Over nearly five hundred years Rome expanded from a humble city-state into the hegemon of the Mediterranean world. The Republic had to incorporate new and diverse peoples in a way that incentivized contributing to the state while maintaining the supremacy and profitability of the state. Put simply, the Roman state had to find a solution to the free-rider problem – the fact that rational self-interested individuals will naturally avoid the costs of group membership while enjoying its benefits. The Roman Republic attempted to address this problem by creating a political and social system where citizenship presented significant benefits and required and incentivized contributions to the state. This convergence of interests created a self-sustaining …show more content…
Plebeians were only offered full citizenship when it became clear that “the patricians constituted a small and shrinking minority, whose position became increasingly untenable as the plebeian elite harnessed wider social and economic grievances in support of their demand for political influence.” Similarly, full citizenship was only granted to the socii, allies who could trade and intermarry, following the Social War as the Roman state, “in order to ensure the loyalty of the rest, as also of the Latins…granted them citizenship.” Attempts to expand citizenship on moral grounds were met with violent resistance from the Roman center; Gaius Gracchus “though opposed by all persons of distinction...[proposed] giving the Italians equal suffrage rights with the citizens of Rome…consul Opimius…sent his …show more content…
The Republic accomplished this with a mixed constitution of monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy, in the form of the consuls, Senate, and citizen assemblies respectively. This system diffused power preventing one element of government from becoming too powerful as to undermine the rights of citizens. As Polybius describes, “it was impossible…to pronounce with certainty whether the whole system was aristocratic, democratic, or monarchical…such being the power that each part has of hampering the other or cooperating…their union is adequate to all emergencies, so it impossible to find a better political system than this.” That said critics of the Republic would identify the failings of this system to maintain balance once put into practice. Prominent among these was that the aristocracy had de-facto control over the entirety of the state; the senatorial class set the agenda for the assemblies, monopolized the consulship, and controlled much of the citizenry through patronage networks. Even in the Century Assembly the wealthy controlled over half of the voting blocs. Nonetheless, this does not invalidate the Roman solution to the free-rider problem. Equality of influence was never a privilege that Roman citizens would have expected. Equally, aristocratic hegemony was a necessity for the free rider problem to be solved;
In reference to Rome, Athens’s citizenship system was less accepting by only allowing free, native born males to nationalize. While this aspect was considered a drawback by the Romans, truthfully it is actually a major tradeoff by Athens. As shown in Document A, Rome was more lenient to upcoming citizens. Although this adds to the power and development of the empire, it also creates holes in its security. Citizens with non-native origins are free to express their hatred and idea of change to the Roman government, by creating a negative cultural diffusion, and contributing to the downfall of Rome. On the other hand, Athens was free from any possible revolts and riots from any non-native Athenians.
The Roman Republic was a political system which was stamped and swayed, but it was not by parties and programmes which we are so familiar with which is a modern and parliamentary variety. And it was not swayed even by the powerful opposition between Senate and People, Optimates and Populares, nobiles and novi homines. The main locomotive force of politics was the strife for power, wealth and glory. (ref: Syme, Ronald 1960 The Roman Revolution, Oxford University Press) [1]
The Roman Republic, was a government, governed by an intricate constitution, which was based on the idea of separation of powers. The Roman Republic, began in 509 B.C, after the end of the Roman Monarchy and lasted for over 450 years. The constitution of the Roman Republic was highly influenced by the struggle of power between the rich families, the patricians, and other Romans who were not from famous or rich families, the plebeians. Their government was divided into three main sections, very much like the Legislative Branch, Executive, Branch, and Judicial Branch. Nowadays, the Senate and assembly resemble the Legislative Branch. In the Roman Republic, the Senate was the most powerful group. The Senate passed all laws and collected taxes. The second part of this branch, was the assembly, and the assembly was elected by the Romans from the plebeian class. The assembly elected consuls, tribunes (representatives from the plebeian class), and made laws. All members of the Senate were part of the patrician class and at the head of the Senate were two consuls. The Consuls controlled the Roman army and in order to become a consul, you had to be elected by a majority of all the citizens in Rome. The consuls, are like our president and the Executive Branch. Although the method of separation of powers came from the Roman Republic, that is not all that came from the Roman Republic that became part of the United States...
The Political Decay of the Roman Republic The fall of the Western Roman Empire was the first example in history on the collapse of a constitutional system which was caused by the internal decay in political, military, economics, and sociological issues. The government was becoming corrupt with bribery. Commanders of the Roman army turned their own army inward towards their own Constitutional systems, fueled by their own ruthless ambition. This paper will talk about how the violence and internal turmoil in 133 B.C.-27 B.C. was what provoked the economic stagnation in the city of Rome and to the end of the Republic and the many corrupt politicians and generals who only thought of nothing more than personal gains and glory. The senate lost control of the Roman military and the reason they rose against the senate was because the senate were no longer able to help manage the social problems or the military and administrative problems of the empire.
Over the span of five-hundred years, the Roman Republic grew to be the most dominant force in the early Western world. As the Republic continued to grow around the year 47 B.C it began to go through some changes with the rise of Julius Caesar and the degeneration of the first triumvirate. Caesar sought to bring Rome to an even greater glory but many in the Senate believed that he had abused his power, viewing his rule more as a dictatorship. The Senate desired that Rome continued to run as a republic. Though Rome continued to be glorified, the rule of Caesar Octavian Augustus finally converted Rome to an Empire after many years of civil war. Examining a few selections from a few ancient authors, insight is provided as to how the republic fell and what the result was because of this.
