List three ways the Roman Republic was different from a monarchy ruled by a single king. Use what you learned about the structure of the Roman government earlier in the lesson.

Answer 1

1. Freedom of Speech was a value that was practiced in the Roman Republic as a precondition for productive civic debate. Ancient monarchies did not value freedom of speech in the way that either the Roman Republic or modern democracies do.
2. The Roman Republic was ruled by two houses, the Centuriate and Plebian council that represented the titled elite in the first case and the common people in the latter. This class-based system of representation did provide the model for the checks and balances style of legislative government that in the United States in the form of the senate and congressional houses.
3. The Roman Republic had no single executive leader akin to the function of either a monarch or a US president. During times of crisis the Senate could elect a dictator who would temporarily act as the supreme leader of the Republic. Unfortunately, this practice seems to have opened the door to the quasi-monarchial succession of Emperors under the Empire. While the senate continued to function under the Empire the consensus among historians is that its power was more apparent than real and that ultimately power lied with the emperors and their supporters. Political disputes under the empire were settled by Civil Wars rather than debate, popular referendum, or legislative votes; this doesn't mean that the Republic was perfect and without turmoil, as Sulla's terroristic 30 year dictatorship or the civil war that followed Caesar's death shows but it appears to have been a more stable and flexible political system up until its end.