1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
pentagon [3]
3 years ago
8

What three things would conquered people would have to do in the Roman Empire?

History
1 answer:
mina [271]3 years ago
6 0

Answer:

Generally they had two very different approaches. By ancient standards — not ours, of course — the Romans were stern but not sadistic conquerors.

Their standard tactic was to enroll defeated enemies as Roman allies or socii. The local elites (or at least, a biddable subset of them) would remain in charge of local affairs. They would be self-governing as far as domestic affairs went. The primary requirement was that the foreign policy of an allied state was firmly subordinated to Rome: no independent alliances or wars were allowed. Socii were required to contribute troops to Roman wars; these troops fought in independent units under their own officers, but high command was exclusively Roman.

The worst thing that usually befell a defeated enemy was the loss of some territory, which could be taken to provide land to Roman settlers who would live there in a new city of their own: a colonia. The colonia was in part a form of plunder, since it took valuable agricultural lands from the defeated enemy. It was also a military foothold intended to keep an eye on strategic locales. However coloniae usually worked as agents of Romanisation as well, particularly in places like Gaul and Spain where the local people would see a Roman colony as a valuable market, a source of exotic goods, and a conduit to the wider world.

Most conquered peoples were gradually assimilated into Roman citizenship. In Italy, this came about through an actual war: long time Roman allies fought to demand full citizenship in the Social War of 91–89BC. More often, local elites would become Roman citizens on a piecemeal basis. People farther down the social scale had fewer opportunities but it was hardly impossible: for example the apostle Paul, a Jew from the province of Cilicia in modern Turkey, was nevertheless a Roman citizen. Eventually the whole of a conquered region might acquire “Latin Rights,” a kind of limited citizenship for every free inhabitant.

The extension of citizenship completed the integration of all the upper classes across the Roman world: non-Romans eventually came to outnumber Italians in the civil service, the army, the Senate and in the ranks of emperors. Finally in 212 AD all free persons in the empire became Roman citizens — though by that time citizenship had little practical political meaning since the empire had no democratic institutions above the level of local government.

In general this system worked pretty well, and by the standards of the time it was fairly generous: the Romans only rarely resorted to the wholesale enslavement and depopulation of defeated enemies, which was otherwise not uncommon.

The flipside of this, however, is that Romans took a very grim view of “allies” who tried to reassert themselves. They regarded a surrender to themselves as a permanently binding contract, and they regarded any breach of that contract with unrestrained fury very different from their normal tactics. The most egregious violence that the Romans inflicted on defeated enemies — the sack of Syracuse (212 BC), the destruction of Carthage and Corinth (both in 146 BC), the levelling of Jerusalem in 70AD — was done to those the Romans regarded as faithless allies, rather than open enemies.

In short, the Romans offered their opponents a mix of incentives: good terms for easy surrender, but terrible punishment for what the Romans saw as “ingratitude” or “stubbornness”

Explanation:

You might be interested in
Who started the reformation in england? john calvin henry viii martin luther john wycliffe
morpeh [17]
<span>If I'm not mistaken it was Henry VIII. Have you tried other sources?</span>
8 0
4 years ago
Read 2 more answers
In less than two centuries, humans have increased the total amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by ________ from the burn
saveliy_v [14]
I think that it is A
4 0
3 years ago
Where each country goes
Bess [88]
Triple entente
1. France
2. Russia
3. Great Britain

Triple alliance
1. Germany
2. Austria-Hungary
3. Italy
8 0
3 years ago
Describe that in economy of the post Civil War South
larisa86 [58]

here's your answer dear friend❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤

8 0
3 years ago
Why had some black leaders taken ?
docker41 [41]

The answer is the third one

4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • PLEASE HELP AND ANSWER!!!!
    8·1 answer
  • Why were the walls of Constantinople built?
    9·1 answer
  • Why did Islam spread so quickly?
    7·2 answers
  • The responsibility of every citizen is to exercise his right to vote in elections. True False
    11·1 answer
  • I was born to freed slaves during the civil war. i became a schoolteacher and worked for economic success and independence of af
    12·2 answers
  • BRAINLIESTTT ASAP!! PLEASE HELP ME :)
    13·1 answer
  • Select the statement that describe the agreement between Germany and Austria Hungary
    13·1 answer
  • What did most delegates from southern states believe about slavery?
    9·2 answers
  • Why might a cartoonist include a known cartoon character like SpongeBob in a political cartoon?
    5·1 answer
  • Competition between great nations is inevitable, but armed conflict in our world is not. More and more, civilized nations find o
    8·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!