0
How did the Roman republic differ from Athenian democracy?
Miller McLaughlin
Whilst the Athenian Republic was a true democracy, the Roman Republic was not. In Athens all decisions were made by its citizens who gathered in the Assembly of the People to vote. The task of the executive was to carry out the will of the people. The Roman Republic had three popular assemblies: the Assembly of the Soldiers (which was restricted to soldiers) the Assembly of the Tribes (this was an assembly of the administrative districts, which was open to all Roman citizens) and the Plebeian Council (which was restricted to the plebeians, the commoners). The Assembly of the Soldiers elected the higher officers of state (the consuls, praetors and censors) and voted on war and peace. The Assembly of the Tribes elected the lower officers of state (the aediles and quaestors). The Plebeian Council elected the representatives of the plebeians, the plebeian tribunes. All these assemblies could vote on bills. Therefore both Athenian democracy and the democratic aspects of the Roman Republic practiced direct democracy. This means that instead of electing representatives to vote on bills, the people voted on them.
However, the above did not make the Roman Republic a true democracy.
The voting system of the Assembly of the Soldiers was stacked heavily in favour of the rich. The candidates for election came all form the elites. There was often pressure to influence voters through the patron-client relationship, where rich patrons helped a retinue of poor clients in exchange for political support. The officers of state, though elected, did not truly act on behalf of the people and made their own decisions as they saw fit. The senate, which was the most powerful political body, was not elected and its members were from the two top social orders: the patricians and the equestrians. It acted in favour of the interests of the aristocracy. Therefore, power was in the hands of the aristocracy and the rich. Effectively, the Roman Republic was an oligarchy.
Shaun Lehner
Sonny Borer
Athens practiced democracy. This means that instead of electing representatives (such as congressmen and senators) to make decisions for them (indirect democracy) , the people themselves decided on laws and policies by voting in the Assembly of the people. The role executive public officials was to execute the will of the people.
Rome was not a true democracy. It was an oligarchy which was controlled by the rich through their control of the (unelected) Roman senate. There was an element of democracy in that the Assembly of the Soldiers voted on war and peace and elected the higher executive public officials, and the Assembly of the Tribes (which gathered all Roman citizens) elected the lower public officials. However, their voting system was biased. It greatly favoured the votes of the rich. The Plebeian Council (the assembly of the commoners) voted on bills.
Wiki User
∙ 6y agoWhilst the Athenian Republic was a true democracy, the Roman Republic was not. In Athens all decisions were made by its citizens who gathered in the Assembly of the People to vote. The task of the executive was to carry out the will of the people. The Roman Republic had three popular assemblies: the Assembly of the Soldiers (which was restricted to soldiers) the Assembly of the Tribes (this was an assembly of the administrative districts, which was open to all Roman citizens) and the Plebeian Council (which was restricted to the plebeians, the commoners). The Assembly of the Soldiers elected the higher officers of state (the consuls, praetors and censors) and voted on war and peace. The Assembly of the Tribes elected the lower officers of state (the aediles and quaestors). The Plebeian Council elected the representatives of the plebeians, the plebeian tribunes. All these assemblies could vote on bills. Therefore both Athenian democracy and the democratic aspects of the Roman Republic practiced direct democracy. This means that instead of electing representatives to vote on bills, the people voted on them.
However, the above did not make the Roman Republic a true democracy.
The voting system of the Assembly of the Soldiers was stacked heavily in favour of the rich. The candidates for election came all form the elites. There was often pressure to influence voters through the patron-client relationship, where rich patrons helped a retinue of poor clients in exchange for political support. The officers of state, though elected, did not truly act on behalf of the people and made their own decisions as they saw fit. The senate, which was the most powerful political body, was not elected and its members were from the two top social orders: the patricians and the equestrians. It acted in favour of the interests of the aristocracy. Therefore, power was in the hands of the aristocracy and the rich. Effectively, the Roman Republic was an oligarchy.
Wiki User
∙ 8y agoThe fundamental distinction between Ancient Athenian democracy and the Roman Republic is that the Ancient Athenians had a direct democracy in which all persons entitled to vote would vote on all issues and the Roman Republic had an indirect democracy in which all persons entitled to vote would vote for representatives who would subsequently vote on all issues.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What is the difference between roman republic and Canadian democracy?
They are not comparable. The Roman Republic was an oligarchy, not a democracy.
How did the roman republic and athenian democracy influence later societies?
