy empire to conquer. This is because of the range of rulers’ lifespans being from 1 year to 4 years, meaning that the empire would be weak. This shows that Rome is an easy target.I think that document A and B are similar because both have to do with terrible emperors. In document A, there is a chart where 20 of the 22 people are assassinated because of their bad leadership. In document B, it talks about how lazy emperors are not properly training the military. Both of these examples show that the lazy emperors are the ones to blame when it comes to the fall of Rome. I think that these documents are related because of the failed attempt of the military trying to stop the different tribes from raiding Rome. In document B, the military is being very lazy and not well prepared for these raids, while document C talks about the many raids on Rome by the many tribes. This shows that these two documents are similar, and that the Romans were very bad at being a military.This document helps explain the fall of Rome by giving you the Roman perspective of their enemies. This is supported by the harsh treatment Ammianus gives to the Huns by calling them savage, or wild animals. This shows that the Romans were very rude to their enemies, and that the enemies are causing the decline of Rome.This document can be used to explain the fall of the Roman Empire by telling you how harsh the government was on the people. This is supported by the severe taxes and terrible government. This shows that this contributed to the fall of the Roman empire.I think the most important causes for the fall of the Roman Empire are political assassinations, military problems, and foreign invasions. Evidence for this claim is that the many assassinations have weakened the government to the point of the emperors becoming lazy. This causes the military to also become unprepared and lazy, too. When there was an invader trying to conquer Rome, the invaders would win because the military didn’t get the proper training, as well as the right equipment. This shows that these were the main causes for the fall of the Roman Empire.
60
It could send to people living outside of Rome a unsettling feeling because the majority of their leader were assasanated and it took 22 leaders to rule for only 50 years. The chart shows “ only six out of the twenty two rulers died either in battle, of suicidle death, or of a natural cause.” The impression on other people outside of Rome was not a good thought.Yes because they both show how the Roman Empire is falling. The sources state “ how the government fell, and then how the army fell.” and “ it shows the inefficient ways of how thing became.”. Both sources relate because they lead to the fall of Rome.Yes because document B talks about the fail of the army and document C is about the invasions on the roman empire. The sources state that “ There can be little doubt that the weaknesses of the late Roman army were largely due to the eventual failure . . . to enforce regular conscription [draft of soldiers]” The map shows the invasion of the Roman Empire.Misunderstanding of the Huns led to thinking less of them so it only made the relationship between them worce. The text states that “ Although they have the shape . . . of human beings, they are so wild in their way of life that they have no need of fire or pleasant tasting foods, but eat the roots of uncultivated plants and the half-raw flesh of all sorts of animals. “ and “ learning from their earliest childhood to endure freezing cold, hunger and thirst . . . . Huns are not well adapted to battle on foot, but are almost glued to their horses, which are certainly hardy, but also ugly”. This only made matters worce which led to the fall of Rome. This shows the decline of the just government, of the Roman Empire. The text states that “ The condition of [Roman] subjects in time of peace [is worse than war] . . . taxes are very severe, and unprincipled men inflict injuries on others . .. A [wealthy lawbreaker] . . . is not punished for his injustice, while a poor man . . . undergoes the legal penalty . . . . The climax of misery is to have to pay in order to obtain justice”. This is how the unjust government was leading to the fall of Rome.The political assassination was the worst because you need good rulers to prosper and and if any of the other events happen then you need a strong leader to lead you through the disaster. The chart shows that “ twenty two leaders ruled in a fifty year time span” and “ most were assassinated which is terrible because it shows the amount of trust they had in the rulers.”. To prosper you need one or two rulers in a fifty year time span mabey three, the political assassination was the major fall in Rome.
