What was the best form of government Rome had?

and even before Caesar there was Marius and Sulla which were just barely republics by that point and definitely not periods that people remembered fondly

How would You change the Republic so it survives and manages all the empire efficiently?

The Kingdom obviously

t. Superbus

Probably make a serious attempt to implement the Gracci Reforms, or at the very least bring their senatorial killers to Justice + try to root out Corruption. The key is to make the Senate accountable to the people and keeping the army in line.

Not any of the people you replied to be

>create law that under a time of emergency, legions can be called up out of subjects in addition to citizens
>at any time that a non-citizen legion is in operation, all of the citizens capable of serving in a legion will be mobilized
>no non-citizen legionary will be allowed to enter Italy under any pretext
>property tax will be imposed based on valuation, and will be progressive (the more shit you have, the higher you pay)
>provincial senates will be created to decentralize power from Rome
>civil service will be composed of paid employees, who will be selected from an open, competitive examination

The Isaurians.

problem is that most of the things that could've saved the republic (military reforms, economic reforms, social reforms, etc) where already done by the likes of the Gracci, Marius, Sulla, and Caesar. The problem is that they were the ones who did it instead of the Senate or people and they managed to do it by bypassing both.

one thing for certain I would have Caesar pardoned after the Gallic campaign and brought home a hero so he becomes another Pompey instead of the guy who destroys the republic. Then I would try to rapidly assimilate the Romans into a greater Mediterranean republic instead of their small little city to delude the influence of their patricians and give the other regions a stake in the republic. Then I would just push all the needed reforms of Octavian, Diocletian, and the good emperors through the democratic avenues (if they stay stuck up, start bribing so long as you just don't force the laws into play) including paying the armies fucking salary through the treasury and and build a patorean guard-like entity that is only loyal to the senate and no one else, I would emphasize libertarian and merchant values so they can put that ancient steam engine into practice and not be all "muh land" bullshit. every few generations I would grant roman citizenship to greater and greater regions and once area of citizenship reaches the border we conquer like hell first the genrmanics and then start smashing our way through Persia I want all the generals to think their fucking Alexander spend every waking moment thinking that it's pitiful that they haven't conquered all that Alex hadn't conquered it's border China or bust.

other than pardoning Caesar most of it is probably impossible though

>I want all the generals to think their fucking Alexander spend every waking moment thinking that it's pitiful that they haven't conquered all that Alex hadn't conquered it's border China or bust.
lol

This ----> mostly.

The Roman senate can be divided up into two factions: the optimates and the populares.

Optimates
>The conservative faction (you can't call them parties) that believed that what was best for the patrician, noble "best-men" was best for everyone else.
>They disagreed fundamentally with the idea of a redistribution of land and wealth; they were economically and socially conservative.
>This was the faction of Cicero, Bibulus, both Catos, etc

Populares
>They believed that the republic needed a re-distribution of land to the urban masses if the nation was to prosper.
>A redistribution of power to the populares from the patrician optimates was probably higher up their list though.
>The party of Pompey, Caesar and Crassus.

I've been talking a lot about a redistribution of land, and here's what I mean:
The Roman army had previously been filled up by smallholding farmers, because you had to own land to serve; the punic wars meant that a shitload of young fighting age farmers lost their lives, or had to neglect their homesteads while fighting.

The punic wars made the nobility of Rome society incredibly rich for various reasons, which allowed them to buy out the remaining small holdings, and farming them with newly acquired slaves. This made them even richer, creating a gigantic wealth gap.

Now that the farmers no longer had any land to farm, they drifted to the cities and became urban plebs who literally lived of dole provided by the senate.

This was incredibly inefficient and destructive, but the Optimates wouldn't budge whenever populares such as the brothers Gracchi proposed legislation to redistribute land.

This continued unwillingness to compromise when it is actually logical to do so, lead to the destruction of the republic because the populares politicians such as Caesar or Pompey could see no other way to achieve progress other than to break the law.

TL;DR: Optimates are too economically conservative

Interesting, thanks for the read

Thanks Mike Duncan

Republic.

The empire is shit and overrated. Republic was when they made most of their glorious conquests. Everything that followed was arguably not as impressive and very unstable because of emperors getting assassinated every minute and trying to usurp power.

This.

The Empire was a mistake. Didn't expand shit and it's government was terrible. Fuck Caesar and his megalomania.

Numa, priestly king.

Kill Marius long before he had a chance to institute his reforms. Let the elites sell or give away land to the poor so that they can then qualify for the legions.

Offering military service to an impoverished underclass is how you create disloyal mercenaries that will support a insurrection based on the promises of an ambitious oligarchic officer corps.

Early-mid republic

Empire was a shitshow.

>Fuck Caesar and his megalomania.
Are you referring to Augustus?

>the Kingdom
Okay
>the Republic
Great at first, okay later, bad at the end
>Empire
Amazing at first, quickly turned into okay-tier, then bad with only some prosperity on the side line, then it turned even worse. All Empires fall after all.

