They are not comparable. They are centuries apart and the societies are totally different. Rome was ruled by two annually elected consuls who at the beginning of the republic were quite like kings and whose power was undefined and therefore unlimited. The consuls acted as executives, legislators, judges and military commanders. The senate was not an elected body. The assembly of the people and the assembly of the soldiers did not elect representatives. Citizens voted on legislation themselves in these assemblies. The assemblies also elected the consuls and acted as courts of appeal during most of the republican period. At the beginning the patrician aristocracy had virtual monopoly over politics and the offices of state. Over time, the leaders of the plebeian movement were given access to the offices of state and were co-opted into a patrician-plebeian oligarchy. The plebeian mass had its own plebeian council separate from the mentioned assemblies. This was because it was set up as a break-away body during a plebeian rebellion against the state. It was integrated by allowing the votes of this council (plebiscites) to become laws binding on all citizens, including the patricians. The leasers of this council, the plebeian tribunes, became the main legislators. Officers of state were elected and got on with their jobs within their remit without supervision by a central body like a cabinet or a president.
Roman ruling only influenced the American government in the fact that both governments were republics. The American founding fathers certainly studied the Roman government, but could see its flaws and changed them considerably. Many people try to read similarities into the two governments where they do not and can not exist.
The Roman Senate was structured differently from modern legislatures.
The battle of Cannae?
The Roman Empire's system of government, particularly during the Republic and early Empire, featured elements such as a Senate and elected officials, which mirror the parliamentary systems in many contemporary Western European governments. The concept of checks and balances was also present, as power was divided among different branches, similar to modern democratic systems. Additionally, principles of citizenship and legal rights established in Roman law continue to influence current Western legal frameworks. Overall, the Roman emphasis on civic participation and governance structures laid foundational ideas that resonate in today's political systems.
All the elected and sometimes appointed officials were responsible for the governing of the republic. Each political office carried its own responsibilities and the entire workings of the government were overseen by the consuls.The Romans themselves were responsible for the government during the republic. It was SPQR. The Senate and the Roman People. The people elected their officials and the senate debated and proposed laws.
As the name "Roman Republic" suggests, it was a republic.
The Roman and British empires were republics.
Senate Consuls Assembly
they are not similar at all
They both partook in orgies.
The roman government was a republic. Republics are where the citizens chose their leaders. To be a citizen you had to own land. In eariler times it was a monarcy. There was a dictater- a ruler with absolute power. A monarcy is where there is one leader. For more info you can go on www.Google.com
Roman ruling only influenced the American government in the fact that both governments were republics. The American founding fathers certainly studied the Roman government, but could see its flaws and changed them considerably. Many people try to read similarities into the two governments where they do not and can not exist.
The government of the United States is a republic. Welcome to the Roman Republic. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics fell in 1991.
Christianity (Roman Catholicism)
yes?
Roman Catholic
In todays notation of Roman numerals: MCMIV