61
Because of the violent chances in leadership people thought they would be better of living outside of the roman empire because 13 emperors were assassinated in 50 years and that would suggest that they weren't the best at their job. Yes, because in document A the text states all of the emperors who ruled in a 50 year period, a lot of these emperors died in battle, document B states that the soldiers refused to wear armor which caused the destruction of cities causing a lot of death and destruction including the emperors fighting in the war. These two documents connect because the roman emperors probably died in battle because because the soldiers refused to wear armor and caused the emperors in battle to die. Yes because they both show the fall of Rome it’s just that this is a map about the invasion that caused the fall of Rome.This document helps explain the decline of the roman empire because people who decided to live outside of the Roman empire joined the tribe called the Huns so they didn't have to live in the roman empire which caused taxes to go down because no one was paying them and the people who stayed talked bad about the Huns.In document E it states that the Huns have taken over Rome and people thought about life with the Huns and decided it wouldn't be so bad because at least they didn't have to live with the strict laws and punishments under the roman empire. Natural disasters because they caused a lot of death and destruction to cities that caused a decline in taxes because 75% of the people were dead. Military problems because without soldiers or soldiers wearing armor many cities were destroyed by other empires. Finally, Political assassinations because for an emperor to be assassinated they must really suck at there job which made the empire weak because of the rapid changes in leaders
62
The people outside the Roman empire will think that Rome is unstable and attack it and try to take it over a lot. Even though Rome is considered one of the stronger empires it’s very unstable and will be easier to attack later when they all drive each other crazy. This led to the end of Rome.Both Document A and Document B talk about the weakening of Rome. But in different ways, Doc. A talks about how the how the government is falling, Doc. B is talking about how the army is falling and how the army is slowly getting weaker and weaker. They are the same because they both have one general topic, the fall of Rome.Yes, there is some connection. Since the Roman army was weak because they had no armor on their head or chest, it was easy for people to win the battle and take over Rome. Taking over Rome is what document C is about and the soldiers getting weaker is what document B is about, one affects the other.He talks about how all the Huns do is make their destructive way amid the pillage and slaughter of those who live around them. Since the Roman army was already weak, it was probably really easy for the Huns to take them over, based on their reputation. This document has showed me that Rome was already declining once it turned into an empire.It explains that not many people liked it in Rome. So there is some turning against Rome happening because of how badly the citizens were treated. Since almost everyone that lived in Rome hated it so much, even before the people left it was probably hard to get people in the army, and less army means weak army and then the Huns to over and took some of them to their side.I think the most important causes were, the assassinations, military problems, and foreign invasions. The assassinations because this turned the Roman government to a corrupt government and no one could trust each other. The military problems because this made them weaker in battle and were easier to take over because they had less armor because the government was focused on something else and the soldiers were lazy. Lastly, the foreign invasions, because it kept causing Rome lose soldiers, which made Rome collect more taxes which made the people unhappy and caused them to move out of Rome. Rome slowly but surely was falling apart for a long time.
63
The message these extremely frequent and violent changes in leadership might have sent the people were to change from a empire in which emperor and the military have full power to a republic where the people chose their leaders.Yes, there are connections between document A and document B. In document A, the majority of the emperors were assassinated. In document B, it is learned that the Romans started to abandon armour and training techniques and started losing battles as a result. This might have angered the people, effectively making the people assassinate their emperor. Document B leads right into Document A.Yes, there is a connection between Document B and Document C because Document B talked about the fall of Rome. Document C has a map showing the routes the enemy took to get to Rome. Both documents talk about the fall of Rome.This document helps explain why Rome fell because not only does it open the door to the world of competition and how tough it is, but also shows how ignorant Romans were about other people.The Romans thought they were too strong and all mighty. You can use this document to explain the Roman empires fall because you can tell by the way the author explains the Huns that the Huns were really amazing leaders and didn’t impose taxes and didn’t make the people able to BUY their way out of court. This explains how much the people hated the Roman government. The Roman government had a severe case of crippling depression.The most important three causes would be armor and conscription, foreign invasions, and natural disasters, which are worse than the others because the others can be fixed by the government really easily. These however, need battles, medicine, and rebuilding to get through which puts them on the top three.
64
The Roman empire was probably scared and they probably tried not to get too attached to their rulers. Because all of the sudden a ruler can get killed when you just got used to him or if the went in battle and the died. Anyways the point is this was not a very safe empire or government.well the connection i see is that it shows emperors dying and how they die in document A. In Document B it shows how rome weakened because of the weak army so it could be similar because since rome got weaker more people died and that could include emperors. the connection i see is that Document B talks about how rome is weak and how they got weak and in C it shows, maybe how rome was weaker because so many troops were attacking and the army wasn't ready so it all connected to the fall of rome.this document explains since the huns were terrible they probably did horrible things to rome and the romans were afraid of them. This also shows how and why some like disasters happened i rome by the huns. which lead to the decline of rome.this document talked about that some people liked being with the huns better so that probably means that they lost people that way as well. which lead to the decline of rome. i think legal justice, natural disasters, and military problems, are the most important because legal injustice involves fairness, respect and equality which is qualities everybody should practice and have everyday. Natural disasters makes it hard for everyone to live because it ruins everything and kills a lot of people which means they run out of money to fix anything as well. Military problems makes the army weak and they can’t fight and so they lose lots of battles which destroys not only the actual city but the liking of people that live in that city and their decision on if they want to stay. I think these reasons made the empire decline because if you set rules you're supposed to follow them and if the leaders that made these rules aren't following them who else is gonna wanna follow them?
