The patres and the plebs were the two social classes in Ancient Rome. Patres made up a small portion of the quirites found in Rome, but they held a special connection with the gods, as only the patricians could hold the auspices. They also could only hold the consulship and most the senate. The plebs made up most the population of Rome, but had less power in government. While some were as wealthy as some patricians, they could only be tribunes and aediles (after their foundation in 493 B.C). One of the main misconceptions held by scholars of Rome was the so-called “Struggle of the Orders”. Many take this to mean that there was a physical struggle and fight between the two classes, but this is just not true. Politically, they did disagree about politics, but both understood that they were both important to the survival of Rome. For instance, after the Plebs went to the Sacred Mountain in 494 B.C for the first secession of the plebs. The …show more content…
That isn’t to say that there weren’t stark contrasts in authority between the two, mainly in elected positions and relationships to the gods. But in some cases, there were debates between different classes of plebs. Poorer plebs wanted to fight for measures like debt and military service. In the early days of the Republic, there was not much to poor plebs’ citizenship except military service. Sometime they would fight in wars against Rome’s foes and comeback to a destroyed homestead. This could drive them to take outrageous loans and could force them into slavery. Poorer plebs fought against these practices, but the wealthier plebs fought for positions in offices. Since they could only hold tribune and aedile positions, the rich plebs tried to make use their wealth to obtain those. This made the rich plebs act like patricians, as their main concern was military and social power. Patricians vs plebs turned into quality of life vs political