The splendor and decline of ancient Rome

Ancient Rome, like China, was one of the most glorious and vast empires in human history, and its influence and contributions are still widely recognized today. From 27 BC to 476 AD, the Roman Empire ruled Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East, becoming a political, military, cultural, and economic center. However, this great empire has also experienced a process of glory and decline. During its glory days, the ancient Roman Empire was known for its great military power and advanced administration. It has established a large and sophisticated administrative system, bringing various territories under its own rule. This efficient administrative structure leads to a more equitable distribution of resources and promotes economic development and cultural exchanges. It has become an indispensable part of the development of human civilization. After the establishment of the ancient Roman Republic, the state was divided into three powers: the senate, the consuls, and the tribal councils. The Senate held real power in the country, decided major issues, and the consuls handled day-to-day affairs.

I. A Brief History of the Roman Empire

Rome, this is a hurdle that Europeans cannot overcome. Almost all of Europe's feudal era wanted to get a little bit of a touch with Rome. Why? Because Rome was the pride of them.

Sadly, however, none of these countries on the European continent today are the successors of Rome. It can even be said that their ancestors were once Roman subversives.

1) History of the Roman Empire

Ancient Rome is divided into three main phases: the Roman monarchy, the Roman Republic, and the Roman Empire.

From 753 BC to 509 BC, this period was the era of Roman kingship. But because it is too far away, there is a suspicion of fabrication. There's not much to say.

509~27 BC, this was the era of the Roman Republic. The Roman Republic was quite splendid, but their republic was an aristocratic democracy. That is, a small number of people decide the fate of the majority, and it is not a republic in the true sense. Of course, it is rare to be able to establish such a system more than 2,000 years ago.

27 BC - 1453 AD, this is the era of the Roman Empire. With a history of 1480 years, it is a bit of a long history, so it is no wonder that all the countries of Europe have to be involved with such an empire.

However, the Roman Empire was not static, and lasted until 1480. During this period, the Roman Empire was not only divided, but also destroyed several times.

In 44 BC, Caesar, the famous consul of the Roman Republic, was assassinated by the Senate. Octavian, the son of his niece, was the heir in his will.

In 27 BC, Octavian was more fierce, not only defeated Antony and Lepida in the last triumvirate, and obtained the supreme power of the Roman Republic, but also eliminated more than 100 senators in the Senate, as well as thousands of knights, so that the Roman Republic became the Roman Empire.

First, the period of the co-rule of the four emperors.

But any empire that lasts for a long time will eventually produce moths. The territory of the Roman Empire was a bit large, and they didn't know much about management, so the emperor was particularly struggling.

By 286 A.D., a Roman emperor named Diocletian felt that his work was too tiring. So he divided the Roman Empire into two parts, and he served as the emperor of the east of Rome, and the emperor of the west gave his good friend Maximian. This was not enough, and two emperors were also given respectively, and two vice-emperors were matched. This is the famous co-rule of the Four Emperors.

People are rushing to engage in unity, but this buddy is good, rushing to engage in division. Now that everyone has tasted the sweetness of splitting, even eight horses will not pull back.

Second, it was divided into Western Rome and Eastern Rome.

Even in 323 AD, when the Roman Emperor Constantine I forcibly united the eastern and western parts of Rome by force, he could not save everyone from wanting to live separately.

Thus, in 395 AD, the Roman Emperor Theodosius I, on his deathbed, divided the empire into east and west again, giving the east to his eldest son Arcadius and the west to his younger son Honorius.

As a result, the Roman Empire was completely divided into two parts, Western Rome and Eastern Rome. Historians also refer to Eastern Rome as the Byzantine Empire.

Thirdly, they were destroyed one after another.

The fate of Western Rome was not good, and at this time the Germanic people were already strong, and they, as neighbors of Western Rome, came to harass people when they had nothing to do. Only 81 years later, Western Rome was destroyed by the Germanic peoples.

The Germanic peoples were called by the Romans as one of the three great barbarian tribes of Europe, the other two being the Celts and the Slavs.

