8. Repetition of History – The Roman Empire

“When thou art at Rome, do as they do at Rome.”

-Miguel de Cervantes

Many similarities exist between the ancient Roman Empire and the United States. The Roman Empire dominated the civilized world between the eighth century B.C. and the fifth century A.D., whereas the United States dominates the 20th century and possibly the 21st century. The purpose of studying the Roman Empire is to illuminate the life-cycle theory of legal structure, because many empires go through this life cycle. Each stage of the life cycle has prominent characteristics and some of these characteristics are compared to events in the United States.

Chapters in this book hinted at a “life cycle” of a legal structure. In the beginning, a new society forms that has an excellent legal structure that encourages hard work, forms strong private property rights, and allows free enterprise. Consequently, businesses thrive and create wealth. The source of the wealth is creating products to consumers, because creating products also creates jobs and employment. Government still has to exist, because government establishes the rules of the game. The only way to finance government is through taxes. As wealth and incomes increase, a government is infused with large flows of tax revenues, giving birth to government bureaucracies. Eventually bureaucracies start to increase in size on their own volition and always need taxes to sustain this growth. Eventually, these bureaucracies become too large that they literally destroy the free markets. They start passing complicated, convoluted rules, regulations, and taxes until the society no longer has free enterprise. Excessive taxes, regulations, and large bureaucracies cause society to stagnate. Businesses start fleeing or go bankrupt, wealth and incomes begin to disappear, and masses of the unemployed appear. Unfortunately, the bureaucracies still want to grow and they keep increasing taxes on a stagnant economy. Eventually, society crumbles and a rich powerful country transforms into a third world banana republic.

The Roman Empire went through this life-cycle of a legal structure. When studying the ancient Romans, historians define two eras: Roman Republic and Roman Empire. In the beginning, the Roman Republic started as a democracy and grew at an incredible rate. As a democracy, all citizens were given legal rights and could vote for politicians. As the Roman Republic approached its apogee and her military dominated the world, the Republic evolved into the Roman Empire, controlled by the Emperor. The Emperor was a dictator, who controlled all government institutions and all the people. Towards the end of the Empire, the Empire evolved into a police state with the Roman Emperor having absolute power until the Western Roman Empire collapsed in the fifth century. (The Eastern Roman Empire, called the Byzantium Empire, collapsed in the 15th century.)

The Rise of the Roman Republic

The Roman Republic and United States evolved into countries that dominated the world in their respective time periods and both republics have eerie similarities. Early in Rome's history, the top leaders had a distrust of powerful kings. For the first 200 years, Rome was ruled by kings, until the aristocrats expelled the last king and established a republic. The republic was a representative government or in other words a democracy controlled by a Senate. Only aristocrats, called patricians, could sit on the Senate and the Senate controlled the machinery of government. The aristocrats had a distrust of powerful kings and they decentralized the power of the government. The Romans published Roman law onto twelve tablets. Roman laws emphasized that “all free citizens had their rights to fair justice guaranteed” [1]. The early Romans gave its citizens the right to vote and hold public office, where citizen was defined in narrow terms. Citizens were free adult males who owned weapons and the weapons requirement was needed so the people could be called forth to serve in the military [2]. Roman laws were shaped from actual court cases and common sense. The laws emphasized individual rights and the private ownership of property.

This is strange, because this is so similar to the United States. The United States was formed as a republic, when we defeated the British crown and formed our own country. The founding fathers had a distrust of kings and wanted to from a decentralized government. Our other cherished rights were similar to the Romans, such as the right to vote and hold public office. Of course, these rights were restricted to white, adult males, who owned property. Consequently, Americans adopted British Common Law system like all other British colonies except Malta. As already espoused, the British Common Law System is pro-business and has a strong foundation for private property rights. Finally, the Common Law System allows court cases to shape the law.

Another similarity is both the United States and ancient Rome absorbed the cultures of other countries. The Romans imported the Etruscan and Greek cultures. For example, the Romans imported the Etruscans artistic and architectural styles, which include the Roman's trademark the arch. The Romans also borrowed certain religious, legal, and political ideas, as well as the gladiators, who fought to their death [3]. Likewise, the United States absorbs the culture, ideas, and people from other countries. Literally, the United States is a melting pot of all the world's cultures and people.

