DBQ Essay
Citizenship in Athens and Rome: Which is the better system?
Citizenship in Athens and Rome
Today, we take for granted our citizenship in the United States. As long as we were born here, we're a citizen. It wasn't always like this in the world. Athens and Rome both had certain systems of citizenship they followed. It wasn't nearly as easy as it is today. A big question, though, is which system was the best. I believe that both Athens and Rome had their strengths and weaknesses in their systems. As to which I think is better, I can't choose. The Roman Republic was more tolerant of whom they allowed to be citizens, but that's not always a good thing. Athens had a better way of election, but was random. Both had good ideas about the judgment of citizens, but in both someone could take advantage of their power. The Roman Republic was more generous in granting citizenship than Athens. They allowed free, native-born adult males, as long as their parents were married in certain areas of the Roman Empire. They allowed free, native-born adult females, but with limited rights. Both female and male children were considered citizens as long as their parents were citizens. Also sons of freed slaves could access citizenship. The only ones that were granted citizenship in Athens were free, native-born adult males. Rome's system was more equal, but in the end could cause problems with conflicts between everyone, trying to get what they want. Apart from who they allowed to be citizens, their ways of election were also different. In Athens, they had election by lottery meaning that every person had an equal chance. This was fairer than Rome's inheritance of their position in the Senate, but it was completely random, and the most ineligible person could be chosen. In order to make important decisions like laws or ostracisms, there needed to be a minimum of six thousand. Rome only needed three hundred to form the senate. Another thing was their judgment of citizens. In Athens, they would perform an ostracism in which the citizens would write the name of the person whom in their opinion had the most power to destroy the government. The person with the most ostraka would be exiled for 10 years. Rome, on the other hand, would rank the citizens into different classes according on their wealth, heritage, marital status, physical and moral fitness, ect. This determined what they got to do, how much they had to pay, and other things like that. If they didn't meet the standards, they weren't given as many privileges. Both could be taken advantage of if someone of higher status was intimated by another or in other similar situations. All they had to do was vote and get a large number of others to try and exile him in Athens or lie about the standards someone has to meet in order for them to be demoted in Rome. As you see, both Athens and Rome had very flawed systems that could cause conflict. That might even be the reason for their fall.
You May Also Find These Documents Helpful
-
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 -
2 Roman Citizenship: Admired what the Persians had done, and the tolerance they had. They let people become Roman citizens.…
- 1379 Words
- 5 Pages
Powerful Essays -
If an Athenian citizens wanted to participate in their government by serving as public officers or as jurors in court cases, they must be selected. Jurors were chosen by lottery and were paid for their service. To serve as public officers, a citizen had to be 30 years old or older and he had to have the level of wealth required to work for the office. To be the top executive posts in the Athenian system, such as the ten annually elected generals, someone must be from the wealthy Athenians or aristocrats. Men of the lower financial classes were allowed to serve as a minor officials, and as many as 900 men were selected on a yearly basis for addition to hundreds of men who served in jury pools.…
- 1661 Words
- 7 Pages
Good Essays -
After 507 BCE Cleisthenes changed the rules of voting in Athens so that every mans’ vote counted and therefore put the decisions affecting the community into the hands of the common man although the majority of the office positions were held by wealthy aristocrats.…
- 522 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
One major strength of the Romans was their policy of assimilation and compromise. This was a stark contrast to the preceding major civilisation, the Greeks. The Greeks followed a policy that is now known as Hellenization. This was effectively forcing Greek cultural, economic, social and political structures on to conquered territories. Alexander the Great even named over seventy cities after himself. They even tried to eradicate native languages and replace them with Greek. The Romans saw how unstable the Greeks became and instead followed a path of assimilation and compromise. Many assimilated cities and cultures were allowed to function fairly independently, needing only to pay taxes and fight in defence of the Romans. In return, they were often given citizenship of Rome, and could hence influence politics, especially at the Assembly of Tribes, where they would have the right to decide issues…
- 633 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
Romans According to the picture in document F, people in the senate usually come from the oldest Roman families and inherited their seats.Having an adverse experience and an omnipotent knowledge, objectives that allows a family to be considered old, and old people will more than likely teach there all knowing knowledge and splendid skill to their children. This stabilizes the senate to only contain smart and wise people. This helps encourage the senate's flow of great thoughts. This helps stabilizes the senate's sense of justice. While the Athenians let the the committee that oversaw the assembly, be decided by a lottery from a general citizenry, according to Document E. In lotteries, power might possibly fall into the hands of people that are careless or contain deep hatred about their state. Power in the hands of a fool could cause the bankruptcy an empire or citizen riots, or even worse. Power in the hands of a fool could cause the rioting of citizens. Power in the hands of a fool could cause the loss of an empire .Whether Athens gave power to the right people is a question for another day, whereas the Romans gave power to the appropriate…
- 710 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
