Athens Vs Rome Dbq

Democracy is a system of government where the people equally run a country. For example, America practices a form of government where the people have the right to elect those who are in power when they become eighteen years of age. In addition, a citizen of this country can practice a religion of their choice along with several other freedoms. In my opinion, Athens was not a democratic society by today’s standards.

The Athenian and Roman governments both had similarities in their form of government, but the differences that they had made them unique because of the parties and rules they lived by. To start off, the Athenian Government was a democracy and the Roman Government was a republic. Each of them had very important specific details which make them unique and different like what made them citizens and able to vote for the officials, and how they organized their government system.

Athens had a better government in my opinion. I think Athens had a better government because they created a democracy. According to the Athens and Sparta Document Set, a democracy means “rule by the people”. The Athens also got to abolish politicians they did not like. Athens also had ten generals, meanwhile, Sparta has two kings. In my opinion, I think that having ten generals is better than two kings because they understand you more. Sadly not all Ancient Athens were citizens, but if a free male would be a citizen if his father was a citizen of Athens. Later on, they changed that law, it was then bothering the father and mother had to be a citizen for the child to be considered a citizen. Sadly the women didn’t get that many rights but they soon they got more status. The Athens also made it to where not only the wealthy can engage in the jury service. In the Athens, you have to be an 18-year-old man to complete military training. On the other hand, in Sparta, you have to be a 30-year-old to complete military training. Basically, I’m trying to say that the Athens had a better

The Greek democratic and Roman republic governments each had their own positive and negative aspects making them similar, yet exclusively different. Both have had tremendous influences on governments in our modern world. Rome was a republic where the leaders were chosen through voting, while Greece practiced a more direct democracy in which the citizens participated in the crucial decision-making within the government. This paper will attempt to diagnose the fundamental similarities of each government coupled with the not so obvious differences. Based on the evidence from each type of government, it is clear that each were similar and different in numerous ways, in particular the way each government

 John Locke-natural rights (people were born with life, liberty, and property), when gov’t established, there is a social contract btwn. the people and gov’t, if the gov’t does not meet needs of people, people can form new gov’t.-ideas incorporated in DI

Athens and Rome are two separate paradigms; they both had a certain standard to a way of life. Athens was civic and Rome was technocratic towards their people. Meaning that Athens was people based which gave the public responsibility to how they wanted to live because they had a voice. They also had customs that connected them as people, like social gatherings. Rome on the other hand was technology based which was more about how to make money or spend money to fix a problem.

Citizenship in Rome and Athens were very different on where they stood and what should be allowed. Not only were their views quite different but so was their area and size. Comparing the two, the Roman Empire was huge and Athens was just a small greek city-state. Rome had better citizenship because of its stronger politics and intellectual thinking. The Romans social system was also better than the Athenians which allowed for more participation.

Also, the structure of government of the Roman and American republic has some similarities. The basis of both civilizations possessed an overwhelming military strength that may be attributed to the success of each nation. No other country has been dominant culturally, economically, technologically, and militarily in the history of the world since the Roman Empire."(Krauthammer, 2004) The United States of America has the makings of a vast empire, being a leader in all of the aforementioned areas. If you were to take a citizen of the current day United States and put him/her in Ancient Rome, I feel that aside from the obvious cultural differences, that person would notice that day to day life would not be that much different from that of life

Both gave citizenship, but in different ways. But the question is, which system was better. Which system was better, Rome or Athens? This question is difficult because they both had good systems, but there is one that is better for both societies. Rome had a better system for at least three reasons: rights, voting, and Senate related reasons.

Rome and the U.S are very similar, like rulers, politics, the poor, the rich, building, schools, tools, and maps. Rome and the U.S have also same problems for example corruptions ASSASSINATION, war, the governments, and traitors. Rome and the U.S do have their good side such as military, housings, weapons, food, entertainment, and technology.

Athenian democracy ensures that a citizen in a society acts according to what society deems appropriate rather than by an individual's assumptions of what is acceptable. Athens as a whole stresses the importance of an active citizen whose life is intertwined with the government. In essence, an Athenian citizen can participate in the decision making of the state and will be enthusiastic in carrying out policies that pass in the assembly. Pericles, an Athenian statesman, makes it clear when he says that "each individual is interested not only in his own affairs but in the affairs of the state as well" (p.147 Thucydides). Socrates, a Greek philosopher, is a firm believer in examining one's actions in life and ensuring that a morally righteous

Aside from these physical differences, there is a difference in the goals between the Greeks and the Romans. In the first case what concerns the Greek city-states is limited to self-preservation if not individual fame and success. The Romans, on the other hand, were concerned with the success of the country as a whole; they knew that if the whole was successful, then the individual parts would also benefit.

The governments of Athens and Rome did have some resemblances. They both had people of the public making laws rather than just an emperor or king. In Rome, the Republic was full of senators from around Rome. Athens had a democracy in which all men, rich or poor, could voice their opinions and form law. This made sure that laws made in Athens were more fair and favored not only to the lower class but the upper class as well.

The Greek city-state that is more well-known is Athens, and during the Golden Age Athens was the first to establish a direct democracy. Athens believed “that the right way to run a democratic state is to trust the majority vote” (The Making of the West, 82). They believed that everyone should have the right to serve which is why they did a random selection by lottery to choose who would be part of the council. In this government no one was more superior to the other, no matter when they lived or how much money they had. The Roman Empire ran their government a little differently.

Some people think that either the Athenians or Romans had a better system. But there are more proven facts that Rome had it. Rome has a better citizenship because of their republic, meetings, and rules. This place was more civilized and was stronger in numbers Because of their system. And of course they were able to conquer more land with the system. The Athenians were a small city state in Rome unable to conquer much land with the system they used.