Did the kingdom actually exist or was it a myth though? Also, what form of government did the Etruscans have?

>Caesar
Referring to those with the title or Gaius Julius Caesar, who was great?

>Did the kingdom actually exist or was it a myth though?
It did, we just know very little about the kingdom/monarchy.

Republic.
I believe it was senate`s fault more than ceaser`s. For instance pompey gained lots of land in east but senate didnt acknowledged it. Ceaser had gained lots of land in gaul but senate tried to imprison him. I think if senate put good of people infront of their own political gains roman republic would might work.
I thought there was provincial senate`s. Maybe i am worng.

But the 753 BC date for it doesn't make sense. That puts it too close to time of the Etruscans who civilized the tribal shit eating Latins.

It did but records of it was burned (probably) by gauls when they sacked rome in 387bc or something.

That is, unless the Etruscans founded the Roman Kingdom, but I don't think they were ever recorded to have a monarchy early on.

Rome was probably founded BY the Etruscans, certainly it's last king was an Etruscan, good chance all the others were, too.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etruscan_civilization

>Those who subscribe to an Italian foundation of Rome followed by an Etruscan invasion, typically speak of an Etruscan "influence" on Roman culture – that is, cultural objects which were adopted by Rome from neighbouring Etruria. The prevailing view is that Rome was founded by Italians who later merged with Etruscans. In this interpretation, Etruscan cultural objects are considered influences rather than part of a heritage.[28] Rome was probably a small settlement until the arrival of the Etruscans, who constructed the first elements of its urban infrastructure such as the drainage system.

>Under Romulus and Numa Pompilius, the people were said to have been divided into thirty curiae and three tribes. Few Etruscan words entered Latin, but the names of at least two of the tribes – Ramnes and Luceres – seem to be Etruscan. The last kings may have borne the Etruscan title lucumo, while the regalia were traditionally considered of Etruscan origin: the golden crown, the sceptre, the toga palmata (a special robe), the sella curulis (curule chair)

>Rome was in a sense the first Italic state, but it began as an Etruscan one. It is believed that the Etruscan government style changed from total monarchy to oligarchic republic (as the Roman Republic) in the 6th century BC, although it is important to note this did not happen to all the city-states.

Don't fuck with the Gracci Brothers. Literally one chance to save the Republic and everybody fucked it up

Rome the city? The republic.
Rome the empire? The principate.

>There are people in this thread so bluepilled that they don't realize Rome's true glory came in the days of the empire.

Fuck republics.

They were basically a hyper power in Caesar's time, Rome's true glory basically started in the late republic.

assassinate Marius when he retires

What could compare with The Roman Republic defeating Carthage?

even when the emperors were good the whole government was a chapshot

little bitches like Commodius and Nero would've never made it anywhere in the Republic

>The Empire was a mistake. Didn't expand shit
eh, I have to go with Augustus on this one. He was right when he said that the empire shouldn't expand beyond the natural defensible borders of the rhine, danube, and euphrates rivers.

Dacia turned out to be an indefensible drain on Rome's resources.

the Sultanate

This. The very competitive nature of the Republic made sure only the best and most capable rose to the top.

And then assassinated

Seems like this thread is 90% pro-Republic, didn't expect that. What happened to all the I M P E R I V M shitters from every other Rome thread?

I have a pretty shameless soft spot for the military fashion of the dominate tbqh

Top fucking kek, more like the opposite. The average magistrate was a worthless chucklefuck that just acted as little better than a constitutional figurehead for the real powerbrokers behind the scenes. Unless you actually think that the likes of Antonius Hybrida were the real leaders of the senate while Pompey was inelegible for any public role by law.
The real strength of the roman government was the system of checks and balances between assemblies and the client system allowing for strong and stable factions to be built.

>trousers
*VOMITUS*

>What was the best form of government Rome had?
They were all transitional states, the natural ebb and flow of human society as Apollonian/Classical Western culture matured, plateaued, and then crumbled as small hypocrisies were left unaddressed and grew into cascading system failures.

And they all had small hypocrisies.

For example, so much of the growth in the late Republic was fueled by outright extortion, of unscrupulous rich guys using the shadiest tactics imaginable to bleed the population dry in order to fund extravagant military expeditions in order to acquire even more land, wealth, and free labor. Their previous system of citizen-militia broke down because there were simply not enough land owners left to fuel massive armies because they had all been driven off their farms when it fell into debt (usually by the same guy who marched them to war) and were driven into the ranks of urban and suburban poor.

This system was unsustainable and eventually led to one man and one family directly owning the largest chunk of his country's wealth and becoming more important than the government itself. By then the democratic government had been dominated by conservative stooges, paid handsomely to look the other way while their aristocratic masters bled the provinces and rigged the system in their favor. Ironically, this one man dominating the economy made a good faith effort to reform the system from within and make it functional again, but when the conservatives killed him for it they shattered the public trust, and the person who replaced Caesar was far more ruthless, unscrupulous, and only cared about Republican values in as much as they were useful to him, and ruled with the people's faith.

