After the overthrow of the Tarquin dynasty, led by Julius Brutus, the ancient Romans avoided a true monarchal government for the remainder of their storied history (Even the later imperial government maintained forms of the republican system. While in practice it could be a system of absolute power for the Emperor, it was theoretically still checked by the Senate and other representative ideals.) This same Julius Brutus was later claimed as an ancestor by the Republican loyalist Marcus Brutus who was among the conspirators in the assassination of Julius Caesar and shows the deeply rooted Roman aversion to Kings. Rome was surrounded by powerful external enemies, including its former Etruscan rulers, and Patrician (the hereditary aristocratic families) in-fighting with each other and the plebeian (common people) class was an immediate source of difficulty. …show more content…
There was never a document describing or prescribing the actual republic – it was all based on agreement (among ‘gentlemen’) and precedent (the mos maioruum, or ‘custom of our ancestors’). Tacitus, in the first words of his Annals, gives us the main clue: res publica et consulatus (the republic and the consulship). The Decline of the Roman Empire with the death of Marcus Aurelius in AD 180, the rule of the empire passed to his 20-year-old son Lucius Aurelius Commodus. The concept of imperial decline beginning with the reign of Commodus is largely adapted from Edward Gibbon 's rather arbitrary work, "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" and may have been a bit premature considering that the western empire endured for another three centuries. While the remaining years of the empire, especially the tumultuous 3rd century, would hardly be characterised by uninterrupted dynastic rule (in large part because of assassination and civil war), Commodus ' reign marks the end of the adoptive period that provided
From ages past, the actions of conquerors, kings and tyrants had brought the Roman Republic to a stance that opposed any idea of a singular leader, of a single man that held total power over the entirety of the state. Their rejection of the various ruthless Etruscan rulers that had previously dictated them brought the Republic to existence in 509 BC , and as a republic their prominence throughout the provinces of the world exponentially expanded. Throughout these years, the traditions of the Romans changed to varying degrees, most noticeably as a result of the cultural influence that its subject nations had upon the republic, as well as the ever-changing nature of Roman society in relation to then-current events. However, it was not until the rise of Augustus, the first of a long line of succeeding emperors, that many core aspects of the Republic were greatly changed. These were collectively known as the “Augustan Reforms”, and consisted of largely a variety of revisions to the social, religious, political, legal and administrative aspects of the republic’s infrastructure. Through Augustus, who revelled in the old traditional ways of the past, the immoral, unrestraint society that Rome was gradually falling to being was converted to a society where infidelities and corruption was harshly looked upon and judged. The Roman historian Suetonius states, “He corrected many ill practices, which, to the detriment of the public, had either survived the licentious habits of the late civil wars, or else originated in the long peace” . Through Augustus and his reforms, the Republic was transformed into an Empire, and through this transformation, Rome experienced one of its greatest and stabl...
During the Republic, the people of Rome had a major disinclination towards any sort of Royalty, which is why when Caesar attempted to lead undemocratically indefinitely, he disrupted one of the core stances that romans shared communally. Caesar over indulged in power when he retitled himself as ‘dictator in perpetuo’. “And as Caesar was coming down from Alba into the city they ventured to hail him as king. But at this the people were confounded, and Caesar, disturbed in mind, said that his name was not King, but Caesar, and seeing that his words produced an universal silence, he passed on with no very cheerful or contented looks…..But the most open and deadly hatred towards him was produced by his passion for the royal power.” Caesars egotism and self-importance made him uncherished by members of the senate. “Everybody knew that Caesar's ego would never allow him to play second fiddle to another senator, and it was equally well-known that another famous military leader, Pompey the Great, had similar ambitions. In January 49, more or less at...
