0
The Roman senators had no formal title or words of address. If you were a close friend of another senator you would address him by his first name, or if not, by his family name. However, in formal senate proceedings, when a man got up to speak, he would address the senate as a whole with the term "conscript fathers".
Wiki User
∙ 13y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Who was the first holy Roman Emperor and how did he get his title?
The first was the Empire's founder, Charlemage. He was "Holy" because his rule had been blessed by the Pope - Leo III crowned Charlemagne personally. He was "Roman" because the Holy Roman Empire was meant to return to Europe the order and cultural life that had been lost when the original Ancient Rome fell.
Why was the roman consuls awarded the power of the veto?
The Roman republic was created after ousting the Etruscan king, Tarquinius Superbus (Teraquin the proud). The Roman senate wanted to ensure no such dictator could reign in Rome again. The senate gave itself the power to veto outlandish laws, like "everyone must give Maximus all their money or else they will die". Its also just the democratic thing to do.
How did Romans feel about people who followed religions other than the Roman religion?
King Louis was from Rome and all the Romans were tolerant of other religions as long as their followers were respectful of the Roman religion.
Were there any Roman families with genealogy surviving the migration period of early Middle Ages?
I have not found any yet, but this is a really interesting question, and I will keep looking. This is what I have found so far.The Roman Empire was permanently divided into the West Roman Empire and the East Roman Empire in 395. The government of the East Roman Empire was Greek, but it is hard to imagine that there could have been no families there that came from Rome. The East Roman Empire lasted until 1453. Our historians refer to it as the Byzantine Empire, but the people in it called it the Empire of the Roman People.One of the most conservative bodies in the Roman Empire was the Senate, and seats in the Senate tended to go to people whose ancestors had been in the Senate. Though it had been pretty much striped of all power by the emperors, the Germanic kings saw that it would enhance their own authority if they kept it alive, so they actually revived some of its lost power. The East Roman Empire had its own Senate, but when it retook Italy in the sixth century, they seem to have allowed the West Roman Senate to continue its work. The last recorded act of the West Roman Senate was done in 603 AD, and there is no record of when it ceased to function. It is entirely possible that some of the families of the Roman Senate were among the old families of Rome.I looked at lists of Popes, but did not find anything. I also looked at lists of famous Italians of the Middle Ages, or at least those who had Latin looking names, and have not yet found anything.MoreThe politicians of the Roman gens Anicia were still active in government as consuls in the sixth century. Anicius Faustus Albinus Basilius, who is believed to have been of this family, was the last Roman to have the title Roman consul who was not also emperor. This was in 541.MoreJulius Celsus was active as a scholar in Constantinople in the seventh century. He was of the gens Julia, which also produced Julius Caesar.MoreThis what I am finding. There were very few records kept in the period of about 600 to 800 AD. This makes searching for patrician families difficult unless there was some connection to government. Also, when the Roman Gentes are examined, it can be seen that they disappeared from history as time passed, even in the best times. I would guess that half of those recorded under the Republic disappeared by the time of the Empire. Very few are represented by historic individuals active at the time of the fall of the Western Empire.The Germanic people under Odoacer and the Ostrogoths both took some pride in maintaining the appearance of legitimacy for their governments, and so they maintained the senate, and they maintained the noble families. But the Lombards did not do this. And when the Byzantines invaded Italy, they replaced the local people, who did not usually support them, with more trustworthy people of Greek origin. Noble Roman families of other parts of the West did not fair even this well. So, while I would bet there were Roman families that kept up a genealogy going back to ancient times, even after the period of the migrations, they are clearly not easy to find, and it may be that there were none, or that those that existed had genealogies based on fictions.Of course, Greek families, living in the East Roman Empire, continued.
What is the difference between the roman republic and the greek democracy?
none really other than internal structure - they were both based off the idea that we should be ruled by philosopher kings not the general populous
What was the roman senate and who were it's members?
The Roman senate was an advisory body made up of at first patricians, but then other classes were admitted if they met certain criteria.
Who could refuse to approve actions of the senate that were not in the best interest of the roman empire?
