The Fall of the Western Roman Empire (also called Fall of the Roman Empire or Fall of Rome) was the process of decline in the Western Roman Empire in which it failed to enforce its rule, and its vast territory was divided into several successor polities. The Roman Empire lost the strengths that had allowed it to exercise effective control; modern historians mention factors including the effectiveness and numbers of the army, the health and numbers of the Roman population, the strength of the economy, the competence of the Emperor, the religious changes of the period, and the efficiency of the civil administration. Increasing pressure from "barbarians" outside Roman culture also contributed greatly to the collapse. The reasons for the collapse are major subjects of the historiography of the ancient world and they inform much modern discourse on state failure.[1][2]
Relevant dates include 117 CE, when the Empire was at its greatest territorial extent, and the accession of Diocletian in 284. Irreversible major territorial loss, however, began in 376 with a large-scale irruption of Goths and others. By 476 when Odoacer deposed the Emperor Romulus, the Western Roman Emperor wielded negligible military, political, or financial power and had no effective control over the scattered Western domains that could still be described as Roman. Invading "barbarians" had established their own power in most of the area of the Western Empire. While its legitimacy lasted for centuries longer and its cultural influence remains today, the Western Empire never had the strength to rise again.
The Fall is not the only unifying concept for these events; the period described as Late Antiquity emphasizes the cultural continuities throughout and beyond the political collapse.
I think that the Answer: is a
Explanation:
Hope this help glad to help
Answer:
Police say security cameras show her leaving the store at the time of the crime. What type of case is this, and what are the possible verdicts? This is a criminal case. The jury can rule that Aubrey is guilty or not guilty
Explanation:
The correct answer is Bias.
A trustworthy source is one that passes factual
knowledge without much bias (where Bias
means holding an unfair or fallacious opinion). In
simple terms, Bias is giving preference for one
thing over another. A source is fully reliable if it
does not show bias. History is a subject where
people reveal their opinions, hence, we have to
be very cautious while going through history.
However, Bias in the source does not
automatically make a source untrue or incorrect.
Recognizing which side the source favors only
allow us to highlight the gaps in the information.
