Passage 1: "Historian Lena Marsh argues that the decline of the Roman Republic was primarily driven by structural economic inequality — the concentration of land in the hands of a senatorial elite left the plebeian class economically dispossessed and politically volatile."
Passage 2: "Recent scholarship by Devraj Nair contends that the Roman Republic's collapse owed far more to the breakdown of elite political norms — specifically, the willingness of ambitious men like Sulla and Caesar to override senatorial convention — than to the material grievances of the lower classes, who had endured similar conditions for centuries without revolutionary consequence."
Which statement best describes the relationship between the two passages?
-
A
Nair's argument undermines Marsh's by showing that the causal variable Marsh identifies was a constant, not a change — and therefore cannot explain the timing of the Republic's collapse.
-
B
Nair agrees with Marsh that economic inequality was a significant factor but argues that elite ambition amplified its political effects.
-
C
Marsh and Nair disagree about whether the plebeian class was economically dispossessed during the late Republic.
-
D
Nair's argument is complementary to Marsh's because elite norm erosion and economic inequality could both independently cause political instability.