Reference no: EM133368111

Assignment:

PART 1 : Post a question related to the content below, the question should be open-ended rather than simple yes/no or fill-in-the-blank types. Ask important questions about themes, comparison, cause and effect, change-over-time, continuity over time, etc. You can also ask an opinion question.

The Nature of Roman Imperialism

Rome's empire was built in three stages: the conquest of Italy, the conflict with Carthage and expansion into the western Mediterranean, and the involvement with and domination of the Hellenistic kingdoms in the eastern Mediterranean. The Romans did not have a master plan for the creation of an empire; as in Italy, much of their continued expansion was opportunistic, carried out in response to perceived threats to their security. The more they expanded, the more threats to their security appeared on the horizon, involving them in yet more conflicts. Indeed, the Romans liked to portray themselves as declaring war only for defensive reasons or to protect allies. That is only part of the story, however. It is likely, as some historians have suggested, that at some point a group of Roman aristocratic leaders emerged who favored expansion both for the glory it offered and for the economic benefits it provided. Certainly, by the second century B.C.E., aristocratic senators perceived new opportunities for lucrative foreign commands, enormous spoils of war, and an abundant supply of slave labor for their growing landed estates.

At the same time, the Roman political system encouraged an imperialistic policy. There was an intense competition between families for the consulship (as we have seen, there were only two per year).

Moreover, many Romans believed in outdoing the deeds of their ancestors. The combination of these factors helped lead upper-class Romans to seek glory and power by winning wars abroad.

By the second century B.C.E., as the destruction of Corinth and Carthage indicates, Roman imperialism had become more arrogant and brutal as well. Rome's foreign success also had enormous repercussions for the internal development of the Roman republic.

PART 2: Answer the following questions:

• In terms of society and classes for the Romans, what were the societal differences and expectations between the Patricians and the Plebeians?
• What are some of the similarities between the Roman government structure and what we have in the US today? Does this speak to the forward-thinking rational problem-solving employed by the Romans ("if it ain't broke, don't fix it") or does it emphasize a need for improvement today?