Comparison Between Rome And Rome

1266 Words6 Pages
Ancient Rome went through a lot of different ways and people to run the city. What this goes to show is that the people actually had a voice in the way things were run. Sadly most of the voices when it came down to it were the wealthier people of Rome. Reading through the history in my opinion if the people did not get a voice Rome would have fell to many factors. Most of these factor would be the subpar leadership that Rome had for some of the generations. Most of these leaders had the same qualities to them is what makes it so sad. Greed is the worst quality among all of the qualities that the bad leaders had. They would go through the money of Rome and also heavily tax the city to get something made in their honor. For example, a great fire in Rome history when a 1/3rd of the city caught fire one night. Many thought it was a staged fire by the Emperor Nero, but he was in Antium at the time. When he returned he blamed the fire on the Christians. This caused a huge city backlash. Nero took advantage of the fire and the amount of land it cleared and built his very own building known as the Domus Aurea. This does not help with moving forward for Rome because it left many people without homes and sparked a rebellion in the heart of the city. When Rome was founded in April 21, 753 B.C.E they were in search of a king to take the throne and dint want to have a Greek background at all. The person they chose was named Aeneas who was a Troy Prince who escaped when Troy fell (West 136). After this time seven kings total reigned over the times of 753 B.C.E to 509 B.C.E. Rome not only had a king, but they also had a council known as the Senate (West 137). At this time most of the kings were Etruscans. In the early years this is where the ... ... middle of paper ... ... family of the the current leader was the main culprit. Was it even worth having a son at this time because in the end they were going to have their head? Rome government and greed was the ultimately the down fall in this scenario, which led to wars all the time. The only thing going for Rome was when the leader was killed by whoever to take over his throne, they knew they had to outdo them. This led to great success in buildings such as the Colosseum. In the end if Rome could have created a council, where multiple people could have led Rome this would have been more successful and maybe not so many of their leaders would have died, but since they never did they had to keep switching up their government ways, which may have put them behind in the end because they had to keep scrambling for new leaders to take the old leaders place, which was usually the son.
Open Document