Male heads of households held great power and could even kill their own children.
Contest in ancient Rome were held in the places that suited them. The chariot races were held in the Circus, the gladiatorial contests were held in an arena and the poetry contests were held in a theater.
slaves
After Claudius was poisoned, Nero came to power.
Yes
the person who held supreme power in a crisis is Augutus he was the (revered one)
It depends on the "emperor" you are talking about. The emperor of Byzantium, or the Greek Eastern Empire, ruled a sophisticated state with many of the same powers and privileges as the ancient Roman emperors. The German emperors of the Latin West aspired to similar prestige, but ruled over a far more fractious polity and had to compete with powerful feudal barons for control of their realm.
Both Because...Good.He was a great leader because he made Rome better, conquered lots of places for Rome, he had great controlling power, he was intelligent, and ambitions.Bad.He invested with supreme authority during a crisis. So he set himself as a dictator.
The Roman emperors were absolute rulers. They power was absolute.
Marc Antony was the one who challenged Octavian for supreme power.
Ancient Rome is not the supreme example for politics.
hope this helps: The roman emperor lead the country and took contol in making the difficult decisions. they helped keep the the country in order. They made laws and kept the country at peace.
If the executive power was held by three people, a crisis would be a very hectic time. There would be a lot of disagreement over what to do. Ultimately one person holding the executive power would be most efficient because he or she would just direct people on what to do as opposed to people arguing or debating over whats best. In a certain sense, a three part executive might develop much as ancient Rome did when three generals were appointed to rule the empire.
No, the 2012 Olympics were not held in Rome.
IN Rome
The Principate.
Jupiter