The ancient Romans had a better system in regards to government and citizenship than the Athenians. Unlike the Athenians, the Romans allowed people living in conquered lands to become citizens with limited rights. Native-born Roman women and children were considered citizens while in Athens, only free, native-born adult males are citizens. The Romans also had a better-organized government system.…
- 536 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
This resulted in a hybrid system, where if you consider the livelihood of the state, and the happiness of its citizens to be the benchmark of what is good, than Rome would be the best state. Polybius considered it the best state because “the strength which is developed by the State is so extraordinary, that everything required is unfailingly carried out by the eager rivalry shown by all classes to devote their whole minds to the need of the hour, and to secure that any determination come to should not fail for want of promptitude;” (Polybius, 1889) The qualities that he describes as good, come down to the drive and confidence of the Roman citizens. As a result of drive and confidence you get successful men that achieve happiness through the acquisition of material wealth. To the Roman man, they strive all their life to achieve happiness which commonly comes through material wealth. This is somewhat common to Athens, but nowhere near the same qualities as Sparta. Although there are differences between the Roman idea of success and the Athenians’. The Athenians, although they used money would not judge each other on the basis of monetary wealth. So in the Athenians eye, the Romans were more likely to get corrupted by monetary wealth. On the contrast because of the government infrastructure, in Rome the state was less likely to get corrupted by sophists, whereas…
- 1907 Words
- 8 Pages
Powerful Essays -
n order to to participate in public life and make decisions affecting the community in Sparta it meant that you had to be a warrior. Sparta was a Oligarchy witch means "rule of the few". In Athens in order to participate in public life and make decisions you had to be native born, male and free. In Athens your political standing depended on you wealth. The men with the highest wealth could seek the highest political offices. The next step down the ladder were men with slightly less wealth referred to as the horse men. The horse men could serve in lesser political offices and join the army. The middle class could only be elected to low level political offices. The poor and the landless could vote but not hold office or be in the army however they could row the ships. Sparta had far fewer…
- 418 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
The estimates of the population of ancient Athens does vary. Women, children, slaves and non-citizens of Athens were not allowed to vote. To be granted the right to vote, one must be a male over the age of 18 freeborn Athenian and had completed the years of intense military training. This would limit the possible voters to those who were born into the right families (Chou, 300). Certain situations could exclude a citizen from being able to vote, if their rights were under suspension usually for failing to pay a debt. However, an ineligible individual could earn the rights of a full citizen of Athens by gaining at lease six thousand votes of approval. This may require a heroic act or a special service to the state. In modern Democracy, and U.S. citizen at the age of 18 or older is allowed to vote. You do not have to be of certain gender, or have military training in order vote.…
- 695 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
Like Mesopotamia, Athens might be well known for their system of law and order. Athens saw the beginning of democracy and government like we know it today. In Athens, government now included citizens, not just representatives like in previous systems. For one of the first times in history, regular citizens could play key roles in how their community and government was…
- 797 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
“The franchise is open to all men who are of citizen birth by both parents” (Document B) Basically in order to be a citizen, both your parents have to, and you have to be a male. This is not just. Women should have say in what they believe is right and wrong, so pretty much ancient Athens wasn’t ruled by the people, so therefore isn’t truly democratic. “ On occasion of their enrollment, the current citizens give their votes first on whether the new candidates appear to be the age set by the law” (Document B) Although the people have a say in whether he is of age, only the men have a opinion. In a way Ancient Athens was truly democratic, but at the same time wasn’t.…
- 453 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
In Rome, not all citizens had the same rights. This was an advantage for the Roman Republic because the people that were conquered by Rome were accepted and put into three categories Latini, Foederati, and peregrini. It was an organization that allowed the Roman Empire to be so successful. On Document C, Emperor Claudius states, “What was the ruin of Sparta and Athens, but this, that mighty as they were in war, they spurned from them as aliens those whom they have conquered.” This quote tells us why Athens way of choosing people to become citizens was inferior to the methods of the Roman…
- 507 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
Ancient Athens was not truly democratic. First off, democracy is a system of government in which power is invested in the people who rule either directly or through freely elected represenative. An example of democracy; You have two treats, the dogs can pick only one treat to eat. I will let them both pick, and not only one. Democracy is equal. Ancient Athens wasn’t.…
- 212 Words
- 1 Page
Satisfactory Essays -
Roman citizenship, republican system, and social standings are overall better than the Athens systems because Roman citizenship requirements gave more freedom towards their people. Although a lot of the Roman society is based on social class which can lead to biased towards those of different “rankings”, the Romans conducted census to control the benefits and privileges of citizenship. According to Claudius, in Document C, Athens had conquered aliens (conquered people or foreigners) and made citizenship difficult for aliens to still be in the same society. However, Romans gave those who were conquered more freedom to rejoin the society, treating their people as a republican system. Roman citizenship requirements allowed much of their people to become citizens, providing their citizens with more freedom than the Athenian system.…
- 802 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays