There were many differences, both socially and politically, between the Patricians (the ruling, aristocratic class) and The Plebeian (common people). Following their victory over the Tarquin, Rome was ready for a Republican form of government as opposed to the despotic tyrant control they had been under. Patricians were the ruling class. They not only had the wealth in Rome, they held power in senate. All laws were of their making and designed to keep them in power. The spoils of war were, by law, the property of the people as a whole, but the Patricians kept it for their own, increasing their wealth. At the same time, the Plebeians were falling further and further into debt. Their lives differed little from that of their Spartan neighbors, the Helots. The only difference was the Plebeians did have the right to vote, yet …show more content…
The common people weren’t even in a position to know what the laws where as they had never been written or made public. This allowed to Patricians to interpret the laws. The harshest of these was the Law of Debt. The battles fought were especially hard on the common people, they lost property and their way of life in their fields while fighting in the army. To recover, they borrowed money from their wealthier Patrician rulers. Unfortunately, they were unable to pay back these debts. They became slaves to their creditors, and were often imprisoned. As the Patricians lot in life continued to improve, the Plebeians became more disenchanted. This led to the First Secession of the Plebeians. This was basically a strike. They refused to serve in the army, putting the Patricians in a position to have to defend themselves. They quickly realized that without the Plebeian soldiers, Rome would be destroyed. The first concession offered was the forgiveness of all debts and the release of all imprisoned debtors. (Outlines of Roman history, chapter 7,
The socioeconomic structure of ancient Sparta was unbalanced and disproportioned, and because of the social unrest between the citizens of Sparta economic reforms were desperately needed. Plutarch highlights this issue when he says:
Rome was kind of a democy it had it’s flaws but by its voting system it makes it a democy. In document C only 2% of Roman’s voted and these votes by the people even though it was few that makes it a democracy. In document C you had to be in Rome to vote which is far because they wouldn’t want an outsider to vote on things that were going on in Rome. In document B poor rich and the freed slaves could vote and for it’s time that is amazing that the poor and the freed slaves could vote. Rome definitely had it’s flaws but for it’s time it was a good democracy but in our fews we don’t think the Rome Republic was a good democy at all.
After the expulsion of the last king of Roman Tarquin established by Brutus. The once before power monarchial government was no longer puissant. The new power was given to the consuls( from the Senate). Brutus bound the people with an oath to allow no one to reign in Rome. During the secession of the Plebs, Spurius Cassius and Postumus Cominius entered upon their consulship.
The fall of the Western Roman Empire was the first example in history on the collapse of a constitutional system which was caused by the internal decay in political, military, economics, and sociological issues. The government was becoming corrupt with bribery. Commanders of the Roman army turned their own army inward towards their own Constitutional systems, fueled by their own ruthless ambition. This paper will talk about how the violence and internal turmoil in 133B.C.-27 B.C. was what provoked the economic stagnation in the city of Rome and to the end of the Republic and the many corrupt politicians and generals who only thought of nothing more than personal gains and glory. The senate lost control of the Roman military and the reason they rose against the senate was because the senate were no longer able to help manage the social problems or the military and administrative problems of the empire. The economics of the Roman Empire soon hit rock bottom due to the high taxation to support the army. Gold was also eroding since Rome was no longer bringing new resources through the expansion. Emperors then tried to mint coins out of silver and copper instead and the end result was inflation and dramatic rises in
Most notably, the ruling Oligarchy (specifically the nobiles) abused their power, caring more for their own material interests and gloria than the welfare of the republic.... ... middle of paper ... ... This resulted in the Senate's hostile reaction to the Gracchi, which therefore allowed the Gracchi to make revolutionary changes to the face of Roman politics, as a direct and indirect result of their actions, including the notion of a tribune as an instrument of initiative and reform, and more importantly, the introduction of violence in Roman politics.
