Power is a natural desire for humans. It is what structures society, makes the world turn, and to get more of it, people will do almost anything. Yet society often follows whoever is in power without a second thought. Because the Romans follow whoever is in power without considering that person’s morals and ideals, they are responsible for the anarchy that ensues after Caesar’s death.
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
It is clear that the dynamics that characterized Rome’s society during the Republic were never easy. There was a constant push and pull of intentions and interests between Patricians and Plebeians. The Patricians always wanting to maintain economic and political supremacy while the Plebeians were in constant
This investigation evaluates the question, to what extent did Julius Caesar 's assassination affect Rome, politically and socially. Gaius Julius Caesar, famously known for his brilliant military strategies and shrewd political expertise, helped transform the Roman Republic into one of the greatest civilization in the western world. During his reign, Julius Ceasar expanded Rome’s geographical territory across Ancient Europe immensely, conquering areas of present-day France and Britain. The investigation will primarily focus on the political opportunities created by Caesar 's death, as well as the public reaction, from the immediate ramifications to its long-term effect on the Roman government. Effects in foreign and other civilizations not directly involved with Roman affairs or within Rome will not included in the investigation. Sources for the investigation will include The Emperors of Rome by David Potter and the Ancient History Encyclopedia .
The First Triumvirate between Gaius Julius Caesar, Gnaius Pompeius Magnus (Pompey) and Marcus Licinius Crassus contributed to the fall of the Roman Republic by undermining the Senate, which was unable to effectively deal with an expanding and diverse empire. This was affected by the triumvirate appealing directly to popular assemblies, because their alliance conflicted directly with the conservative Optimates, who refused to change with Rome's expansion. Though ultimately because each triumvir, being an ambitious general and politician was clambering for the same place; to be top man of Rome. The very inception of the Triumvirate, and the resulting power swing it created was the beginning of the end for the Republic.
Before the collapse of the Republic, Sulla, a roman patrician, declared himself dictator and used proscription lists, a list of people posted in the forum who were declared enemies of the state, to maintain his power. This example shows how lust for power was inherent and already destructive in the Republic, prior to its collapse. Similar to lust for power, greed could be found within the Republic before its collapse. For example, patricians, aristocrats, would buy farmland from plebeians who were serving in the army, and they used the land to increase their wealth. Lastly, loyalty was viewed as an important aspect of the Republic, specifically loyalty to politicians, family, and the Republic’s beliefs. Most Roman households had some allegiance to a certain politician and would support that politician despite their own personal beliefs. These three ideals of the Republic were established and followed long before the collapse of the Republic, and all three grew into destructive forces that caused the collapse of the
The first triumvirate was and alliance between three prominent politicians, Crassus, Pompey and Julius Caesar. The Roman historian Livy described the First Triumvirate as 'a conspiracy against the state by its three leading citizens'. The agreement was unofficial and private. It was formed in the summer of 60-59 B.C. The first triumvirate however is a bit misleading in name. Not only was it never called that by the contemporary Romans, but it was a far more inclusive factio (faction) than the term triumvirate implies.
The Roman empire owed its existence to Julius Caesar’s military genius and leadership. At the time of his birth, the Roman republic was rife with corruption, losing touch with the people as Rome rapidly expanded. In addition, the republic suffered much unrest due to an excess of slave labor, leaving many unemployed for the government to sustain with basic food and entertainment, or “bread and circuses.” Caesar changed this, joining partnership with two other prominent men, the wealthy Crassus and the general Pompey, to form the First Triumvirate. However, he quickly took the reins of the new government, securing his position as dictator with many populist actions, such as distributing land to poor farmers. They, in turn, showed loyalty toward their leader, providing unity and patriotism. The Roman empire was born into the perfect geographical and cultural circumstances to rise to greatness.
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.
Prior to the formation of the second Triumvirate, Julia Caesar had been brutally assassinated, which plunged Rome into another Civil War. The second triumvirate was formed when the Lex titia was passed in 43BC, making the position of Anthony, Lepidus and Octavian the highest constitutional office in the Roman state. As Scullard stated, “In place of the dictator Caesar, there were now three dictators.” The second Triumvirate was created to strengthen political control and used their power to legally hunt down those who had conspired to kill Caesar. This resulted in Civil War between the Second Triumvirate and Brutus and Cassius at the Battle of Phlipii 42, which undermined the authority of the Senate as most leaders died in battle. Eventually,
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
Subsequently, the system was corrupted because weak or vulnerable individuals were associating with men in power; in exchange of support, and loyalty, for the sake of protection, which broke the Democracy. Socrates said, “Democracy elevates men to positions of authority not because of their wisdom or their fitness to govern, but because of their ability to sway the masses with empty rhetoric. In Democracy, it is not truth that matters; it is public relations.” That is exactly what it was happening in the Roman Republic.
However, in the year 43BC after a period of unstableness in Rome, Octavian and Antony came to the realisation that they needed to make a political alliance. Thus creating the Second Triumvirate, after the first which included Julius Caesar,