Artikels

Digging History 9: The Roman Republic

Digging History 9: The Roman Republic


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

>

Video oor die Romeinse Republiek vervaardig deur die American Institute for Roman Culture.


Lucius Cornelius Sulla (138 en ndash 79 vC) was 'n suksesvolle generaal wat aan die hoof van die optimaliseer, Rome & rsquos konserwatiewe en aristokraties-leunende politieke faksie, het sy legioene gebruik om die mag in Rome te gryp en die daaropvolgende burgeroorlog teen die gewild faksie. Daarna het hy homself as diktator aangestel, sy politieke teëstanders by duisende vermoor en grondwetlike hervormings uitgevoer wat die Romeinse Republiek in sy laaste dekades sou versterk, maar uiteindelik nie kon slaag nie.

Sulla behoort aan 'n ou patrisiërfamilie wat teen sy geboorte eeue lank van sy bloeityd verwyder is. Hy het ontbind en grootgemaak grootgeword, saam met akteurs gekuier en 'n geminagde beroep in daardie dae gehad. Opvallend aantreklik, het hy sy bestaan ​​behou as 'n jong man wat welgestelde ouer vroue verlei en aangeval het, waarvan minstens twee in raaiselagtige omstandighede gesterf het nadat hulle Sulla die enigste erfgenaam in hul testamente genoem het.

Hy begin sy politieke loopbaan in 107 as Gaius Marius & rsquo quaestor, of finansiële landdros, in die Numidiaanse Oorlog, maar toe hy die Numidiaanse koning deur verraad verower en krediet eis vir die beëindiging van die oorlog, wek hy Marius se wrok. Toe die Sosiale Oorlog (91 en 88 v.C.) uitbreek, presteer Sulla skitterend, terwyl Marius, toe hy bejaard was, nie. Sulla is in 88 vC verkies tot konsul en kry bevel oor die oorlog teen Pontus, maar Marius het die opstel van 'n wet ontwerp wat die bevel van Sulla verwyder het en dit in plaas daarvan aan Marius gegee het.

Sulla het geantwoord deur sy legioene in te lig dat as Marius aangestel word om die oorlog te beoefen, hy sy eie legioene sal gebruik en nie Sulla & rsquos men & ndash nie, wat hulle die geleentheid ontneem vir die ryk belonings wat hulle in die vorm van buit verwag het van 'n suksesvolle oorlog teen Pontus. Omdat hul finansiële belange bedreig is, het die legioene Sulla ondersteun om in Rome te marsjeer.

Marius en sy ondersteuners is gedwing om te vlug, maar toe Sulla na die oorlog teen Pontus optrek, keer Marius aan die hoof van sy eie leër in 87 vC terug na Rome, laat Sulla & rsquos -verordenings omkeer, maak 'n tiental vooraanstaande Sullans tereg en word verkies konsul vir 86, net om 17 dae na sy konsulaat te sterf.

Sulla het die oorlog teen Pontus gewen, en keer daarna terug na Rome, waarna hy aan die hoof van sy leër 82 vC ingegaan het, nadat hy die Mariane verslaan het. Hy het al hul wetgewing ongedaan gemaak, reaksionêre konserwatiewe grondwetlike hervormings ingestel wat die mag van die aristokrasie versterk het en die van die middelklasse verswak het, en homself as diktator aangestel. Daarna het hy die Marians doodgemaak en gewild by duisende, verby stellings, of lyste met die naam van vyande van die staat wat wettiglik deur iemand vermoor kan word in ruil vir 'n beloning en 'n deel van die beskuldigde slagoffer se eiendom op voorlegging van sy kop aan Sulla & rsquos -agente. Hy bedank in 79 vC, trek terug in die privaat lewe en sterf die volgende jaar.


Die bou van die Romeinse Republiek

Die onbekende republiek was 'n kortstondige eksperiment in konstitusionele demokrasie.

Pous Franciscus se geskil met die uittredende minister van binnelandse sake, Matteo Salvini, herinner ons daaraan dat verhoudings tussen kerk en staat in Italië baie kan wees. Deur die Christelike boodskap van liefdadigheid teenoor die behoeftiges te weergee in teenstelling met Salvini se 'kruistog' teen die vermeende 'invasie' van vlugtelinge, kan pous Franciskus probeer word om die 'gewete van gelowiges met dié van die burger' te verenig. Dit was die woorde wat die politieke denker Carlo Cattaneo in die middel van die 19de eeu gebruik het toe die pas verkose pous Pius IX bereid was om die tydsgees met bemoedigende oop gemoed te omhels.

Net soos die verspreiding van liberale idees aanleiding gegee het tot gelokaliseerde revolusies in Palermo, Parys, Berlyn, Wene, Milaan en Venesië, lyk dit asof Rome 'n nuwe weg begin. Pius IX, 'n betreklik jong en onervare liberale pous, wat graag wou reageer op die nood van die mense, het nie net 'n amnestie van politieke gevangenes aangekondig nie, maar het na 'n meer verligte politieke rigting gekyk.

Die nuus van die liberale pous het soos 'n veldbrand versprei, wat tot toenemende verwagtinge gelei het: gewilde entoesiasme vir Pius IX het diegene wat geglo het dat hy die hoof sou staan ​​van die geestelike renaissance van Italië en die liberale nasionale beweging, gegroei.

Die tydsberekening was beduidend: die Neo-Guelph-beweging, wat aangevoer het dat die pous alleen Italië kon verenig, was aan die toeneem. Pius se oënskynlike welwillendheid teenoor politieke hervormings, tesame met die nuus dat hy die Risorgimento geseën het, was 'n enorme hupstoot vir die nasionale beweging wat die Oostenrykse oorheersing in die noorde van Italië beveg.

Teen November 1848 was alle hoop egter in die wiele gery. Oorweldig deur die golf van volksentoesiasme wat sy vroeë hervormings ontketen het en huiwerig was om 'n nasionale revolusie te lei, verloor Pius sy senuwees. Nadat Piemonte oorlog teen Oostenryk verklaar het, kondig Pius aan dat sy troepe nie by die Italiaanse patriotte sou aansluit nie, aangesien hy nie oorlog kon voer teen Katolieke Oostenryk nie.

Teleurstelling het ontevredenheid onder die rewolusionêre veroorsaak en na die sluipmoord op een van die vooraanstaande institusionele figure in Rome, die pouslike diplomaat Pellegrino Rossi, het die situasie buite beheer geraak. Die onstuimige atmosfeer wat gevolg het, het Pius laat vlug, uit vrees vir 'n bloedige rewolusie, en hy vind toevlug in die Koninkryk van die Twee Sicilië. Uit die veiligheid van Gaeta het hy 'n beroep op alle Katolieke lande gedoen om hom te red teen die revolusionêre.

In Rome is die einde van tydelike mag verklaar en 'n nuwe konstitusionele vergadering is op 9 Februarie 1849 verkies. dit deur 'n onbestendige situasie. Giuseppe Mazzini, die Italiaanse patriot en revolusionêr, wat al meer as 'n dekade in ballingskap was, was op pad na Rome.