65
 This political environment of Rome came from on top of the world, to a swift and deadly fall. The majority of people outside of the Roman Empire must’ve been in shock. The most powerful Empire in the world had lost 22 emperors in 50 years.
Between Document A and B, the similarities I see involve the unstable nature of the army and emperors within the Roman Empire. The text from Document B, “But when, because of negligence and laziness, parade ground drills were abandoned, the customary armor began to seem heavy since the soldiers rarely ever wore it.”, “There can be little doubt that the weaknesses of the late Roman army were largely due to the eventual failure . . . to enforce regular conscription [draft of soldiers] .”, and the astounding, 22 deaths of Emperors within 50 years, in Document A. This all leads back to the initial claim of the Roman Empire becoming corrupt and beginning it’s downfall.
Document C and B both go deep into the last stage of the fall of Rome. The chart from Document C explaining the fatal invasion of the Vandals on Rome, and the text from Document B, “So our soldiers fought the Goths without any protection for chest and head and were often beaten by archers. Although there were many disasters, which led to the loss of great cities, no one tried to restore breastplates and helmets to the infantry. Thus it happens that troops in battle, exposed to wounds because they have no armor, think about running and not about fighting.” This is all just one piece of evidence dissecting the final years of the Roman Empire.

 The decline of the Roman Empire was wild and violent. In a way, I see this description of the Huns as a road map to the Roman Empire’s decline. Phrases like, “Huns are not well adapted to battle on foot…”, or “Like unthinking animals, they are completely ignorant of the difference between right and wrong. Fired with an overwhelming desire for seizing the property of others…” This text has a vague resemblance to the final years of Rome.
The Roman Empire was the most powerful in the world. A man stating that living with a savage tribe known as the “Huns”, is better that the place he formerly was, Rome. In the text, “The condition of [Roman] subjects in time of peace [is worse than war] . . . taxes are very severe, and unprincipled men inflict injuries on others.”, and “The climax of misery is to have to pay in order to obtain justice . . . . [He said] that the laws and constitution of the Romans were fair, but deplored that the governors, not possessing the spirit of former generations, were ruining the state.”, represent the near end of Rome.
 Out of all the six documents, I believe the most crucial part of the Roman decline is legal injustice. With trust in government, the citizens of a state are truer to their word and bring more inspiration to the table. “There can be little doubt that the weaknesses of the late Roman army
were largely due to the eventual failure . . . to enforce regular conscription [draft of soldiers] . . . . The exempted categories were . . . numerous. Hosts of senators, bureaucrats, and clergymen were entitled to avoid the draft; and among other groups who escaped were cooks, bakers, and slaves”. This evidence of government failure prevented the empire from strong soldiers, kickstarting their downfall.
66
The fact that the roman leaders were dying so frequently would’ve been a great opportunity for people living outside of rome because the roman empire wouldn’t be able to develop.
There might be a connection between doc. A & B. I think this because in doc. A it gives a chart of emperors that died some in were and in doc.B it says,’’ they first asked the emperor to set aside the breastplates . . . and then the helmets. So our soldiers fought the Goths without any protection for chest and head and because they have no armor were often beaten.’’ This shows that some of the emperors shown in doc. A that died in the war might have died because they didn’t have any armor.Many people could be trying to invade because they know to Romans have no armor as stated in doc. B. In doc. B it says,’’because of negligence and laziness, parade ground drills were abandoned, the customary armor began to seem heavy since the soldiers rarely ever wore it. Therefore, they first asked the emperor to set aside the breastplates . . . and then
the helmets.’’
In document D it talks about wild people called the Huns who are absolute savages with no way of life. This information is found in document D, sentences 2&3. This shows that the roman empire could get infested with Huns and the Romans wouldn't have any armor to protect themselves with.in document E it describes the chaos and lack of order in Rome. This is talked about throughout the document.The most important causes are military problems, foreign invasions, and natural disasters. I think this because natural disaster such as volcanic eruptions and floods can easily wipe out 50,000. This will dramatically cause a decline in population. Then there are foreign invasions that would be hard to defend against because the lack of enforce to wear armor.
67
The message that these frequent and violent changes in leadership sent to people outside of the Roman Empire were that the emperors were always getting assassinated so they thought it was a bad empire. No their were no connection between document A&B because document A talked about all the emperors and how they died. Document B is about how the soldiers didn't want to wear armor anymore.No because document C is about how the Vandals went through Rome to invade. Document B is again about how they're soldiers didn't want to wear armor.Document D explained the decline of the Roman empire because they were lying about how the huns savagery.Corruption of law made Rome horrible place to live
 Foreign Invasions and natural disasters because nobody wants to get invaded so they wouldn't like to come to Rome
68
The people living outside have Rome might have thought that the line have royalty might have not been such a good thing. It shows in document A that all the rulers were killed one way or the other. This explains why the people living outside have Rome would think that Rome was not a very safe and happy kingdom.
