The Roman Republic was often known for its lasting influence for the development of Western political governance and ideals and is often hailed as a beacon of democracy in ancient history. But an in depth look reveals it to be more complex. While the Roman Republic held democratic elements that allowed citizen participation and representation, its political structure was ultimately characterized by a significant concentration of power among the elite and few for the average person. This essay will explore the extent of democracy within the Roman Republic, analyzing key aspects such as the electoral system, legislative bodies, and social hierarchy and the democratic nature and the implications it had on the overall governance of the state.
By this time, it took more effort to vote since people were coming from all over to vote. Rome started to add limits, “How easily a small number of urban residents registered in a rural tribe could determine the vote of that tribe is clear from the small percentage of citizens who actually voted.” (Document C) This shows how little the number of people voted that were actually Roman citizens. The Roman Republic started to become an aristocracy whenever a lot more of the wealthy people came into power.
The citizens would elect Praetors, these were judges that ruled in the judicial branch and would be voted for each year(AR). Usually only the wealthy Praetors would be elected leaving out the middle and lower class citizens of Rome(AR).Today in The U.S., people can vote on issues that are addressed within America and are also able to vote on who is elected as the president no matter what financial state they are in. In Rome, the lower class citizens also known as the plebeians, were forced into the army and were furious at the fact that
The patricians in the beginning of Roman government were the higher class. After the fall of kings ruling the government and then Rome deciding to going to a republic form of government, this upper class of men ruled the Roman government and people. Patricians were usually rich and wealthy individuals that came from a long line of wealthy families. Most patricians lived in the Roman walls, this was very common for wealthy patricians and the poorer citizens lived in the country side. These patricians controlled and highly influenced the direction of laws.
Roman Republic: Oligarchy or Democracy While the system of government employed by the Roman Republic may appear to be democratic in theory, there is some debate as to whether one can consider the manner in which it functioned practically as being truly democratic. The main debate centres on the issue of whether the Roman Republic was a democracy or an oligarchy. Issues such as unequal distribution, a political structure that favours the elites, and the power of individuals, make an argument in favour of oligarchy, while the system of election by popular vote, the time limitation on holding office, and the sharing of power at every level of government, combine to make a case for democracy. All of these structures were exploited and manipulated
In 1861, Italy was founded, although Rome was founded in 753 BC. Rome is in the region of Lazio, in Italy. Italy is surrounded by Spain, Switzerland, France, and Greece. Rome became a major power in the Mediterranean because of its geography, government, and military. Italy has many different mountain ranges and rivers that helped it become a major power on the Mediterranean.
Jazz Orr Mr. Winslow U.S. History 15 April 2016 Income Inequality Income inequality has been a great factor in America today. The Roman Republic had been through a similar situation and had a common path as the United States, which we are currently still in. The society of the Roman Republic in 509 B.C. fell in 27 B.C. because of the gap between the rich and the poor. What needs to be taken into consideration to end income inequality is how people are being taxed and which type of people have their hands in the political process.
1. Was Rome's political system in fact as democratic as it was portrayed by Polybius? Rome's political system was in fact as democratic as Polybius portrays it to be. Rome's political system was divided into "three elements" that had separate powers and could check and balance the actions of each other. Similar to the United States three branches of government (executive, legislative, and judicial), Roman government consisted of a mixture of three types of governments: monarchy, aristocracy and democracy.
It seems like in every part of history there is some type of class struggle. One class has all the power while the other does not and is constantly fighting for it. Well during the time of the Roman Republic, history repeats itself once again. During the time of the Roman Republic there were two economic classes that were constantly fighting for power and the right to have a say, those two classes were the Patricians and the Plebeians.
Western Civilization 101 Part 1: Roman Republic Roman Republic’s social structure was entirely based on wealth, freedom, property and heredity. Just like any other ancient society in the world history, the Roman Republic was also entirely controlled by men who were at the top of the social hierarchy. More so, the slaves were at the bottom of the social hierarchy while the women and the common people, referred to as the plebeians, followed closely. Going upwards, the wealth citizens followed the women and they were characteristic of using their wealth to acquire power. The top most class of people on the social hierarchy were the class of rulers who governed the republic and ensured adherence to the law was strictly followed.
The distinction seen in ancient Rome is similar to what is seen in modern society, although treatments of the classes are dealt with in a different manner. From the distribution of government handouts to simple amenities- such as housing- there were factors that separated the rich from the poor. It is evident that the difference between social classes was something the public was aware of and possibly took pride in. A good indication of this is seen in Cicero’s letter as he first mentions that there were elements to the theater he found unappealing and later went on to say there was a moment that the public would have found amusing but M. Marius would have not (3:8CITE). It is obvious from this statement and many others throughout the letter that Cicero felt he and his companion were of higher status than their peers, possibly due to their social and political status.
They exercised great political and religious power. On the other hand, the plebeians were a free Roman and were a common group of people that include the poor and that wealthy land owner. We can notice that the majority of them from the wealthy, but they were ordinary citizens not elite. They worked in agriculture, construction, selling, and crafts. The distinction between patricians and plebeians in Ancient Rome was so big, for example, no one could become a patrician simply by acquiring wealth or political power
The Plebeians were the poor. The farmers, the tradesmen, the average Joe’s, majority. The Patricians were the aristocrats, the wealthy, the minority, the ruling class (). The Patricians would abuse the power they had. They would rent out land that belonged to the state only to other Patricians,
Family life was an important factor in the Roman Empire. The Paterfamilias were the dominant male in the family and were to be their family’s guardian. All of the upper-class children were expected to be able to read and write. The boys were taught reading, writing, moral principles, family values, law, and physical training. Almost all of the marriages were arranged.
Early Rome was ruled by kings in tandem with the Senate until 509 BC. Above all else, politics was the stronghold of the Roman empire and fueled just about every aspect of rule; finance, military, religion or the lack there of, power,
