Ihr Seid verfluchte hunde! (you are damned dogs!)
To infinity and beyond lol trololol
The basic reason was for entertainment. Some historians like to put symbolism in the hunting event by proposing that they were showing the people the superiority of the Romans over forces of nature. But to the people of the time it was exciting entertainment as the hunts were staged in elaborate forest settings, and in the Colosseum, live trees and shrubs were used.
The actual leader, is called a tsar
It would be safe to say no, Britain did not have straight roads before the Romans landed. At the time of the Roman takeover Britain was divided into various tribes and each tribe had a leader. They were not civil engineers. Most of Britain's roads were muddy footpaths before the Romans came.
The Roman or Latin word for Spain is Hispania.
Sorry, Question needs more specifics.
The answer is "barbarid"
The basic reason was for entertainment. Some historians like to put symbolism in the hunting event by proposing that they were showing the people the superiority of the Romans over forces of nature. But to the people of the time it was exciting entertainment as the hunts were staged in elaborate forest settings, and in the Colosseum, live trees and shrubs were used.
Al haarib
a good man
It's safe to say that most of the Romans had slaves with the exception of the very poor.It's safe to say that most of the Romans had slaves with the exception of the very poor.It's safe to say that most of the Romans had slaves with the exception of the very poor.It's safe to say that most of the Romans had slaves with the exception of the very poor.It's safe to say that most of the Romans had slaves with the exception of the very poor.It's safe to say that most of the Romans had slaves with the exception of the very poor.It's safe to say that most of the Romans had slaves with the exception of the very poor.It's safe to say that most of the Romans had slaves with the exception of the very poor.It's safe to say that most of the Romans had slaves with the exception of the very poor.
I would say the Romans because they had better technology.
chilaw
Romans
Some would say the Romans were civilised but others would disagree.
No, the Russians did not descend from the ancient Romans. Anthropologists say that modern Russians are of Slavic descent.No, the Russians did not descend from the ancient Romans. Anthropologists say that modern Russians are of Slavic descent.No, the Russians did not descend from the ancient Romans. Anthropologists say that modern Russians are of Slavic descent.No, the Russians did not descend from the ancient Romans. Anthropologists say that modern Russians are of Slavic descent.No, the Russians did not descend from the ancient Romans. Anthropologists say that modern Russians are of Slavic descent.No, the Russians did not descend from the ancient Romans. Anthropologists say that modern Russians are of Slavic descent.No, the Russians did not descend from the ancient Romans. Anthropologists say that modern Russians are of Slavic descent.No, the Russians did not descend from the ancient Romans. Anthropologists say that modern Russians are of Slavic descent.No, the Russians did not descend from the ancient Romans. Anthropologists say that modern Russians are of Slavic descent.
Leader?...Well you can say James!
Very little is factually known about Spartacus. We know he was a gladiator who escaped along with some others and rampaged all through Italy. He is often described as a Thracian, but it is not clear weather this is his nationality or his gladiatorial style of fighting. He had to have been a persuasive talker in order to get others to follow him in his escape, (the punishment was a nasty death, if they were caught) and he had to have had some military knowledge in order to elude the Romans for so long. That's all we can factually say about Spartacus.