Downfall Of Rome 's Republic

Final EXAM Part II: A Brutus vs Publius the Dangers and Benefits of a Large Republic

Chalking up the fall of the Roman Republic to a decline in traditional Roman morality, while not false, sells the events and changes that were the causes for the fall of the Republic short. At the end of The Third Punic War with Carthage we arguably see the Republic at its height. However in only a decade things begin to change, we see events that send Rome as a Republic past a point that Rome could not recover. Gaius Marius’s military reforms, specifically that of allowing for the captive cencsi, men who owned no property, and the creation of professional soldiers is the true catalyst for the downfall of the Republic. By enacting these reforms Marius opened up military duty to Rome’s largest group of citizens, however it created unforeseen issues, such as what to do with these men once they returned from battle. These reforms opened the door for military generals like Sulla and Caesar to gain the unquestioned support of their troops, in many instances gaining more respect from the soldiers then they had for the Roman state itself. These military reforms are a constant through line through the fall of the Republic, touching large political issues such as the conflicts between the Populares and the Optimates, or the rise of The First Triumvirate; socioeconomic issues such as the rise of Roman aristocracy, development of a slave based agriculture system to the profits from war. The complexity in which these reforms help lead to this immoral Roman state is complex and has been

A republic, like Rome, moves at a maddeningly slow pace. Legislation is put through a system of checks and balances where rivals debate ad nauseum over proposed policies. In a perfect world, this ensures that only which is most beneficial for the state and her peoples becomes a reality. A Tyrant, however, can accomplish a great deal in only a short amount of time. A good leader, like Augustus, can propel his people forward unhindered by the chains of a republic. The Roman people, according to Tacitus: “prefered the security of the current regime to the dangers of old” (Yardley 2008, 3). Even if it lacked freedom, many were willing to submit to an empire if it meant stability and security.

Some policies and institutions of the Roman Republic were useful to help them succeed in conquering first Italy and then the Mediterranean world. Before of the institution of the republic, the romans were a monarchy since their beginning and they were basically a pastoral people. Rome suffer several changes and improvements under the control of the Etruscan kings. The Etruscan were civilization settled north of Rome in Etruria, and they once had control over almost all the Italic peninsula. The Etruscans influences in Rome were profound, they transformed Rome from a pastoral community to a city (91). The Etruscan built the street and roads that help the development of temples, markets, shops, streets, and houses. They basically brought urbanization to Rome. It is fairly to say that the Rome republic was a fusion between the elements of the Etruscan civilization and the Rome elements. The combination of the different political institutions and policies made the Romans succeed in their conquest territories.

The Roman Republic has ended. The new regime has taken over and turn into something that the Romans thought would never happen an Empire. The common citizens had no more say in his own government. The dictators of Rome made sure the poor stayed poor and the rich stay rich. The dictators used “bread and circuses” to distract the

Tiberius Gracchus and Cicero were two men who were both concerned with wellness of the citizens of Rome; however, they had different opinions on the best way to achieve political advancements. Throughout the different generations of the two men, the same issues plagued Rome, and throughout their lifetimes the separate factions of the senate became more polarized as they continued to disagree about the fate of Rome. Cicero wrote letters to his friends and family which today offer great primary information about what it was like in Rome during the late republic. In our virtual reality game, Saeculum, I get firsthand insight into the issues that plagued Rome when my clients come to me with the issues of land, food, and water. I am tasked with

In The Assassination of Julius Caesar, Michael Parenti highlights the many significant people and events that characterized the late Roman Republic. Specifically, he focuses on the time period between the election of Tiberius Grachus, to the rise of Augustus, the first emperor of Rome. In this account of history, Parenti presents the social, political, and economic aspects of the Roman culture from the perspective of the Roman commoner, or plebeian. Using this perspective, he also spends a great amount of time examining the causes and effects of the assassination of Julius Caesar. The views that Parenti presents in this book stand in sharp contrast with the views of many ancient and modern historians, and offer an interesting and enlightening perspective into class struggle in the society of the Roman republic.

