The History of Roman Imperial System - Research Paper Example

Was the Roman Imperial system, particularly its form of government, more closely related to the Spartan or Athenian model? Imperialism is defined as policies, systems or practices of a certain government or state. The imperium concept was in ancient roman, and as a concept, it was relevant to them. The term “Imperare” means to command and “imperium” means the power to command, and by extension, the territory to which the command will be obeyed and accepted by the subjects. Schumpeter defined imperial as the purposefully disposition of certain power on the part of the state to unlimited forcible expansion. However, roman imperialism is not of the kind, its form of imperialism for instance, was often hegemonies rather than annexationists, and there were times when the roman militaries were inactive during the republic. This paper will therefore compare the roman imperial system to the Spartan governing. Ancient Greece for instance, it had four forms of governments namely: Aristocracy, Monarchy, Oligarchy and Direct Democracy. Direct democracy government was exercised in ancient Athens; here citizens of the state were allowed to participate in politically in making decision that seems to be standard to all citizens. While in Ancient Sparta they had an oligarchy form of government, here the state was ruled by citizens who were classified in small groups, the small groups were in charge of the military as well. Sparta had mixed government, as a result of the mixed government state, it had both Oligarchy and democracy; the state of Sparta was hereditary and it was ruled by two kings from the Eurypontid and Agiad families. They were both Heracles descendants and had same authority. This equal authority prevented them from acting against each other. This form of government acted as a model to other poleis, it had three ruling classes, the assembly, council of elders and the Ephorate. In spite of having the mixed government, Sparta was well organized in its rulings. On the other hand, kings were rulers of the Roman city state. The king acted as a supreme ruler and the power he had over his subjects was consolidated by his own negotiation with his gods. In addition as a King, he often ensured that he maintains both his title of supremacy in the military as well as religious authority. However, the ancient government was later broken by the Roman citizens after they expelled their last king; this led to the kingdom of Roman to become a republic, and later processed to be an empire. At this point, the government and religion became one; this came to pass because of Emperor Augustus as well as his successors. Moreover, kings in Roman had no absolute power over their subjects and were merely seen as chief executive to their subjects and the senate. However, they exercised absolute power to the military team. Rome had three administrative assemblies as well compared to Sparta. The Senate; it acted as a body of advisor to the king, the comitia curiata; which was involved in endorsing and correcting laws that have been suggested by the king and the comitia calata; which acted as an assembly of college priests, it was involved in assembling citizens to be eyewitnesses of specific acts, listen to proclamations and declaration of feasts and schedules of holiday for the coming months. Generally, citizens in Rome had the voice towards their government. Unlike Rome, the roles of the kings in Sparta were basically religious, judicial and militaristic. Kings were chief priests of the Sparta state and they took part in sustaining and maintaining communication between them and the Delphian sanctuary. They also took part in exercising total authority in politics of Spartan. During the Heredotus regime, the Sparta judicial functioning had been denied to deal with cases that involve heiresses, adoption and issue dealing with public roads as well. In addition, criminal and civil cases were judged by official individuals referred to us ephors and the elder’s council who were referred to as gerousia. The Gerousia had twenty eight elders with age sixty and above and were elected to be in those positions for the rest of their life. Moreover, policies that were laid by the high state were later discussed by the council, who later propose alternative actions to the Spartan citizenry body, of which one of the alternatives is adopted through voting. The citizens had a chance of exercising their rights through voting for the proposed alternatives. Nevertheless, the Spartas constitution gave the Assembly a clear precedence. The Assembly was involved in meetings that took place monthly and it was made up of adult men. They were involved in voting bills that were presented by the council. In addition, the assemblies were powerful and were constitutionally allowed to exile the king. However, they had no absolute tyranny towards the Athenian, the government of Sparta is said to have had a balance state. The Sparta constitution generally demonstrated democracy and was much admirable than any other system of government in Greece. Moreover, the five elected ephors acted as executives who were involved in carrying out the day’s activities in the city including welcoming and sending the Sparta ambassadors. In the initial stages they acted as clerks but with time during mid-sixth century they earned more power. However, they were less than the gerousia since they were elected for a period of one year alone and were not re-elected. Compared to ancient Rome, where legal practices and principles were traced from the laws from the twelve tables which were promulgated in 449BC, and it was issued and ordered by Justinian I. The laws were continuously used and have been adopted in the Western Europe as well. The laws included citizen’s law and were often applied by citizens and the subjects had further jurisdiction on cases that involves other citizens. In addition, they had laws of nations which were applicable to foreigners and the way they dealt with the Romans, as well as natural laws which were commonly applied to all citizens. Looking at the two governments in Sparta and Greece they all had kings as rulers, they had similarities in their structure, especially the as assemblies. However, the most distinct character between the two is the involvement of citizens in decision making. It is more profound in Sparta than Rome. For governments to practice democracy as most of the nations across the globe claim, is the fact that citizens of a certain nation should be allowed to full take part in decision making on issues that concern them. This is and has been challenging issues especially to individuals who seek power, since people across the globe are well aware of what it means and the benefits a society can a achieve if a government exercises good governance. Bibiliography 1. “The Internet Ancient History Sourcebook,” last modified February 2, 2007 http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/asbook.html. 2. “Halsall, Paul’s Ancient History Sourcebook,” Internet History Sourcebooks Project, accesses April 27, 2011, http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/asbook.html. 3. “The Internet Ancient History Sourcebook.” 4. “Ancient History Sourcebook” Read More