Mazzini se visie vir die Romeinse Republiek het die streeksgrense van die pous se gebiede oorskry: Rome was 'n stapsteen vir die stigting van 'n nasionale, demokratiese republiek. Republikeinse Rome sou 'n baken vir die res van Italië wees en 'n model vir liberale oral. Na sy vestiging in Londen in 1837, het Mazzini naam gemaak as 'n charismatiese en passievolle voorstander van demokratiese, nasionale beginsels. Hy het 'n groot aantal mense byeengekom, veral in Engeland, waar Victoriaanse radikale vinnig die belangrike geleentheid besef het wat in 1849 vir Rome, Italië en 'menslikheid' oopgemaak is. Terwyl die soewereine en keisers van Europa die stigting van die republiek veroordeel het, het die radikale pers, digters van die Chartist en Engelse republikeinse redenaars met hoop verslag gedoen van die prestasies en vordering van die nuutgestigte republikeinse regering.

Die Romeinse Republiek was inderdaad 'n belangrike, indien dit van korte duur was, in konstitusionele en demokratiese bestuur: dit het die doodstraf afgeskaf, gewaarborgde vryheid van aanbidding en vryheid van assosiasie en verbod op sensuur. Dit het ook algemene (manlike) stemreg ingebring, 'n baken in die geskiedenis van Italië. Sodra die Romeinse Republiek op sy knieë gekom het, sou die Italianers tot 1946 moes wag vir algemene stemreg.

Internasionale waarnemers het die verwikkelinge in Rome met groot belangstelling dopgehou: in Engeland het die protestante aan die een kant die vlug van die pous as 'n geleentheid beskou vir die geestelike herlewing van Italië, terwyl die parlement aan die ander kant te bang was vir die verspreiding van republikeinse idees om steun aan die Romeinse Republiek. Die konserwatiewe pers in heel Europa was ontsteld, berig dat revolusionêre rooi vlae swaai en plunder. Slegs die VSA erken die nuutgestigte regering in Rome, al is dit te laat. Sonder formele erkenning van Europese regerings was die Romeinse Republiek gedoem en toe die Franse keiser generaal Oudinot se leër stuur om in die naam van die pous te veg, is die lot van die klein demokratiese republiek verseël. Veroordeling van die Franse ingryping in Engelse radikale artikels, soos Pons, het niks gedoen om die houding van die Britse establishment teenoor die Republiek te verander nie. Brittanje, wat versigtig was vir die republikeinse ideologie, het die ingryping eers veroordeel nadat Rome swaar gebombardeer is deur die Franse.

In Junie 1849 beleër die Franse Rome. Nóg ruïnes of villa's is die bomaanval gespaar. Bloedige gevegte is gevoer terwyl patriotte - mans en vroue - na Mazzini se visie en onder die charismatiese leiding van Guiseppe Garibaldi die stad probeer verdedig het. Revolusionêre het in die stad saamgedrom, nie net uit alle dele van Italië nie, maar ook uit die buiteland.

Terwyl die stad oorgegee het aan die mag van die Franse troepe, het Pius IX hom gereed gemaak om na Rome terug te keer. Sy vroeë besluit om die regte van die mense te handhaaf, het, sonder die vertroue om dinge deur te voer, gelei tot die beleg van Rome en die genadelose slagting van patriotte en burgerlikes.

Marcella Pellegrino Sutcliffe is besoekende genoot by die Institute of Education, UCL en die skrywer van Victoriaanse radikale en Italiaanse demokrate (Boydell & Brewer, 2014).


Die Praetorskap in die Romeinse Republiek. 2 vol

Soos dit vir my lyk, bied die administrasie van Asië geen groot verskeidenheid sake nie, en Marcus Cicero troos sy broer Quintus, wie se imperium in Asië het die senaat pas nog 'n jaar in die vooruitsig gestel, en dit hang alles hoofsaaklik af van die bedeling van geregtigheid ” (Cicero V Fr. 1, 1, 20 tr. Shackleton Bailey). As model vir geregtelike optrede het Cicero die voorbeeld van 'n onlangse praetor in Rome aanbeveel (ibid. 21 C. Octavius ​​pr. 61 vC). Pretore was die belangrikste Romeinse regters. Praetors het die permanente provinsies in die buiteland beheer. Praetors word getuig van 'n massa inligting wat sintese vereis. En die praetoriaanse geskiedenis kan 'n alternatief wees vir vertellings van konsuls en verowering. Die praetorskap, skryf Brennan, was “ die belangrikste tandwiel in die Romeinse administratiewe masjien ” (6). Die deugde van die boek van Brennan is dat dit die sintese bied. Die gebrek daarvan is dat Brennan daarop aandring om teen sy getuienis te argumenteer en praetors as militêre bevelvoerders te behandel.

Die Praetorskap in die Romeinse Republiek ( PRR) kan op twee maniere beskou word. Aan die een kant is dit 'n stel tabelle met 'n lys van bekende Republikeinse praetors per provinsie en op datum (App. A, “ Commando's in 'n paar belangrike territoriale Provinciae, 219-50 ″ App. B, ” Fasti Praetorii“), wat deur die inhoudsopgawe en indekse tot die bespreking in die teks gekoppel is. Aan die ander kant is dit 'n verhaal van die ontbinding van imperium vanaf die koninklike tydperk. Cicero, Die legibus 3, 2/4, vertel hoe die konings ’ imperium is oorgeplaas na die twee konsuls van 509 vC. Brennan brei hierdie verhaal uit deur die “ konseptuele sprong ” wat betrokke was om die praetor 'n tweede, mindere graad van imperium in 366 vC (12-73) tot aan die vooraand van die keiser se diktatuur, toe imperium was so onderverdeel en versprei onder landdroste en promagistrate dat dit onherkenbaar was. “ Sodra 'n pro praetore begin sy amptelike mag delegeer, ” skryf Brennan (638), en ons is ver weg van die idee dat imperium was die volle mag van die ou konings van Rome. ”

By die vertel van sy verhaal neem Brennan “ die uitkykpunt van die senaat ” (viii) aan. Hy voeg by, ek kan ook opmerk dat as ek besluite toeskryf aan die senaat of die senatoriale instelling, ek redelik selfversekerd voel, in elk geval, onlangse pogings om die ‘ demokratiese ’ elemente te beklemtoon van die res publica het nie voorgegee om veel te bied oor die vorming van die Romeinse praetorskap nie en#8221 (32-3). Die senatoriese perspektief is beslis wettig, dit is die perspektief van ons twee hoofbronne, Cicero en (in wese) Livy. Maar dit kan ook verdraaiings veroorsaak. Eerstens, elkeen van die byna 850 praetors wat deur Brennan gekatalogiseer is, is deur die Romeinse volk verkies. Vir 'n ander een is die belangrikste bron vir die Republikeinse presidentskap buite Cicero en Livy 'n statuut van die Romeinse volk. Oor die Lex de provinciis praetoriis, ook bekend as die “Piracy Law, ” Brennan skryf, maar danksy die ontdekking van 'n groot inskripsie van Cnidus (10.1), is ons nou uiters goed ingelig oor sommige van die reëlings van die Senaat vir Masedonië toe Didius het van syne afgewyk provinsie, in 101 of 100 ″ (523-4). Om te sê dat 'n statuut van die Romeinse volk die reëlings van die Senaat weerspieël, is (ten beste) heeltemal misleidend. Iets van die demokratiese element van die res publica kom deur in die statuut self (Crawford 1996 no. 12, Cnidos Copy, kol. III, reëls 28-37 tr. mod.):

Die senior konsul is om briewe te stuur aan die volke en state aan wie hy goeddink, om te sê dat die Romeinse volk omgee, dat die burgers van Rome en die bondgenote en die Latyns en die van die vreemde nasies wat in 'n vriendskapsverhouding met die Romeinse volk is, veilig kan vaar, en dat Cilicië weens hierdie aangeleentheid en volgens hierdie statuut tot 'n praetoriaanse provinsie gemaak is.

