Athenian and Roman Democracy Athens and Rome had two very different forms of government. These two forms of governing were efficient in their own ways. But success only came to the Roman Republic because of how they managed to keep control of Rome. Basically, the Romans did not let everyone participate in the government. Instead, the people chose officials to represent them.
The Conflict between Patricians and Plebeians In early Rome, the patricians were a considerably privileged aristocratic class of Roman residents. Enrollment in this class was inherited and could only be attained by conception until the end of the Republic (Raaflaub, 2007). On the contrary, the plebeians were all the Roman subjects who were not patricians. Initially, patricians were prohibited to wed plebeians, so there was no plausibility of development among the orders (Raaflaub, 2007). The advancement of the Roman structure of government is centered on the conflict for power between the two classes.
I believe tyrannical rulers throughout the History of Ancient Greece directly brought about the establishment of early Democracy Plato and Aristotle define a tyrant as, "one who rules without law, looks to his own advantage rather than that of his subjects, and uses extreme and cruel tactics against his own people as well as others"] One of the most notable tyrants whom did not embody the modern designation of what a tyrant would be, was Peisistratos. After several unsuccessful attempts he seized power in Athen in 546 BCE and ruled until his death in 527 BCE, after which he was succeeded by his two sons, Hippias and Hipparchos. The difference in his methods was that unlike other tyrants both before him and a after him, was that even after he overthrew the aristocracy in Athens and all other threats, he was a kind and considerate leader and not what one would view today as a typical tyrant. The negative connotation of the label, tyrant originated in fifth-century Athens, where the democrats more or less created the tyrant as their anti-type to advance the democratic movement, most probably after Peisistratos rule. Therefore, Greek history itself clarifies to some extent that Tyranny was not thought of by Greeks as a bad title, not in the context of certain tyrants, though.
The Iceni were voluntary allies of Rome while Prasutagus, their king, was alive. They were independent, and not under direct Roman control. When he died, it was revealed that Prasutagus had left half of his kingdom to the Roman Emperor Nero, and the other half to his 2 daughters. As Tacitus noted, the Romans disregarded Prasutagus’ wishes altogether: “Prasutagus, king of the Iceni, famed for his long prosperity, had made the emperor his heir along with his two daughters, under the impression that this token of submission would put his kingdom and his house out of the reach of wrong. But the reverse was the result, so much so that his kingdom was plundered by centurions, his house by slaves, as if they were the spoils of war.” It was not unusual for Romans to take control of the kingdom of a client-king and make it a Roman province after the death of the king.
Compare and Contrast Athens and Sparta Culturally and Politically Essay Matias Antezana P.2 1/14/13 The two rivals of ancient Greece that made the most historical information and gave us the most traditions were Athens and Sparta. They were close together on a map, yet far apart in what they valued and how they lived their lives. One of the main ways they were similar was in their form of government. Both Athens and Sparta had an Assembly, whose members were elected by the people. Sparta was ruled by two kings, who ruled until they died or were forced out of office.
Generally ignored by historians is the fact that the two monarchs and their crusader knights sacked Messina on that occasion. Messina remained the second most important city of Sicily until the seventeenth century, when its position was challenged by Catania. There were fleeting periods when Messina's economic and political power rivaled that of Palermo. Messina has often been associated with its disasters. The bubonic
Rome represented a sharp break from the Hellenistic and Greek civilization after Rome had successfully taken over all the small kingdoms of the Hellenistic world and then incorporating these small kingdoms into the Roman Empire. We can still see that Greek influences never really went away and it always remained alive in Rome culture to a much lesser degree in areas such as politics economy and military even after the end of the Hellenist period when Octavian conquered and defeated Egypt under the rule of Cleopatra in 30BC The Roman Legion and the Greek Phalanx were two of the most amazing revolutionary tactics that was developed in ancient time. The Greek Phalanx and the Roman legion were both responsible for innovating new forms and ways of defeating an enemy. There use of tactics is what revolutionized the way war would be fought from then on. We will soon see that both of these ancient tactics have various things in common as well as many differences.
The Senate of Rome had most control over the citizens. Han China did not allow lower class citizens to have a say on how the empire was ruled; while, Imperial Rome had a senate to represent their plebeian’s or ordinary people. Another difference between the Han China and Imperial Rome was that the emperor of Han China had been chosen through the family and the citizens of Imperial Rome chose their ruler. Han China and Imperial Rome emphasized territorial expansion in both of their societies. They perceived threats to security; this led to war and then increased the length of border.
But unlike many other kingdoms, the Romans incorporated the conquered peoples into their society. The Romans first took control of most of the Italian peninsula. After a series of bloody battles, many of which they lost, the Romans conquered their great rival in the West, Carthage of North Africa. This allowed them to dominate the western Mediterranean and freed them to pursue conquests in Western Europe to their north. It also demonstrated an important lesson, the author points out, which some of Rome’s neighbors tended to ignore to their grave peril: the Romans never give up.
A Spartan's life was to serve for the state then die for the state. Although the two city state of Sparta and Athens were individual as in governmental differences, they both managed to become very powerful powers in Ancient Greece. Athens became a democracy under the rule of Solon in 594 B.C. Solon altered the made unfair laws. Draco made a law that only made murder a death crime.