But at last unshackled from tired old political dogma of the do-nothings in the senate, he proved to be the most capable and effective ruler that Rome ever had.

>Ironically, this one man dominating the economy
Actually afaik Caesar's wealth came almost exclusively from his military career. Before Gaul, he was backed by Crassus, who dealt mainly in trade and if anything was one of the worst speculators and provincial blood suckers. After Crassus he was backed mostly by bankers and all around businessmen like Oppius and occasionally Atticus.
The greatest landowner was actually Pompey, who basically owned half of Italy's farmland between his holdings in Campania and the Ager Gallicus.

Romans wore trousers for a longer period than they didn't

The Julii were an ancient family but on the verge of financial ruin by the time Gaius came along, and he turned himself into one of the single richest men in Rome through one of history's most notoriously effective conquests, draining the entire nation of Gaul of its wealth and slaughtered virtually its entire male population of fighting age, fitting modern definition of a genocide. He was a rare genius who bucked the trend consistently outpreformed his foes even when he was outnumbered and outmaneuvered.

And yes, Crassus fits every definition of a robber baron and was one of the single wealthiest men to ever live, as measured by total amount of the money supply owned. His horrible end at the hands of the Parthians was a fitting death for an individual of such breathless avarice.

Throw in Pompey, the conservative stalwart and powerful land owner, and you've got the first triumvirate: the three wealthiest individuals jockeying for power over one another locked in an informal alliance against the rest of the country. A military general, robber baron, and land owner: The military won in the end, as it was the cause which had the backings of the people.

Incorrect.

Pompey was so much more than just a land owner.

Yeah well, his power base tied directly into his landowner status. His early political career was centered around his ability to raise and pay whole legions out of his late parents' "serfs" and income. The fact that his idle men mostly resided in Campania and Picenum and were ready to march on Rome at his becon was basically how he managed to get one illegal military commission after the other from the death of Sulla to the end of the first triumvirate.

you know Crassus didn't actually have gold poured into his throat right?

It's not like Plutarch's version is any less horrible than the molten gold tbf.

>no trousers
>8th century BC to 1st century AD
>trousers
>2nd century AD to 15th century AD
How good are you at mathematics user

really the problem wasn't that it stopped being the republic but the fact they didn't own up to it and still called it one

just declare it a kingdom make the "princeps" their kings and make a proper rules of successions to save the empire from the assloads of civil wars they gotten. It would've also made sure the king would be accountable to Rome and not use the military and Praetorian guards to keep their power and be accountable to them.

my recommendations was to revive the old king system, even if it ended up like Tarquin where he just controls the electors to build a dynasty once the dynasty dies power to choose will go back solely into the government so the next ambitious person will use legal means instead of costly and destructive civil wars and purges (that and they won't leave Rome making the entire city completely irrelevant).

The Republic died in 133 BC when Tiberius had Octavius physically removed from the Assembly, bypassed the Senta completely, surrounded himself with armed thugs and stood for re-election in defiance of tradition. Caesar and then Octavian only laid bare that which had been true for a century.

The problem with the Principate was that Tiberius sucked and decided to just turn into a hikki which allowed Sejanus to essentially act as the real ruler of Rome and allowed future generations of the Praetorian Guard to get big heads.

Aurelian, Pertinax, likely Gordian III, Numerian and Probus... all good or potentially good emperors taken out because of Praetorian treachery.

By not being stupidly expansionist, which kills the need for military reform due to economic strain which kills the eventual political collapse/reformation.

Interestingly enough from Theodosius I onwards all the way until Maurice, which is a period of more than 200 years, the rulers of the Eastern Roman Empire ruled with unprecedented stability, and with the sole exception of Basilicus' revolt, the imperial succession was peaceful and most Emperors died naturally.

What went so right?

wolfpack

I'm just glad you told me you're a Byzaboo this early so we don't have to waste each other's time.

why is there so much hate for Marius in this thread? Would you rather have an unprofessional army?

I'm not a "Byzaboo", whatever the fuck that means, I'm a PhD student specialising in Late Antiquity. The Eastern Roman Empire is still the Roman Empire my dude

Because Marius's reforms were sorely needed, but on a grand scale were still a half-baked compromise which didn't address the core problem of good Romans being driven off their land, and allowed the small hypocrisy of soldiers more dependent upon their general for their after-service quality of life than the state.

So when generals began marching their armies around in defiance of the state, these legionaries were apt to follow them, knowing that it was their best chance to not being some impoverished dirt farmer on the ass end of civilization once their term of service is up.

Hold up.

Look at the fucking dates man.

It seems clear that wearing trousers correlates with the decline of Rome.

Also the problem of him essentially flouting the law so he could stand for successive consulships because MUH PROPHECY and to sate his large ego and willing to plunge the Republic into chaos because his ego couldn't take Sulla getting credit for anything.

Really once the Punic and Macedonian Wars ended the death of the Republic was inevitable.

>tfw no roman pagan republic space superpower

nice run down user

No, it's just "The Eastern Roman Empire". It's own damn thing.

Republic