Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The theory that a representative of the people ceases to be one when he acts against the wishes of the people, was repugnant to the genius of Roman constitutional theory. [57] If carried to its logical end, this theory removed all constitutional restraints on the popular will, and put the state under the absolute control of a temporary popular ...
In addition, after the consulship had been opened to the plebeians, the plebs acquired a de facto right to hold both the Roman dictatorship and the Roman censorship [6] since only former consuls could hold either office. 356 BC saw the appointment of the first plebeian dictator, [13] and in 339 BC the plebeians facilitated the passage of a law ...
In Roman constitutional law, the assemblies were a sovereign authority, with the power to enact or reject any law, confer any magistracies, and make any decision. [6] This view of popular sovereignty emerged elegantly out of the Roman conception that the people and the state (or government) were one and the same. [17]
Aeneas, whom the Romans believed Romulus and Remus descended from, fleeing from the burning city of Troy. The second epoch saw the reigns of the last three legendary kings. The second epoch was more consequential than was the first, which was in part due to the significant degree of territorial expansion which occurred during this period. [2]
The imperial constitution developed from Augustus' victory in the civil wars of the late first century BC. In two settlements, he claimed to give up his wartime powers and restore a republican form of government but actually subverted republican precedents to establish him as the legal head of the state with power to involve himself in any matter and overrule all other magistrates.
The Roman Republic in 100 BC. For centuries, historians have argued about the start, specific crises involved, and end date for the crisis of the Roman Republic. As a culture (or "web of institutions"), Florence Dupont and Christopher Woodall wrote, "no distinction is made between different periods."
Ultimately, if there was no veto, and the matter was of minor importance, it could be voted on by a voice vote or by a show of hands. If there was no veto, and the matter was of a significant nature, there was usually a physical division of the house, where senators voted by taking a place on either side of the chamber. [1]
The legislative assemblies of the Roman Republic were political institutions in the ancient Roman Republic.According to the contemporary historian Polybius, it was the people (and thus the assemblies) who had the final say regarding the election of magistrates, the enactment of Roman laws, the carrying out of capital punishment, the declaration of war and peace, and the creation (or ...