Brennan is lofwaardig eksplisiet oor die historiografiese tradisie waarop hy put. Hy het sy idee geneem uit 'n paar paragrawe van Badian: “ In 'n kort, maar belangrike oorsig het E. Badian 'n gewysigde skets van die administratiewe geskiedenis van die praetorskap aangebied, wat vir die eerste keer (sover ek kan weet), het die belangrikste vrae gevra wat die huidige studie wil beantwoord ” (31-2 Badian 1979). Badian het drie fases van die praetoriaanse geskiedenis onderskei: vanaf 227 v.C., toe die senaat praetore bygevoeg het toe dit provinsies van 146 v.C. geannekseer het, toe die senaat geweier het om nuwe praetors vir Afrika en Masedonië te skep, en sodoende 'n roetine -roetine gemaak het en vanaf 81 v.C. promosies van stadsprofetoriteite.

PRR het ander voorlopers. In die beskouing van landdroste as die sentrale kenmerk van die Romeinse staat, kyk Brennan terug na Mommsen 1887 en sy 45 bladsye oor die praetorskap (12-14). Vir sy definisie van adel en sy siening van die Romeinse politiek as kompetisie vir hoë ampte, noem hy Gelzer 1912 (32). Vir augurs en auspicia, kyk hy na Linderski 1986 (15-18). Deur die opsomming van praetors op datum, hersien hy Broughton 1951-86 deur dit per provinsie te noem, en hy hersien Jashemski 1966 (viii). Brennan's boek neem ook sy plek in onder onlangse werk oor die vroeë en laat Republiek deur jonger Amerikaanse geleerdes (vroeg: Mitchell 1990, Stewart 1998 laat: Kallet-Marx 1994), en ook langs Hölkeskamp 1987 en Cornell 1995 oor vroeë Rome, en Lintott 1993 en 1999 oor administratiewe en grondwetlike aangeleenthede.

Dit is die moeite werd om enkele historiografiese tradisies te noem wat Brennan nalaat. Hy probeer nie die Romeinse staat in terme van regte en pligte van burgers, of die Romeinse administratiewe geskiedenis in terme van ekonomie en die geskiedenis van idees nie, op die manier van Nicolet (1976, 1977), wie se naam nie verskyn nie. die bibliografie (wat vreemd is, aangesien Nicolet as die prominentste erfgenaam van Mommsen beskou kan word). Brennan gebruik ook nie die werk van die studente van Nicolet ’s Ferrary (1988), wat die Romeinse ekspansionisme en filhellenisme verbind het nie, en David (1992), wat die praetoriaanse howe bestudeer het as 'n quasi teater van die politiek. Brennan probeer die Romeinse politiek nie as uitdrukkings van sosiale stryd, veral oor grondbesit, sien op die manier van Brunt 1971. Brennan sê niks oor Brunt se kritiek op Gelzer se opvattings oor nobilitas en klientel (Brunt 1988), of oor Giovannini se kritiek op Mommsen se opvattings oor imperium, promagistrasie en die hervormings van Sullan (Giovannini 1983). Brennan probeer ook nie om die Romeinse politiek as 'n gemeenskaplike aktiwiteit te beskou nie, soos Millar 1998.

Die boek van Brennan is gegrond op die implisiete en korrekte aanname dat grondwetlike (openbare en heilige wet) vrae vir ons belangrik moet wees, omdat dit vir Romeine van belang was. Waarom was dit vir Romeine belangrik? Miskien omdat die vorme heilig en beproef was of uit 'n meer onheilspellende voorliefde vir rituele, simbole, hiërargieë en arcana, of omdat daar werklike gesagsbotsings was wat opgelos moes word. Daar word gereeld gesê dat Romeine nie 'n grondwet gehad het nie. Wat dit ook al mag beteken, dit is 'n feit dat Cicero 'n Romeinse grondwet kan opstel Die legibus, en dat iemand iewers die Romeinse munisipale wette geskryf het. Ons moet in elk geval iets van die grondwet weet net om sin te maak van ons bronne. Byvoorbeeld, in die beroemde Korinte-inskripsie met vermelding van M. Antonius-” auspicio [[Antoni Marc]] i pro consule classis/Isthmum traductast missaque per pelagus” (“ onder die vaandel van M. Antonius, pro -konsul, is 'n vloot oor die landgrond gedra en oor die see gestuur ” ILLRP 342) - ons moet weet wat auspicium was, wat 'n pro konsule was, en hoe iemand kan wees pro konsule voordat hy konsul geword het.

Maar dit is nie duidelik dat Brennan se manier om grondwetlike vrae te hanteer die beste is nie. Brennan heg uiters belangrik aan 'n paar abstrakte selfstandige naamwoorde— imperium en auspicia -en beskou die hele Republikeinse geskiedenis as 'n wegval van 'n oorspronklike ideaal (12-20). Sy operasionele konsep is die “dodge, ”, 'n woord wat hy by Daube 1991 leen om 'omseiling' en '8220-omseiling' of '8220-verkeerde interpretasie' te noem-'n onbewuste oortreding van grondwetlike beginsels (37-8, 598-601). Die vestiging van die praetorskap, met sy mindere graad van imperium, toon 'n voorbeeld van 'n goeie dodge ” (601). Maar moet 'n mens die geskiedenis so 'n skema van ortodoksie en afwyking afdwing? En hoekom net imperium en auspicia ? Waarom nie (sê) dicio of ductus ? Dit as dit bewys kan word imperium en auspicia Dit was inderdaad sleutelterme, moet dit so vreemd hanteer word, aangesien dit beide transend en regverdig is (“dormant ” auspicia, 14)? Om die Romeinse grondwet in terme van abstrakte selfstandige naamwoorde te bestudeer, moet 'n mens (ten minste) die tydgenoot van agterste bronne onderskei, en dan die hele konstellasie van konstitusionele terme in ag neem. 'N Boek wat aan hierdie kriteria voldoen, is Béranger 1953, en sy metodes kan winsgewend na die Republiek uitgebrei word.

Tog kan beter maniere om oor die Romeinse grondwet te praat uit antieke bronne geleer word. Die Aristoteliër Athenaion Politeia. behandel die Atheense gesindheid eers diachronies, dan sinchronies. Ons bronne wat sinchroniese sienings van die Romeinse grondwet bied, sluit in Polybius 6, 11-18 en Cicero's De republica en Die legibus. Die legibus 3, 3/8 lui: “ Laat die regsadministrateur, wat privaatdragte beoordeel of beoordeel het, die praetor wees. Laat hom die beskermheer van die burgerlike reg wees. Laat daar soveel praetors wees, met dieselfde mag, as wat die senaat besluit of die mense beveel. ” 'n Ander, ondergebruikte sinchroniese bron is die Lex Irnitana, wat beantwoord aan 'n gewone definisie van “grondwet ” en wat uitdruklik geskoei is op Romeinse praktyke. Ch. 91 by uitstel ( intertium) lui gedeeltelik: “ die statuut en wet en posisie moet wees soos dit sou wees as 'n praetor van die Romeinse volk beveel het dat die saak in die stad Rome beoordeel moet word tussen Romeinse burgers ” (González 1986 tr. Crawford ). Vir 'n diachroniese perspektief het ons Cassius Dio. Maar vir die ernstigste en volledige historiese uiteensetting van die Romeinse grondwet, moet ons na die Encheiridion van Sextus Pomponius.

