Athens And Citizenship Dbq Essay

One of the reasons Rome had a better system than Athens is their organized government. One of the reasons Rome had a better system than Athens is their organized government. According to Document E, Athens had an assembly that passed laws and other things that the citizens could attend and vote for important things. In Document F it said that the members of the

Athens and Rome were two powerful civilizations. Their impact still influence us today. About 500 BC, people were no longer considered subjects. They are now called citizens, and had to meet certain responsibilities. If you meet the requirements then you could be granted citizenship. Only certain people could be granted citizenship, and it was to be honored and protected. Athens had a better system then Rome, because the Athenians where more cautious and gave people equal chances for obtaining citizenship. They also did ostracism, and believed in The Old Oligarch.

The Romans were more friendly with their citizenship and they made more friends than enemies and this is better for rome because they have more agriculture and farmers and this is what made Rome better than Athens . The male in Rome

The Athenians had good citizenship because when people were granted citizenship they had a say in the government. Unlike in the Roman Republic when citizens were only elected, ambassadors had a say and most of the time the ambassadors came from wealthy Roman families. This action showed discrimination of wealth against the Roman citizens, meanwhile the Athenians had the freedom of speech and could participate in government actions. One example is taken from Document B, which shares that the Athenian government was fulfilled by “Lottery or by-election and that any citizen who wishes should be allowed to speak” in the Athenian government. What is important to notice is how the government was chosen by lottery.

Citizens in Rome that are assigned these jobs not only attain a high position but also have a lot more power and authority. For example, according to Source A, Consuls, who are also considered magistrates, had “the absolute authority in running the military… and can spend as much public money as they choose”. They were ultimately “...the supreme masters of the government.” (Source A). This part of the government would lead historians to believe that the constitution was despotism, not a democracy. Another reason showing that the Roman Republic was not a democracy was the how the Senate had functioned. The Senate presents laws and deals with issues outside of the civilization. Scholars may consider this to be an

Since ; Athens was a democracy I feel that this better benefitted the citizens living their because it allowed citizens to vote for what they agreed with and what they opposed. For example in Document E it stated that there was an Athenian assembly and they had the power to pass laws, set budgets, and declare war. Whilst in Rome all of the decision making was in the hands of the Senates. All of this could not happen unless the Citizens came to vote. In Athens all forty thousand citizens were allowed to attend, however for some reason there was a shortage of citizens able attend at least six thousand have to be present to make important decisions . Voters had to make the treacherous trip to a hillside called the Pnyx near the Acroplois. Document B The Old oligarch was comparing Rome an Athens for instance it said "It is the poor man's fleet and

One reason that the system of citizenship in Rome was better was because they care for foreigners. In Doc. F it states, "The Senate had primary responsibilities for foreigners." In Doc. F it states, "The Senate had primary responsibilities for foreigners.

Rome had a better system of citizenship due to these three reasons: they gave up citizenship more freely, they had censors that judged people, and they had a smaller Senate making it easier to agree on one idea. One reason that the system of citizenship was better in Rome was that they gave up citizenship more freely than Athens did. The evidence that shows this is in Document A when it says that they let free, native-born, adult males, free, native-born, adult females, free, native-born, male children, female children, and sons of freed slaves. Athens only let free, native-born adult males be citizens. This evidence helps explain why Rome had the stronger system because it shows how they let all types of people, not

Rome had so much land they needed to create an efficient way to make laws. Each part of Rome would vote for one of their men citizens to become a representative. The man voted to be the representative would move closer to Rome and vote for laws their people would want. In document D it says , “And the law is as follows: Each citizen wrote the name of the man who in his opinion had the greatest power to destroy the democracy; the man who got the largest number of ostraka was obligated to go into exile from his native land for a period of ten years.” In Ancient Greece, there was a direct democracy. They would have 500 men come together to vote for new laws for their city-state. Rome had the more efficient type of government because it was more fair and fewer people had to vote. Lastly, Rome had a social class and Senate. The Senate would be made up of 300 Patricians. The Patricians are wealthy nobles in the upper class. The Plebeians would vote for the Patricians to become part of the Senate. The Plebeians we part of the common class. The Patricians would have to impress the Plebeians to try to get their vote to become part of the consul. If men were picked to become part of the Senate they served for

