Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 105 views

    Polybius Assignment

    Uploaded by

    miketol
    The document discusses Polybius' analysis of the Roman and U.S. systems of government. It notes that the Roman system had an executive branch similar to the U.S. President and a legislative branch like the U.S. Congress. However, the Roman system lacked an independent judicial branch for checks and balances. The document also argues that while the U.S. system is more democratic, money in politics has allowed an aristocracy to emerge where only the wealthy can effectively run for office.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as ODT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Polybius Assignment

    Uploaded by

    miketol
    105 views3 pages
    The document discusses Polybius' analysis of the Roman and U.S. systems of government. It notes that the Roman system had an executive branch similar to the U.S. President and a legislative branch like the U.S. Congress. However, the Roman system lacked an independent judicial branch for checks and balances. The document also argues that while the U.S. system is more democratic, money in politics has allowed an aristocracy to emerge where only the wealthy can effectively run for office.

    Original Description:

    polybus

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    ODT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document discusses Polybius' analysis of the Roman and U.S. systems of government. It notes that the Roman system had an executive branch similar to the U.S. President and a legislative branch like the U.S. Congress. However, the Roman system lacked an independent judicial branch for checks and balances. The document also argues that while the U.S. system is more democratic, money in politics has allowed an aristocracy to emerge where only the wealthy can effectively run for office.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as ODT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as odt, pdf, or txt
    105 views3 pages

    Polybius Assignment

    Uploaded by

    miketol
    The document discusses Polybius' analysis of the Roman and U.S. systems of government. It notes that the Roman system had an executive branch similar to the U.S. President and a legislative branch like the U.S. Congress. However, the Roman system lacked an independent judicial branch for checks and balances. The document also argues that while the U.S. system is more democratic, money in politics has allowed an aristocracy to emerge where only the wealthy can effectively run for office.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as ODT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as odt, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    Polybius: Why Romans and Not Greeks Govern the World

    1. Polybius divided the Roman government into kingship, aristocracy, and democracy. He

    describes kingship as one that is acknowledged and approved by its subjects; aristocracy as an

    oligarchy that is capable to govern with wisdom and appropriately apply justice; and a

    democracy where the people abides to the established laws and follows principles such as

    respecting and honoring elders and parents. The Roman government is similar to the U.S.

    government in that had an executive branch--consuls who had 1 year kingships and controlled

    the military; these Consuls would be consider as a the U.S. President who controls the military.

    Romans had also a legislative branch composed by the senate which passed laws, distributed

    resources, and appointed and confirmed judges; the U.S. is similar in that it has a legislative

    branch that creates laws, distributes resources, and confirms judges that have been appointed by

    the executive branch. The differences between the Roman and U.S. government is that the

    Roman had no a judicial branch that checked and balanced the other branches but was the people

    who had that power. In the case of United States, we have a judicial branch that balances the

    other two branches. Although U.S. government is democratic in essence, it is more representative

    than the Roman one. Also, the U.S. legislative branch has an extra check-balance feature that the

    Romans did not have, being this the power of the House of Representatives.

    2. I think that the Roman political system had somewhat stability because no branch

    could exceed its power beyond of what was necessary due to a “fear” of being interfered in their

    duties or business. The check and balance in the Roman Republic worked in the following form:

    the Consuls were checked by the Senate with the power of the purse. The people ratified the
    treaties that the Consuls wanted to establish with other foreign powers. The Senate was checked

    by the people by confirming their proposals and laws and had the power to restrict the Senate

    possibly by mob-rule. Lastly, the people was checked by the Senate in terms of business'

    contracts and controlling finances among the people. Also, it checked the people by appointing

    the judges that would hear civil trials.

    3. The Senate was the real center of power in Rome because it controlled the Consuls and

    the people by managing the resources they needed to operate. The Senate could deny to the

    Consuls to supply resources such as food and clothing for their army. It also could deny to the

    people contracts for constructing and restrict the use of transportation-ways and the land despite

    that were public domain.

    4. The aristocracy emerged from monarchies becoming tyrannies. However, aristocracy

    tended to deviate into oligarchy and thus democracy came into play making a stop to the

    oligarchy.

    5. It does not play any part in the U.S. Constitution. One evidence of that is the

    Emoluments Clause that impedes the federal government in granting nobility and impedes

    officials in receiving gifts from foreign powers without approval from Congress. The

    Constitution also allows any citizen to run for office regardless of economical status.

    Notwithstanding, the politics we see today are plagued by high amounts of money which makes

    running for office to some people almost impossible; it is a matter of who has more money to run

    the best ads in TV and making rallies to win over the people. Thus, I think that we are seeing

    some sort of aristocracy in U.S. politics and government where those who have the means are the

    ones filling the governmental positions.


    Works Cited

    Polybius. Myers, Henry A. Historiarum reliquiae (Paris: Didot, 1839), VI, iii-xvii, 338-48,

    passim.

    You might also like