Rome Vs Athens Dbq Analysis

Citizenship in Athens and Rome has similarities and differences. Being a citizen is being a native or naturalized member of a state or nation who owes allegiance to its government. Being a citizen meant different things in each empire. The relationship between the citizen and their nation varied from their system of citizenship. Rome had a better system of citizenship because they were more open to who they allowed citizenship, they gave people they conquered citizenship, and personal grudges, judgements about others/topics would not affect the Empire.

When the Athenians were making their laws all 40,000 of their citizens were invited to the lawmaking process,whilst the Romans had a 300 man senate. Also the Romans had an easier way of becoming a citizen. Another way that they differ is that Athens was ruled by a council of 500 and the Roman empire was ruled by the senate and up until third century BCE Roman kings.The Roman Empire is far more superior to the Athenian city-state because of the more efficient government, better laws and more in touch citizens.

Documents E and F both describe both the Athenian and the Roman assemblies and senates. The Athenian assembly was much less reliable compared to Rome’s for two reasons, its size and how it was chosen. Athens assembly was made up of every citizen which counted to about 40,000 men. This would make choosing one option very difficult amongst all the citizens since they all have different opinions; also leaders of the assembly were chosen by random lot and that could pave the way towards rigging and that would allow for a non-trustworthy person to lead 40,000 people on one decision. The Roman senate was more efficient compared to the Athenian one because it only had 300 members; these members were also very high ranking officials who belonged to some of the oldest Roman families making them more

The Greek society was a direct democracy with people voting on the issues themselves instead of representatives voting on their behalf. Any male citizen over the age of eighteen was allowed to vote. Like the Romans, the Greek government was divided into separate parts. The Greek government consisted of an assembly, council, and courts, with each requiring a different number of voters present. The people all gather and vote on issues by hand, and this is the simplest form of majority rules. The role of the people is extremely important in how the society and state is governed and run. This early form a democracy was detailed by Pericles funeral oration during the Peloponnesian War. Pericles was an eminent Athenian politician who states in regards to the government of Athens, “Its administration favors the many instead of the few; this is why it is called a democracy (Pericles, “Funeral Oration”, pp. 2)”. Here, Pericles states that the people have all the power and their opinion is highly valued. Likewise, the Romans valued the people’s opinions so highly that they entrusted with them rewards and punishments, vital aspects that held the society together. Pericles also states, “…nor again does poverty bar the way, if a man is able to serve the state, here is not hindered by the obscurity of his condition (Pericles, “Funeral Oration”, pp. 2)”. Here is the essence of democracy, every man no

To begin with, both of their ways that they chose the officials were similar but also differed. The Athenian Government and the Roman Republic both had the citizens of each side choose the officials, but they both had a difference in limitations on how they chose the officials. In Athens, the citizens would vote for the officials, but the people who were official citizens were the ones who were 18 or over, born in Athens, and had to be males. This means that outsiders, slaves, or women could not vote because they were not considered citizens. Additionally, the Athenian Government system for voting was organized with citizens by the name of demes or demos; who belonged to tribes and where combined with others of the same area to make a larger group, which in turn were combined to form ten tribes. (Gill, thoughtco 2017). In contrast, citizens of Rome had to be over 15 years old, male slaves could also vote if they were granted freedom, the women were considered citizens but had no voting rights. The

If there was anything that Rome and Greece where known for it was there brute military and ruthless violence that brought both empires to the top. Although many people don't see it Rome and Greece did have many similarities in their militaries. One thing that both

Athens and Sparta are the two famous city-states in Ancient Greece. The Athens was more superior then Sparta. The Athenians were stronger because they had a better geography, government, cultural achievements, and I would rather live in the Athens.

For Polybius the advantage of the roman republic over Athenian democracy was that, successively more people shared power as a safeguard against abuse until the immorality of democracy again led to conditions favorable for the receiving of the "Fuehrerpinzip." In his plan, there successively occur three "good" forms of government – kingship, aristocracy, and democracy – only for each to succumb to corruption and for its resulting understanding in its distorted form – respectively dictatorship, oligarchy, and adhocracy, or mob rule – to be overthrown by the kind phase of the next. Polybius also tells us that the senate puts forth its control largely because it has the power to carry out investigations of capital crimes and to offer ultimate negotiation in civil disagreement. There are no rights prior to the state Mixed government implies checks & balances (Polybius, Roman Republic), which implies the good of the entire community.

     Because Rome tried to maintain a republic it had different needs compared to the Greeks. "The Romans, unlike the Greeks, were distinguished by practicality and common sense, not by a love of abstract thought. In their pragmatic and empirical fashion, they gradually developed the procedures of public politics and the legal state." (Perry 88)

For several years, scholars and historians from around the world have been debating about the Roman Republic’s constitution. Many have described their constitution as purely democratic; however, others find aspects of the Roman Republic characterizing despotism or an aristocracy. So, which form of government could best describe the Roman Republic? Currently, there is no exact answer, but because of meticulous studies, observations were recorded and assumptions were made. From a selection of resources, the most common claim inquired that the Roman Republic should not be considered an accurate form of a democracy and there are a collection of reasons as to why this is.

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

After nearly half a millennium of rule, the Romans began to lose their grip on Europe in the fifth century. The Fall of Rome left in its ruin political chaos, confusion, wide spread devastation, although the Romans at the time had no idea the fall of Rome was occurring. Divide of Western and Eastern Rome, invasions, military disloyalty, and economic instability are some of the factors associated with the fall of Rome. In AD 476, the last Roman emperor in the west, Romulus Augustulus, was removed from power by Odovacar, leader of the Goths.

Athens and Sparta were two powerful city-states, different from each other where Athenian democracy focused on economic advancement, while Sparta oligarchy focused on military force. Democracy is a system of government where citizens have the right to vote, whereas oligarchy is a system of government where only a group of people is in control and only their opinion or decision that were taken into consideration. Leading to the thesis statement that people are better served by Athenian democracy than the Spartan oligarchy, supported in three evidence points. Firstly, Athenian democracy allowed citizens participation in government that gave them freedom to vote and take part in legislation. Secondly, the Athenian government provided Athenian men better education, by being taught how to read and write to reach their academic advancement. Lastly, the Athenian democracy’s contribution to Athens military advancement that protected its citizens.

In contrast Rome did not have the geological barriers that Greece had. Therefore, under the Roman system, cities answered to a central government that was chosen by the citizens. The fact that Romans had to elect senators gave citizens the need for a unified and participant society. The Roman war strategies were also more unified than the Greek strategies, thus, ensuring their success.

Ancient Athens was a highly polarized society in which citizenship meant everything. Citizenship permitted individuals to not only participate in the democratic