Another similarity is when both countries were growing, they integrated the conquered lands and people into the empire. The Romans granted legal rights and citizenship to the conquered people. They also introduced them to the Latin language, Roman law and customs [4, 5]. The Romans did expropriate lands and booty from the conquered countries, but were ingenious when conquering them. The conquered countries became integrated into the Roman Republic and these countries could share the spoils with Rome of newly conquered territories [6]. Likewise, the United States expanded its boundaries by annexing new states to the Union. As the United States was expanding westward across the Great Plains, the United States allowed new states to form and become equal members with the other older states. The new states could send senators and representatives to Congress and have their citizens elected to the highest levels of government.

Many countries like to form colonies, when they expand their borders. Many leaders did not have the foresight of what is means to integrate conquered lands and people. The usual method is to extract as much wealth and resources the empire can and treat the conquered people as inferior and sub-human. Over time, treating people poorly causes tension and this tension leads to revolts and uprisings. To squash the revolts and restore order can be costly to the empire. Eventually, if the costs become too high, the empire has to withdraw and pull out. This is what happened to the United States. The United States was a colony of the British Empire and the British were spending large sums of money for armies to protect the Midwest territories from the French and Indians. The British wanted the American colonies to help pay for these military costs through new taxes, but the American colonies had no representation in England. Colonists were second-class citizens and the American colonies revolted and broke away from the British Empire.

The United States and Roman Republic connected all their citizens and cities with a massive infrastructure. The Romans built aqueducts, baths, bridges, and roads [7]. It was once proclaimed that all roads lead to Rome and after 2,000 years, some of this infrastructure is still standing and is being used in the 21st century. Several aqueducts built in the Augustan Age still transport water to Rome. The aqueduct, Pont du Gard is still used and located in southern France [8]. Moreover, a Roman bridge is still used in Alcantara, Spain ([9]. Likewise, the United States is connected by a massive infrastructure of roads, railroads, and ships. A good infrastructure allows a strong economy to form. A large, efficient infrastructure allows different regions to specialize in products and services that they do best and sell them to consumers anywhere within the country. Businesses can transport Idaho potatoes, Michigan automobiles, Texas crude oil, and Florida oranges to any place cheaply within the United States.

The Roman legal system changed gradually over time and towards the end of the Roman Empire, the law emphasized state control and the Roman government evolved into a total dictatorship with the Emperor controlling every aspect of the state [10]. One can argue that the United States is developing in a similar fashion. The federal, state, and local governments have been passing laws that increase the power of government while decreasing the people's rights. The size, scope, and mission of government are gradually becoming a larger sector in the U.S. economy. A large government with a strong military can give birth to an empire and thus kill a republic.

The Birth of the Roman Empire

Towards the end of the Republic, the Roman Republic went into decline and politics dissolved into chaos. The republic fragmented into quarrying groups ([11] and two civil wars disrupted the Roman Republic with an explosion of violence [12]. Many Senators became fearful of the powerful and popular generals, like Caesar and Pompey, because they could take advantage of the political chaos and seized control of the government. Caesar was popular among the people, because Caesar was a brilliant general, a war hero, had the gift of rhetoric, and born into a noble class. Some Senators were afraid of Caesar and tried to turn Pompey and Caesar against each other. Other Senators wanted Caesar to relinquish control of his army, so the Senators could bring corruption charges against Caesar and remove him from power, using the Roman court system to punish Caesar. However, Caesar rebelled against the government using his army and was able to defeat Pompey's army. Now Caesar had control of the Roman government, but his long-term plans were cut short, when several conservatives of the Senate plotted Caesar’s assassination [13].

The Roman government was in disarray and its fiscal health was declining fast. Rome accumulated a large debt, experienced declining revenues, and issued new coins [14]. The top leaders could not control the government budget and tried to use taxes to meet budget shortfalls. Anything that had a name was taxed. Government imposed head taxes on free men and slaves. The government levied taxes on corn, soldiers, arms, equipment, and transport. The Roman government even levied taxes on columns and doors [15]. As poverty spread among the republic, the people fled from the poverty of the countryside and moved to Rome. They remained idle, seeking free corn or other public aid [16].

The Senate was considered quite corrupt. Senators would lend money at exorbitant interest rates to people who lived in the provinces, so they could buy luxury items or pay taxes. (The provinces were conquered Roman territories located outside of Italy). The Senators would also receive financial rewards by accepting bribes from bidders to collect taxes in the provinces, which was called tax farming [17]. Some Senators would serve one-year terms as governors of the provinces. This one year allowed the governors to extort as much property and wealth possible in the form of taxes. In some towns and regions, the people were forced into poverty and were not able to pay their poll taxes [18].

