Introduction Paragraph:
After examining the issues surrounding ancient Roman society, I am convinced that Rome was not a democracy.
The fact that citizens didn't have equality, there was no economic freedom, and the fact that there were not many human rights (They had slaves), support my belief because they demonstrate how Rome was not a true democracy.
Body Paragraph 1/Support for Reason 1:
One reason I maintain this position is that not all citizens were equal.
For instance, Patricians had more power than the everyday people in Rome, they could make new laws, pick 6-month dictators, and held a high position than the Plebeians.
In the article, The Roman Republic, the people at Ducksters emphasizes that patricians had overall more power than plebeians, and plebeians had more power than the slaves.
According to the text, “Not all …show more content…
I’m aware that people who think Rome is a democracy may argue that America also had slavery.
Yes, America did have slavery, and yes it was a very bad time for people of color, but this was later changed by some great people, like Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King. As for Rome, no one banned slavery in Rome.
Conclusion Paragraph:
The question of whether ancient Rome was or was not a democracy is very confusing and demonstrates that some things are hard to figure out and that the definition of a democracy changes over time.
My analysis of this issue has left me with little doubt that Rome was not a democracy.
(State the opposing views belief)
First off, Not all citizens were equal, some had more power than others, this makes evident that Rome was not a democracy for in today's democracy all citizens are equal.
Moreover, another reason why this is not a democracy is that there was no economic freedom, this highlights that Rome was not a democracy, this is so because not everyone could by land, only some people had the rights to buy land and those people were
After examining the issues surrounding ancient Roman society, I am convinced that Rome was not a democracy.
The fact that citizens didn't have equality, there was no economic freedom, and the fact that there were not many human rights (They had slaves), support my belief because they demonstrate how Rome was not a true democracy.
Body Paragraph 1/Support for Reason 1:
One reason I maintain this position is that not all citizens were equal.
For instance, Patricians had more power than the everyday people in Rome, they could make new laws, pick 6-month dictators, and held a high position than the Plebeians.
In the article, The Roman Republic, the people at Ducksters emphasizes that patricians had overall more power than plebeians, and plebeians had more power than the slaves.
According to the text, “Not all …show more content…
I’m aware that people who think Rome is a democracy may argue that America also had slavery.
Yes, America did have slavery, and yes it was a very bad time for people of color, but this was later changed by some great people, like Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King. As for Rome, no one banned slavery in Rome.
Conclusion Paragraph:
The question of whether ancient Rome was or was not a democracy is very confusing and demonstrates that some things are hard to figure out and that the definition of a democracy changes over time.
My analysis of this issue has left me with little doubt that Rome was not a democracy.
(State the opposing views belief)
First off, Not all citizens were equal, some had more power than others, this makes evident that Rome was not a democracy for in today's democracy all citizens are equal.
Moreover, another reason why this is not a democracy is that there was no economic freedom, this highlights that Rome was not a democracy, this is so because not everyone could by land, only some people had the rights to buy land and those people were