Preview

The Manipulation of the Roman Masses by the Roman Politicians During 100 Bc to 44 Bc

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
4472 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The Manipulation of the Roman Masses by the Roman Politicians During 100 Bc to 44 Bc
“…Was this ambition? Yet Brutus says he was ambitious; and sure he is an honorable man. But were I Brutus, and Brutus Antony, there were an Antony would ruffle up your spirits, and put a tongue in every wound of Caesar that should move the stones of Rome to rise and mutiny… … Here was a Caesar! When comes such another,” addressed wise Marc Antony to the manipulated Roman citizens. (Foote and Perkins, 678 –683).
During 509 BC to AD 27, Rome was a republic where its citizens elected leaders by voting for senators (people from upper class or patricians). On the other hand an emperor had total power or dictatorship since he controlled the Roman society (different groups of people from the wealthiest to the most poor). As the Roman society was divided into various groups, not all had similar rights, including the right to vote. Thus, even if Rome had elections, was it a democracy? During Caesar’s time of reign (100 BC to 44 BC), this was how the government and the Roman society behaved. In William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, the similar intense affect or the change on the ordinary citizens can be witnessed due to the manipulation of these citizens by the upper class citizens such as Julius Caesar, Marcus Brutus, Cassius, and Marc Antony. The Roman emperors, patricians and the equestrians came from the upper class that had power and various rights such as the right to vote. As a result, they were able to manipulate the uneducated, lower classes of ordinary citizens, slaves and freedmen as politicians by the use of their army, their oratorical skills and by means of bribery, intimidation, and by other acts of abusing their position or power. Due to the unequal levels in society, politicians could easily manipulate the people under them.
Majority of the Romans did not have the right and the power to rise and revolt against the politicians since they came from a low-leveled society. The Roman society was classified into different classes though the majority of the Roman



Bibliography:  Coulson, Ian. The Roman Empire. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.  Corbishley, Mike. Ancient Rome. Oxford: Oxford Ltd., 1989.  Frazee, Charles A. Volume 1: From the Stone Age to 1500 – World History. San Diego, CA: Greenhaver Press Inc., 1999.  Nardo, Don. Daily Life-Ancient Rome. San Diego, CA: Kid Haven Press, 1994.  Nardo, Don. The Roman Empire. San Diego, CA: Kid Haven Press, 1994.  Kleeman, Brian M. “The Roman Constitution.” (1998): 4 pg. 3 May 8, 2004.  Cimon

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    First, there were very practical barriers to fair and equitable voting in the popular assemblies. For instance, “ all voting had to be conduct in Rome.” ( From “How democratic was the Roman Republic?” written by Alan Ward) Once Roman territory has expanded, it was mostly the well-to-do rural voters and their clients who could afford time and expense to come to Rome…

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    As Sallust stated, “Greed destroyed honor, honesty and taught men to be arrogant and cruel. Ambition made men false. Rome changed.” The Roman Republic was critically weakened between 78 and 49 BC. The underlying flaws within the structure of the Senate and the republic itself, political corruption and violence and the formation of the first triumvirate, which should not have been permitted under the democratic state, all contributed to its decline. Manipulating these decaying social and political conditions were significant individuals, who, despite the efforts of the senate, rose to prominence and power, which culminated in Civil war.…

    • 1044 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    CCOT Rome

    • 509 Words
    • 2 Pages

    From its founding in the eighth century BCE to its western collapse in 476 CE, Rome’s governmental structure changed considerably. After a brief period of monarchy, the Roman Republic was established. The republic rules for several centuries, ruling by the voice of the people. Senators represented the interested of Roman citizens. However, with the reign of Caesar, this changed. Rome became an empire ruled by a single emperor. His dictatorial rule was imposed upon the people without their consent, starkly different from the elected representatives of the republican era. Later, Diocletian decided to split the empire, causing two separate political entities to develop; the Western and Eastern Roman Empires. This destroyed Rome’s original unified imperial structure and gave it a more regional character. The strength of the bold empire was lost. Also, Roman political attitudes toward religion changed during its history. Traditionally, Rome was pagan, with most worshipping a polytheistic religion sponsored by the state. Later, Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity, and Rome became a Christian empire. This was much different from the pagan beliefs of long ago. In addition, women gained a few rights during the imperial era, granted by politicians in the government. They had more commercial rights and freedoms than their republican predecessors.…

    • 509 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Julius Caesar Dbq

    • 292 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Seeing as Rome had a new Democratic government, not one individual could rule. However, they still had votes on who to elect for government and for the contestants it was big competition. According to Document A “Life of Caesar” by Plutarch, even the competition for smaller, miserable-looking communities was tough. This is because there is always “jealous…

    • 292 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    How Did Sparta Change

