How did Roman Imperialism help create conditions that would lead to the collapse of the Republic and the introduction of one-man rule?

Question

The Social War revealed the talent of one general in particular, the ambitious Lucius Cornelius Sulla, who became consul in 88 BCE, and was chosen by the senate to lead his army to fight the Parthians. However, Marius believed he should be the one to fight the Parthians, so he and his supporters defied Roman custom by trying to prevent Sulla from taking military command. Sulla responded by marching on Rome with his legions of troops. In the civil wars that followed, the two men both took control of Rome at different points, each time brutally murdering the supporters of their opponent. Sulla ultimately emerged victorious and became dictator. In a bloody purge he executed those who had opposed him or whom he believed to be a danger to the state. He then carried out a program of reforms aimed at protecting the power of the Senate. By establishing the example of dictatorship, Sulla had paved the way for major changes in Rome’s government. Within a generation of his death, the old Republic was practically gone. The end of the Republic was the result of the ambitions of just a few influential and powerful individuals, the most powerful men in Rome. From this example, and the instability it created, the checks and balances of the Republic fell apart, leaving room for a singe ruler to control Rome.

Answer 1

Rome had been an Oligarchy (rule by the few) for many years before it became a dictatorship. Originally, Rome's social and economic structure was built around citizen soldiers who would till the soil in peacetime and fight for the republic in time of war. As plunder became more and more important to the Roman economy, Rome engaged in a long series of wars. This changed the basic functioning of the Republic. Now soldiers were full time warriors and slaves tilled the fields. The gap between the rich and poor grew enormously. Rome constantly needed to expand to maintain the new status quo and soldiers became loyal to their commanders rather then to the republic because their pay was dwarfed by the amount of plunder allowed them by their commanders. With no real loyalty to the republic and an economy that constantly demanded more plunder, loyalty to the commanders resulted in real power being wielded not by the senate but by the generals, who fought amongst themselves for the prize of total power.