Download Roman History The Roman Republic The Greeks produced artistic

Roman History
The Roman Republic
The Greeks produced artistic and scientific works of enduring significance.
They established the city as a political community of all the citizens. They
set up the first democracy and instituted in it the right to co-determination
for all citizens. But they never achieved a national unit encompassing all
Greeks.
And the Romans? Among them, too, we find philosophy, political thought,
literature, and the arts - although they, in this case, took up many of the
impulses from the Greeks. They achieved especially independent
accomplishments in, e.g., the areas of architecture and engineering, but
above all, in organizing human co-existence by means of legal
mechanisms.
From where do these differences between the Greeks and the Romans
arise?
Differently than the Greeks, the Romans formed an empire, which stretched
from Spain and France to the Tigris and the Euphrates, from North Africa
to the North Sea. They won this empire in many struggles, in which the city
of Rome itself was sometimes endangered. And they managed this for
centuries. Those who were subjected - the Spaniards and Gauls, the
Africans and Greeks - often offered resistance. But there was also much
admiration for the achievements of the Romans. Without them, the world
would look differently today: We can still see many remains from the
Roman time - amphitheaters, bridges, water systems, graves - in cities like
Trier, Köln, Haltern, Augsburg, Regensburg, and along the Mosel river.
Some European languages arise from Latin. Roman justice has had
influence, not only in America and Europe of later centuries, but
elsewhere. And finally, the Roman Empire was the also the area in which
Christianity could spread.
From ancient times until now, many historians have asked how the city of
Rome, which was originally very small, managed to build a world empire.
Until around 500 B.C., Rome was smaller than Sparta and Athens in
Greece, approximately only as big as the Hansa city Hamburg.
Ancient authors like Polybios, who wrote a world history around 150 A.D.
in Greek, ascribed the superiority of the Romans to their good constitution.
Others mention that the Romans put forth a special effort in support of the
state. That is certainly true - but why did they do it? How did they get their
good constitution?
Roman History, page 1
External pressures contributed to the need for the Romans to, very early,
agree to common dealings, in order to survive. When, around 500 B.C.,
the reign of Etruskian kings in Rome was toppled, there arose against the
Patricians (nobles) an internal enemy in Plebians (commoners), which in
turn forced them to direct all their energies to political dealings. The nobles
in Rome could never develop their own forms of life, as they are
expressed in, e.g., the Olympic Games of the Greeks. They were forced
into actions on behalf of the res publica, the state, into a life as a
politician or a military leader. On the other hand, the common interests of
the nobles and commoners, above all against foreign threats, hindered the
internal tensions from being carried to the point of one side's victory.
Compromise - the readiness deal with others - formed a large segment of
the history of Republican Rome - until finally the world empire change
Roman society itself: Rome became a monarchy.
Birth and Development of the Early Roman Republic
Whoever visits Rome, the capital of Italy, today, will find not only the seven
hills, on which settlements arose in the earliest times; he will encounter
also in the street and plazas, again and again, a sign which reminds one
of ancient tradition: SPQR, i.e., Senatus Populusque Romanus (the
senate and people of Rome).
But before this sign became common for the Roman republic, Rome
already had a long history behind itself, to which, e.g., the she-wolf, evervisible in contemporary Rome, points.
Monarchy and Etruskan Reign
Until around 500 B.C., Rome was ruled by kings. At first, these kings were
really, as in Greece, military leaders in time of war, and high priests.