The Roman Republic did not have much influence on later societies except for the Italian city-states of the High and Late Middle Ages and the Renaissance which referred to it as a model for the development of their systems of self-governance. The society of the last phase of Roman civilisation (the Later Empire) had more of an influence in the societies of Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages. Athenian democracy did not have an influence util the development of democratic ideas in Modern Europe.
How did the roman republic differ government under the Etruscans?
because Romans have republic government.
What type of democracy did the Roman Empire have?
The Roman Empire was not a democracy, there were no votes and no voted elected officials. It was however designed as a Republic which had appointed representation, Senators.
Why did the ancient Greek city-state Athens have a direct democracy while the Romans had a republic?
Republic and democracy are two different things. A Republic can be a democracy, just as a constitutional monarchy today can be a democracy. Democracy existed in the Roman Republic, as it had three different assemblies of the citizens (Centuriate, Tribal, Plebeian). Athens went through phases - monarchy, oligarchy, limited democracy, radical democracy.
Who was first the roman republic the roman empire or the athenian democracy and in what order?
Athenian democracy, Roman Republic, Roman Empire
How did Athenian democracy differ from Roman republicanism?
The Roman Republic was a form of government in which the people would choose the representatives to govern them, which means that the elected the senate and assembly made the laws. The Athenian Democracy was a direct democracy which means that they were a form of government in which an assembly of ordinary citizens makes decisions. Any male citizen could take part in the Athenian Assembly but women, slaves and people born in other countries were not allowed to participate in government.
Did Athenian democracy or the Roman Republic grant equality to all people?
Neither - bot had slaves, upper classes and lower classes.
What is the difference between roman republic and Canadian democracy?
They are not comparable. The Roman Republic was an oligarchy, not a democracy.
How did the roman republic and athenian democracy influence later societies?
The Roman Republic did not have much influence on later societies except for the Italian city-states of the High and Late Middle Ages and the Renaissance which referred to it as a model for the development of their systems of self-governance. The society of the last phase of Roman civilisation (the Later Empire) had more of an influence in the societies of Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages. Athenian democracy did not have an influence util the development of democratic ideas in Modern Europe.
The illuminated manuscripts created by the Axum civilization demonstrate a clear cultural exchange between Axum and which of the following classical civilizations?
athenian democracy APEX
Why did the Romans adopt a republic rather than a democracy for their government?
Their territory was too large to govern by democracy
How were the political systems of the Roman empire and the Roman republic different?
the Empire was virtually a Dictatorship and the republic was a democracy
How did greek and roman versions of democracy differ?
Both Greek and Roman democracies were based on citizen participation in governance, but there were key differences. Greek democracy in Athens was direct, with citizens voting directly on laws and policies, while Roman democracy was more representative, with elected officials making decisions on behalf of the people. Additionally, Greek democracy was limited to free male citizens, while Roman democracy eventually extended to include more diverse groups.
How did the roman republic differ government under the Etruscans?
because Romans have republic government.
The roman republic provided a model for the US government in what way does the US government differ from the roman republic?
Temporary dictatorship
How did Athenian democracy differ from the roman democracy?
Whilst the Athenian Republic was a true democracy, the Roman Republic was not. In Athens all decisions were made by its citizens who gathered in the Assembly of the People to vote. The task of the executive was to carry out the will of the people. The Roman Republic had three popular assemblies: the Assembly of the Soldiers (which was restricted to soldiers) the Assembly of the Tribes (this was an assembly of the administrative districts, which was open to all Roman citizens) and the Plebeian Council (which was restricted to the plebeians, the commoners). The Assembly of the Soldiers elected the higher officers of state (the consuls, praetors and censors) and voted on war and peace. The Assembly of the Tribes elected the lower officers of state (the aediles and quaestors). The Plebeian Council elected the representatives of the plebeians, the plebeian tribunes. All these assemblies could vote on bills. Therefore both Athenian democracy and the democratic aspects of the Roman Republic practiced direct democracy. This means that instead of electing representatives to vote on bills, the people voted on them.However, the above did not make the Roman Republic a true democracy.The voting system of the Assembly of the Soldiers was stacked heavily in favour of the rich. The candidates for election came all form the elites. There was often pressure to influence voters through the patron-client relationship, where rich patrons helped a retinue of poor clients in exchange for political support. The officers of state, though elected, did not truly act on behalf of the people and made their own decisions as they saw fit. The senate, which was the most powerful political body, was not elected and its members were from the two top social orders: the patricians and the equestrians. It acted in favour of the interests of the aristocracy. Therefore, power was in the hands of the aristocracy and the rich. Effectively, the Roman Republic was an oligarchy.