In die lang uittreksel uit die Encheiridion bewaar in die eerste boek van Justinianus ’s Verteer (1, 2, 2) behandel Pomponius drie temas: die oorsprong en ontwikkeling van die reg in Rome, die name en oorsprong van die landdroste en die name van die mans wat kennis van die burgerlike reg bely het. Wat die pretorskap betref, sê Brennan tereg, maak Pomponius twee feitefoute. Hy sê dat praetors Spanje en Narbonensis regeer het, nie die twee Spaanse nie en hy sê dat Sulla vier praetors bygevoeg het, nie twee nie. Brennan maak die uittreksel minderwaardig en noem dit die werk van 'n “epitomator ” en 'n “snelle skets ” (60). Hy skryf, en sy opname (die Encheiridion) het twee boeke gevul en was ongetwyfeld gevul met watter variante hy ook al kon versamel oor die ontwikkeling van die Romeinse politieke stelsel. Verteer is waarskynlik verskeie verwyderings uit 'n goeie bron, en dit het geen werklike waarde as 'n onafhanklike verslag oor die skepping van die praetorskap nie ” (ibid.). Maar 'n encheiridion was reeds 'n distillasie (vgl. Epictetus), en daar is geen rede om te dink dat Pomponius ’ verder afgekook is nie. Die waarde van Pomponius lê in sy chronologiese sweep, van die koninklike tydperk tot sy eie tweede eeu na Christus, en in sy visie dat die Romeinse regs- en administratiewe geskiedenis as deel van die sosiale en politieke geskiedenis van die Romeinse #8220civitas. ” (Die woord civitas, blykbaar 'n weergawe van polis) Vir Pomponius het die wet verander as 'n funksie van bevolkingsgroei, probleme met die samekoms van die volksgenote of die Romeinse volk, vertragings in die neem van die sensus, die afwesigheid van konsuls as gevolg van oorloë in die verte, die toestroming van buitelanders, en territoriale anneksasie. Twee interessante gevolge van Pomponius se proto-Bruntiaanse benadering tot die Romeinse geskiedenis is dat hy naatloos van die Republiek na die Prinsipaal oorgaan, en dat hy die senaat en keisers tot geringe rolle verlaag. Pomponius bied die volgende skets van die praetoriaanse geskiedenis (tr. Watson):

( Grawe. 1, 2, 2, 27 367 v.C.) En toe die konsuls weggeroep is na die oorloë met naburige mense, en daar was niemand in die civitas wat gemagtig is om regsondernemings in die stad te onderneem, is dat 'n praetor ook geskep is, genaamd die stedelike praetor, omdat hy jurisdiksie in die stad uitoefen. (ibid. 10 na die Lex Hortensia Terselfdertyd het die landdroste ook regskwessies besleg, en om die burgers in kennis te stel en voorsiening te maak vir die jurisdiksie wat elke landdros oor 'n bepaalde aangeleentheid sou uitoefen, het hulle publikasies geneem. Hierdie bevele, in die geval van die praetors, vorm die ius honorarium : “honorary ” is die term wat gebruik word, omdat die wet ter sprake gekom het uit die hoë eer van die pretoriaanse amp. (ibid. 28 244 vC: PRR 85-9) Enkele jare daarna het die enkele praetor onvoldoende geraak omdat 'n groot menigte buitelanders in die civitas ook, en so is 'n ander praetor gestig, wat die naam peregrine praetor gekry het, omdat hy hoofsaaklik jurisdiksie uitoefen tussen buitelanders. (ibid. 32) Die anneksasie van Sardinië en kort daarna van Sicilië [227 vC] en mettertyd van Spanje [198 vC] en uiteindelik van die provinsie Narbonensis het tot die skepping van soveel praetors gelei as wat daar provinsies was wat ondergekom het Romeinse heerskappy, sommige van hierdie praetors wat die sake van die stad bestuur, ander oor provinsiale aangeleenthede. Toe [81 v.C. het Cornelius Sulla strafhowe ingestel ( quaestiones publicae), byvoorbeeld oor vervalsing, met parricide en met messtekery, en hy het vier ander praetors bygevoeg. Volgende [44 vC] het Gaius Julius Caesar twee praetors en twee aediele opgerig om toesig te hou oor die koringvoorraad, en uit die naam van die godin Ceres is dit die graanpretors en aediele genoem. So is twaalf praetorskappe en ses aedilskapskepe geskep. Daarna [23 vC] het die vergoddelike Augustus sestien praetors gestig, en later [44 nC] het die vergoddelikte Claudius twee praetors bygevoeg om fideikommissêre jurisdiksie uit te oefen. Een van die poste is sedertdien onderdruk deur die vergoddelikte Titus [79-81 nC] en deur die vergoddelikte Nerva [96-8] herstel, om jurisdiksie uit te oefen tussen die keiserlike tesourie en private burgers. Daar is dus agtien praetors wat jurisdiksie uitoefen in die civitas. (ibid. 34) Daarom, altwee vertel, tien tribunes van die plebs, twee konsuls, agtien praetors en ses aediles, wat geregtigheid in die civitas.

Pomponius vertel die verhaal op een manier waarop Brennan dit op 'n ander manier vertel. Pomponius sien die praetoriaanse geskiedenis in terme van die regsgeskiedenis en die ontwikkelende behoeftes van die civitas Brennan sien dit in terme van militêre geskiedenis. Oor die wettige oorsprong van die stedelike praetorskap (367 vC word die siening van Pomponius ’ gesekondeer deur Livy, wat die verkiesing van “ een praetor aanteken om jurisdiksie in die stad uit te oefen (6, 42, 11). Maar vir Brennan, “Livy ’s se verklaring dat die praetor geskep is ‘qui ius in urbe diceret ’ moet in 'n sekere sin anachronisties wees ( PRR 58-78, op 61). Weereens, dit moet beklemtoon word dat die werklike bewyse vir die vroeë ontwikkeling van die kantoor feitlik Livy se verduideliking uitsluit dat die praetor bekendgestel is ‘qui ius in urbe diceret ’. ” (601). Soos Brennan in die OCD inskrywing ” praetorHy het ook die reg gehad om 'n leër te lei, en dit is inderdaad die hoedanigheid waarin ons hom meestal in Livy-boeke 7-10 vind. tot 292 v.C., waar Livy se eerste dekade sluit, presies 15 is bekend, slegs sewe daarvan word getuig dat hulle enigiets doen en net twee word gesien as bevelhebbers: L. Pinarius (349 v.C.) het die bevel oorgeneem aan die kus na die dood van 'n konsul (Livy 7, 25, 12-13) en Ap. Claudius (295 vC) het die bevel in Etruria gehou totdat die konsuls gekom het (ibid. 10, 24, 18-26). Die getuienis sluit niks uit nie.

Wat die peregrine praetor betref (244 vC. Brennan voer aan dat hy ook oorspronklik 'n militêre bevelvoerder was: hierdie praetor sou regsgedinge in Rome hanteer wat konflikte tussen burgers en nie-burgers behels, en die taak sou kwalik so swaar gewees het dat dit nie deur die oorspronklike praetor uitgevoer kon word nie. PRR 85-9, op 86). Dus stel Brennan voor om te vertaal ” inter peregrinos” as “ oor buitelanders ” ( OCD PRR 4). Inter peregrinos beteken natuurlik in gevalle waar (een of meer) buitelanders betrokke is, ” net soos inter sicarios beteken in gevalle waar (een of meer) vergiftigers betrokke is. ” Die interessante vraag wat Brennan nie stel nie, is wie peregrini was in 244 vC. Het hulle Latini ingesluit, of het Latini reeds dieselfde privaatregte as Romeinse burgers?

