Republican Reform

[DominusNovus]

Hello everyone. I'm a big Roman History buff, as well as an alternate history buff, and I use this site often for research. At the moment, I'm pondering on how to go about improving the Republic, to make it more stable, equitable, etc. and I was curious as to what you guys thought.

 

Just some ideas I've been brainstorming:

 

1) Give the various assemblies the power to propose and deliberate legislation.

2) Seperate the civil and military governments more. Don't give the command of legions to governors.

3) Maybe make the checks and balances of the republic more clear cut and simple. I think that maybe one of the reason they were so often ignored has to do with their intricacies.

4) This is the big stretch. Creation of a new assembly, the Colonial Assembly, which represents the various Roman colonies.

5) Tied into #4, gradually give provinces more rights. For now, lets call them Agri Coloniae, or Colonial Territories, awarding them the rights of Roman colonies, but on a regional basis, rather than a city basis.

6) Not really to help the republic, but the state in general, if the garrisoned defence forces are allowed to settle down and marry. I'd suggest seperating them from true legions, so as to keep the legions mobile and untied to the locals.

 

Alright, thats all I've got for the moment. Thoughts?

[Germanicus]

Hi DominusNovus, welcome.

 

All our thoughts on the subject to date are pretty much contained Here

 

Regards

 

Germanicus

[DominusNovus]

Hi DominusNovus, welcome.

 

All our thoughts on the subject to date are pretty much contained Here

 

Regards

 

Germanicus

Ah.

[caldrail]

Hello everyone. I'm a big Roman History buff, as well as an alternate history buff, and I use this site often for research. At the moment, I'm pondering on how to go about improving the Republic, to make it more stable, equitable, etc. and I was curious as to what you guys thought.

 

Just some ideas I've been brainstorming:

 

1) Give the various assemblies the power to propose and deliberate legislation.

2) Seperate the civil and military governments more. Don't give the command of legions to governors.

3) Maybe make the checks and balances of the republic more clear cut and simple. I think that maybe one of the reason they were so often ignored has to do with their intricacies.

4) This is the big stretch. Creation of a new assembly, the Colonial Assembly, which represents the various Roman colonies.

5) Tied into #4, gradually give provinces more rights. For now, lets call them Agri Coloniae, or Colonial Territories, awarding them the rights of Roman colonies, but on a regional basis, rather than a city basis.

6) Not really to help the republic, but the state in general, if the garrisoned defence forces are allowed to settle down and marry. I'd suggest seperating them from true legions, so as to keep the legions mobile and untied to the locals.

 

Alright, thats all I've got for the moment. Thoughts?

 

You're going to fail. Republican Rome is full of ambitious determined young men eager to rise to the top. No matter what system you install, you'll run up against the roman character. When power is on offer, people will go to great lengths to grab it. Good luck with your alternative Rome, but my estimation is it will end in a bloody civil war between the leading contenders.

Edited March 1, 2006 by caldrail

[M. Porcius Cato]

1) Give the various assemblies the power to propose and deliberate legislation.

What check would there be on their power? What cost would they incur for bad legislation? It's easy to be reckless and stupid when you've got nothing to lose--and most of the Roman head count had little to lose and much to gain by voting to send Italian farmers out to get booty for the Roman mob. Seems to me that keeping the proposal of legislation in the hands of the senate was critical. What the Gracchi did was open up a Pandora's Box of reckless, short-sighted legislation.

 

2) Seperate the civil and military governments more. Don't give the command of legions to governors.

Sounds like an OK plan, but who would have command of the legions? Would they be obligated to at least protect the province?? And if so, who would decide what constituted a threat?

 

3) Maybe make the checks and balances of the republic more clear cut and simple. I think that maybe one of the reason they were so often ignored has to do with their intricacies.

Nahh, that's just a problem for us. The organization of the Roman republic was sort of like a tinkerer's garage--the tinkerer knows EXACTLY where everything is, just no one else does!

 

4) This is the big stretch. Creation of a new assembly, the Colonial Assembly, which represents the various Roman colonies.

5) Tied into #4, gradually give provinces more rights. For now, lets call them Agri Coloniae, or Colonial Territories, awarding them the rights of Roman colonies, but on a regional basis, rather than a city basis.

This seems like a solid reform--but what would be the domain of the Colonial Assembly?

 

BTW, while we did have a thread on this before, it's valuable to return to these issues from time to time. Presumably, people have learned something new since last they thought about these issues!

[P.Clodius]

Create a colonial essembly? What for? Lets just take a little look at the Roman system of colonialization.

 

Colony 1) Colony of latins with Jus Latii (latin rights). This meant you had the right to intermarry with a Roman citizen, all offspring would be considered Roman. You enjoyed the benefits of being a Roman just not the rights, Civitas Sinesuffagio, (citizenship without the right to vote).

 

Colony 2) Colony of pure Romans. Right to vote.

 

Colony 3) Double Colony. Colony of Romans living in an exsisting town/city. The none Romans could be granted Jus Latii.

 

Colony 4) Municipium. A self-governing exsisting town/city. It would be self-sustaining, independant, and the ruling class would be granted full Roman citizenship.

 

So what would your colonial assembly do? Going off the above it seems that a colony would be well represented anyway as many of those who lived there would have had a say in theory.

Edited March 1, 2006 by P.Clodius

[Germanicus]

BTW, while we did have a thread on this before, it's valuable to return to these issues from time to time. Presumably, people have learned something new since last they thought about these issues!

 

I agree, but will continue to point people in the direction of similar threads they may not have seen, and are obviously of interest to them.

[DominusNovus]

Create a colonial essembly? What for? Lets just take a little look at the Roman system of colonialization.

 

Colony 1) Colony of latins with Jus Latii (latin rights). This meant you had the right to intermarry with a Roman citizen, all offspring would be considered Roman. You enjoyed the benefits of being a Roman just not the rights, Civitas Sinesuffagio, (citizenship without the right to vote).

 

Colony 2) Colony of pure Romans. Right to vote.

 

Colony 3) Double Colony. Colony of Romans living in an exsisting town/city. The none Romans could be granted Jus Latii.

 

Colony 4) Municipium. A self-governing exsisting town/city. It would be self-sustaining, independant, and the ruling class would be granted full Roman citizenship.

 

So what would your colonial assembly do? Going off the above it seems that a colony would be well represented anyway as many of those who lived there would have had a say in theory.

Well, someone living in a colony can't always go back to rome to vote.

[M. Porcius Cato]

Well, someone living in a colony can't always go back to rome to vote.

 

Very true. The suggestion has been made that the roll of non-resident Romans may have been allowed to vote via proxy. I'm not sure that this is right, but if it were, it would have been another cool feature of the republican constitution.