The Eastern Roman life was better, because it was far from the Germanic territory, so it lasted for 1058 years, and it was not until 1453 that the Eastern Rome was seriously destroyed by the Ottoman Empire.

In 1204 A.D., Eastern Rome also experienced a catastrophe of national destruction. After the Fourth Crusade, the Crusaders sent by the Western European countries actually killed their allies and destroyed their allies, the Eastern Romans, and did not regain their country until 1261. Therefore, this annihilation is also related to the Germanic people.

2) The Germanic East Francia had to call itself the Holy Roman Empire.

In 476 AD, the Western Roman Empire was destroyed by the Germanic peoples. There were also many branches of the Germanic people, among which there was a Frankish kingdom that raised its hands in support of the Pope, so it was approved by the Pope of Rome: it's okay to change the emperor, just don't change your faith, the Germanic people can rule Rome as well!

In this way, the Frankish kingdom was recognized by the majority of Christians, especially in 800 AD, during the reign of Charlemagne, who gradually completed the unification of the Germanic peoples and became the overlord of the Western European continent.

Unfortunately, Louis, the son of Charlemagne, divided his empire into three and gave them to his three sons: Lothair I, Charles the Bald, and Louis the German.

Lothair I, divided into the Middle Frankish kingdom, mainly in Italy.

Louis the Germanic was divided into the kingdom of East Francia, mainly in Germany and Austria.

Charles the Bald, divided into the Kingdom of West Francia, mainly in France.

As a result, the Frankish kingdom collapsed completely, but their faith remained, and they still believed in Catholicism, a branch of Christianity (after the division of the Roman Empire, Christianity was also divided into Catholicism and Orthodoxy).

Since the beliefs are the same, then their nostalgia for the Roman Empire is naturally very close. The Kingdom of East Francia had a very good king named Otto I, who unified the large and small vassal states in East Francia.

In 962 AD, Otto I was in Rome and was crowned by Pope John XII, officially called Emperor and known as Roman Emperor. At this time, the Kingdom of East Francia was also renamed the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation, known as the First German Empire.

In 1157, Frederick I (commonly known as Barbarossa) was crowned Holy Roman Emperor after conquering his neighbors and becoming a famous macho man in German history.

It was not until 1806 that the Holy Roman Empire was overthrown by Napoleon. In fact, did this empire have a half-dime relationship with the Roman Empire? Of course not. These Germanic people in Germany insisted on putting gold on themselves, and there was no way.

3) Tsarist Russia did not have to have anything to do with the Roman Empire.

Tsarist Russia is even more interesting, if the Germanic people destroyed the Roman Empire, continued the Catholic faith, and can still have a little bit to do with the Roman Empire, then Tsarist Russia and the Roman Empire are really not involved at all.

But if you look at the coat of arms of Russia, good guys, the double-headed eagle that symbolizes the Roman Empire, it is the coat of arms of Russia. You can see how much they wanted to get closer to the Roman Empire.

In fact, in the history of Tsarist Russia, there was only one contact with the Roman Empire, and it was only the Eastern Roman Empire.

In the early years of the Eastern Slavs, the Rus' principality was established in the Kiev region. As a result, in 1240, he was destroyed by Genghis Khan's grandson Batu. From then on, the Eastern Slavs mixed with the Golden Horde established by Batu.

Some of them built Muscovy around Moscow, where it was responsible for collecting taxes from the Golden Horde. After a long time, they had the strength to resist, so they went out on their own.

Muscovy was the predecessor of Tsarist Russia. In 1472, during the reign of Ivan III, the Grand Duke of Moscow, he married Sophia, the niece of Constantine XI, the last monarch of the Eastern Roman Empire.

The key is that the Eastern Roman Empire was destroyed by the Ottoman Empire in 1453, so Tsarist Russia just accepted the cultural traditions brought by the princess of the Eastern Roman Empire.