Die Romeinse regering was ook vir nie-burgers. Dit bied selfs strukture vir nie-burgers om hul regte teenoor burgers te bevestig, veral die repetundae hof. Die Lex de provinciis praetoriis gepoog om te verseker dat die burgers van Rome en die bondgenote en die Latyns, en die van die vreemde nasies wat in 'n vriendskapsverhouding met die Romeinse volk staan, veilig kan vaar ”. Die praetors wat vanaf 227 v.C. gestuur is om Sicilië en Sardinië te regeer, word gereeld namens provinsies gewerk. So het L. Scipio, praetor op Sicilië in 193 v.C., in syne neergelê bene vir die plaaslike senaat van Agrigentum dat daar in die senaat nie meer koloniste sou wees as wat daar oorspronklike Agrigentores ” was nie (Cicero Verr. 2, 2, 50/123), en is deur die Italici vereer ( ILLRP 320). 'N Ander goewerneur uit die tweede eeu het gespog, en as praetor op Sicilië het ek die vlugtelinge van die Italici gejaag en 917 slawe teruggegee. ILLRP 454).

Volgens Brennan se eie rekening was praetors nooit meer as derde snaar militêre bevelvoerders nie. Tydens die Hannibaliese Oorlog ( PRR 98-221), en#8220 pretoriese bevelvoerders in Italië was selde bedoel om beduidende gevegte teen die Kartagoë te voer of om Galliese stamme in die veld aan te pak. Oor die algemeen is praetors (of pro praetoribus) verskyn slegs in groot veldtogte om 'n gegewe konsulêre bevelvoerder ” (610) te help. Toe daar militêre noodgevalle in Sicilië en Sardinië was, het die senaat hulle tot twee provinsies (konsulêr en praetoriaans) gemaak en konsulse met leërs gestuur (136-53). Toe 'n derde bevelvoerder in Italië of oorsee nodig was, het die konsuls legate aangestel (610-17). Die taak van die praetor was minder om te verower as om te regeer na die verowering.

Grade van imperium was egter belangrik. Toe praetors gestuur is om die twee Spaanse heersers te beheer (197 v.C., was hulle stylpretors in die plek van die konsul ” ( pro konsule). Vir Brennan is die verskil tussen die imperium van 'n gereelde praetor en die imperium van 'n praetor pro konsule was “ grootliks simbolies ”: “Dit kan aangetoon word dat dit verbeter is imperium —Of die van 'n praetor of privaat - impliseer nie noodwendig 'n groter leër nie, net 'n groter taak en 'n meer onafhanklike posisie. Dit het altyd 'n gewilde stemming vereis en#8221 (610). Maar Sicilië en Sardinië het geen permanente legioene gehad nie. Die Spaanse het legioene gehad, en konsulêr imperium dit lyk asof dit nodig was om 'n legioen in die geveg te lei. Die tipiese militêre bevel van 'n praetor sonder versterking imperium was daarenteen die vloot (139-41).

As die Pomponius -verslag oor die Romeinse magistrasies 'n swakheid het, is dit dat dit prorogasie weglaat. Polybius, Pomponius ’ intellektuele meerdere, het erken dat prorogasie 'n belangrike senatoriale prerogatief is (6, 15, 6):

Boonop hang dit van die senaat af of bevelvoerders en ontwerpe en projekte klaar is of nie, want die senaat het die soewereine mag om 'n nuwe bevelvoerder te stuur wanneer die jaar geëindig het, of om die een onder bevel te behou.

Brennan skryf: 'n Voorgeskrewe konsul word gewoonlik 'konsul' genoem en word in die plek van 'n konsul ''n voorgeskrewe praetor' 'genoem' ',' 'sê hy. 8217 en ‘praetor '” (73). Dit is onwaar (Giovannini 1983, 59-65). 'N Voorgeskrewe praetor het 'n praetor gebly as hy verbeter word imperium, het hy 'n “praetor geword pro konsule“. Van hierdie titel, óf “praetor ” óf ” pro konsule” was 'n aanvaarbare afkorting. So spreek Marcus Cicero sy broer Quintus toe as “praetor ” ( V Fr.. 1, 1) terwyl die demos van Claros hom vereer het as antipatos ( pro konsule SEG 37, 958). M. Antonius was praetor in 102 v.C., pro konsule in 101 v.C. ( PRR 357) en konsul in 99 v.C. Brennan maak ook 'n nie-bestaande onderskeid tussen voorgeskrewe goewerneurs en “ex-landdroste ” in Rome (241-5) dit was dieselfde.

Hier is hoe prorogasie gewerk het. Praetors het hul provinsies per jaar ontvang. Wanneer hul imperium is voorgeskryf, kan hulle op hul plek bly, nuwe provinsies deur senatoriese besluit ontvang, of nuwe provinsies in die jaarlikse lot ontvang. Boonop kon promagistrate nie stedelike provinsies hou nie (stedelike praetor, peregrine praetor, praetor wat voorsitter was van 'n quaestio). Vanaf 146 vC, soos Badian gesien het, is slegs ses praetors jaarliks ​​verkies, terwyl tot agt provinsies gevul moes word civitas het meer landdroste nodig gehad as wat dit verkies het, en daarom het die bevoegdheid roetine geword. Elke jaar sou nuutverkose praetors lotte trek oor die stadspretorskap, dan sou die oorblywende nuwe praetors plus die prorogueerde praetors lotte trek vir die praetoriaanse goewerneursskap. Marius, praetor in the city in 115 BC, then allotted Further Spain for 114 BC, is the earliest recorded example of a praetor who was elected once, then allotted provinces twice (Plutarch Marius 6, 1 cf. PRR 498). But we cannot say when the practice began. In 214 BC, all the praetors were prorogued and given new provinces (Livy 24, 10, 4). Already by 183 BC, when an elected praetor was a flamen dialis who could not leave Rome, praetors drew lots for city and territorial provinces separately (Livy 39, 45, 4). Later, praetors normally drew lots twice, first for city praetorships, then, a year later, for provincial governorships. Verres, for example, was allotted the urban province for 74 BC and the province of Sicily for 73 BC (Cicero Verr 2, 1, 40/104 2, 2, 6/17).

Polybius presents prorogation as a senatorial prerogative. But on any matter the senate could be overridden by the Roman people, as occurred increasingly after the Gracchi. In die Lex de provinciis praetoriis (101 or 100 BC the people assumed the normally-senatorial task of naming (some of) the praetorian provinces. The statute is one of our best sources for praetorian duties passed over by Livy, such as financial administration (Crawford 1996 no. 12 Cnidos Copy, col. iv, lines 10-30):

And he who has the Chersonese and the Caenice as his province is to hold this province along with Macedonia and is to act as he shall deem it proper in order that, for whomever it shall be appropriate for him to collect those public revenues, he may collect the public revenues in that province according to the lex ( locationis) and he is to be in those places each year for not less than sixty days before anyone else takes over from him and he is to devote effort, insofar as it shall be possible, so that those who have a relationship of friendship or alliance with the Roman people may not be expelled from their territories and so that no war or wrong may hereafter affect them and that praetor or proconsul who holds the province of Macedonia, before he leaves the province, according to the decree of the senate passed in relation to him, should establish the boundaries of the vectigal of the Chersonese, as he shall deem it proper, as quickly as possible.

