How Is The Roman Republic Democratic

610 Words2 Pages

Between the years 509-27 BCE, Rome was considered a republic, which is a type of government in which people vote for representatives to make laws. People were classified as either patricians, plebeians, or slaves within the republic. The patricians were people of the upper class; the ones with all the money. Plebeians were usually farmers, merchants, artisans, or traders and slaves were usually prisoners from the war. During the early Rome expansion, the government was composed of two consuls, the senate, and a dictator when needed. The consuls were responsible for supervising the government and commanding armies. In addition, the senate consisted of three hundred patricians that voted on laws. Lastly, if necessary, a dictator would step in at a time of war, and carry out decisions when there was not enough time to discuss other options within the government . Based on the mentioned information, many people argue about how democratic the Roman Republic really was. The Roman Republic was primarily democratic, however, there were some aspects that could label it as an aristocracy. The Roman Republic …show more content…

For example, according to Professor Alan Ward, voting was only held in Rome. For people who lived in Rome, it was no problem, but for residence of other cities, they had no way of voting unless they had the time and money to travel to Rome. Historian Ramsay MacMullen argues that only two percent of the Roman population voted “which makes any notion of direct democracy nugatory.” In addition, the people had no voice in who the candidates were. Also, the voters could not propose legislation Only the magistrates and tribunes were allowed to put legislation before the people, with or without the consent of the senate. Moreover, the Roman Republic was not a perfect democracy because people were not given all the opportunities they should have been

Open Document