Suetonius does a very good job of capturing what Rome was like. Rome in the early empire was a place of both civility and barbarianism. The citizens of the city were not that good at returning nutrients to the soil, and were more concerned about luxury trade, which identified your status. Although he does a good job with stating facts, Suetonius’ opinions came out from time to time when discussing the behavioral traits of Julius Caesar, Nero, and Vespasian. He believed that the proper and just use of the power of the Res publica is to have authority, be concerned with the greatness of Rome, and conduct things in such a manner that will benefit the citizens and generations to come. The reason I am saying this is because throughout his writings,
...picture, that on the verge of its collapse the Roman Republic, was a society composed of internal flaws. The Republic namely submitted to its own internal divisions, on multiple levels, from the divisions inherent to any society based on a slave economy, to divisions within the proto-democracy of the Senate itself. Inequalities between the haves and the have nots, as well as inequalities and struggles for power and control on the very highest level of Roman society created a general instability of the Republic, thus making its collapse not a miraculous or shocking event, but almost something to the effect of the removal of an illusion. With the collapse of the Republic, the internal tensions and conflict that constituted Roman life on multiple levels merely finalized themselves, taking a new political form that followed the same path as previous the political form.
The Roman Era and the Feudal Era had many differences and comparisons between them. The Roman Era was gevorn by a king and the lower priest underneath him. The Feudal Era was almost like the Roman Era small communities were formed around the local lord and the manor. The lord owned the land and everything in it.
The plebeians are everyday citizens of Rome, and although they do not play a vital role in Julius Caesar, they are quite substantial benefactors of the relationship of governments. However, this is not the case in this story, when the plebeians are simply influenced by the political tricks. During the dispute between Brutus and Antony, the plebeians are fickle; the mass conforms and do not bother to debate or voice their opinions. In "Not One of Us" Kazin Al...
Overall, the proletarians had very different and more dreadful lifestyles then the bourgeoisie. The proletarians had very bad working conditions and were paid low wages. On the other hand, the bourgeoisie were the social power and could control mostly everything to keep them at absolute power.
In essence, the Roman Republic had incorporated from the Spartan constitution but had reformed it in the way that it had taken away what faults they had. The Roman Republic had taken the idea of unifying the people of the country with both “courage and high morality,” “combined in one soul or in one state,” to make it difficult to be overcome by enemies (Page 146). due to the forceful rule of Sparta, the Helots surrounding the Spartan polis decided to break free and revolt. This allowed for the larger powers to capitalize on the weakened infrastructure and leave Sparta defenseless since they could not fend off both forces. Moreover, a key to the success of the Roman Empire was also the downfall of the Greek city-state Sparta. On behalf of the neighboring powers, Sparta they had ruled over them to work the land under slavery. In contrast, the Romans had let the surrounding landowners and city-states to govern autonomously without taxes or any tribute payments and had only required for the people to be loyal to the Roman Republic and contribute troops to Rome’s armies. This allowed for the size of the Roman republic to grow alongside with its army all under one rule. Furthermore, a settler might forfeit its Roman citizenship to land in a new colony and consolidate Italy under the rule of the Roman Republic. Additionally, these roman citizen colonies were smaller in size but would protect the coasts from any invading naval armies, creating a widely system of
It was only a tiny city-state, much like the city-states that were growing at the same time in Greece. The common citizens were called the plebs or plebeians. They marched out of Rome in a body and threatened to make a new city in 494 BC. In 350 BC the plebeians were admitted to the dictatorship. The Roman Senate has been called the "most distinguished and important political body, which has ever existed in the world."
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...
The lack of war allowed the Roman Republic to stagnate and become self-indulgent. By the end of the Punic Wars, which combined these elements, Rome was sure to fail. Without a common thread uniting its society, the Roman Republic unraveled because it had nothing left holding it together. Works Cited (Plutarch, p. 269), (Holland, p. 14), (Plutarch, p. 319), (Holland, p. 33)
After the Commercial Law came the Penal Law. This had to do with the issue of crime. The laws were unusually harsh do to their ineducation. Despite this the wealthy class usually enjoyed more freedom from the law than the lower classes. There was no jury in the court back in the times of Babylon. The code of Hammurabi was like an eye for an eye punishment. If you killed someone than you would be killed.