Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Roman forum republic
Democracy in ancient rome
Western civilization is forever indebted to the people of ancient Greece and Rome
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Roman forum republic
Roman Republic
Rome was kind of a democy it had it’s flaws but by its voting system it makes it a democy. In document C only 2% of Roman’s voted and these votes by the people even though it was few that makes it a democracy. In document C you had to be in Rome to vote which is far because they wouldn’t want an outsider to vote on things that were going on in Rome. In document B poor rich and the freed slaves could vote and for it’s time that is amazing that the poor and the freed slaves could vote. Rome definitely had it’s flaws but for it’s time it was a good democracy but in our fews we don’t think the Rome Republic was a good democy at all.
Polybius states that no one really knows if the Roman Republic was an aristocracy or democracy
or despotism. How could we say for sure what the Roman Republic was if we don’t really know ourselves what it was. Rome’s Republic had a thing called the Assemblies it was the most important and the people voted on who was in office. This Assembly would pass laws and the most important part was them deciding on peace and war. This proves that they were a democracy because the people are voting on what they want. Professor Fergus Millar believes that all male citizens had a right to vote unless they are disqualified. Rome was very good for letting their people vote even if they were poor or rich it didn’t matter as long as you weren't disqualified you are fine. They all could have a say but women but they where getting there. Rome is an amazing city and the people that lived there where lucky to be in such an amazing place. Rome for it’s time was amazing and way better than any other democracy in the world at the time. If Rome wasn’t declining so fast in the end of it’s life it would have been up for many many more years and might even still be here today. No one can say that Rome wasn’t a democy because if someone can vote it is without a doubt a democracy. Rome will always be remembered as one of the first democratic city's ever to live and I will never faded from our history.
A good government forms the basis of a good nation. The Republic is a Roman concept and the U.S. today is a Democratic Republic. Document 1 and 2 summarize all three branches of the Roman government and have a chart comparing both our types of governments,
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 came into existence at the termination of the Roman kingship in 507 B.C.E. The last king of Rome, Tarquin the Proud, was expelled by Collatinus and Brutus, as a result of his arrogance involving the matter of one of his relations raping the wholesome Roman matron Lucretia and her subsequent suicide. The rape of Lucretia was really a representation of the frustration that the roman citizens felt regarding the kingship. The later kings had little regard for roman values and the roman populus, which they used as something of a slave labor force. Brutus and Collatinus became the first Roman Consuls, elected by popular vote.
...te. The Roman Republic was a great innovative idea, but it could not have been successful without the cooperation of the citizens. The citizens acted as the glue that kept the Republic together. In fact, the downfall of the Roman Republic started with the citizens.
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.
In a document by Professor Alan Ward it goes into further depth how Rome wasn't truly democratic. The had disenfranchised,by places the poles farther so the people couldn't reach them. Voters could easily dominate sovereign popular candidates. Yet they did have forms of government in which citizens could directly
The Roman Republic began approximately around 509 B.C. when the nobles drove the King and his family out of Rome. This monumental incident helped shape the start to the transformation of the monarchy into a republican governmental system. This is known to have begun by that of the Roman nobles trying to hold their power that they had gained. The Republic was “[a] city-state [which] was the foundation of Greek society in the Hellenic Age; in the Hellenistic Age, Greek cities became subordinate to kingdoms, larder political units ruled by autocratic monarchs” (Perry 105)
Rome was a so called Republic, But there were a few things that romans did that makes them a little bit of a democracy, along with things that make them very republic. My beliefs are that they were not really democratic but mostly a republic. Even though they may seem not as republican they really are.
The Roman Republic ultimately failed due to the lack of large-scale wars and other crises that had united the Roman populous early in the history of the Roman Republic. Roman leadership and honor became compromised. In the absence of war and crisis, Rome’s leaders failed to develop the honor and leadership necessary to maintain the Republic.
The Roman Republic was not really democratic as we understand democracy today in the United States. Democracy is a government ruled by the people, not just for a small percentage of the wealthy and the privileged few. For example, what we learned from this class work is that only 2% of the entire population of the Roman Republic had the ability to vote.
According to this video (The Roman Empire. Or Republic. Or...Which Was It?: Crash Course World History #10), Rome had a government that worked for everyone because both the patricians (the wealthy families) and the plebeians (the commoners, mostly farmers and traders) had a say in the government at the height of the republic because all the parties were represented. The plebeians made up the assembly, the patricians made up the Senate, and the consuls were made up of one plebeian and one patrician. The consuls had to be nominated by the Senate and approved by the assembly. Any plebeian could be in the assembly, and any patrician could be in the Senate. Those who are opposed could say that Rome had a corrupt government because some generals took all the power and took sole control over the republic-turned-empire. Those who are opposed are wrong because as long as the government was good, no one had all the power. The Senate made laws, the assembly made sure the laws were in the good of the people, and one consul made sure Rome was sound domestically, and one consul led Rome in military campaigns. This means that no one could get much power due to the checks and balances of Rome.
The Roman Republic had a very democratic society. A majority of people that I have asked ,have made the assumption that the Roman Republic was not very democratic. A couple of the people I talked to said that they would only let the people vote in Rome itself and nowhere else. This of course was unfair to the people of lower class who could not afford to travel to Rome, although demokratia states that people should be equal and have the same rights to impact certain political events. Although it was inconvenient, the citizens of the Roman Republic were provided with free range to vote and have a say in their government.
The roman republic was kind of democratic.There are multiple reasons and pieces of evidence on why they were democratic,one of the reasons why was that the people had power,which meant that they had a say in weather if they would want certain law to be made or have a certain person be put into. Another reason why for the romans being democratic was that every adult male citizen was able or had to vote unless specifically,disqualified,also free slaves were also allowed.
Cicero claims, “People believe that strictness and good faith are not to be found in our courts . . . so we Senators are scorned and despised by the people of Rome”(Cicero 111). Cicero also accuses Verres by saying that he, “. . . takes enough for himself, his protectors, and his counsel, and the president of the court, and the judges”(Cicero 111). This shows the fall of Roman statesman’s morals by explaining why they are loathed by the people of Rome. Verres embezzles government money for his own use, and to avoid prosecution, bribes the court officials. Rome’s democratic values are declining because, Cicero says, the actions of Verres are not only happening in Sicily, but they are applicable to the rest of Rome. The ability of the citizens of Rome to control their government is minimized by the lack of control on the senators. The empire also could not possibly be democratic if its leaders are permitted to abuse their power. This directly contradicts Aristotle’s definition of democracy, which claims that a democratic leader must rule and be ruled in turn. While the Senators of Rome are ruling the people, they are failing to be ruled in turn and thus are not representative of a true
The Roman Republic did not have a pure democracy, but an alteration of it that provided those who had money with power, wealth, and land. While some parts of their government system contained what democracy offers, such as citizens voting to pass laws and deciding to have peace or war with another country, there were some components that were not democratic, such as citizens not being able to choose candidates for election, not being able to propose legislations, and only male citizens being able to vote, which amounted to being about two percent of the Roman population, only because the people who voted were in Rome, and several people did not have the time or the money to travel there.