A General Comparison between the Senate of Ancient Rome and the Senate of the United States

4115 Words Nov 11th, 2013 17 Pages
A General Comparison between the Senate of Ancient Rome and the Senate of the United States Research Class
16th August 2012

Outline
I. Introduction
Thesis statement: It is known to most that Western countries are on the rule of parliamentary democracy. We also know that Western countries inherited their political system from the ancient Greeks and Romans, especially the Roman political system. It has shaped western parliamentary system more than any others. However, different parliamentary systems have their specific characteristics. Has shaped from what it was in Ancient Rome to that we see today. This paper will compare and contrast the Ancient Roman Senate to today Modern
…show more content…
The social connection provided the required political foundation for the Senate. The Ancient Roman civilization started the Roman Kingdom, not the Roman Republic. This Kingdom was totally different from the later Monarchy in the history of the Middle Ages, because the system did not have an inherited King. The increasing powerful aristocracy, wealthy landowners and trade merchants who dominated Rome’s social and political scene had organized themselves into a council of elders known as the Roman Senate. The senate had privilege to select who the next King would be (Pearson 19). The King and the Senate had a cooperating relationship until 509 BC. In that year, the last King, Lucius Tarquinius Superbus, also known as Tarquin the Proud, was a tyrant who was overthrown by the city-state’s nobles. He succeeded to the throne because he assassinated the former King. So he was the King without the Senate’s approval. During the same year, the city of Rome became a republic. At the beginning of the Republic, the might of the Senate was very weak and powerless, because of the might of the two magistrates. A magistrate was a kind of officer who served as the leader of Ancient Rome and Greeks, and who was elected by citizens who lived in the cities. Not only did the two magistrates share the leading position in the city-state, but they also had powerful might over the Senators. “Since the transition from monarchy to constitutional