In the final days of the Republic, elections were dominated by bribery, corruption, and violence [19]. The Senators and other top government officials could bribe judges and juries. In one instance, the Governor of Sicily was charged with mismanagement by plundering the wealth of his province. The first year’s profits were for his defense attorney, the second year's profits were used to pay the jury, and the third year profits went into the Governor's pocket [20]. Nevertheless, the prosecutor was Cicero, who was one of the greatest lawyers of the Roman Republic. The Governor fled into exile, because he did not think he would win his court case against the powerful Cicero.

Cicero was a young attorney, philosopher, and one of the most brilliant orators to rise out of the Roman Republic. Cicero was born from equestrian stock, but was able to rise to the consulship. The consulship could only be held by top-rung aristocrats. Cicero was a firm believer in the Roman Republic and tried to prevent the government's transformation into a dictatorship [21].

The rich became more ostentatious towards the end of the Roman Republic and the number of wealthy were so few that Cicero remarked “less than 1,000 men in Rome were wealthy” [22]. The rich or the aristocrats were few, but controlled the machinery of the Roman government [23]. The richest Roman citizens ostentatiously displayed their wealth and they also used their wealth to bribe elections and juries [24].

Early in the Republic, families had small plots of land to grow crops and any surplus the family grew could be sold in the markets. Towards the end of the Republic, nobles bought or expropriated these small plots and public lands and consolidated them into estates. The families were pushed out or used as property-less tenants to work the land. The rich even used slaves to cultivate the land. One method the rich stole from the poor was to steal a poor man's land, when he served too long in the Roman military [25]. Another method is for top officials to expropriate a person's property, when assessing a fine ([26].

Pirates roamed the seas and thieves strolled along the countryside. The Romans were tired of the political chaos and violence. They yearned for peace and wanted law and order [27]. One person rose to meet the challenge and he was Gaius Julias Caesar Octavianus, also known as Augustus. Augustus was Caesar's grandnephew and inherited 3/4 of Caesar’s wealth. Augustus used this wealth to raise an army to crush all opposition to his rule, assassinated Cicero [28], and crushed the armies of the conservatives, who murdered Caesar.

Augustus was a dictator and was Rome's first Emperor. However, Augustus is considered one of the greatest leaders of the ancient world, because he restored law and order, and established a new framework of government [29]. The people of the Roman Empire suffered less from extortion and had a more friendly form of government. Augustus even tried to address the immorality problems of his times [30]. Moreover, Augustus started the policy of allowing autonomy of local governments [31].

The reforms of Augusts brought peace and prosperity to the Roman Empire that lasted for the next 100 years. “More people could enjoy the fruits of prosperity than was possible again for the next 1,500 years” [32]. New cities were founded, as cities and trade flourished. [33]. Trade with the Roman Empire extended all the way to the Far East. Romans were even importing Chinese silk [34]. Further, the arts and letters flourished under the Augustan Age. Several cities instituted public education, which taught reading, writing, and arithmetic [35].

Unfortunately, the good times never last. Over time, Roman Emperors started to consolidate their power and gradually controlled every aspect of Roman society. Towards the end of the Roman Empire, the government became so oppressive; it was just as bad as the Soviet Union.

The Decline of the Empire

The Roman Empire went into decline during its last three centuries and it was no accident. Each Emperor assumed more control over society and kept raising taxes to finance a growing, bloated government bureaucracy. The Roman government kept increasing taxes to pay for three institutions. First, Rome had to finance its army and navy. Second, the government bureaucracies became larger, more complicated, and more expensive, such as the imperial court and other Roman bureaucracies. Third, the government provided social welfare to feed the poor children in Italy. These institutions cost money and the Roman government had trouble financing these activities, as Rome's prosperity began to decrease [36].

For the Roman government to finance its activities, taxes became high and oppressive [36]. Written history is not detailed enough about the level and oppressiveness of the Roman's tax system, but some accounts are written of the effects of high taxes towards the end of the Roman Empire. For example, Egyptian leaders complained to Rome about taxes, because people were fleeing the villages, trying to escape from the tax collectors. If someone defaulted on his tax payments and fled into hiding, the tax collectors would beat the person's family and relatives, and subject them to other types of punishment. The family and relatives would have either pay the taxes or tell the tax collector where the tax evader was hiding. The tax collectors invented new forms of executions for tax defaulters. If no family or relatives were left, then the tax collectors would pass punishment on the tax evader's neighbors or seek revenge on whole villages [37]. Literally, the Roman tax system destroyed the taxpayers [38]. (You probably thought dealing with the IRS was bad, it could be a lot worse).