(It is curious that the praetor collects revenues before establishing tariff-boundaries.) The Lex de provinciis praetoriis also covers the praetorian governor’s judicial responsibilities (ibid. lines 31-9):

If the praetor or proconsul to whom the province of Asia or Macedonia shall have fallen abdicate from his magistracy, as described in his mandata, he is to have power in all matters according to his jurisdiction just as it existed in his magistracy, to punish, to coerce, to administer justice, to judge, to appoint iudices en recuperatores, [registrations] of guarantors and securities, emancipations, and he is to be [immune from prosecution] until he return to the city of Rome.

The source that best reveals, in concise detail, the complexity of the praetorian governor’s task is Marcus Cicero’s letter to his brother Quintus, which Brennan treats rather summarily ( Q Fr.. 1, 1 PRR 566-8). Where Brennan, following Badian, generally prefers to call praetors “commanders,” Marcus uses the word gubernator (ibid. 5). Marcus says that Quintus’ difficultas magna will be not provincials, but Roman publicans, and he explains how to handle them in an excursus (ibid. 32-6). Marcus describes the praetorian governor’s entourage, comprising chosen legati and an allotted quaestor, whose capacities for exploiting provincials Quintus must check (ibid. 10), as well as apparitores, personal slaves, and a praetorian cohort (ibid. 11). Marcus describes official relations with provincials (tours and requisitions, ceremonial arrivals, local honors ibid. 9-10, 30-1), private relations ( hospitium, amicitia ibid. 16), and the temptations of art, bodies, and money (ibid. 8). It is a measure of the potential ramifications of relations between praetorian governors and provincials that Marcus himself, despite being out of office in Rome at the time, received letters and embassies, asking him to intervene with Quintus, from Blaundus, Dionysopolis, Apamea, Antandros, and Colophon ( Q Fr. 1, 2, 4).

Quintus Cicero was prorogued in Asia three times, which was about par for the course. It was par for the course before Sulla (cf. e.g. Sulla himself, pr. urb. 97 BC, pr. in Cilicia 96-93 BC: PRR 358 C. Sentius, pr. urb. 94 BC, pr. in Macedonia 93-87 BC: PRR 525-6), and it was par for the course after Sulla (cf. e.g. Verres, pr. urb. 74 BC, pr. in Sicily 73-71 BC: PRR 486-90). That is to say that other than adding two praetorships and two praetorian courts ( quaestiones), Sulla made no changes to the office, either formal or informal (Giovannini 1983, 73-101). Brennan acknowledges that “there is no trace of a lex Cornelia on this matter” (396), and that “it is remarkable to see how few territorial provinciae show evidence of a sustained policy of annual succession” (636). But he cannot bring himself to admit that “Sulla’s far-reaching reforms” (639) are a mirage (388-402, esp. 389-92). Under the heading “Institutionalization of Ex Magistratu Commands” (394-6), Brennan writes: “A major Sullan development was that it was henceforth understood that both consuls and all praetors should normally remain in Rome for the year of their magistracy” (394). As the examples of Marius and the others show, this had been the status quo ante.

Brennan has reasonably chosen to end his story in 50 BC. In 55 BC, Pompeius Magnus had remained in Rome and governed Spain through legates (518-20, with a valuable survey of precedents at 519). In 52 BC, he had passed a law establishing a five-year hiatus between Roman magistracies and provincial promagistracies (402-3). Through these measures, Pompeius effectively provided the two bases of the imperial provincial system, with its imperial provinces governed by legati Augusti and public provinces governed by promagistrates.

While no one would ask that he had worked any harder, Brennan could have continued the story of the praetorship into the Principate—in the manner of Pomponius. New documents regularly show praetors at work in the new political circumstances. With the Principate, a history of the city praetorships becomes possible. In the customs law for Asia, the peregrine praetor appears in his traditional role (Engelmann and Knibbe 1989 SEG 39, 1180, section 50):

The consuls Lucius Valerius Volesus and Gnaeus Cinna Magnus [AD 5] added: whenever a dispute arises about this law, concerning this dispute… the praetor who gives judgement between Romans and foreigners is to have (the right of) giving…”

While the new praetors of the aerarium receive publicans’ cautions (ibid. sec. 43 cf. secs. 45, 54-5, 58, 61):

Let the publican who has contracted for the exaction of duties give satisfaction publicly, with guarantors and land fixtures (pledges), in the judgment of the consuls Gaius Furnius and Gaius Silanus or the praetors in charge of the aerarium.

In die SC de Cn. Pisone patre, one praetor convicts and sentences Piso’s equestrian accomplices, and another seizes their goods (Eck, Caballos, Fernández 1996, lines 120-3):

Visellius Karus and Sempronius Bassus, associates of Cn. Piso senior and conspirators and accomplices in all his crimes, ought to be declared outlaws by the praetor who presides over the law of treason and it is (the senate’s) pleasure that their property should be sold and the profits consigned to the aerarium by a praetor in charge of the aerarium.

In a recently-reedited wooden tablet from Puteoli, the urban praetor appears in a new topographical context (Camodeca 1996 AE 1996, 407):

Copied and checked from the edict of L. Servenius Gallus, praetor, which was posted at Rome in the Forum Augustum under the Porticus Iulia on the…column before his tribunal in which was written that which is written below: ‘L. Servenius Gallus, praetor, says…’

Imperial praetorian history remains to be written. For the facts of Republican praetorian history, we shall all gratefully consult Brennan’s Praetorship in the Roman Republic for their interpretation, we should also remember Pomponius’ Encheiridion.


Die Romeinse Republiek: 'n baie kort inleiding

The rise and fall of the Roman Republic occupies a special place in the history of Western civilization. From humble beginnings on the seven hills beside the Tiber, the city of Rome grew to dominate the ancient Mediterranean. Led by her senatorial aristocracy, Republican armies defeated Carthage and the successor kingdoms of Alexander the Great, and brought the surrounding peoples to east and west into the Roman sphere. Yet the triumph of the Republic was also its tragedy.

In hierdie Very Short Introduction, David M. Gwynn provides a fascinating introduction to the history of the Roman Republic and its literary and material sources, bringing to life the culture and society of Republican Rome and its ongoing significance within our modern world.

ABOUT THE SERIES: The Very Short Introductions series from Oxford University Press contains hundreds of titles in almost every subject area. These pocket-sized books are the perfect way to get ahead in a new subject quickly. Our expert authors combine facts, analysis, perspective, new ideas, and enthusiasm to make interesting and challenging topics highly readable.


Course Outline for Our Homeschool History World History Curriculum

A full year of world history introduces homeschool high school students to major events from the time of Ancient Rome through early twenty-first century.