It was the tribunes who could veto the actions of the senate (or any other magistrate except a dictator) if they were not in the best interests of the people.
What is the lawmaking body of the Roman Republic?
A republic can take more than one form in actuality. Meaning the bodies of legislature can be more than of one name and type. For example, the US is a republic with federal legislative bodies sitting (working) in Congress. The Congress is made up of two legislative sections, the House of Representatives and the Senate. The House represents the people, thus has over 438 representatives (divided up based on the population of each state, thus California has the most reps.) while the Senate represents the states, with each state having 2 senators for a total of 100 Senators. These totals together, Representatives and Senators, make up the number of electoral votes in the Electoral College. this total is 538. When the federal elections take place, the 1st Tuesday in November, every 4 years, the President elect must win 50% plus 1 of the total electoral college votes to become the next president of the USA. The total, 538 legislators, means the President elect has to win at least 269 electoral votes to be elected. Different countries with a Republic system, for example France has one as well, would have the details of their legislative setup somewhat different though similar the USA. This would be the case of all the republics around the world. The other major system of legislative democratic governments, parliamentary systems, would have a different setup entirely. For example all of the members of the British Commonwealth (any nation formerly owned by Britain) would have a Parliamentary system. They would be democratic (selected by the people in voting) but not a Republic (which also is democratic since its members are also selected by the people by vote).
What is the difference between a Roman dictator to Roman senate?
A Roman dictator is a patrician that rules for 6 months and has almost complete power. they were used in times of crisis when a war was going on. A senate is a person who works for the government on the legislative branch that makes and passes the law. They power over the other groups ove people on this branch of government
What two groups made a government in ancient Rome?
The two groups that were in the Roman society were the patricians and the plebeians. But please remember that this situation was only in the early days. As the city grew and the empire prospered other social classes developed based on wealth.
How was the roman Senate different from the unite states Senate?
The U. S. Senate is half of America's legislative branch of its government. The Roman republic was a type of government. In other words a senate is pat of a republic, not the republic itself.The U. S. Senate is half of America's legislative branch of its government. The Roman republic was a type of government. In other words a senate is pat of a republic, not the republic itself.The U. S. Senate is half of America's legislative branch of its government. The Roman republic was a type of government. In other words a senate is pat of a republic, not the republic itself.The U. S. Senate is half of America's legislative branch of its government. The Roman republic was a type of government. In other words a senate is pat of a republic, not the republic itself.The U. S. Senate is half of America's legislative branch of its government. The Roman republic was a type of government. In other words a senate is pat of a republic, not the republic itself.The U. S. Senate is half of America's legislative branch of its government. The Roman republic was a type of government. In other words a senate is pat of a republic, not the republic itself.The U. S. Senate is half of America's legislative branch of its government. The Roman republic was a type of government. In other words a senate is pat of a republic, not the republic itself.The U. S. Senate is half of America's legislative branch of its government. The Roman republic was a type of government. In other words a senate is pat of a republic, not the republic itself.The U. S. Senate is half of America's legislative branch of its government. The Roman republic was a type of government. In other words a senate is pat of a republic, not the republic itself.
Did ancient Rome have three branches of government?
No, the Roman republic did not have three branches of government. They only had two, hence the motto SPQR---the Senate and the Roman People. The Senate could roughly be defined as the upper branch and the popular assemblies could roughly be defined as the representative branch. The Praetors, who, among other things, corresponded to our judges or judicial branch of government, were a part of the Senatorial branch of government.
Why do historians study roman assemblies and senate?
Historians do this because it is their job. There are historians who specialise in the history of Rome, just as there are historians who specialise in the history of other peoples and other historical periods. They study all aspects of Roman history, not just the assemblies and the senate. The study of these two institution is part of getting an understanding of Roman politics and society.
How did Julius Caesar gain more power after he was dictator of Rome?
He filled the senate with people who were loyal to him, so he could avoid reproach from the other branches.
Which group was responsible for making the early Roman republic more democratic?
some would argue that it all stems from the Greeks , such a level of democracy that existed in Rome @ that time... But in terms of "group" it has to be the Senate. Rome was ruled by a succession of Etruscan kings , who turned to the senate for "advice" , but the senate had other plans , by making the title of "King" one that was believed to be an enemy of the people , the senate enforced there brand of democracy .
