Question

How did Constantine further the decline of the city of Rome?

1.He sacked the city during the civil war that saw him eventually take power.
2.By introducing Christianity he damaged civic pride in the city.
3.He lowered taxes and cut spending on infrastructure, causing the roads to become less reliable.
4.He moved the capital of the empire hundreds of miles away.

Answer 1

4.He moved the capital of the empire hundreds of miles away. Hugs!! :)

Step-by-step explanation:

Constantine did not sack the city of Rome during his rise to power; instead, he played a pivotal role in shifting the focus of the Roman Empire away from Rome. The main reason often attributed to Constantine's role in the decline of the city of Rome is:

He moved the capital of the empire hundreds of miles away: Constantine relocated the capital of the Roman Empire to Byzantium, renaming it Constantinople (modern-day Istanbul). This move significantly diminished Rome's importance as the political and administrative center of the empire, leading to a decline in its influence and power. The eastern capital became the new center of governance, trade, and culture, while Rome gradually lost its prominence within the Roman Empire.

Answer 2

Answer: He moved the capital of the empire hundreds of miles away.

Explanation: Constantine moved the capital of the Roman Empire from Rome to Byzantium, which he renamed Constantinople, in 330 AD. This move left Rome with less power and influence, causing a decline in the city's population, economy, and infrastructure. Constantine's shift of the capital also affected the Roman army, which had to focus on defending the empire's eastern frontiers rather than Rome's western frontiers, leaving the city more vulnerable to external attacks. Constantine's religious policies and economic decisions did not cause the decline of Rome as they are not directly linked to the city's decline.