Written Assignment Unit 4 (2)

docx

School

University of the People *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

HIST 1421

Subject

History

Date

Oct 30, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by ChiefMoose2566

Written Assignment Unit 4 University of the People HIST 1421-01 Greek and Roman Civilization – AY2024-T1 Instructor Asal Morvari October 4, 2023

Introduction The paper is going to describe the circumstances that led to the establishment of the Roman Republic. Then it is going to explain the elements of the Roman Republic that made it democratic. To end the paper I am going to explain the elements that made me question the Roman Republic’s democratic nature. The Roman Republic The Roman Republic was established when the patrician class overthrew the traditional dynastic monarchy. Aristocracy overturned the last Roman king during a political revolution and turned the Roman Kingdom into the Roman Republic by establishing a republican government with various assemblies where Roman citizens could be involved in decision-making. Romans were left with a hatred for monarchy and although there was a division of class they all longed for freedom and republican values (Lumen Learning, 2022) . The element that made the Roman Republic democratic was the residents (members of the populous Romanus/people of Rome) had a right to vote. The supreme commanders of the government were elected for one-year terms. All the voting was done via a secret ballot, to retain anonymity to prevent target violence and intimidation, citizens would write their decision on a clay wax tablet and insert it into a box. The government was a representative democracy, where Romans elected people to dictate the government. There were elections to select the members of the Tribune of the Plebs, they could veto a proposed law/action/legislation in the name of the people of Rome. There were elections to select a consul that would take the role of rule and there was even an option to elect two consuls so that there was a check and balance system in place by alternating the power between the consuls each month, these were the people that created the

legislations, and guide the state during times of war. They represented the will of the people and could be removed from power if they acted against the will of the people (Bobertz, 2022). The elements that made me question the Roman Republic’s democratic nature, all the people and citizens of Rome did not have equal power, this was due to the division in society that classified citizens as patricians and plebeians with the inability to change their classification even if they were wealthy, this meant that plebeians were unable to join the monopolized Consulship, senate or the inherited religious rites. There was the added fact that only men had rights, women, and slaves could not vote or participate in government and only those that had served in the military for ten years were eligible for consuls and magistrate roles. The Republican Rome was a mix of three branches of government consisting of the consuls, the senate, and the magistrates, with the power residing in the two magistrates that made the consuls. The magistrates were elected for one year and it was an unpaid position, meaning that it was only reserved for the rich, it consisted of Quaestros (financial officials), and Censors (maintained the list of citizens for military and taxation purposes). The consuls, carried out the functions of the former kings, holding supreme civil and military authority in Republican Rome, this role only lasted for a year then they became senators for life. In theory, to prevent them from having absolute power they needed each other’s vetoes but they did have the administrative power conferring command of the army and the interpretation and execution of the law. They also had the right to choose lictors (twelve men) that would accompany them, they also had the privilege of retaining their prestige by joining the senate (Brown, 2016; Saint Leo University, 2021 ). The senate (advisory branch of the Roman government) was chosen by the kings and then by the censors and they served for life, they were chosen from ex-consuls or other officers. These members were viewed as kings and although they did not have any direct power they were still

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

highly regarded and their advice was taken into consideration, they also had a close relationship to religion. The dictator (head of the Roman Republic) although they were supposed to serve for 6 months, was only appointed during emergencies and was supposed to act with the consent of the senate and were supposed to be appointed by the consul or the military tribune there were occasions were when the dictators stayed for longer. For example, Sulla was appointed for an undefined period and Julius Caesar was appointed in perpetuo (no set endpoint) and ruled with full dominance (Brown, 2016; Saint Leo University, 2021 ). The Assembly of Centuries, composed of all members of the army was in charge of electing consuls annually. The assembly of Tribes, composed of all citizens, approved or rejected laws and decided on issues of war and peace. This assembly was only possible due to protests that the plebs made and since they consisted of 90% of the population they made enough ruckus for the patricians to create a new office that became the only way for these citizens to have some power. The assembly, although consisting of all citizens they were managed so that higher class members had more weight in their opinion and their votes were elevated in consideration, which created an unfair advantage when decisions were made concerning the election of the consuls. Another element that made me question their democratic nature was that the candidates for the consulship consisted of only the senatorial class, meaning that those in power were the aristocrats of Rome. Plus, due to the power that generals and other members of the government were able to accumulate and the people that they had under their control, no limitations on roles and no rules could keep them from obtaining what they wanted, even if they had to use other people as the image of the plans that they wanted to execute (Brown, 2016; Saint Leo University, 2021 ).

Even though the Roman Republic was not a truly democratic government it did have important elements that distinguished it from an oligarchy and allowed some involvement for the citizens as it kept being developed and as it grew elements started to change to make it more inclusive to all citizens. The government in the Roman Republic was an improvement to the monarchy that existed when the Etruscan kings ruled, and it was now a group of citizens elected to represent the population that was responsible for the good of the people, and at least there were some processes set in place so that the people could change representatives and elect another in their place. Word Count: 1092

References Bobertz, N. (2022, August 15). The Roman republic vs. Athenian democracy: Comparisons . The History Ace. https://thehistoryace.com/the-roman-republic-vs-athenian-democracy-comparisons/ Brown, Z. S. (2016). How democratic was the Roman republic? Theory and practice of an archetypal democracy . Inquiries Journal. 8( 11 ). http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/articles/1492/how-democratic-was-the-roman-republic- the-theory-and-practice-of-an-archetypal-democracy Saint Leo University. (2021, March 17). Democracy in troubled times. https://slulibrary.saintleo.edu/c.php?g=368038&p=2487222 Lumen Learning. (2022). Boundless world history 1: Ancient civilizations – enlightenment – Version 35 . Boundless.com. https://archive.org/details/boundless-world-history/boundless-world- history/page/n744/mode/1up

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version