Religion was, for the Romans, important from the beginning: at every
opportunity - whether in private or public life - one tried to secure for one's
self the favor of the gods. [Religion in the Roman sense was, however,
different the our notion: although the Roman gods were personal, i.e., they
had personalities and acted as personal agents, the Romans did not have
a personal relationship with their gods.] Prior to every important
governmental action, the king had to consider the auspices, i.e., the
signs, from which it should be determined whether or not the gods
approved of the action. [From this we get the English adjective denoting an
important occasion.] For the interpretation of the signs, and for all
questions concerning the gods, there were priests. Religion and the state
were firmly bound together. But for the Romans, religion did not consist,
as it does for the Christians, in the awareness of a salvation, in the
Roman History, page 2
individual's obligation to meditate and to live in a way which respected all
human life and helped one's fellow humans. Rather, the goal of religion for
the Roman was to remove, by means of rites and rituals, the insecurities
and uncertainties, which arise from nature or from other humans, and
which threaten humans; these rites and rituals consisted of sacrifices, of
festivals for the gods, and of asking questions to the gods.
The king had, above all, the task of defending against external enemies.
He was supported in this by the council of the elders: the senate, which
advised the king and also probably had the right to determine the new
king when the previous king died. There was also already an early form of
the citizen's gathering in this first phase of Roman history. It was organized
by one's membership to familial clans. It was different, in both early Roman
history and later Roman history, from the Greek citizen's gathering,
because not every individual vote counted. What counted was the
collective results of a group. The citizen's gathering seems to have had the
right to confirm a new king by acclamation; perhaps it also had to be
consulted, when matters of war and peace were to be decided.
In this earliest social ordering, the king was not especially elevated. That
changed, when the Etruskans - a people, which had formed itself in the
region today known as Toskana - conquered Rome (around 600 B.C.)
and Etruskan kings ruled in the city. These kings claimed more rights than
their predecessors. As an external sign of their power over the lives and
bodies of the citizens, twelve liktors (civil servants) continually walked
ahead of them, carrying bundles of rods (faces) and axes. The seat of the
king was an ivory throne (sella curulis), and the king was clothed in a
purple garment, and crowned with a gold wreath. The Etruskans
introduced also many new religious customs in Rome, especially the habit
of trying to predict good or evil by examining the entrails of animals.
The Nobles Start the Republic
Around 500 B.C., the nobles ousted the last Etruskan king, Tarquinius
Superbus, from Rome. From then on, policies were to be no longer the
affairs of one individual, but rather a communal matter, i.e., in Latin, res
publica. But much from the monarchical period was carried over into the
new order of the republic.
It is a trademark of the Romans, to preserve old things as much as
possible, and to retain that which they have preserved. At first, the only
thing that was new was that the life-long monarchy was removed, and
instead, an executive office was created, which could only be held for one
year (the principle of annuity, from the Latin annus, meaning year). The
holder of this office had almost the same powers as the king: he lead the
Roman History, page 3
Roman military, took over the liktors and the throne. Accordingly, he also
had to examine the auspices before any important official business was
conducted.
But for the nobles, the power of this one official was still to big, even
though it was restricted to one year. So at some time - exactly when, we
don't know - the office was divided: the two officials were now called
consuls. Both had the same power and the same symbols of office, and
each could forbid actions by the other. An important protection against the
mis-use of the office was in this principle of colleagueship.
Colleagueship and annuity were also the standard for all the other offices
which would later be created. In the republic, there was no payment for
holding office; each office was considered as an honor. Therefore, only
the rich could hold office.
The senate from the monarchical times was retained; it now advised the
magistrates (officials). Two Censors decided who got into the senate, and
they also had the general duty of supervising daily life and standards of
justice. In choosing senators, they considered mainly those who had held
an office. Thus the political experience of Rome was collected in the
senate. For this reason, and also because the people were bound to the
senators by means of clientel, no magistrate could act against the will of
the majority of the senate, even if the senate had a merely advisory
function. Rome differed distinctly from democratic Athens by means of the
great significance of the senate.
The citizen's gathering was also retained, although now, new forms of the
gathering arose. One, the centuriatcomittien, was organized according
to property. There were a total of 193 centurien (voting blocs). For the
rich and wealthy alone, 98 were reserved. Because only the total result of
a respective centurie was counted, the poor were at a disadvantage.
Roman History, page 4