What was the three part government of rome called?
Rome's tripartite government is a modern revision of history. If you read about the Roman republic you can't help but see that it was a bipartite government. They did not have three branches of government. They had two branches of government, the Senate and the Roman People" (SPQR) Although they had Praetors, who were judges, the praetors were members of the senate and had other duties as well. For example, they could govern a province and raise an army. These were the identical powers of the consuls. There was no separate judicial branch of government in ancient Rome.Rome's tripartite government is a modern revision of history. If you read about the Roman republic you can't help but see that it was a bipartite government. They did not have three branches of government. They had two branches of government, the Senate and the Roman People" (SPQR) Although they had Praetors, who were judges, the praetors were members of the senate and had other duties as well. For example, they could govern a province and raise an army. These were the identical powers of the consuls. There was no separate judicial branch of government in ancient Rome.Rome's tripartite government is a modern revision of history. If you read about the Roman republic you can't help but see that it was a bipartite government. They did not have three branches of government. They had two branches of government, the Senate and the Roman People" (SPQR) Although they had Praetors, who were judges, the praetors were members of the senate and had other duties as well. For example, they could govern a province and raise an army. These were the identical powers of the consuls. There was no separate judicial branch of government in ancient Rome.Rome's tripartite government is a modern revision of history. If you read about the Roman republic you can't help but see that it was a bipartite government. They did not have three branches of government. They had two branches of government, the Senate and the Roman People" (SPQR) Although they had Praetors, who were judges, the praetors were members of the senate and had other duties as well. For example, they could govern a province and raise an army. These were the identical powers of the consuls. There was no separate judicial branch of government in ancient Rome.Rome's tripartite government is a modern revision of history. If you read about the Roman republic you can't help but see that it was a bipartite government. They did not have three branches of government. They had two branches of government, the Senate and the Roman People" (SPQR) Although they had Praetors, who were judges, the praetors were members of the senate and had other duties as well. For example, they could govern a province and raise an army. These were the identical powers of the consuls. There was no separate judicial branch of government in ancient Rome.Rome's tripartite government is a modern revision of history. If you read about the Roman republic you can't help but see that it was a bipartite government. They did not have three branches of government. They had two branches of government, the Senate and the Roman People" (SPQR) Although they had Praetors, who were judges, the praetors were members of the senate and had other duties as well. For example, they could govern a province and raise an army. These were the identical powers of the consuls. There was no separate judicial branch of government in ancient Rome.Rome's tripartite government is a modern revision of history. If you read about the Roman republic you can't help but see that it was a bipartite government. They did not have three branches of government. They had two branches of government, the Senate and the Roman People" (SPQR) Although they had Praetors, who were judges, the praetors were members of the senate and had other duties as well. For example, they could govern a province and raise an army. These were the identical powers of the consuls. There was no separate judicial branch of government in ancient Rome.Rome's tripartite government is a modern revision of history. If you read about the Roman republic you can't help but see that it was a bipartite government. They did not have three branches of government. They had two branches of government, the Senate and the Roman People" (SPQR) Although they had Praetors, who were judges, the praetors were members of the senate and had other duties as well. For example, they could govern a province and raise an army. These were the identical powers of the consuls. There was no separate judicial branch of government in ancient Rome.Rome's tripartite government is a modern revision of history. If you read about the Roman republic you can't help but see that it was a bipartite government. They did not have three branches of government. They had two branches of government, the Senate and the Roman People" (SPQR) Although they had Praetors, who were judges, the praetors were members of the senate and had other duties as well. For example, they could govern a province and raise an army. These were the identical powers of the consuls. There was no separate judicial branch of government in ancient Rome.
What was the roman senate?
The Senate of Rome was one of the central and longest-lasting features of Roman government. Consisting of wealthy or otherwise influential Roman leaders, the Senate passed laws, appointed particular leaders for particular posts in civil and military affairs, oversaw military action, and in later years advised the Emperors, among many other important political functions throughout Rome's long history.