  • Week One: Ancient Rome – Republic (500 BC to 44 BC)
  • Week Two: Ancient Rome – The Empire (44 BC- AD 36)
  • Week Three: Roman Emperors and Their Claims to Fame
  • Week Four: Britannia and Roman Rule
  • Week Five: Constantine, Division, and the Fall of the Roman Empire
  • Week Six: Test & Review
  • Week Seven: Barbarians and Byzantium
  • Week Eight: Die Middeleeue
  • Week Nine: The Silk Road and the Rise of Islam
  • Week Ten: The Vikings
  • Week Eleven: Closing the Chapter on the First Millennium
  • Week Twelve: Test 2
  • Week Thirteen: Die kruistogte
  • Week Fourteen: Mongole
  • Week Fifteen: The Shogunate, the Samurai, and the Ninja
  • Week Sixteen: Two Scots, a Plague, and a War
  • Week Seventeen: Royals and Roses, Part I
  • Week Eighteen: Royals and Roses, Part II
  • Week Nineteen: Test 3
  • Week Twenty: Ouderdom van ontdekking
  • Week Twenty-One: The Renaissance
  • Week Twenty-Two: Not-so-Sweet 16, Part I
  • Week Twenty-Three: Not-so-Sweet 16, Part II
  • Week Twenty-Four: Test 4
  • Week Twenty-Five: Russia, a Ruler, and a Revolution, Pt. 1
  • Week Twenty-Six: Russia, a Ruler, and a Revolution, Pt. 2
  • Week Twenty-Seven: Russia, a Ruler, and a Revolution, Pt. 3
  • Week Twenty-Eight: Die Industriële Revolusie
  • Week Twenty-Nine: Afrika
  • Week Thirty: Test 5
  • Week Thirty-One: World War I, Part 1
  • Week Thirty-Two: World War I, Part 2
  • Week Thirty-Three: World War II, Part 1
  • Week Thirty-Four: World War II, Part 2
  • Week Thirty-Five: Reaching New Heights
  • Week Thirty-Six: Test 6

Course Sample

World History: A Two-Thousand-Year Tour
By Tammie Bairen

Inleiding

This particular high school world history course is different than many others available. It takes advantage of the students’ ability to research and learn as they are digging into history to find the answers to the discussion questions and to formulate their own opinions. Those students who are not accustomed to researching will, hopefully, gain a new skill that will serve them throughout their lives.

Instead of the typical textbook-style course, students will be directed to specific websites, books, videos, and other media during this course. No extra purchase is required. Many resources will be referenced so that students can use what is available to them. Study should not be limited by the resources provided in the lessons, however. Further exploration is highly encouraged! It is my hope that students will be intrigued by the events that have taken place during the last 2,000 years and the fascinating way in which so many events are connected and will desire to further their understanding of history by reading more, watching more, and listening more.

Though we could begin our study at the very beginning of time as we know it, this course will begin with the establishment of the Roman Republic. We simply do not have enough time in a thirty-six-week course to cover eight millennia, so we will cover slightly more than two. While not every topic will be or can be covered, major events on each continent will be discussed. Some topics will cover more than one week due to their historical importance.

Students should have a globe or a large map of the world to which they can refer. Though many areas of the world have changed drastically over the course of 2000 years, the geographical position of those areas has remained the same. Historical maps will be provided in the lessons as available.

Questions will be scattered throughout the lessons, so I recommend using a notebook or typing your answers on the computer. Remember to save the file.

Answer keys will be provided as a separate download on the site.

Week 1: Ancient Rome – Republic to Empire

In Europe, there lies a country said to be shaped like a boot—Italy. Within this country is a city with an extremely rich and fascinating history—Rome. Many things still in use today are a direct result of Rome’s influence in the world many centuries ago. It is with this city we begin our travel through time.

To establish an understanding of the beginning of the Roman Republic and the events that led to its demise, please explore the following resources and answer the questions that follow.

  • World Book eBook: Ancient Romans https://schoolhouseteachers.com/staff-n-teachers/world-book-ebook-library/ – pages 6-9, 12-13, 18-21
  • The Ancient Romans by Allison Lassieur (https://www.amazon.com/Ancient-Romans-PeopleWorld/dp/0531167429 – link provided to identify book you may be able to find it through your local library)
  • “Political Structure of the Roman Republic” – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3B5pGiWptb4
  • “Conflict of the Orders” – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3rvA2eju0w
  • “Punic Wars” – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARF2r3Ol80Y

SchoolhouseTeachers.com note: Parents should closely monitor children’s use of YouTube and Wikipedia if you navigate away from the videos and articles cited in these lessons. We also recommend viewing the videos on a full screen setting in order to minimize your students’ exposure to potentially offensive ads and inappropriate comments beside or beneath the video.

  1. When did the country of Italy first appear in written records?
  2. What was the occupation of most residents of Italy at this time?
  3. What group of people lived in northern Italy at this time?
  4. What was the political unit adopted by this group? (If you are unable to determine this from the reading, you can click through the link of the name of the group that answers #3.)
  5. Who were the seven kings of Rome, and when did they rule?
  6. With what is Ancus Marcius credited? Lucius Tarquinius Priscus? Lucius Tarquinius Superbus?
  7. What does the name “Superbus” mean?
  8. When the last king and his family were exiled from Rome, the city already had a senate and an assembly that served the king. These formed the backbone of the republic. What is a republic?
  9. What were the two main social classes in Rome, not including slaves?
  10. What was the highest position in government? What did they do?
  11. How many men ruled as consul at one time? What would be the advantage of this? The disadvantage?
  12. How did someone become a dictator?
  13. Who were the lawmakers of Rome?
  14. What was the Assembly?
  15. What was the Forum? (The first image in this lesson is a Roman Forum in ruins.)
  16. Who elected the Consuls?
  17. Who else did the Assembly elect? What did they do?
  18. What would be blamed for the fall of the Republic?
  19. In at least one paragraph, describe the Conflict of the Orders (aka Struggle of the Orders).

Additional Activities:

  1. Find at least five countries that have a republic form of government today. There are quite a few.
  2. Describe some of the differences between the Roman Republic and the United States government.

Moving Forward

We’re going to fast forward a couple hundred years. Quite a bit happens in Rome and its surrounding areas during the ensuing years. There are whole books devoted to the wars in which Rome was engaged during the Republic years. We, unfortunately, do not have the time to devote to all of them. You are encouraged to do your own research if you are interested in learning about these wars (some of the websites listed above have information):

  • Latin war (498-493 BC)
  • Samnite wars (343-290 BC)
  • Pyrrhic war (280-275 BC)
  • Punic wars (264-146 BC)
  • Gallic wars (58-50)

Besides the conquest and domination beyond the city walls, Rome began to have internal strife. There were a series of civil wars that aided in the weakening and eventual destruction of the Republic.

Read about the Civil War between Marius and Sulla that took place between 87 and 82 BC.

Toward the end of the Republic, some new characters come on the scene: a politician—Marcus Licinius Crassus, a statesman and general—Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus (Pompey), a young lawyer—Marcus Tullius Cicero, and a young Senator—Gaius Julius Caesar. Using the following resources, learn about these famous people and the roles they played in the death of the Republic and answer the questions that follow.

Read the section titled Comprehensive World History: Italy which follows this lesson.

  1. How were Pompey and Sulla connected?
  2. Describe Pompey’s role in the spread of Rome’s territory.
  3. What is a praetor? (You may need to refer to a dictionary.)
  4. What is a triumph?
  5. What is a quaestor?
  6. What position did Pompey hold even though he was too young? Who did he share that with?
  7. What was Julius Caesar able to achieve through his alliance with Crassus and Pompey at the age of 41?
  8. What did Caesar’s co-consul do? What was the result of that?
  9. What is the First Triumvirate?
  10. How do the relationships between those involved in the First Triumvirate disintegrate?
  11. Detail Julius Caesar’s rise to power.
  12. What changes did Julius Caesar make while he was dictator?
  13. What are ides? When did Caesar die?
  14. Describe the Julian Calendar.
  15. Upon the death of Julius Caesar, who rose to power? What happened to the Republic? What did Rome become?