Much ink from the historians’ pens has been spilled seeking to explain the reasons behind the fall of the Roman Republic. As Gruen notes, “from Montesquieu to Mommsen, from Thomas Arnold to Eduard Meyer…the Republic’s calamity has summoned forth speculation on a grand scale. How had it come about?” (1) Certainly, from one perspective, it can be said that the attraction of this event is to a degree overstated: it is based on the belief of the stability of political systems, of the deterrence of the possibility of radical changes in political worldviews and general social arrangements and structures. Furthermore, it marks a decisive shift, in the political arrangements of a grand civilization of Ancient Rome: in other words, it marks an instance where even within the continuity of a singular civilization, such as that of Rome, there can be the presence of political turbulence and abrupt changes of directions regarding the form which political power and hegemony ultimately assumes. Yet, what is perhaps more important from the perspective of the historian is the precise sense in which the events of the collapse of the Roman Republic still remain ambiguous, arguably because of the multi-faceted manner in which this fall occurred. Hence, Gruen writes: “the closing years of the Roman Republic are frequently described as an era of decay and disintegration; the crumbling of institutions and traditions; the displacement of constitutional procedures by anarchy and forces; the shattering of ordered structures, status and privilege; the stage prepared for inevitable autocracy.” (1) In other words, the collapse of the Roman Republic is complicated because of the multiple dimensions in which such degeneration ultimately happened: it was not mere...
Over the span of five-hundred years, the Roman Republic grew to be the most dominant force in the early Western world. As the Republic continued to grow around the year 47 B.C it began to go through some changes with the rise of Julius Caesar and the degeneration of the first triumvirate. Caesar sought to bring Rome to an even greater glory but many in the Senate believed that he had abused his power, viewing his rule more as a dictatorship. The Senate desired that Rome continued to run as a republic. Though Rome continued to be glorified, the rule of Caesar Octavian Augustus finally converted Rome to an Empire after many years of civil war. Examining a few selections from a few ancient authors, insight is provided as to how the republic fell and what the result was because of this.
In 509 B.C. the Romans declared themselves a republic, free from rule of the Etruscan kings. (“The Rise of…”) From that point on, the Roman’s form of government would never include the title of “king”, in fear that a single person would gain absolute power. The republic included a dictator (in emergencies), the senate, two consuls, and several other positions. (Bishop) Although the goal of creating a republic was to have a government that represented the wishes of its people, the Roman senate consisted of men of wealth or power, leaving most of the plebeians, or common people, out of the picture. Many of the emperors’ policies strengthened the power of the government, and therefore weakened the power of the plebeians. By the end of Sulla’s rule in 78 B.C., grain prices had risen substantially and there was large gap between the rich and poor. (“The Rise of…”) When Julius Caesar took power, he initiated several reforms that were much needed at the time. Caesar spent large volumes of money on entertaining the citizens, while expanding citizenship to people of conquered lands and lessening the power of the senate. His policies threatened the method of income of senators and around 60 senators, in the name of saving the republic, murdered Julius Caesar at a senate hearing in 44 B.C. Civil war then erupted in Rome and lasted over a decade. At the end of the blood brawl, it was Octavian who emerged victorious; he would be the first Roman Emperor and would be known as Augustus. (Morey) Although the “Liberators” (Julius Caesar’s assassins), might not have realized it, the day that Julius Caesar died was the same day that the republic died; t...
Rome was a major power because it always made certain its own military prowess was preeminent. There have been many ideas presented as to the fall of the Roman Empire. Many believe that Rome declined morally and the violence and decadence of the societal norms led to the demise. Gibbons has been credited with the theory of the influence and transference of Christianity over the Roman system of Gods and Goddesses that perpetrated the fall. Another theory lays the blame at the feet of the Emperor, that the happiness of the people and the functioning of the government was directly correlated with the personal merit and management skills of the reigning authority. This 10 page paper argues that the imperialistic tendencies of Rome over time and the pre-eminence of military expansionism in the latter stages, was the deciding feature of the "fall". Bibliography lists 7 sources.
The Romans were on one of the greatest people of all. They had power, wealth, and even a half of the world. They built one of the strongest and vast empire that world has ever seen. They came from nothing to something awesome. It started of as a city and ended up being one of the greatest empire of all. This essay is going to focus on the Roman Empire from the rise to the fall and the government, architecture, mythology, Family Structure, and Food of the Romans.
There were many reasons for the fall of the Roman Empire. Each one interweaved with the other. Many even blame the initiation of Christianity in 337 AD by Constantine the Great as the definitive cause while others blame it on increases in unemployment, inflation, military expenditure and slave labour while others blame it on the ethical issues such the decline in morals, the lack of discipline of the armies and the political corruption within the Empire. Three major contributions that led to the collapse of the once great empire were: the heavy military spending in order to expand the Empire, the over-reliance on slave labour which led to an increase in unemployment, and the political corruption and abuse of power by the Praetorian Guard leading to the unfair selection of many disreputable emperors and the assassination of those not favoured by the Guard.