If you think about the two documents closely, you can figure out that since some of these deaths were in battle, the soldiers in the battlefield must have not been wearing armor. They could have also been lazy and neglected, so they could not fight hard enough to keep their leader alive. It stated in document B that soldiers fought without breastplates or helmets, and were often beaten by archers. If that was the case, then we can understand that their Emperor couldn't have survived.
This is a possible maybe. Document B mostly focused on the weaknesses of Rome’s military. Document C shows the invasions of Rome and the people who invaded them. So, the two documents don't have much in common. Except for the fact that maybe those places on the map were invaded because have the poor military. The Huns were a pack of savages. It states in document D that the Huns were raised as savages until they were grown up animals. They were glued to their horses, because they weren't very well adapted to combat on foot. Comparing the lazy Romans to these unthinking animals, the Roman’s population was most likely going to decline.
If a wealthy lawbreaker went into a trial with a poor man, the wealthy man would have a fair case, while the poor man has to pay for the right have justice. But is that really justice? More crime in the city means more people lose their valuables and end up on the streets. If they are too weak and poor to do a job, the society cannot run. And no one would get a fair case in court, so eventually, the population would decrease.
I would think that natural disasters, military problems, and foreign invasions are the three most important causes have the decline. Natural disasters can happen anywhere at any time! So, it’s very hard to avoid things like that. When you live in Rome, and you’re a man, you will probably have to do a lot have fighting. If there are even a few problems with the military, and your men have to retreat, you aren't going to win many battles. Therefore, many men will die. Foreign invasions were very common according to the map. But it wasn’t only Rome who was invading. When there’s an invasion, helpless children die, or get captured! Same thing with the women. The men will do their best to stop the invasion, but sometimes they can’t. Those are the reasons why those are the most important ways Rome’s population declined.

69
It could have shown that the roman empire was falling and probably an easy and big target. In the text a lot of emperors got assassinated and the people that assassinated them probably were trying to take over. It could have shown that the roman empire was falling and probably an easy and big target. In the text a lot of emperors got assassinated and the people that assassinated them probably were trying to take over. No because doc B talks about amour while doc C shows the time that places got invaded. It states in the text “foot soldiers wore breastplates and helmets. But when, because of negligence and laziness, parade ground drills were abandoned, the customary armor began to seem heavy since the soldiers rarely ever wore it.” which doesn't have to do anything with invasions in rome from foreigners. I guess if romans talk like that about other people then there probably not the one most people want to partner with anymore. In the text it says “The Huns exceed any definition of savagery”. I wouldn’t want to partner with someone if they were talking like that about anybody.If the conditions in a place of the world is so bad that they are happy when they get conquered by another something must be wrong in their land. Also he makes the conditions sound horrible which they probably were. In the text it says “[He] . . . considered his new life . . . better than his old life among the Romans, and the reasons he gave were as follows: . . . The condition of [Roman] subjects in time of peace [is worse than war]” he liked his new life among the huns and the first reason he gave already made rome sound horrid in which it probably was.I think natural disasters, military problems and foreign invasions are 3 reasons why the roman empire fell.i think natural disasters are one of the reasons rome fell because natural disasters were probably super hard or next to impossible to clean up, they still are. In the text it says “the Roman world was shaken by a violent and destructive earthquake . . . . The shores of the Mediterranean were left dry by the sudden retreat of the sea . . . but the tide soon returned with the weight of an immense [flood] which was severely felt on the coasts of Sicily, . . . Greece, and of Egypt . . .. Fifty thousand persons had lost their lives in the flood [in the city of Alexandria alone] .” that means a lot of their community got killed and then even more got killed with plagues. In the text it says “More important in initiating the process of decline was a series of plagues that swept over the empire . . . which brought diseases [from] southern Asia to new areas like the Mediterranean, where no resistance had been established even to contagions such as the measles. The resulting diseases decimated the population. The population of Rome decreased from a million people to 250,000.”that must have devastated all and only 250,000 people were able to help clean up the mess. The second thing i think took down rome was military problems. In the text it says “There can be little doubt that the weaknesses of the late Roman army were largely due to the eventual failure . . . to enforce regular conscription [draft of soldiers]”. If they had more army then they probably wouldn't have been beaten by foreign invaders. it also says “So our soldiers fought the Goths without any protection for chest and head and were often beaten by archers. Although there were many disasters, which led to the loss of great cities, no one tried to restore breastplates and helmets to the infantry. Thus it happens that troops in battle, exposed to wounds because they have no armor, think about running and not about fighting”. The breastplates and helmets that kept them thinking they were safe and helped them zone into defeating the other people, while without the armor they were thinking about if they got hurt because there isn't anything there anymore. The third main reason i think rome fell is foreign invasions. They already lost 75% of their population to natural disasters, all the dying soldiers and no one seeking to get more, and the last thing they needed were people like foreign invaders taking them. In the text it says “ Economic life worsened in consequence. Recruitment of troops became more difficult, so the empire was increasingly reduced to hiring Germanic soldiers to guard its frontiers. The need to pay troops added to the demands on the state's budget, just as declining production cut into tax revenues.” they had to pay people to stop other people from taking their people. crazy right?! It also took money from the government which they probably needed to help fix the city up, so they had to jump up taxes so they could try to get the city to go back to normal.
