During the decline, the Roman army had been severely weakened to the
point where invaders that could have previously been defeated by the
Empire were eventually able to destroy it. Ultimately, the Roman Empire
collapsed because of "the general failure of its armies to perform the
tasks that were required of them." One reason for the breakdown of the
army was that the Roman legions would fight in civil wars over their
choices for Emperor because they were unhappy with the weaker Emperors
that were frequent in the later Roman Empire. "These struggles served as
an irresistible invitation to German and other enemies to break into
the distracted provinces." Although the civil wars served as a
distraction to the Roman army, the wars also had a detrimental effect on
the army because they damaged its manpower, both in quality and
numbers.
The Roman army during this time was divided into the high
quality soldiers, called the field force, and the lower quality
soldiers, referred to as the frontier force, who did not fight as much
as the field force. The frontier force was mainly deployed to local
garrisons that were not as volatile as the places where the field forces
fought. Because of the civil wars between the legions and the battles
against outside invaders and enemies of the Western Roman Empire, the
field force was considerably weakened and greatly reduced in number.
The field force had to take second-rate soldiers from the frontier
force, thus lowering the quality of the army. The waning quality of the
Roman army was not its only concern; there were also not a sufficient
number of new soldiers being drafted. all the info is in there thank litpick.com i didnt write this
Answer:
Competitive and empowering mindset helps athletes think they can achieve anything, along with the best and right tools. For example a football athlete thinks there's nothing he can't achieve because he has the agility, strength and physical fitness to play.
D. The national government lacked the ability to tax
Authenticating or Identifying Evidence, Rule 901 (a) ALL IN ALL. The proponent must provide evidence adequate to sustain a finding that the item is what the proponent asserts it is in order to satisfy the requirement of authenticating or identifying an item of evidence.
<h3>What is Rule 901. Authenticating or Identifying Evidence?</h3>
Authenticating or Identifying Evidence, Rule 901 (a) ALL IN ALL. The proponent must provide evidence adequate to sustain a finding that the item is what the proponent asserts it is in order to satisfy the requirement of authenticating or identifying an item of evidence. The authenticity of the evidence is one need that must be met for it to be considered admissible by the court. A rule of evidence known as "authentication" stipulates that there must be adequate evidence to support a determination that the thing in question is what its proponent says.
The first step in authenticating a piece of evidence is to call a witness who can attest from personal experience that it is what the claimant says it is. As an illustration, in United States v. Evidence must be sufficiently demonstrated to establish its authenticity in order for it to be admitted into court. Only a prima facie showing is necessary, hence the burden of proof for authentication is relatively low.
To learn more about Rule 901 refer to:
brainly.com/question/24261690
#SPJ4