After the fall of Tarquinius Superbus’ reign of Rome, the Brutus and Collatinus led patrician revolution leads to the beginning of a new era in Roman history: the republic. The early republic is mostly a patrician favoring institute and created it in order “to restore power and privileges that popular royal tyrants had usurped from them” and to make it “difficult for any one aristocrat to acquire too much power at the expense of the rest” (Ward 59). Greek historian, Polybius, in his book, Histories, talks about the greatness of this Roman republic and its constitution by claiming: “Now the elements by which the Roman constitution was controlled were three in number, … and all aspects of the administration were, taken separately, so fairly

Many individuals believe the fall of the mighty Roman Republic is because they were doomed from the start. However, to be doomed it means to have been set up or condemned into a certain path of destruction, but the Roman Republic did not. The republic ran successfully from 509 BC to 27BCE. It was not until 133BC- 27BCE when the Republic began to experience problems. The fall of the Roman Republic, is not due to the fact it was “doomed”, however, it was because of adversity the Republic faced such as, the class distinction, the individuals who strictly sought power, and military

One of the greatest empires in history is the Roman Empire, but ironically what makes it one of the greatest is also what lead it to start falling apart. In other words, many different factors lead Rome to its success and prosperity, but these factors also are the ones that initialize the ruin of the republic. Different authors such as Polybius, Cicero, Sallust and Plutarch describe several of these factors that lead the Roman Empire to its glory and failure. Polybius relates Rome’s success to its political structure and the commitment and self-sacrifice that its citizens have for the republic. But, on the other hand, a few years later Cicero, Sallust, and Plutarch claim the factors that make the republic so great are the triggers to the increase of the need for power and high status in Rome’s citizens, therefore resulting in corruption.

When articles are written about the fall of the Republic and the fall of democracy, the blame is often attributed to one man: Julius Caesar. However, a figure that tends to be overlooked in popular history held the consulship over fifty years prior to the Republic’s inevitable fall was named Gaius Marius. Coming from an obscure Volscian town in the territory of Arpinum, sixty miles south-east of Rome, Plutarch wrote of Marius coming from poor origins and rising to the consulship as an archetypal ‘rags to riches’ story. This is nothing more than dramatic flair, since in reality he came from a good municipal family who were members of the local aristocracy, with the contemporary view characterising them as powerful nobles in their native town.

Wherever a Roman citizen might be, he must go to Rome to vote or to take part in the making of the laws. But when the citizens of Rome met together in the Forum, or on the Campus Martius, they made a large and unwieldy body, which could not do any important political business. Rome never learned that a democratic government in a large state is impossible without representation; that is, the election by the people of a few leading men to protect their interests, and to make the laws for them. Giving up on the policy of incorporation and the absence of the principle of representation were the two great defects in the Roman political

During the earliest years of the Roman Republic, Patricians had control over nearly everything, Plebeians had almost no rights. Plebeians had no right to question the decisions of the Patrician government since no laws were actually written down or published. The ‘conflict of orders’ is the struggle the Plebeians endured to gain rights and an opportunity to move along and further within the society of Rome and the political

The first of Sulla’s power changing was after his first victory. Sulla went from having nothing to getting a little taste of power. Sulla was born into a noble family, but was hardly brought up like he was a part of one (175). His father left him no money and he ended up living in a cheap rented apartment (175). As a young adult, he didn’t take anything serious and was known to hang out with actors or comedians and share their lifestyle (176). It wasn’t until he was appointed quaestor in Marius’ first consulship to make war in Africa on Jugurtha, that Sulla experienced his first government

Once before, after the formation of the Republic, the aristocratic families of Rome, Patricians had exercised control over the majority of the Roman people, Plebeians. The revolt of the Plebeians and their struggle in turn pushed for new political and economic reforms (Morey. n.d., Chap. 6). However, in the new democratic republic of Rome, another gap between the Italian allies, Latins and Romans with full citizenship was getting wider. Many of the Latin colonies had limited voting rights and could not hold