Another way to finance a large government is for the government to “print” money to cover government spending. Although Roman coins were made from silver, Emperors could debase the coins to create more money. As the silver coins came back to government, government would melt the silver coins down and mix in cheap metals like copper. Now, the government creates more coins and the Roman government could increase the money supply without buying any new silver. At the beginning of the Empire, coins were almost pure silver; towards the end of the Empire, coins had a speck of silver in them. However, rapidly increasing the money supply causes rampant inflation and weakens the currency. Heavy taxation and a weak currency put Rome’s financial system into decline and the high inflation caused food to be driven from the markets [36].

Like the Roman government, local governments had trouble balancing their budgets. Again, local governments were spending more than what they collected in taxes, but some other things changed as well. Towards the end of the Roman Empire, autonomy of local government was completely gone. The central government, i.e. the Emperor, interfered with local government administration and imposed rules and mandates for local governments. City councils had to collect the taxes, enlist military recruits, and enforced the Emperor’s orders [36, 39].

The Roman society evolved into a police state with an all powerful central government [40]. The peasants became tied to the farmlands and free movement became impossible. The landowners needed the peasants to cultivate the fields and as recruits in the Roman army, when the need for soldiers arose [41]. The Roman Emperors even created secret police. The secret police would trick people into saying some bad words about the Emperor, so they could be arrested and executed [42].

The population started to decline in the second century A.D. along with the decline in production. A declining population causes demand for goods and services to fall. Less people buy homes, food, and other products and services, which causes industries to contract. A smaller population also places pressure on the armed forces [36]. Furthermore, there were no technological improvements [36] and under an oppressive state, men were no longer able to create fresh, original ideas [43].

Some scholars believe the Roman Empire would have collapsed in the third century A.D., but several Emperors reformed the Empire. This reform was a double-edge sword. The Roman government needed to be restructured, because an authoritative government with arbitrary rules causes graft, favoritism, and corruption at all levels of government. A restructuring causes a shock to the system and can get bureaucracies to temporarily function correctly again. However, the Emperors kept increasing the size of government and re-structuring the government has short-term impacts [39].

Two Emperors, Gallienus and Dicletian, restructured the Roman Empire, extending the life of the empire another two centuries. Emperor Gallienus reformed and restructured the Roman army and navy, and also introduced the cavalry. A cavalry is armed soldiers mounted on horses. It is a mobile and an efficient striking force. However, it was costly to feed both soldiers and their horses [44].

Dicletian reorganized the whole Roman Empire. Dicletian further reformed and restructured the Roman army and navy as compared to the previous Emperor Gallienus. Also, Dicletian reformed the tax system, and proclaimed, “No man shall possess any property that is tax-exempt” [41]. Dicletian divided the provinces into smaller units and had to create a new class of bureaucrats to regulate the smaller units of provinces, which caused a heavier financial burden. Dicletian further split the Roman Empire into the Western and Eastern Empires. The Western Empire collapsed in the fifth century A.D. and the Eastern Empire survived up to the fifteenth century as the Byzantium Empire [45]. Diocletian usurped control and freedom of local governments, binding them to an all powerful Emperor. Furthermore, each person inherited the social class of his parents, completely freezing social mobility [46].

By the 3rd Century A.D., the Christians became scapegoats of the economic hardships of the Empire and any person holding a membership of a church could be executed [47]. Towards the end of the Roman Empire, government became larger, more oppressive, and possibly more inefficient. The restructuring of the Empire from Gallienus and Dicleitan evaporated over the next two centuries, because the Roman Empire showed all the signs of collapse in the fifth century. For instance, Rome possessed the one characteristic of a banana republic. The army routinely murdered its emperor and would then appoint another [48]. Technically, Roman law forbade an Emperor to station an army in Rome. Thus, Roman emperors created armed guards called the Praetorian Guard. The Praetorian Guard routinely assassinated an Emperor and appointed another. With the constant change in Roman leadership and financial troubles of the Empire, uprisings against the Roman government were frequent along the northern frontiers [49]. The Roman Empire fell into barbarism and the dividing line between civilization and savagery disappeared. It is no wonder why the Germans could so easily raid the Empire [50].

Conclusion

Analyzing Rome is a complex topic. This civilization collapsed over 15 centuries ago. Of course, the author put his twist on the interpretation of events, emphasizing a growing government and a government’s hunger for tax revenue. However, that is what historians do. Not everything is written down, so historians must use inference and deductions to connect the dots in a story. Some things are clear. Rome started with a great legal structure and over time, the Roman government through an Emperor took complete control over its economy. We see the similar pattern with the United States. The United States started with a great legal structure, but now the government at all levels is exerting their influence over all aspects of the economy. The only difference is it appears to be occurring at a faster rate. It appears this life-cycle of the legal structure goes through a shorter life cycle. The Roman Republic lasted 500 years before it transformed from a republic to a dictatorship. Then the Roman Empire lasted another 500 years before it completely collapsed under an oppressive government. The Soviet Union lasted only about 70 years, while the United States appears to be falling apart after 200 years after its creation. This life-cycle of the legal structure shortened because of technology. Technology allows government to control its population and rapidly change the legal structure . Further, modern states can easily round up trouble makers and quickly execute them.