70
It might make them feel uncertain about their future. That there is instability among the leaders of the Roman Empire. This is obvious because accordingly, there were many assassinations of their rulers. Even by getting rid of these rulers, it showed that they were the ones with true power.Document A talks about how corrupt Rome’s government was, and Document B talks about how bad their army was in numbers and armor. They both talk about how bad and corrupt the army and government both are. Meaning they both are unorganized which is a connection between the two.They both talk about armies. In the map it shows routes from armies and Document B accordingly talks about their army. Document B Includes how Rome’s army is falling apart and how they are lazy, then Document C shows their routes and how easy it will probably be to invade Rome because of how Rome is lazy. So they connect when it comes to writing about armies.It shows how deadly the Huns really are and how the Roman army might fail. Since I already know how immature the Romans are in armies, the Romans would be more vulnerable and fail in a war against the Huns. Therefore this is why my answer is correct.It gives information about unfair laws that the Roman Empire set for the Romans that caused their decline. There were things such as,”taxes are very severe, and unprincipled men inflict injuries on others . .. A [wealthy lawbreaker] . . . is not punished for his injustice, while a poor man . . . undergoes the legal penalty”. This why and what caused the decline and the corruption of the Roman Empire.In my opinion I think the natural disasters, assassinations, and armor issues are most important causes of the decline. First of all, natural disasters can cause a huge and destructive impact on cities and towns, can end many lives, they could be tsunamis, earthquakes, hurricane, cyclones, and floods. Second of all, assassinations of rulers means a bad example for Rome and giving a bad reputation, especially to those outside wanting to live in Rome. Last of all, their armor issues and problem is really immature of them and really dumb in my opinion, they could save lives but no, they just don't feel like making the armor. If they actually did they would do great in wars and against archers which is a major impact. These are my three reasons and opinions why I think these declines are most important to Rome.
71
That a lot of people died and that they should change it. Also that dod something about it.
Yes there is a connection. The connection is There was no strong leader to be strong.yes there is a connection. The connection is having a weak army allowed the country to not be as good.
You can explain the decline of the Roman Empire because the invasion by the huns contributed to the romans decline.
You can explain the decline of the Roman Empire because the roman government was unfair leaving higher taxes to the poor.
The most important causes is natural disasters, military problems, and legal injustice. Natural causes can ruin a lot of where they live which causes a lot of money, military problems if there not a lot of soldiers and if one gets hurt it would be hard to fight, and legal injustice because when people leave to live in another place then the taxes would be higher one the poor.
72
People living outside the roman empire will think that the empire is weak because they can't stick to one ruler for a long period of time. There was 22 rulers in 50 years and 14 of them died of assassination. This is one of the events that caused the fall of rome.They both talk about the decline of roam. Document A was stating how man rulers were where in 50 years and how many of them died of natural deaths (not many ) and Document B it talks about how roam was falling and how they lost many battles.So over all they both talk about hoe roam fell.yes in document B it talks about how the romans lost invasions because of there laziness and in document C it talk about the different routs the invaders took to reach roam.so in both documents they talk about how the invaders came to roam and how the romans lost to the invaders .this document was written in the romans perspective so it explains how the romans see the huns ."The Huns exceed any definition of savagery. They have compact, sturdy limbs and thick necks . . . . Although they have the shape . . . of human beings, they are so wild in their way of life that they have no need of fire or pleasant tasting foods, but eat the roots of uncultivated plants and the half-raw flesh of all sorts of animals". in document E it states that the rich have a advantage because they can buy there way out of every thing ." taxes are very severe, and unprincipled men inflict injuries on others . .. A [wealthy lawbreaker] . . . is not punished for his injustice, while a poor man . . . undergoes the legal penalty". Foreign invasions,military problems,and legal injustice. I think that these three are the most important because the problems where caused or started inside of the empire it was caused buy the empire not natural events.