    • 1516 Words
    • 7 Pages

    As the age of the Greeks was coming to an end, a small kingdom in central Italy was gaining power and growing. During this time, Rome was not yet the Rome as we know it today. In 753 BCE the Kingdom of Rome was founded on a hill top right next to the Tiber River. This kingdom lasted for around 200 years until in 509 BCE when the people of Rome overthrew the king and created a republic. Like the Athenians, the Romans also showed pride in their participation in government. However unlike the Athenians the Romans set up a republic in which the people of Rome voted for representatives and those reps then discussed, voted and participated in the government. This in turn meant that political participation in Rome was less direct than it had been in their Greek counterparts but, this in no way stopped the Romans from participation in politics. The Romans believed in one very important virtue. This virtue was called gravitas and it represented the Roman’s seriousness and importance it put toward aspects of life, one of which was politics. The Romans felt that being involved in government was a civil duty that all Romans must know about it. The people of Rome felt this way because they did not want to revert back to the time when they were ruled by kings. Unfortunately the era of the republic began to fall as a cycle of violence ensued. Rome was in constant chaos at this time and as shown throughout…

    • 1516 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The citizens of Rome are also called the plebeians. The plebeians didn’t have many lines as the main characters in the play, but they cause what the outcome of the play will be. Throughout the play, they are manipulated by their leaders, changing their minds quickly, and had an important role in the play. The common people support their leaders throughout the play, and in return the rulers would gain their trust and more power to rule in making decisions for them or against them. In Julius Caesar, the common people are easily manipulated by their leaders, but their rulers need the support of the plebeians, because they could overthrow their leaders.…

    • 474 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Roman Republic was a form of government that included two major players. The Senate and the Assembly made up the backbone this type of rule. The Roman Senate was a group of people, often of noble birth, very similar to our present day Congress. This governing body helped to form many of the Roman laws and elected representatives to preside over different areas or tasks. Under the watchful eye of the emperor, these men essentially controlled everything that went on in Rome and its empire. The second part of the Republic was a pretty much all-inclusive group simply called the people. This group consisted of all free men who were citizens of Rome. The People group was made up of the Assembly, which had a hand in the making of laws and election of magistrates. The Assembly had great judicial power. It was somewhat like our court system today with judges and even a jury. Although there are many similarities between our present day government and the Roman Republic it lacked the efficiency of the Greek Democracy. Rome was still ruled by a monarchy and the nobles, which ultimately makes it the inferior form.…

    • 679 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Roman Republic was rather democratic.The Romans were the start of a democracy, and we include many of their ideas today in the United States. They were democratic because they had a constitution two important elements including legislation, and the right for citizens to vote. The Romans still use the same concept as the government does nowadays, such as the magistrates, senate, and assemblies. The assemblies job was to pass legislation, which is the most important reason that Romans were democratic.…

    • 165 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    To begin with, Ancient Rome had a stable form of government. Their government was a republic. Every citizen had the right to vote whether they were Patricians, the wealthy, or Plebeians, the non-wealthy. The goal was to prevent any individual from gaining too much power over others. There were three branches that balanced the government: the Senate, Consuls, and Dictator. The Senate made the laws, the Consuls dealt with foreign issues, and the dictator only ruled when a task needed to be done.…

    • 334 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Fall of the Roman Empire

    • 772 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Ancient Rome was found aristocratically. The government wanted to be as fair as possible by giving power to the people, and stopping tyranny. While Rome was a republic, the government took a democratic form. Once Rome became and empire, it was no longer democratic. It became and autocratic government, but still had a senate to hear out. Ultimately, the ruler make the decisions. While Rome was a republic, they had a constitution as well, but it was never officially…

    • 772 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The idea of the Electoral College was first introduced at the 1787 constitutional convention. Some delegates argued that the president should be selected by the legislature, however that might create a conflict of interest with the president trying to please the legislature and not actually being independent. Other delegates favored a direct election, where the popular vote would decide the president. The argument was that more populous states would have more control over the less populous states. Another argument is if the people would have enough knowledge about the candidates to make an informed decision. The idea of an indirect election where the president was elected through a College of Electors garnered much support. Each state, have…

    • 888 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Ancient Roman Politics

    • 443 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Ancient Roman politics, religion, and entertainment all played a major role in how the Roman forum was organised and what buildings were built and arranged. This can be seen in many buildings created by the leaders at the time, such as Julius Caesar, as they are based around these three aspects of Roman society, and it shows the significance the forum had in relation to specific buildings.…

    • 443 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Athenian Democracy

    • 396 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Roman Republic was set to be a type of government in which the people would choose the rep. to govern them. It simply relied heavily on the principles of check and balances system to get by. Changes could be made more easily than could the Athenians. The Romans had very little outside enemies so they didn’t have much to worry about. It was considered the “upper class”. Most of the Romans had wealth and had a big basis of land ownership. This internment government showed some form of stability and effectiveness. On the flip side, the Athenian “wealth came mostly from a lot of barters and trades.…

    • 396 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    50 BC contained a strong element of popular participation even if balanced by a still stronger aristocratic tradition. The Roman version of democracy suffered from the same limitations in the eyes of a modern critic as did the earlier Athenian version. The voters were all adult male citizens so that women, slaves and those who did not have the citizenship of Rome were totally excluded from poitical life. At 450 years as a republic, Rome became and empire in the wake of Julius Caesars rise and fall century…

    • 89 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Rome had succeeded in abolishing the tyrannical rule of the kings and became a republic, yet she was more of an aristocratic republic. Her power rested more in a particular class than in the whole people (Morey, 1901).…

    • 830 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays