INTRODUCTION:
According to (National Geographic Society, 2022). As the final Etruscan king of Rome was deposed, the Roman Republic was established in 509 BCE. With two representatives chosen by legislative assemblies to preside over the Roman Senate and lead the Roman military, the Roman government functioned as a representative democracy in the form of a republic. Nevertheless, the Roman Republic never aspired to be a direct democracy; instead, it had a fused government that combined elements of "kingship," "aristocracy," and democracy.
Throughout its existence, the Roman Republic maintained its undemocratic nature, with many of its institutions growing less democratic as time went on. Due to social and economic upheavals in 130 B.C., politics became violent, which led to the adoption of a secret ballot that made it impossible for Roman officials to be
…show more content…
These features are still present in the American government today. The comitia centuriata (Centuriate Assembly) and the comitia tributa were among the most significant democratic institutions in Republican Rome (Tribal Assembly). Citizens may vote on laws in these assemblies and choose representatives to rule on their behalf. In addition, the Roman Republic maintained a system of checks and balances that aimed to strike a balance between the aristocrats (elite), the middle class, or the magistrates. This arrangement made guaranteed no one faction held excessive power.
Notwithstanding these democratic components, the Roman Republic's aristocracy-dominated governance made it ultimately undemocratic. The Senate, which was predominately made up of nobles, held the majority of the republic's power. This indicated that very few people actually influenced the decisions that the government made. (National Geographic Society,
The Roman Republic was often known for its lasting influence for the development of Western political governance and ideals and is often hailed as a beacon of democracy in ancient history. But an in depth look reveals it to be more complex. While the Roman Republic held democratic elements that allowed citizen participation and representation, its political structure was ultimately characterized by a significant concentration of power among the elite and few for the average person. This essay will explore the extent of democracy within the Roman Republic, analyzing key aspects such as the electoral system, legislative bodies, and social hierarchy and the democratic nature and the implications it had on the overall governance of the state.
Polybius goes on to say, “no one can say for sure whether the constitution is an aristocracy or democracy or despotism” in Document A. He then explains how the Roman Republic was each of them, an aristocracy, a democracy, and a despotism, for various reasons. One of these reasons was that, at times, the consuls, or the magistrates, and the Senate had more power than the Assemblies, but in different situations, it was the opposite. This shows that even Polybius, a man who was actually alive during the Roman Republic, didn’t know how to label
The kingship (or monarchy) would be represented by the consuls, the aristocracy by Senate, and democracy be represented by the assemblies. By complementing one another, this would ensure that the government would work efficiently without having any party rising to sole power. The effectiveness of this government was so overwhelming, even Polybius admitted that this led to “nearly the whole world fell under the power of Rome in somewhat less than 53 years – an event certainly without precedent” (Polybius, VI.
In 509 B.C.E. the Romans had taken back their own rule that the Etruscans had maintained for Decades(RR). A republic was formed after the Romans were in control again that gave the people a say in how the state was run(RR). Many countries had copied this form of government including the United States(RR). The Romans also had the three branches of government. The executive legislative, and judicial branch.
Polybius believed that this system of checks and balances made the Roman constitution one of the most stable and long-lasting forms of government in the ancient world. According to Polybius, the Roman monarchy provided stability, while the aristocracy represented the interests of the rich and influential classes, and the people's assembly (the democracy) supplied a voice for the ordinary people. He believed that the mix of these three elements
The Roman Republic lasted from 509 B.C.E to 27 B.C.E. The Roman Republic was democratic, but not always. Such as when the wealthy took over, it was more difficult to become a Roman citizen, and there was a lot of division in the society. However it was still democratic because they let the majority of legal men vote, even the free slaves later on, the people had a voice, and everyone mainly had a job to do in order to help the community. The Roman Republic tried to be democratic, but then it led to it just being an aristocracy.
How democratic was the Roman Republic? Historians and professors have debated this topic for years. This republic developed in Ancient Rome while Greece was flourishing. They had been led by kings, but the leaders abused the power, so a group of patricians overthrew the king, Tarquin the Proud. However, the Roman Republic was not very democratic for many reasons.
If it weren 't for need for power and jealously/rivalry between generals ( Maricus, Sulla, Caesar, ad Pompey) the republic would have survived, thrived, and been more democratic. Rome developed into a city-state, first ruled by kings, then formed a new form of government called the Republic. For 500 years, Ancient Rome was governed by the Roman Republic. The Roman Republic was not upheld by a written document. The United States government is very similar to Rome’s model of the Republic.
In a representative democracy, citizens choose representatives to vote on laws and make political choices. In ancient Rome, many political leaders and historians claimed that the government was a democracy. However, Rome was never truly a democracy, due to their unfair government organization, and lack of democratic citizenship. In terms of government career holders, and as regular citizens, some groups of people were more powerful and privileged than others. To start off, the government of ancient Rome was far from democratic.
Democracy is what we call a formation of government where citizens and group of people can vote on laws. The Roman Republic did not have a well developed formation of their government but it did have the qualifications of democracy. There were pros and cons of voting in the Roman times such as anybody can vote. According to Professor Millar, he says, “Every adult male citizen, unless specifically disqualified, had a vote, and there was no formal exclusion of the poor. Free slaves could also vote.”
Although one of their best ideas was known as the type of government they established what is now known as the republic, and since then it has been copied by other places, the united states uses and has similarity to roman republic. The U.S government is based partly on the model of Rome’s. the parts and similarity’s that we still use today are things like citizenship, legal code, legislative branch /senate, and others. The republic all started when the romans finally overthrew the Etruscan conquerors they had around (509 B.C.E) once they were free the romans came up or established the republic, a government were the citizens picked a representative to rule on their behalf. The concept of Citizenship in Rome was that males of ages 15 or older, that came from original tribes or places of Rome became citizens.
Considered one of the greatest Empires to rule Europe, the Roman Republic dwelled of a extensively civilized society and government. Leaving historians continually pondering how the Roman Republic stayed civilized for the large amount of time the Republic ruled. Nevertheless, democracy was vital to the success of the Roman Republic, society depended on it. Yet, was the Roman’s definition of truly being democratic, different from the current society's state of democracy? The Roman Republic was significant for the time of government, considering the past governmental care of the Republic.
Also, Rome follows in Greece's footsteps. For example, Livy once said, “And no wonder: for if we confine our observation to the power of the Consuls we should be inclined to regard it as despotic; if on that of the Senate, as aristocratic; and if finally one looks at the power possessed by the people it would seem a clear case of democracy” (Doc. B). This shows that Rome follows in Greece’s footsteps because even though Rome was considered a democracy, in actuality, the senate acted as an aristocracy, because in both a small group of elites ruled. The councils acted as a despotism, because both have one or more elected officials, with great power.
This shift was not in the form of a sudden revolution, and rather grew as a gradual switch from a monarchy previously under the Etruscans. The republic stood for liberty and extended citizenship of the people. In the Roman republic, the people chose officials to represent their interests. Dominating the government was a senate that was primarily made up of the wealthy, landholding class, known as patricians. This outraged the lower class plebeians, who later gained power and elected their own officials.
Introduction The Roman Republic was established in 509 BCE, after a long struggle against kingship. The Roman Republic was characterized by elements of democracy, such as the election of officials and the creation of a representative government. However, the Republic was also marked by undemocratic practices, such as the exclusion of plebeians and women from political power. This paper will discuss the circumstances that led to the establishment of the Roman Republic, the democratic elements of the Republic, and the undemocratic practices that made the Republic questionable.