73
The people living outside of rome might have got an image that rome would be sad and weakened since part of the empire was dead as in assassination, killed in battles , and plagues , they could have got an image that they could beat them in wars or in battles or could send people from outer rome to assassinate someone from rome. I found this evidence in Document AIn my opinion yes , their is a connection because in Document A in the text it staes that many people were killed in battles , as in Document B states that many soldiers were killed because they were to lazy and that the armor was to heavy so they had to fight with no armor . I found these facts in Document B and Document A.Yes their is a connection in Document B it states that there were many disasters and led to the loss of great cities and in Document C it states that the Roman world was shaken by a violent and destructive earthquake their is a connection between these two facts. In document D its talking about the huns how they are ignorant and unthinking animals this might be a sign was in that the huns might have assassinated someone in rome since they are unthinking animal's this is a connection between Document A and Document D.It helps explaining the decline of the roman empire because Document E states that the Roman world was shaken by a violent and destructive earthquake as in Document C also states that the Roman world was shaken by a violent and destructive earthquake.The three most important causes in my opinion were as in Document C the earthquake that destroyed the roman world , Document B another of the important causes in my opinion the soldiers were to lazy to walk miles with heavy armor so they asked the emperor ro take the armor away that made the roman world weak , and lastly Document A because its like a mystery who could have assasssinated someone was it the huns or someone from outer rime or inner rome?
74
Since people paid heavy taxes and weren’t treated fairly they would not listen to their leader/leader. The citizens of the roman empire would agree to stop paying taxes which led corruption in the government.
Both documents talk about the corruption and weakening of the Roman empire. Document B features that Roman army were largely due to the eventual failure to enforce regular conscription. Soldiers refused to wear armor because their laziness. This led them to lose battles. Document A features that Rome’s size had its problems. Eventually everyone who lived in Rome was evacuated.
Both documents feature the decline of Rome. In document B it shows how the Romans ignorance led to many problems. They refused to wear armor which made them lose the battle. In document C it features attacks and battles all over Rome and what year they took place.In document D the document states the roman opinion on the Huns. They think they're uncivilized and lawless.(their food doesn't taste good).
The roman empire fell because it was unstable. The government forced its people to pay taxes that were very severe, and unprincipled men inflict injuries on others.I think that diseases, political assassinations,and foreign invasions led to the decline of rome. The problem with diseases is that they can spread to many amounts of people in a short amount of time. Every person in rome believed different things. It was impossible for everyone to like their leader. This led to killing and assassinations. Foreign invaders could take over a large empire.
75
This shows to the outsiders of Rome that if the emperors of Rome frequently get mostly assassinated and that they were hated by Rome citizen it wasn't a good community nor a safe place. The charts shows that 22 emperors were killed and 13 were assassinated. That shows it wasn't very peaceful in that time.There is not really a connection between Document A and Document B because document A shows how and when previous emperors died. Document B talks about how Rome weakened. The title says “Roman Emperors 235-285 CE”. The title of Document B is “Fall of Rome DBQ”. That means that they are different topics.
There isn't really a connection between document B and C. There isn't a connection because Document B talks about how the Rome Empire's army were lazy and didn't want to wear the armor that they supossed to wear because it was too heavy for them. Document C shows a map of the invaders that came to Rome and what time. The source says, "Source: An excerpt from the ancient book Concerning Military Matters by the Roman historian Vegetius, c. 450 C." "Foreign invaders of the Romn Empire". This means that they show two different things and on two different sources.
This document explains the decline of Rome because the Huns, as Ammianus Marcellinus says, exceed any definition of savagery and they were kind of like animals. The Huns were not well adapted to battle on foot, and glued on their horses most of the time. Because the Huns were untaught from right to wrong, they were fired up with a big desire to destroy others property and would slaughter those wholived around them. " Like unthinking animals, they are completely ignorant of the difference between right and wrong. Fired with an overwhelming desire for seizing the property of others, these swift-moving and ungovernable people make their destructive way amid the pillage and slaughter of those who live around them." That means that they didn't know the rules and how to interact with people the right way and were animal like.
This can help explain how the Roman Empire was declined because the more people heard that the former Romans were happier with the Huns, more people would want to leave and their wouldn’t be an empire anymore.”[He] . . . considered his new life . . . better than his old life among the Romans”. If everyone wanted to leave then the Roman empire probably would of wanted to start a war to get their people back but more people would of died.