Watch: “The History of the Romans: Every Year” from the beginning until 2:48 to see the growth of the territory of Rome during the Republic and the beginning stages of the Empire. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5zYpWcz1-E)

Journal Entry: What did you find the most interesting about the time of the Roman Republic?

Essay Option: Write a two-page essay describing the events during the time of the Roman Republic, including the main characters. Typically, an essay would be in either Times New Roman or Courier New size 12 font, double spaced. Be sure to include a reference list at the end of your essay. Do not plagiarize! Do not copy and paste but use your own words to describe these events.

Additional Information: Shakespeare’s play, Julius Caesar, is about the death of Julius Caesar at the hands of Brutus and Cassius. If you have time and are so inclined, go ahead and read it.


Republiek

Ons redakteurs gaan na wat u ingedien het, en bepaal of hulle die artikel moet hersien.

Republiek, form of government in which a state is ruled by representatives of the citizen body. Modern republics are founded on the idea that sovereignty rests with the people, though who is included and excluded from the category of the people has varied across history. Because citizens do not govern the state themselves but through representatives, republics may be distinguished from direct democracy, though modern representative democracies are by and large republics. Die term republiek may also be applied to any form of government in which the head of state is not a hereditary monarch.

Prior to the 17th century, the term was used to designate any state, with the exception of tyrannical regimes. Derived from the Latin expression res publica (“the public thing”), the category of republic could encompass not only democratic states but also oligarchies, aristocracies, and monarchies. In Six Books of the Commonwealth (1576), his canonical study of sovereignty, the French political philosopher Jean Bodin thus offered a far-reaching definition of the republic: “the rightly ordered government of a number of families, and of those things which are their common concern, by a sovereign power.” Tyrannies were excluded from this definition, because their object is not the common good but the private benefit of a single individual.

During the 17th and 18th centuries, the meaning of republiek shifted with the growing resistance to absolutist regimes and their upheaval in a series of wars and revolutions, from the Eighty Years’ War (1568–1648) to the American Revolution (1775–83) and the French Revolution (1787–89). Shaped by those events, the term republiek came to designate a form of government in which the leader is periodically appointed under a constitution, in contrast to hereditary monarchies.

Despite its democratic implications, the term was claimed in the 20th century by states whose leadership enjoyed more power than most traditional monarchs, including military dictatorships such as the Republic of Chile under Augusto Pinochet and totalitarian regimes such as the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.


4 Roman Head-Hunting

Executed criminals, Roman gladiators, or war trophies?

That question has yet to be answered about the 39 male human skulls discovered in the late 1980s in a burial pit near a Roman amphitheater and Walbrook stream in London. These men, most of whom were 25󈞏 years old, led hard lives judging by the evidence of decapitation, fractures, sharp-edged weapon injuries, and blunt-force trauma on their skulls. Their deaths have been dated to 120� when Londinium (now London) was a thriving capital in Roman Britain.

Immediately after the skulls were unearthed, there was no money to analyze them in depth. For decades, they sat untouched at the Museum of London, until bioarchaeologist Rebecca Redfern and earth scientist Heather Bonney did a more thorough analysis a few years ago. They published their findings in early 2014 in the Tydskrif vir Argeologiese Wetenskap.

Although the skulls don&rsquot look as though they were mounted on posts, the researchers believe they may have been exhibited in the Londinium amphitheater after the men died. They could have been thrown into the burial pit later. But Kathleen Coleman, a Roman gladiator expert from Harvard, disagrees. Without gravestones proving these men were gladiators, she believes they may have been killed in riots, common assaults, or gang warfare.

Redfern doesn&rsquot buy that argument. &ldquoThere is no evidence for social unrest, warfare, or other acts of organized violence in London during the period that these human remains date from,&rdquo she said. &ldquo[Instead, there are] two possible outcomes&mdashthat these are fatally injured gladiators, or the victims of Roman head-hunting&mdasha tantalizing prospect.&rdquo

Were these head-hunting trophy skulls, such as those displayed by the military at Hadrian&rsquos Wall in Roman Britain? The archaeologists want to do isotope analyses to determine where these men resided originally. The answer to whether they were locals or distant strangers may help scientists to narrow the possibilities of how and why they died.


Roman Daily Life

  1. Men and Women
    • Paterfamilias---the Roman father had complete and God-like power over his family. He could sell his children into slavery or kill them. He could also tell them who to marry and how to live their lives and they had to obey.
    • Gravitas--the Roman ideal behavior--discipline, strength, loyalty
    • Women--highter status than in Greece, but could not vote
  2. Children and Education
    • Boys were favored because only they could be politically and economically successful
    • Girls are not even given their own name. Instead, are named after their father, such as Julius' daughter would be called Julia. If there was more than one daughter, each would be called Julia the Elder, Julia the Second, Julia the Younger etc.
    • Only patrician boys are educated, to age 16, when they are adults
    • Girls marry at 12-15, their father picks their husband, and the husband is usually an older, successful businessman or comes from a politically powerful family. It's not about love, it's about making an alliance with a powerful family.
  3. Slawe
    • varied in treatment. A valuable Greek tutor-slave might live with the family and be treated as such, while a worker in the salt mines would be treated like an animal.
    • Gladiators---trained warriors, like professional athletes but slaves. Fought to the death in the arena. Some lived 10-20 years and attained rock star status.

DMCA Complaint

If you believe that content available by means of the Website (as defined in our Terms of Service) infringes one or more of your copyrights, please notify us by providing a written notice (“Infringement Notice”) containing the information described below to the designated agent listed below. If Varsity Tutors takes action in response to an Infringement Notice, it will make a good faith attempt to contact the party that made such content available by means of the most recent email address, if any, provided by such party to Varsity Tutors.

Your Infringement Notice may be forwarded to the party that made the content available or to third parties such as ChillingEffects.org.

Please be advised that you will be liable for damages (including costs and attorneys’ fees) if you materially misrepresent that a product or activity is infringing your copyrights. Thus, if you are not sure content located on or linked-to by the Website infringes your copyright, you should consider first contacting an attorney.

Please follow these steps to file a notice:

You must include the following:

A physical or electronic signature of the copyright owner or a person authorized to act on their behalf An identification of the copyright claimed to have been infringed A description of the nature and exact location of the content that you claim to infringe your copyright, in sufficient detail to permit Varsity Tutors to find and positively identify that content for example we require a link to the specific question (not just the name of the question) that contains the content and a description of which specific portion of the question – an image, a link, the text, etc – your complaint refers to Your name, address, telephone number and email address and A statement by you: (a) that you believe in good faith that the use of the content that you claim to infringe your copyright is not authorized by law, or by the copyright owner or such owner’s agent (b) that all of the information contained in your Infringement Notice is accurate, and (c) under penalty of perjury, that you are either the copyright owner or a person authorized to act on their behalf.

Send your complaint to our designated agent at:

Charles Cohn Varsity Tutors LLC
101 S. Hanley Rd, Suite 300
St. Louis, MO 63105


Kyk die video: Timeline of the Roman and Byzantine Emperors (Julie 2022).


Kommentaar:

  1. Akshat

    Ek glo dat jy verkeerd is. Ek is seker. Kom ons bespreek dit. E-pos my by PM, ons praat.

  2. Thaxter

    Dit is nie so nie.

  3. Dantel

    We will try to be sane.

  4. Umarah

    Very amusing idea



Skryf 'n boodskap