The Eastern Roman Empire believed in Orthodox Christianity, so Tsarist Russia also believed in Orthodox Christianity. It was also after this that Ivan III decided to use the Roman double-headed eagle as the coat of arms of Muscovy.

It is worth mentioning that the original meaning of "Tsar" is the meaning of the title of "Caesar" of the Eastern Roman Emperor, and this cultural worship could not be more obvious. Therefore, Tsarist Russia always regarded itself as the successor of the Roman Empire. In fact, even Eastern Rome was not called the successor of the Roman Empire, let alone Tsarist Russia.

4) The surrounding countries all fantasize about inheriting the mantle of the Roman Empire.

In fact, in addition to the Holy Roman Empire and Tsarist Russia, there were many countries that wanted to get involved with the Roman Empire. For example, the famous French Empire not only perfectly inherited the religious beliefs of the Western Roman Empire, but also regarded itself as the successor of the Roman Empire for a long time.

In 1804, Napoleon called the Pope of Rome to crown himself, claiming to be the emperor of the French. At the same time, Napoleon compared himself to the perfect successor to the Roman Empire, and even canonized his son Napoleon II as King of Rome.

And the Kingdom of Bulgaria, which was called its emperor by the Tsar, like Tsarist Russia, was both Slavs and claimed to be the successor of the Roman Empire.

Even during World War II, Italian Prime Minister Benito Mussolini, after invading Albania, seized the Adriatic Sea. At this time, Mussolini thought of the past glory of the Roman Empire, and actually planned to create a third Roman Empire.

The most is the Ottoman Empire, they destroyed the Eastern Roman Empire and occupied other people's territory. As a result, after coming into contact with Roman culture, I couldn't help but sigh: what a fragrance! Then he began to claim that he was the continuation of the Roman Empire, good fellow, his skin is thicker than the city walls, right?

The rule of the Roman Empire, which lasted 1480 years. It was preceded by the Roman monarchy and the Roman Republic, which together have a history of more than 2,000 years.

The history of Rome, and the influence on the history of Europe, is simply too great. And the Roman Empire practiced Christianity, which was approved by the Pope. In ancient Europe, there was basically a combination of church and state, so whoever was approved by the Pope of Rome was orthodox.

Everything is justified and inherits the mantle of the Roman Empire, which can represent orthodoxy, which is why the major empires are vying to get involved with the Roman Empire.

In China, there is actually a similar phenomenon. For example, the Han Dynasty had a profound impact on Chinese civilization, and after the fall of the Han Dynasty, the Shu Han established by Liu Bei, including the Han regime established by Liu Yuan, a Hun at the end of the Western Jin Dynasty, were all for the sake of competing for orthodox qualifications.

In fact, Rome disappeared as it disappeared, and there was no legitimacy to speak of. The only thing that deserves to be left behind is the culture of Rome. However, these empires seem to pay more attention to the influence of Rome and ignore the inheritance of Roman culture.

Second, the republic is the secret of ancient Rome's failure to fail

It is said that in 390 BC, a group of Celts (known to the Romans as Gauls) defeated the Roman army on the banks of the Alia River outside the city and subsequently occupied Rome, and the Romans inside the city fled with little resistance. The Gauls sacked the city of Rome and demanded a large ransom before leaving Rome in triumph.

Most civilizations in ancient times, if this kind of thing happened, often the dynasty fell and the civilization died, but Rome did not perish, but from this incident, began to expand, and eventually unified the Mediterranean.

In 390 B.C., during the Roman Republic, ancient Rome continued to expand during the Republic, reaching its peak in the early days of the Empire. In the process of expansion, Rome not only lost to the Celts, they suffered many defeats, but in the end Rome survived.

What did Rome rely on for so long? We can think that it was the republican system of Roman characteristics that ensured the survival of Rome.

1) What is the Roman Republic?

Whether it is the Roman Republic or the Roman Empire, it is a title given by historians.

The official name of Rome is "The Senate and the People of Rome", abbreviated as SPQR. The Roman people are Roman citizens, that is, Roman males who have citizenship rights.