The Fall Of The Roman Empire Rome was one of the biggest, most powerful empires in recorded history. Such an empire could not fall due to one factor alone in a short period of time. It was a slow process of decay. Many factors would influence the toppling of this Empire, such as social gaps, religion, economical troubles, and corruption in politics. Among all of these factors, one of the most obvious and major causes was the crumbling of one most powerful military forces in history, The Roman army.
The Roman Empire was incredibly large and successful. In the prime of the empire population reached up to 56.8 million people. The land they conquered amasses to an outrageous 1 million square miles. Their influence is so great that even now people can see their imprint in architecture, law, and even helping spread Christianity, the world’s most populous religion. These amazing facts also begs a question. How did one of the world’s greatest civilization fall? Well, the fall of Roman Empire in 476 ACE was aided by ineffective rulers, the crumbling economy, and the invasion of the Germanic Tribes.
The Roman Republic began approximately around 509 B.C. when the nobles drove the King and his family out of Rome. This monumental incident helped shape the start to the transformation of the monarchy into a republican governmental system. This is known to have begun by that of the Roman nobles trying to hold their power that they had gained. The Republic was “[a] city-state [which] was the foundation of Greek society in the Hellenic Age; in the Hellenistic Age, Greek cities became subordinate to kingdoms, larder political units ruled by autocratic monarchs” (Perry 105)
Rome's Republican era began after the overthrow of the last Roman King Tarquin Superbus by Lucius Brutus in 509 BC(1), the Senate was ruled the by the people of Rome. The Roman Republic was governed by a largely complex constitution, which established many checks and balances, so no man could have complete control. The evolution of the constitution was heavily influenced by the struggle between the patricians and the other prominent Romans who were not from the nobility. Early in Rome’s history, the patricians controlled the republic, over time, the laws that allowed these individuals to dominate the government were repealed, and the result was the emergence of a the republic which depended on the structure of society, rather than the law, to maintain its dominance. This is similar to the creation of the American system of government. Starting with the over throw of t...
Brutus was one of many Romans with noble bloodlines. Although Brutus was noble, he never used it to get ahead. There are many times when Brutus could have used the fact that he is truly noble but he didn’t. Many people argue that a noble man wouldn’t have killed Caesar. In some ways that is true, but Brutus’ case was different. A noble man would only for the good of others and that is what Brutus did. He killed Caesar because 7he was afraid of how powerful he could become. Even then he had a hard time doing it, and that is what separates Brutus from the other conspirators. Every other conspirator had little or no reason to kill Caesar. Brutus was willing to do anything for Rome. During his speech about Caesar’s murder Brutus stated “I have the same dagger for myself when it shall please my country to need my death” (III.ii.45-46). This shows how Caesar, this is my answer: not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more” (III.ii.20-22). He was too passionate about his country to let Caesar turn it into a dictatorship. Mark Antony and Octavius recognized that Brutus was the one noble roman. In his final speech mark Antony said “This was the noblest roman of them all. / All the conspirators save only he/ Did that they did i...
The decline and fall of the Roman Empire is a scholarly article written by Justin Ott about the Roman Empire and the events leading up to its fall. The article mostly focuses on the military and economy of Rome in the third century A.D. It lists in the beginning a few of the different theories people have of how Rome fell, including led poisoning and the spread of Christianity. The article seems to want to disprove these theories, showing how they are not the main causes for the collapse of Rome. “Gibbon’s arguments in these sections can be accurately summarized as “the insensible penetration of Christianity in the empire fatally undermined the genius of a great people.” The problem with this conclusion is two-fold. First of all, this explanation is too narrow as it is difficult to believe one single factor brought down the empire. More importantly, it is clear that the Eastern Roman Empire was by far more Christian than the West, therefore if Christianity was behind the fall, the East should have fallen first.” The article’s audience appears to be historians, or those who are interested in history, or just the Roman Empire. It
The Roman Republic ultimately failed due to the lack of large-scale wars and other crises that had united the Roman populous early in the history of the Roman Republic. Roman leadership and honor were compromised. In the absence of war and crisis, Rome’s leaders failed to develop the honor and leadership necessary to maintain the Republic. The Roman Republic was founded in 509 BC after the ruling Tarquins abused their extensive power as monarchs and were overthrown. The goal of the Roman Republic was to have a strong government, governed equally by the patricians and the plebians, and to avoid another Roman Monarchy.