Comparing The Roman Republic And Athenian Democracy

Ancient Greece was consisted of many city-states; the most famous were Athens and Sparta. Those two rival cities had an opposite political system as well, democracy on the one hand and dictatorship on the other. Of course both systems, as anyone can see, included many inequalities between citizens.

The term democracy comes from the Greek language and means "rule by the people."(Democracy Building 2012) The democracy in Athens represents the events leading up to modern day democracies. Like our modern democracy, the Athenian democracy was created as a reaction to a concentration and abuse of power by the rulers. Philosophers defined the essential elements of democracy as a separation of powers, basic civil rights, human rights, religious liberty and separation of church and state. The most current definition of a democracy is defined as a “government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral

The Representative voting system in the Athenian government was more democratic, than the Roman Republic. In Athens, the first 6000 male citizens voted for their elected officials. Athen’s voting system is truly democratic because the male citizens voted on roles in the government, and sign up for roles. In Rome, all full male citizens could vote, while leaving out the other two types of citizenship that cannot vote2. Only having full citizens is less democratic because the other two citizens could not vote. The Athenian Democracy and Roman Republic both have restrictions on their voting system, but Rome had more restrictions on citizenship.

The Roman Republic was made up of a collection of more documents that collectively acted as a constitution. This particular constitution had novel features that were designed to inhibit autocratic rule. The two features of the constitution were very strict term limits and collegiality, whereby each position was being held by at least two people. Most Republic and Imperial ages Romans made this constitution very sacred, and eventually it allowed Rome to be the dominant world power. The Roman Republic never operated as a strict Republic but more as a combination of Republic and

One of the three parts of the government is the Sente. The Senate advised the consuls, they served for life, and gained control of financial affairs. They made laws and people weren’t chosen into the Senate by the common people, the consuls had to choose them. Only wealthy men were allowed in the Senate.

The Roman Republic was a system that based itself on law and order. A complex and intricate constitution balanced out all the power, which was mainly held by the two consuls. These consuls held large amounts of power, but they could only serve one year and were each elected by a senate. In addition, each consul was subject to a veto from the other, so no consul with visions of absolute power could implement tyrannical laws. These checks and balances to prevent corruption and injustice were the foundation of Rome’s influence, greatness, and power.

The Roman Republic’s constitution consisted of three different components: the Consuls/Magistrates, the Senate, and the Assemblies. Consuls were a group of male patricians that directed the military/government, and they were also known as magistrates. The Senate was a group of patricians or wealthy plebeians (also known as “New Men”) that passed new laws, controlled finance, and advised their former peers, the magistrates. Finally, the Assemblies, who will be focused on later, were a group of all adult male Roman citizens (not including slaves) who would elect magistrates, vote on laws, and veto magistrate actions. These groups of people were selected by the majority of people (not including women or

Rome was the first Republic in the western world that have inspire the political thinker over the century’s. Nowadays the representative democracy that most of the modern countries have is an imitation closer the Roman Republic than the Greek democracy because they were using the system of elect representatives. (37

The roman republic’s political structure was defined by the roman constitution, SPQR-senate and the people of Rome. There were three branches of government, the senate, the assemblies and the magistrates. “Her annually elected magistrates” (Livy), consisted of; 2 consuls who were the most important, their functions included being commander-in-chief of the army and to implement the senate’s decisions, the senate ‘’passed decrees to the magistrates with was usually obeyed’’ (Byrd), praetors were judges who administered Roman law and quaestors who managed financial matter.

Roman Republic began when the Romans overthrew their last Etruscan emperor in 509 B.C. During the Republican period, a government in which citizens elected their representatives, a magistrate in which two consuls being the most important among them and also the senate, which was the ruling body of the state. These elected magistrates were chosen annually by the citizens to rule Rome on their behalf. A republic differs a little bit from democracy, in which the citizens are expected to play an active role in governing the

Historian Henrik Mouritsen notes, “Political rights do not exist in a vacuum, but are embedded in social and economic structures which determine the extent to which they can be realized in practice.” The constitution of the Roman republic, a civilization in ancient Rome that lasted from 509 to 27 BCE, laid out the three main sources of power: the magistrates, the senate, and the people in the assemblies. Magistrates included all elected or appointed public officials, from rulers to party planners; the senate consisted of prior consuls and aristocrats who advised the magistrates and assemblies; the assemblies of people elected public officials and voted for laws. Each of the three branches was intended to keep the other in check, with the

Consuls watched over and had to supervise all the decisions made by the tribunes. They had to supervise all the happenings that were conducted by the people and would give the senate control over urgent business. But they would also

Ancient Athens could be defined as a period of time roughly around 330 BC where democracy and its meaning and purpose were called into question. Democracy, otherwise known in Greek as demokratia, is defined per root as “rule by the people”. Struggling to find a fair and civil way to rule the government, many rules were called into question as to whether they were truly lawful and fair. In the end, the Athenian constitution was written in a way where the rich and privileged were favored over the poor despite morals and character. As will be further explained, the Athenian community of 330 BCE was not truly a democracy.

The Roman government is very unique compared to others. While many places had either a monarchy or democracy the Romans found a way to have both. The Roman empire had both a senate and an emperor. The Senate made up the Democracy part having elected officials who although made laws couldn’t without approval of the emperor. The Emperor made up the Monarchy part having the final say in all important objectives.

Rome’s early government was essentially a democratic monarchy. It comprised a king, a senate (council of elders) and a Comitia Curiata – a form of general assembly reflecting the prevailing societal structure – which elected the king and gave him his powers (Morey, 1901, Chapter III). Late in the 6th century BC, it transitioned uneasily into an aristocratic republic. While the specific forms, offices and powers of the various governmental bodies evolved, often catalyzed by social conflict between the patrician and plebeian classes, it remained a tripartite set of mechanisms comprising the Magistrates and Consuls, Senate, and Assemblies and Tribunes (EmpireRome.com, n.d.).