Roman Democracy Vs Athenian Democracy

Democracy, as defined by Polybius, was a “regime based on effective rule by the people.” In Polybius’ Histories, democracy was not based on each citizen having the ‘right to do whatever they wish or propose’ but true democracy relied on “reverence to the gods, succour of parents, respect to elders, obedience to laws, are traditional and habitual, in such communities” as well as decisions being decided by the majority. It has been agreed upon by most ancient historians that Rome was not a democracy, however, its political elements did contain ‘democratic elements’ and the democratic nature of these elements has been a source of much debate between historians. Historians such as Fergus Millar have argued that Rome’s political character was more similar to Athenian democracy than it has been credited whereas others such as minimise the significance of the democratic elements of Rome’s political system. In order to determine how democratic Rome’s political system was, the role of the people as well who was elected and into what positions should be examined. The way in which the elections were conducted should considered as well.

One of the main sources on Rome’s political system is Polybius (c.200-118 B.C.) a Greek historian; who following Rome’s victory in the Third
Polybius, further emphasises the important role that the people played in Rome’s political system as he argued that there was “no case [in which] it is safe for the Consul to neglect either the Senate or the goodwill of the