Carthage And Rome: Republic Vs. Oligarchal Republic

812 Words4 Pages
Republic Versus Oligarchal Republic Carthage and Rome had several similarities and several differences. Rome was a republic, electing its officials to rule over them and enforce the laws. Carthage was an oligarchal republic, with aristocrats being the only ones allowed to hold office. I will attempt to explain how each government worked and their differences. Rome was a republic. Republic is defined as "A government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law." (Republic., n.d.). Rome would elect its leaders from all of the groups of people, Patrician and Plebeian alike. The head of state was the consuls, two men…show more content…
Representative democracy, Republic, oligarchy, dictatorship. No two forms of governments are exactly the same, each having to adapt to the culture and the people around it. Many governments are more than one form, such as Britain is a monarchy and a representative democracy. Rome was a republic, letting its people elect officials and allowing any male citizen hold office. Carthage was an oligarchy and a republic, having elected officials but only from a certain class. One has to wonder, was that one of the reasons Carthage fell? Rome's government, at the time, was one chosen and run by the people. Carthage was one chosen and run by the elite. Rome would not enter a war or do something that put its people at risk. Carthage did not care about its general population's safety. Could this attitude be one of the reasons Rome was able to destroy it so easy? While I cannot say for certain if the reason Carthage fell was due to its government, I can say that during the time Rome was a republic, it was unstoppable, and Carthage never had that power. It appears to me that governments, when in the hands of the people, work better than monarchies or oligarchies. What do you
Open Document