Final answer:
The claim that Roman conquests led to a shortage of money and slaves is false; in fact, these conquests often increased Rome's wealth and the number of slaves, although reliance on slavery caused long-term social and economic issues.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that Rome ran out of money and slaves as a result of Roman conquests is false. Roman conquests were instrumental in expanding the empire's wealth and slave population. In the early periods of Rome's expansion, conquest led to the acquisition of vast new resources, such as the grain supply from Egypt, Sicily, and Sardinia. Moreover, the sale of captured individuals as slaves into the Roman markets was a significant economic activity that added to their wealth.
Slavery played a central role in Roman economy with many slaves acquired through military campaigns. However, over-reliance on slave labor led to a stagnation in technological progress and contributed to the undermining of the social status of free Roman citizens, especially small-scale farmers. While the abundant availability of slaves temporarily aided economic development, it eventually led to systemic issues within Roman society.
The wealthy elites mostly benefited from these conquests, often at the expense of the lower class and small landholders, many of whom had their land confiscated or were forced to sell due to prolonged absences during military campaigns. Eventually, such social and economic stressors contributed to the transformations and problems faced by the Roman Republic.