>What was the single most important event that led to the collapse of the Roman Republic?
I think it was the First Settlement by Augustus when he took pro consul power.
Discuss
The refusal to recognize Ricimer as western emperor by the East. If they had treated him like a completely legitimate political actor, he probably wouldn't have sabotaged the re-invasion of North Africa.
>>812259
He's talking about the fall of the REPUBLIC, mate.
>>812265
I got confused cause he started by saying the end of the republic led to the collapse of the republic
>>812243
When pompey and the rest fled rome
>>812301
Of they just stayed and fought, ceaser would have been captured and killed and the Republic would move on
>>812243
>led to the collapse of the Roman Republic?
That could go all the way back to Tarquinnius if your are a picky little sod.
But I would have to categorically say it was Crassus' little expedition to Parthia and the destruction of his death in turn led to the breaking of the Triumvirate, which in turn led to Gnaeus Pompeius and Julius Caesar fighting for power which led to the Civil War that ended in Caesar to be the dictator and Pompey dead, which in turn led to his murder by Brutus and co which led to Gaius Octavius to plot for power fight Brutus and co which lead to Optimates loosing and then Augustus seizing power in Rome that led to another civil was that allowed Octavian to become Augustus Ceaser
Foundation of Roman Republic.
>>812243
Why was the republic so much better than the Empire? More centralized? Less bloated?
>>812353
It wasn't? It achieved the same amount of chaos that the empire faced. The only difference seems that the empire was in decay longer.
It's gotta be when the senate tried to dismiss Caesar from his post and take away his legions, yo.
Furthermore, Carthage must be destroyed.
>>812243
Carthage was a restrain on the virtue of rome.
>>812361
At least in the Republic you don't have to bow to some shitty emperor that got the position because he inherited it or tore apart the the land killing and raiding their own people so he could take it from some other asshole. Fuck ceaser, fuck Augustus, and fuck those spineless shits that abandoned pompey to run to ceaser only to kill him later, and then get their ass kicked again. Ruined everything.
>>812386
The Republic laid the foundations that the empire built on and later destroyed. If Rome was always an empire it would have never got out of italy and just become the etruscan's little bitch state
It was easilly the huns causing an immigration crisis. Things such as the death of valens and theodosious were not fatal blows on their own.
Also, stilicho did nothing wrong.
>>812243
Lucius Sulla's reign of blood
He broke the Roman democratic process and made Julius Caesar inevitable.
>>812386
Did the Romans ever work out an actual official method of succession, considering 'Emperor' wasn't even really an official position for so long?
>>812379
I kinda liked that, because nobody took the republic seriously and it was corrupt. People needed a few hundred years to realize that a good dictator is worse than a shit republic.
Also I guess that does make lotgh anime based on the fall of the republic
>>812401
They tried, and it was a clusterfuck from the moment that it was implemented.
The problem of succession is something that has plagued that style of government since ancient times.
>>812397
whoops, misread republic as empire
>>812401
They never figured it out. Everytime and emperor died there was worry for another fucking civil war. Jesus christ, after the got rid of nero, they should have got the message that giving ultimate power to one person doesn't turn out well because 99% of the time they are psychotic, spoiled, assholes who just fucks over everyone until they are killed by their own guards or kill themselves.
>>812423
>after the got rid of nero, they should have got the message that giving ultimate power to one person doesn't turn out well
but when they tried redistributing the power, everyone fought each other to be number 1.
>>812243
I would saying Sulla's taking of Rome with his army, and his proscriptions. That legitimized the use of violence and military power as legitimate methods of achieving power, after that it was just a matter of time before someone else tried to use his methods to gain power. Really though, you can go all the way back to the foundation of the Republic if you really wanted to find causes that were instrumental to the fall of the Republic.
The fact that the senate was corrupt and incestuous and the Roman people knew this and trusted a clear dictator more
>>812439
Because they knew the Republic's power can be taken after pompey was defeated and abandoned. Fucking ceaser, he couldn't just not have a power trip and and actually talk to the Senate, no no, he was "resorting the Republic" did he understand the oxymoron?
>>812462
*restoring
>>812462
Caesar was really attempting to address long standing grievances that were at the base of the problems the Republic was facing, sure he was probably a selfish man seeking power for his own sake, but the issues he tried to reform were real ones. The Senate's disdain for the plebs and insistence at increasing their own power and wealth lead directly to the disconnect that allowed men like the Gracchi brothers and Marius, then later Caesar, to use the cause of the people to gather power. If they actually had bothered to adopt decent governmental reforms instead of getting a stick in their asses about every reform because they hated the guts of the guys that promoted them, they might have staved off the fall of the Republic for a long time, Ceasar was a symptom of the maladies killing the republic, not the cause.
>>812502
nailed it
Sulla waving his dick around. The amount of leeway the Senate gave to Pompey, which paved the way for Caesar.
>>812400
Well, by that logic (which I dully agree with), wouldn't Marius be a better example? He did it first, and at least Sulla was trying to restore power to the senate, though ultimately unsuccessfully.
>>812243
The system of the Republic wasn't built to govern multi ethnic empire spanning the medditerean. The truth of the matter is unless the Republic changed significantly there was no way it was going to change. Either one warlord would take over the whole pie or they would splinter off their own lititle pieces. All things considered I think ended in the best fashion with Augustus on top
>>812340
/thread
>>814501
You fucking suck was that really worth adding
The military reforms of Gaius Marius allowed a standing army to become attached to one general.
>>814510
Yeah but with out Marius' reforms the legions would have fallen apart. The levy system Rome was using was never going to work once the empire got larger than Italy.
>>812462
If Caesar hadn't have done it, someone would have. He wasn't that special, he was just ambitious, rather skillful, and took his chance. All it would have taken was Pompeii turning around and deciding he wanted to rule the Republic officially, or Crassus buying it out, or any of the Myriad of other people to subjugate it. Marius and Sulla did it to a degree. The republic was dead walking when Augustus got to it.
didn't think I'd get to use this in another thread.
>>814532
why did the new recruitment system have to involve centralizing power into one general
>>815146
Because otherwise the empire would split apart into different factions like late tell byzantines
>>815116
>watermark
Disdain for plebs.jpg
>>815288
i have no control over that. well, i mean i could edit it out but come on, i'm lazy.
>>815146
That was mostly an unintended consequence. The various war Rome had been fighting, in particular the Punic wars, and greatly depleted Rome's manpower, and Rome needed more men than ever as they had gained tons of territory and now had commitments to foreign countries, and all of the was exacerbated by the men being asked to stay on multiple campaigns, which meant their properties were lapsing into disrepair, and since the Legions didn't pay at that point, you'd come home and find yourself flat broke, to where you wouldn't even qualify for military service anymore. All these compounding factors lead to a manpower crisis, which Marius' reforms were intended to fix. He made it so that soldiers were now volunteer professionals who were paid for their work, the state would pay for their equipment, all class restrictions for service were removed, and men were promised an allotment of land at the end of their service. This meant the poorest of the poor could now serve in the military, however, it also created a system were in the troops were more loyal to their commanders, who could just make promises of land and wealth to the disenfranchised poor that were now filling the ranks, who due to their poverty generally had a low amount of allegiance to the state.
>>814404
certainly, as this anon >>815303 excellently explained, Marius was certainly culpable. But the problems that came from his reforms were ones that could have gotten ironed out in the democratic process. After Sulla, that was effectively impossible because of how dysfunctional and rigged it became.