I think all of these causes had their own part in the decline of Rome and all led up to creating different problems. For example, the military problems like armor and conscription, affected it a lot because they had a lack of people who wanted to be in their military and the armor was too heavy for them and they didn’t want to fight with it. This led to their military being weak and instead of fighting they would just run away. Their enemies had an advantage because of this reason of having not many military members, which led to them losing their wars. Another one is the natural disasters. The natural disasters caused 75% of the population go down. Like the tsunami caused by an earthquake and the plagues. The last one is the foreign invaders. Foreign invaders helped decline Rome like the other causes because they would rob Rome and it would be hard to make sure new ones don’t come back and they would have to replace the city again.
76
The message that has been sent to the people outside of the Roman Empire is that they probably wanted the Roman Emperors to die because if the Roman Emperors died, then the other empires would win. The evidence is that the people that are not with the Roman Empire are really happy that their empire has won. The evidence is important to the answer because the evidence is giving back up facts about the answer.
There is a connection between Document A and Document B because in Document A, it is giving you a lot of information on the different rulers and how they died and in Document B, it's explaining how and why the Roman Empire fell so fast. This information is stated in both Document A and B. This evidence is important to the answer because since the Roman Empire lost all of the protective armor, that was one of the reasons why the Roman Empire fell.
There is kind of a connection between Document B and C because Document C is a map of the invaders that came to Rome, but in Document B, it's explaining a little part of the decline of Rome. This is stated in my own words and in Document B and C. This evidence is important to the answer because with my own evidence it kind of backs up the real answer.This document can explain the decline of the Roman Empire because the Huns were really crazy and savages and they were apart of the decline of Rome. This is stated in the whole document. This evidence is important to the answer because the answer is stating how the Huns were crazy.This document can help explain the decline of the Roman Empire because it talks the law breaking and the government problems. This is stated in Document E. This evidence is important to the answer because it is telling you the government and the financial problems of Romes declines.I think the natural disasters are more important because those disasters could have destroyed their property and their territory.
77
That the empire is weakening and soon enough they would be weak enough to invade. That could also show how unstable the empire was and that lead to the downfall of the empire eventually.

That the empire is weakening and soon enough they would be weak enough to invade. That could also show how unstable the empire was and that lead to the downfall of the empire eventually.		No because they are 2 completely different subjects. I don’t see any link because one is about Armor and Soldiers. The other is about empires I see no link.Yes because this map could be used to back up Document B if needed to. It is sort of alike because it is talking about ambush and the other talks about attack and stratagy.It shows what could be used to defeat them. The huns could. these swift-moving and ungovernable people make their destructive way amid the pillage and slaughter of those who live around them. This proves my point.It shows how people started losing there faith in the government and wasn't as willing to do anything. [He said] that the laws and constitution of the Romans were fair, but deplored that the governors, not possessing the spirit of former generations, were ruining the state. This shows what they felt like.Military Armor because it can cause them to lose or win in a war. This is from anwser # 2 of Doc B It contributed by the soldiers being easier to defeat because they were unprotected. “ So our soldiers fought the Goths without any protection for chest and head and were often beaten by archers. Although there were many disasters, which led to the loss of great cities,” This shows how it contributed to the fall of rome.
78
I think the people of the Roman Empire might have been worried of what is going on in the leadership. Because there were so many leaders in such a short time, the citizens might think there are problems and that the leaders are not strong and they might need a new system of power or leadership.
In both documents the fall of Rome is discussed. In the first document the fall fo the roman empires is talked about. In the second document they talk about the fall of the roman army and how the soldiers laziness led to the fall of Rome.
Document C and document B both describe the fall of the roman empire. Document B describes how the soldiers refused to wear helmets and breastplates. In document C they show how many people attacked Rome and when.
This document describes the insane actions done, and this can weaken the Roman Empire. This was written from a roman point of view, and calling people “unthinking animals” might cause problems.
It was said the Romans were treated badly and the conditions were worse that war. If they were treated so badly they would not have a successful empire.
I think the most important of the three causes are foreign invasions, military problems like armor and conscription, and assassinations. Foreign invasions can weaken the army and kill many people in Rome. Less people is a weaker empire. Military problems also are a big issue. If soldiers don’t have the protection gear they need to fight they won't win any battles. They will just lower the populating and weaken Rome.
79
The Roman people are very violent and out of control. Their emperors did not rule in a way to keep their people happy.
There is a connection between Document A and Document B because they both explain how they died fighting with/without armor. This information can be found in Doc A&B.