There is a fundamental difference between a democracy and a republic as it concerned the political entitlement of the citizenry. The citizens of a republic do not participate directly with governmental affairs. The citizens of a republic can however have a say in who does participate. The Roman republic has two prefect systems to prevent dictatorship which didn’t work.
Rome became a powerful empire engulfing much of Europe, North Africa, and parts of Asia and what seemed like this great entity called the Romans were always in the search of more territory and land to conquer and assimilate into their ever growing vast empire. However, this was not always the case, before Rome became one of the greatest empires in all of history, Rome was a republic. They were government consisted of a Senate who much like our country today represented certain classes of the citizens of the Republic. During the growth and rise of the Roman republic conquering neighboring territories and competing for land grabs was not Romans primary objectives. Romans believed in the well being and wealth of Rome, and if that meant the total destruction of a potential adversary, then as history will show that is unfortunately to the detriment of the adversary what happened.
The nature of government and political culture in ancient Roman society was similarly complicated as our our political infrastructure in modern day Western civilization. In addition, it had its own unique characteristics rendering it a mechanism of social ideal; one where the population was provided for, and at the same time ruled by an upper lass in the electorate.
There were several strengths of the Roman Empire which enabled it to survive for more than four hundred years. These strengths included a strong foundation, having been built off of the Roman Republic; the standardization across the empire of many aspects of life, such as language, law, and especially the extension of citizenship, which made the empire more cohesive and easier to rule; and strong leaders, who were able to utilize the manipulation of the upper class and Senate, and the management of the military.
This new Republican government, which was administered by the consuls, was not the easiest to transform. Because of the expansion in Italy, the government began to initiate political institutions. These institutions enforced laws and provided authority which were very similar to imperium. “The Romans had a clear concept of executive authority, embodied in their word imperium, or “the right to command” (Spielvogel 117). Since the Romans were very sensible in their actions, they made and implemented them only as needed. The most essential positions held were the few elected magistrates and the two consuls who were “chosen annually, administered the government and led the Roman army into battle” (Spielvogel 117). If the consul was otherwise occupied, either a dictator or praetor would assume responsibility for the time being.
Rome's Republican era began after the overthrow of the last Roman King Tarquin Superbus by Lucius Brutus in 509 BC(1), the Senate was ruled the by the people of Rome. The Roman Republic was governed by a largely complex constitution, which established many checks and balances, so no man could have complete control. The evolution of the constitution was heavily influenced by the struggle between the patricians and the other prominent Romans who were not from the nobility. Early in Rome’s history, the patricians controlled the republic, over time, the laws that allowed these individuals to dominate the government were repealed, and the result was the emergence of a the republic which depended on the structure of society, rather than the law, to maintain its dominance. This is similar to the creation of the American system of government. Starting with the over throw of t...
The Roman Republic was founded in 509 BC after the ruling Tarquins abused their extensive power as monarchs and were overthrown. The goal of the Roman Republic was to have a strong government, governed equally by the patricians and the plebians, and to avoid another Roman Monarchy. For years Rome was guided by great men, such as Cincinnatus and Scipio Africanus, who led the Republic through hard times, conquering such enemies as the Etruscans and the Carthaginians. Large-scale war united Roman society in its common goals. However, after Scipio’s victory at Zama in 202 BC, a new Roman world began to take shape. Roman soldiers returned home from their victory to find that they could not pay for their farms, becoming “squatters” on their own lands after having to sell them to richer men. The Senate became corrupted, and despite the Gracchi brothers’ best efforts, the rich patricians soon monopolized nearly all aspects of the Republic, from trading and “farming” to governing the people. After marching on Rome, Sulla became dictator in 82 BC. After Sulla, the First Triumvirate: Pompey, Crassus, and Caesar, owned virtually all power in Rome, yet each had his own desire to defeat the other two and become Emperor. When Crassus died in battle, Caesar had his chance. He defeated Pompey and marched on Rome, victorious. After declaring himself Dictator for Life, Caesar was assassinated, and another Civ...
Years ago, the Romans created one of the biggest and best organized empires the world has ever seen. Throughout their lands, they built towns and roads, and spread their way of life. One of the reasons why their empire was so successful was that, unlike other ancient states, the empire welcomed outsiders. Foreigners could become Roman citizens. At first this was a given as a reward for the loyalty or f...
“He is said to have been tall of stature… except that towards the end.” What was it that really led to the fall of the Roman Republic? There are a lot of different factors to consider when trying to determine what caused the collapse. By examining The Rubicon, The Life of Julius Caesar, and some accompanying handouts from class, this paper will discuss how the Roman Republic did not collapse because of one factor. The collapse of the Roman Republic was like that of a game of Jenga. Factors were pulled out of the Republican system just like a game of Jenga until the Republic could not stand anymore.
Philosopher A: In the Republic, the Senate was the primary branch of the Roman government and held the majority of the political power. It controlled funds, administration and foreign policy, and had significant influence of the everyday life of the Roman people. When Augustus came to power, he kept the Senate and they retained their legal position. The Emperor’s rule was legitimized by the senate as he needed the senators experience to serve as administrators, diplomats and generals. Although technically the most authoritative individual in Rome, Augustus strived to embody Republican values. He wanted to relate and connect to all parts of society including Plebeians. Through generosity and less extravagance, Augustus achieved a connection with the common people.