Victoria, Jeju
The Roman Republic was established upon the basis of violence and bloodshed, and it is no surprise that this violence continued for the rest of its history. Spectacles of death and bloodshed were almost normal, quotidian matters in Rome. Even now, one of the things ancient Romans are most famous and commonly known for are their violent pastimes and enjoyments – and it was perhaps this normalisation of violence that led to the eventual ruin of Rome’s own Republic.
Political violence in this case seems to stem from the division of classes within the Roman
Republic. There was a gradual build-up of tension between the upper-class Patricians and the working-class Plebeians; in the early beginnings of the Roman Republic, the conflicts between these two classes were resolved peacefully through compromises. However, as the Republic began to grow, so did the tension and animosity between the two groups. The Plebeians soon became tired of the Patricians’ ruling. In 495 B.C.E., according to Livy, the Plebeians started a riot for the first time. In the end, the Senate negotiated with them, making compromises once more. As Rome at the time was small, her armies mostly consisted of willing Plebeians and farmers. The commoners were necessary for the authorities, and so the Plebeians and the Patricians formed a symbiotic relationship.
This symbiotic relationship was the key reason as to why Rome was able to avoid any
political violence in its early stages. But as the Roman Republic expanded and grew, slaves replaced the Plebeians in both military and agricultural matters. Hence, the Patricians no longer saw the necessity of sustaining the symbiotic relationship, even for the sake of peace and political stability. No longer was Rome the politically and domestically stable land of peace, as it was now divided into two groups with two different, opposing interests.
What succeeded this broken political balance were riots, wars, and assassinations. In 133
B.C.E., the Roman Republic experienced its first political assassination in their history. When
Tiberius Gracchus wished for a second term as a representative of the Plebeians, senators of the time frowned upon him. Eventually, a dispute between the followers of Gracchus and their enemies broke into a war, where the senators repeatedly struck Gracchus’s supporters. From this event onwards, Roman society began to slowly unravel, as political violence became more and more common in the history of Rome. Around 80 B.C.E., these outbursts of violence began to grow in both magnitude and frequency.
Sulla – formally known as the Roman dictator Lucius Cornelius Sulla (82 ~ 80 B.C.E.) –
reformed the Constitution of the Roman Republic in a revolutionary way. In the years before Sulla’s dictatorship, Rome had become exponentially more politically violent. During Sulla’s short but memorable period of ruling, Roman politics once more found its original stability and balance. It was only after Sulla’s death that the problem of political violence in Rome once again emerged. From then on politics was marked by violence in the city and fighting between gangs supporting rival politicians and political programmes.
After another period of political violence, it was only once Julius Caesar was named dictator
that change began to happen. Whilst he had the power, Caesar tried to reform the Roman society of the time, preserving the political balance of different parties by allowing citizenship to military contributors and bringing back banished nobles. Trust which later proved to be useful in eliminating much opposition when he later imposed laws and discouraged violence, even as a warlord himself. However, such change could not last, and, as is commonly known, Caesar was soon assassinated by the Senate. This was the final, closing chapter of the Roman Republic.
As previously recounted, once the effectiveness of violence had been tasted by the Roman
politicians of the time, they became addicted to that delectable taste. Political violence – even murder, and assassination – had the Roman senators and politicans hooked. And such rapid growth in cases of political violence brought civil wars, conflict between two opposing political sides. The Romans’ delusional and chimeric belief in the indestructibility of the Republic fuelled these cases of civil wars, internal divisions, and political instability. Caesar’s assassination was the final breaking-point of Roman society, pushing it finally into the eventual fate of destruction. In the end, the Roman Republic committed history’s most painful suicide ever.
History is always a source of knowledge for us, and in the case of the Roman Republic, it is
perhaps the most applicable of the many events which we learn in history. As many countries develop, the gap between the classes widens, and if this should not be properly handled, politicians may inevitably face the same situations and consequences as the Romans did. Even recently, cases of political violence – the United States Capitol Attack being one example – have begun to reveal themselves. If such issues are not taken seriously, nor handled with the required thought and reflection needed, the world may end up seeing more republics crumble into history.
Bibliography
[1] Beard, M. (2011). BBC - History - The Fall of the Roman Republic. [online] Bbc.co.uk. Available at:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/romans/fallofromanrepublic_article_01.shtml.
[2] Daley, J. (2018). Lessons in the Decline of Democracy From the Ruined Roman Republic. [online]
Smithsonian Magazine. Available at:
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/lessons-decline-democracy-from-ruined-roman-republic-180970711/.
[3] Little, B. (2019). How Rome Destroyed Its Own Republic. [online] History. Available at:
https://www.history.com/news/rome-republic-augustus-dictator.
[4] Sun, Z. (n.d.). The Causes and Development of Political Violence in the Late Roman Republic.
[5] Watts, E.J. (2018). The Fall of Rome and the Lessons for America. [online] Time. Available at:
https://time.com/5478197/the-fall-of-rome-and-the-lessons-for-america/
Comments