There is no possible connection between Document B&C because Document B is talking about soldiers and how the Romans killed the Christians and Document C is showing us the ways people how they invaded and the ways to took to get to Rome.
You can use this document to explain the decline of the Roman Empire because it is telling us how the Huns conquered and took over Rome. It also explains how the Huns did not adapt too well on feet. This information can be found on Document D.
This document can help to explain what caused the decline of the Roman Empire because it is talking about taxes, laws, and many more. This information can be found on Document E.
The one I regard as the most important causes is military problems like armor and conscription because they explained how they killed the military with/ without armor. All the information about the military can be found on Document B.
80
It sent a message that the government was unstable, which meant the empire was vulnerable to attacks. In turn, outsiders sacked the entire city. “By the 5th century CE, when the city was sacked by outside invaders, Rome had been badly weakened by a number of problems.”
A The connection between document A and Document B is the decline of rome. Both of the paragraphs explain how rome declined. (Doc B)“Although there were many disasters, which led to the loss of great cities.” (Doc A)”Rome had been badly weakened by a number of problems.“
The connection between document B and C is the decline of Rome, by invasions and bad decisions, such as the removal of armor because it was too heavy, in document B, and the invasion if the Vandals, in document C. “Therefore, they first asked the emperor to set aside the breastplates . . . and then the helmets.”
Document D can help explain the decline of the Roman empire because of their battle skills and what they do. They destroy any man-made site they see that is not theirs. Then, they kill everybody in it. This means that they could of did this to the Romans, weakening them over time. "Fired with an overwhelming desire for seizing the property of others, these swift-moving and ungovernable people make their destructive way amid the pillage and slaughter of those who live around them. "
Many romans might of wanted their government to be like the Huns. So in turn, they protested until they got what they wanted, causing lots of property damage and destruction, allowing invaders in. “[He] . . . considered his new life . . . better than his old life among the Romans, and the reasons he gave were as follows: . . . The condition of [Roman] subjects in time of peace [is worse than war]”
The 3 most important causes, in my opinion, were the political assassinations, military problems, and natural disasters. I picked political assassinations because it sparked many events. It signaled a bad government to the people, meaning anybody could attack, leading to havoc. I also picked military problems, because it lead to great loss of military and land. They asked the emperor if they could stop wearing armor because it was too heavy. “So our soldiers fought the Goths without any protection for chest and head and were often beaten by archers.” Lastly, I picked natural disasters because of the great loss of lives. The main cause was the two diseases, measles and the plague. The loss of lives meant less taxes for the government, which also meant that there are less people eligible for the military, meaning that Rome was easy pickings. “ The population of Rome decreased from a million people to 250,000.”
81
the message might say that Rome is a unsafe place and does not have a strong army according to document a and b
yes their is a connection because in document a it is telling us that their was many art 22 emperors in the past 50 years and in doc B it states why the army was weak and thats made a redone that they died is because the people may not be strong enough to protect the empores .
yes in doc b it tells us that the people in the army abandoned their armor and they were being killed left and right and since the army was weak they got taken over and invaded.
how it help explains in document d the huns took over Rome because the roman army was weak and could not defeat the huns.
I dont understand the question but I know in document E that some people were happy about being taken over because the roman government was unfair.
the army had a big part of this because they grew weak an could not protect their emperors and got taken over by huns and also lost may battles ,and had have invasions because of this
82
The frequent and violent changes in leadership lead people outside of Rome to believe that it was weak. Thus many attacks happened. This eventually lead Rome to it's downfall.
There is not very many things that are the same, or that refer to each other, aside from the fact that terrible decisions were made during this confusing period of time.
Yes, the connection between document B talks about how the Roman army got rid of their armor and grew weak. In document C, it shows where and when people attacked Rome.
Document D describes the kind of people that attacked Rome. And the description makes them seem unbeatable. The Huns were the main reason Rome was destroyed.
Many people were becoming frustrated with Roman laws and government corruption. When the Huns came many people embraced their takeover and enjoyed their new lives.
Millitary problems, legal injustice and foreign invasion were probably the most important factors in Rome's downfall. If no one want's to serve and the army is weak then invasions will have an easier time taking control.
83
To not live in the Roman empire because it has bad emperors.
Yes. People did not like the emperors because they were ok with weak armies.
Yes there is a connection because people from other parts of the world had an influence on the Romans
Yes there is a connection because if the Huns are so crazy then they could easily lead to the decline of the Roman empire.
A lot of people liked not having to follow Roman laws when they were conquered by the huns and they realised that it was not fair that other people had to follow these laws.
MINB
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183