Roman citizens held assemblies to elect, vote, make laws, and appoint officials. The number of people with citizenship increased as ancient Rome expanded. However, the number of people attending each rally ranges from hundreds to thousands.

Roman consuls and tribunes were supreme governors, elected by the citizens' assemblies and responsible for leading armies in war, governing cities, etc., although their terms of office were short, usually only one year.

It is the Senate that is specifically responsible for governance, and the Senate is a group with a lot of power. Major matters need to be debated and discussed by the Senate before they can be implemented. The Senate controls law enforcement, state finances, day-to-day management, is responsible for the logistical supply of the army, and much more.

There are strict requirements for the qualifications of the senators, which vary from one historical period to another, and are generally serving or retired finance officials who are at least 30 years old or older.

The Roman republican system combined the advantages of monarchy and parliamentarism, and provided the institutional guarantee for Rome's domination of the Mediterranean.

2) Why did the Roman republic last for a thousand years?

Although the Celts were able to capture Rome, the center of Roman power was not hit, and Rome was able to recover quickly after the Celts retreated.

Many other ancient civilizations of the same period, once the center of power was hit, could never be restored, and this was the advantage of the Roman republic.

In addition, there is a relative openness to this system, and the sense of belonging in Rome is not race or ethnicity, but citizenship, and the core of citizenship is freedom.

Citizenship did not belong only to the Romans, as the conquest expanded, citizenship was granted to those outside the city of Rome, even slaves.

And the senators could also come from outside Rome, even barbarians, although the Romans discriminated against barbarians, but this discrimination was not racial discrimination, but a mockery of barbarism and vulgarity, similar to the city people looking down on the countrymen.

Citizens have rights, and naturally they have obligations. In the course of Roman expansion, new conquests became Roman sources of military and financial resources if they had citizenship. The Senate, on the other hand, does not need to put a lot of effort into governing the local area.

This model ensured that Rome could quickly reassemble a new army even if it suffered a defeat. In the Punic Wars, for example, the Romans were able to reorganize their armies quickly despite repeated defeats at the hands of Hannibal. Carthage, on the other hand, could not, and after a long period of attrition, it finally could no longer support it, but was destroyed by Rome.

3) Why did the Roman republic die?

Rome continued to expand, the battlefield became farther and farther away from the city of Rome, and more and more people had citizenship, and a lot of wealth flowed into Rome.

The social crisis was exacerbated by the gap between the rich and the poor within Rome, the intensification of the power struggle, the slave problem, and the conflicts with the conquered lands.

None of the republicans could solve these problems, not only could they not solve the problems, but after a series of reforms, Rome embarked on the road of dictatorship.

The previous Roman army consisted of citizens, but as the battlefield moved away from Rome and the war continued, the citizens could no longer profit from the war, and the profits of the war were taken away by the plutocrats.

After Marius's reforms, the Roman legions became mercenaries, and the citizens became mercenaries for the generals, instead of fighting for the state, they became the private soldiers of the generals.

After the privatization of the army, the generals began to challenge the authority of the Senate, and dictators began to appear, typified by Sulla's army against Rome.

After that, dictators continued to appear, Caesar, Pompey, Crassus and others, until Augustus, although the senate was still there, but the authority of the emperor was fully established, and Rome entered the imperial period.

In 212 A.D., citizenship was extended to all freedmen in the empire, meaning that the privileges of citizenship were completely lost. Distinctions between citizens depend on wealth, class, and status. At this point, the Senate also completely lost its right to speak.

At this time, the Roman Empire was also in crisis in the third century AD. At this time, the northern barbarians, the Germanic relatives, the relatives of the Celts, once conquered Rome and became the greatest threat to the Roman Empire.

In the eyes of some historians, Rome at this time was actually gone, and all that remained was the Roman Empire, which was still clothed in Roman cloak and that the spirit of freedom had been replaced by autocracy, and the next thousand years were actually a thousand years of autocracy.