The Roman government was democratic when it came to the citizens. The citizens could elect their own officials, and the officials were supposed to represent every level of Roman society. There were many types of officials. The two consuls were the chief officials of Rome. Once elected, they served for two years (Trueman, Chris). One of their most important powers was controlling the army (Government under Roman Republic). When they were unsure of a course of action, they were advised by the Senate, a council of around six hundred male citizens (Trueman, Chris). Those six hundred men were usually from wealthy patrician families and were the ones in charge of making the laws and controlling the spending. Contrary to the election of the other officials, the Senate was appointed by the current Consuls. Once they were appointed, they served for life. When one member died, another was chosen in their place (Government).

To begin with, both of their ways that they chose the officials were similar but also differed. The Athenian Government and the Roman Republic both had the citizens of each side choose the officials, but they both had a difference in limitations on how they chose the officials. In Athens, the citizens would vote for the officials, but the people who were official citizens were the ones who were 18 or over, born in Athens, and had to be males. This means that outsiders, slaves, or women could not vote because they were not considered citizens. Additionally, the Athenian Government system for voting was organized with citizens by the name of demes or demos; who belonged to tribes and where combined with others of the same area to make a larger group, which in turn were combined to form ten tribes. (Gill, thoughtco 2017). In contrast, citizens of Rome had to be over 15 years old, male slaves could also vote if they were granted freedom, the women were considered citizens but had no voting rights. The

From 509 BC to about 27 BC, Rome was considered a republic. During this time there was no single leader of Rome and the government was run by elected officials. The main leaders of the Roman Republic were the consuls. There were always two consuls in power at a time. Each year new consuls were elected to serve for a one-year term. This kept any one man from becoming too powerful in the government. At the time the Senate was the most powerful governing body in Rome. The Senate had control of the state’s finances and foreign policies. Senators were elected by the people to represent them in government. The Senate was made up of 300 of the most elite and wealthiest of the Roman Republic. One of the most important roles of the Senate to undergo the checks and balances of the Roman government. Checks and balances are the “principle of government under which separate branches are empowered to prevent actions by other branches and are induced to share power” (The Editors). The checks and balances of Rome helped to stabilize the government and allowed the power to be distributed somewhat equally between the consul, the Senate, and the people. However, the fall of the Roman Empire eliminated this type aspect of government in Rome (Kagan 101-103).

The first reason why Rome’s citizenship system was better than Athens’ is because they accepted more people as citizens. In document A it shows who could be allowed to become a citizen in both Athens and Rome. Rome allowed all people except slaves to become citizens while Athens only allowed free native born adult males to become citizens. Rome was a lot more lenient when giving citizenship which is probably one reason they boasted a population of 45,000,000.

For Polybius the advantage of the roman republic over Athenian democracy was that, successively more people shared power as a safeguard against abuse until the immorality of democracy again led to conditions favorable for the receiving of the "Fuehrerpinzip." In his plan, there successively occur three "good" forms of government – kingship, aristocracy, and democracy – only for each to succumb to corruption and for its resulting understanding in its distorted form – respectively dictatorship, oligarchy, and adhocracy, or mob rule – to be overthrown by the kind phase of the next. Polybius also tells us that the senate puts forth its control largely because it has the power to carry out investigations of capital crimes and to offer ultimate negotiation in civil disagreement. There are no rights prior to the state Mixed government implies checks & balances (Polybius, Roman Republic), which implies the good of the entire community.

Romans were a civilization that originated after the Greek culture. They, like Greeks, saw an extreme significance in the idea of a love for one’s country and loyalty. The Romans, however, were more concerned with public affairs such as education, sanitation, and health. They held a strong connection with their ancestors and wished to imitate what the ancient Romans did. Although Romans rejected the idea of a Rex, or king, they favored the common hero. They wanted a leader who a “regular Joe”, someone who was average and could still led an average life after doing extraordinary things. The Romans also had a very defined government that was broken into consuls, senate, and assembly. There were two consuls who served in place of the king as the leaders of the Roman Empire. Next in succession was the senate, comprised only of patricians who debated and passed legislation. Finally, there was the assembly made for the plebeians to approve laws.