Another trend that occurred in Ancient Rome, and is currently happening in Europe and the United States is a slow down in a population growth rate. Economic prosperity always seems to slow down a country’s population growth rate. Many people want to accumulate wealth. As the level of society’s wealth increases, it takes longer time to accumulate this wealth. The antithesis of wealth is children. Unfortunately, bearing and rising children are time intensive and can hinder the accumulation of wealth. Therefore, in wealthy societies, many couples have no kids or very few kids. Further, having children and families hampers the ability to obtain a higher education. This naturally leads to the population slow down.

European countries like Germany are close to a zero population growth rate, whereas the United States has some population growth, resulting from immigration. Over time, less people means fewer consumers. All industries would see a gradual decline of demand for their products. Also, all units of government have less people to regulate and control. This is the crux. Government rarely contracts its size, scope, and mission. If government keeps its original size or keeps growing, a smaller population means people have to pay larger tax bills. Then higher taxes and more regulations over time can become so burdensome that the economy fails. We are starting to see this in the United States. For example, many cities in the State of New York are experiencing population declines. Residents are fleeing, but the size of municipal governments is not decreasing. Instead, they are devising new and higher taxes, which further drive businesses and people from the State of New York.

Home | Table of Contents | Next Chapter

References

[1] Starr, Chester G. 1971. The Ancient Romans. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 12-16.

[2] Nardo, Don. 2002. The Rise of the Roman Empire. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press, Inc., p. 23.

[3] Ibid, p. 22.

[4] Ibid, p. 25.

[5] Starr, Chester G. 1971. The Ancient Romans. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, p. 21.

[6] Crawford, Michael. 1978. The Roman Republic. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, p. 46.

[7] Grant, Michael. 1999. The Collapse and Recovery of the Roman Empire. London and New York, NY: Routledge, p. 68.

[8] Starr, Chester G. 1971. The Ancient Romans. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, p. 158.

[9] Ibid, p. 130.

[10] Ibid, pp. 152-155.

[11] Crawford, Michael. 1978. The Roman Republic. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, p. 46.

[12] Ibid, p. 124.

[13] Starr, Chester G. 1971. The Ancient Romans. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 82-85.

[14] Crawford, Michael. 1978. The Roman Republic. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, p. 162.

[15] Ibid, p. 176.

[16] Ibid, p. 161.

[17] Starr, Chester G. 1971. The Ancient Romans. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 72-73.

[18] Ibid, pp. 116-118.

[19] Ibid, p. 72.

[20] Ibid, p. 116.

[21] Ibid, pp. 78-79.

[22] Ibid, pp. 118-119.

[23] Ibid, p. 73.

[24] Crawford, Michael. 1978. The Roman Republic. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, p. 134.

[25] Ibid, pp. 102-108.

[26] Ibid, p. 141.

[27] Starr, Chester G. 1971. The Ancient Romans. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 120-121.

[28] Ibid, p. 87.

[29] Ibid, pp. 86-88.

[30] Ibid, p. 92.

[31] Ibid, p. 132.

[32] Ibid, p. 124.

[33] Ibid, p. 134.

[34] Ibid, pp. 138-139.

[35] Ibid, p. 104.

[36] Ibid, pp. 144-145.

[37] Ibid, pp. 179-180.

[38] Grant, Michael. 1999. The Collapse and Recovery of the Roman Empire. London and New York, NY: Routledge, p. 46.

[39] Starr, Chester G. 1971. The Ancient Romans. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, p. 198.

[40] Ibid, p. 197.

[41] Ibid, p. 199.

[42] Ibid, p. 173.

[43] Ibid, p. 142.

[44] Grant, Michael. 1999. The Collapse and Recovery of the Roman Empire. London and New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 35-38.

[45] Ibid, pp. 39-43.

[46] Starr, Chester G. 1971. The Ancient Romans. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 197-198.

[47] Ibid, p. 191.

[48] Grant, Michael. 1999. The Collapse and Recovery of the Roman Empire. London and New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 3-13.

[49] Ibid, p. 16.

[50] Starr, Chester G. 1971. The Ancient Romans. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, p. 207.