At the end of the 6th century BC, Rome established a republic under the dictatorship of the aristocracy. During the Republican era, it went through an aristocratic republic, an "aristocratic-plebeian republic", and an oligarchy republic. Subsequently, it achieved the transformation from a republic to an empire. In the imperial era, it first took the form of a head of state, and eventually an oriental-style monarchy as its home. The Romans can be said to have experienced almost all the political forms of ancient society, and the development of its political system is the full manifestation of the ancient political system of the world. So its legacy is multifaceted.

The most glorious era of the Roman state was the era of the "aristocracy-plebeian" republic, that is, the period when the plebeians broke the monopoly of the nobility on state power and participated extensively in the political affairs of the state. However, the republic did not achieve Athenian-style democracy on this basis. Roman citizens enjoyed political rights worthy of the name. Moreover, in a vast country with hundreds of thousands of citizens, even the Greeks failed to enable citizens to exercise direct rights over legislation, the election and supervision of officials, and some judicial matters.

As far as the consul is concerned, when he is given great authority to lead an army into battle, he enjoys absolute power to accomplish his purposes in all matters necessary. In reality, however, he needed the support of the people and the Senate, without whom he could not realize his plans.

Although the Senate enjoyed enormous powers, it was obliged to listen to the voice of the people in public affairs and to respect their wishes, and its resolutions were subject to the approval of the citizens' assembly, in which the commoners and nobles voted together on major issues. Without the mandate of the people, it cannot investigate the most serious crimes against the State and impose the death penalty. Proposals concerning the interests, honour and power of the senators themselves were to be voted on or rejected by the people. The most important thing is that if any of the tribunes intervenes, the Senate cannot finally decide anything, not even hold a meeting. And the tribune always carries out the will of the people and respects their wishes. For these reasons, the Senate fears the people and must respect the will of the people. As the supreme organ of power, the Senate was largely constrained by the Citizens' Assembly. In the same way, the people must show humility and obedience to the Senate and respect the members of the Senate in public and private matters.

The principle of checks and balances seeped into virtually all parts of the republican institutions. For example, the colllegiality system of officials, that is, any senior official has veto power over his colleagues to prevent the actions of his colleagues. There are 10 tribunes, and each tribune's actions are restricted by the intervention of other tribunes. The two consuls, exercising military, executive and judicial powers, are equal in status and have veto power over each other, and the consuls are elected and have a limited term of office (one year, non-renewable for ten years). Another example is the establishment of tribunes to check the powers of the consuls and the senate, and the powers of the tribunes are regulated and limited accordingly. In addition, the Romans carefully defined the terms of reference of the People's Assembly, the Senate, and various high-ranking officials, as well as the temporal and spatial limits of power. One power that appears excessive is counteracted by measures on the other hand, and another is excessive that limits the time and territory in which it is exercised. Adding one power to remedy or restricting another, dividing some powers to prevent them from being too concentrated, and so on. Its good intentions lie in achieving a perfect mechanism of restraint and balance. For later generations of Westerners, Athens provided a source of democratic principles and passions, while Rome provided an example of a political structure as an effective operating technique and operational procedure for democratic principles. In the constitutions of modern Western countries, the principle of separation of powers and the principle of popular sovereignty have been appropriately reconciled. Without the republican spirit, there would be no Roman political structure of balance and restraint.

It can be seen that the Roman republic already had the bud of constitutionalism in its infancy, which is one of the reasons why many political scientists use the term "republic" and "constitutionalism" as one and the same concept.

