Answer:
Correct answer is answer C, Magistrates could appoint Senators.
Explanation:
Magistrates <em>appointed </em>Senators. Senators were elected by <u>Consuls, Tribunes and Censors</u>. But <u>Magistrates could select Senators </u>that, as in the case of an election by Censor, did not have the right to vote. <em>Even though Senators could have been appointed by Magistrates </em>(answer C), <em>those did not have the power to elect them</em> (answer D)
Senators were a deliberative organ, while Magistrates were a legislative organ. This means that Magistrates<u> created law</u>, and Senators were a political authority in the <u>representation of the whole Roman Empire</u>, having the power to move the military into war or construct new infrastructure. Therefore, this explanation indicates that <em>Senators did not rule over</em> the Magistrates (answer A) or <em>adviced the Magistrates</em> (answer B).
I believe it is B but double check me.
Answer: During the early republic, the Roman state grew exponentially in both size and power. Rome's complex political institutions, however, began to crumble under the weight of the growing empire, ushering in an era of internal turmoil and violence. In 27 B.C., Augustus became the first—of many—emperor of Rome.
Explanation: The most straightforward theory for Western Rome's collapse pins the fall on a string of military losses sustained against outside forces. Rome had tangled with Germanic tribes for centuries, but by the 300s “barbarian” groups like the Goths had encroached beyond the Empire's borders.
The answer is true. Hope this helps