After Octavian established his empire in 27 BC, the autocracy of the ancient Roman Empire lasted for 5 centuries. However, this autocracy did not form a continuous and far-reaching root like the Chinese imperial power, so that it has a natural legitimacy because of its long tradition, and people do not think about its basis and origin. The absolutism of the Roman Empire was only a necessity, and hundreds of years of despotism did not cultivate the loyalty of the subjects, nor did it form a complete and universally accepted theory of absolutism. The typical absolutist theories and concepts of the imperial era can be summarized as follows: the emperor's position is based on divine will, and his actions should be in harmony with the heart of heaven; He was not a god in his own right; He was the supreme governor of the Roman Empire, not an Oriental monarch; He should not regard his power as a personal privilege, but as a duty; Although the throne is not determined by election, it is not passed on from father to son, and the emperor chooses the wisest of the wise to be his heir; He should live in frugality, not in pleasure; He should be the father and benefactor of his subjects, not their master; He was the first servant of the state, not the master of the state; His subjects were freemen, not slaves; His subjects need to love him, and he needs to love them; Wait a minute. The Roman Empire, which lasted for hundreds of years, did not completely cut off the republican spirit, nor did it dry up completely, but allowed it to dive underground, accumulate, merge, and transport. It proves that in the Western political tradition, authoritarian politics has shallow roots and fragile vitality.

Politically, the Romans were the conquerors and masters of the Greeks, but culturally they were ashamed of themselves and felt that they were nothing more than uncivilized "barbarians" (Plautusian) to the Greeks. So they greedily absorbed Greek culture, extracted the ripe fruits of the Greeks' ideas, and made themselves rich and elegant. As a result of the Roman conquest of Greece, Greek culture underwent a process of transformation or grafting, in which it became attached to another shell from the social medium that gave birth to it. The creativity and vitality of the Greek nation had been exhausted, and at this time, the Romans took over the baton in their hands and transplanted the seeds of mature Greek culture to the land that was still full of life. Thanks to the role of the Romans, the Greek culture, which had already tilted towards the East during the Hellenistic era, turned to the West. The Romans acted as a bridge to transmit Greek culture to medieval Western Europe.

In hundreds of years of glorious political practice, the Romans cultivated a republican spirit with the equality and freedom of citizens as the core, and created a complex and exquisite republican system with the republican spirit as the driving force. In terms of the breadth and depth of its civic participation and the extent to which the spirit of civil liberties was guaranteed and fully developed, it was not comparable to the heyday of Athens. Unlike the Athenians, who derived a kind of spiritual satisfaction from their participation in political affairs, the political sphere was also regarded as an area in which they enjoyed life and realized the value of their own lives. However, the sophistication of the Roman conception of the political system, the skillful combination of the republican spirit – the affirmation and guarantee of equal liberty of citizens – with the principles of stability and efficiency had never been practiced by the Athenians.

The republic has its roots in the Latin res publica, which means "public affairs of the people", and refers to the public affairs of citizens outside of the private sphere, such as family affairs.

The republican form of government was created as the antithesis of the monarchy, although the monarchy is also a kind of autocracy, but the imperial system only refers to the hereditary system of the head of state and its supremacy in the entire state power structure, while the autocracy covers the all-round system of selection of administrative officials from the central to the local.

Whether it is an ancient city-state republic or a modern constitutional republic, the head of government is elected, which is a common feature of all republics. The main characteristics of the modern republic are the separation of powers and mutual checks and balances among the legislative, executive, and judicial powers, and it is a combination of the republican democratic system and the constitutional system. From this point of view, the republic is indeed a democracy, and the republic is constitutionalism, so many political scientists also regard the republic as a synonym for constitutionalism.

Although the two concepts of republic and democracy overlap or overlap considerably, they are different in connotation and extension. Although both republicans and democracies imply that government officials are elected by the people, democracy means the election of government officials at all levels, from the central to the local level; In ancient and modern times, a republic refers only to the election of a head of state. At the Philadelphia Constitutional Convention of 1787, the Founding Fathers of the United States liked to refer to American democracy as "republican" to distinguish it from the direct democracy of ancient Greece, which they saw as a tendency to mob rule. From an empirical point of view, a large part of the connotation of republican systems in history and reality overlaps with democracy, which is why people often equate republics with democracies.

The fundamental principle of the republic is that the world is for the public, state power is a public property, and the governance of the country is the common cause of all citizens. It emphasizes the public, fair and neutral nature of the government, that is, the government must serve the interests of all, not only the interests of a few people in power.