• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Rome’s Cursus Honorum

Status
Not open for further replies.

AoM

Member
Aug 8, 2012
2,237
1
0
With Trump's inauguration almost upon us, I thought I'd write up a post on how the Romans were able to avoid situations like this.

Latin for ”course of honors", the cursus honorum of the Roman Republic was the mandatory political ladder for all men aspiring to power and political life.

An aspiring Roman would first start by serving in the military, getting experience in an area that was vital to Rome's success. Next, they would run for the office of quaestor, where they would get experience with money and finances. They could then run for the office of aedile, a position which was responible for public events (although this office was optional). After that, the man would run for the office of praetor, whose main duty was to preside over law courts. Lastly, the man would be able to run for Rome's most important office, known as consul (there were two of them). Only after going through the above steps could a Roman man achieve this highest office. Along the way, he received experience in numerous domains of Roman politics, which gave him the skills necessary to be an effective consul. It's worth noting that the term for each office was only one year (and there were age restrictions for each office as well). Of course, this doesn't mean that there weren't any incompetent consuls, or that no men were able to skip offices and generally overlook the official restrictions. But the system itself was designed to keep someone with no experience from attaining what was the most powerful office in Rome. Here's a helpful pic from wikipedia:



I'm pretty unfamiliar with politics in other countries. I assume some have to have something similar.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
I'm not sure we want to be picking the Roman Empire as an example of functioning democratic government, or government that never fell victim to authoritarian populists, or really as an example of anything relating to 21st century politics. The word populist is derived from a Latin word "populares", which described one of the factions in Roman politics. One of the most famous of the Populares became known by the name Emperor Augustus after seizing all power in a usurpation aided by his policies of supporting the urban middle-class against the senatorial elite.
 

AoM

Member
Aug 8, 2012
2,237
1
0
I'm not sure we want to be picking the Roman Empire as an example of functioning democratic government, or government that never fell victim to authoritarian populists, or really as an example of anything relating to 21st century politics. The word populist is derived from a Latin word "populares", which described one of the factions in Roman politics, one of whom became known by the name Emperor Augustus after seizing all power in a popular usurpation.

I'm not picking the Roman Empire; I'm looking at a specific system which was used during the Roman Republic.
 

marrec

Banned
Oct 11, 2010
42,661
37
860
I'm not picking the Roman Empire; I'm looking at a specific system which was used during the Roman Republic.

Thanks for the graphic and the write up, fascinating. I love Roman history but never visualized the political structure so clearly.


This is basically arguing that all populists are Donald Trump tho? Cause none of the men mentioned in the first few paragraphs bare any resemblance to Trump other than being populists.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
I'm not picking the Roman Empire; I'm looking at a specific system which was used during the Roman Republic.

I know, and I'm pointing out that one of the two predominant political factions during the era of the Republic was an explicitly populist party, that the cursus honorum did almost nothing to rein in, and ultimately brought about the end of the Republic. So what's the lesson here?
 

danm999

Member
Jul 15, 2014
10,832
0
0
Trump strikes me more as one of the Gracchi; the populist Tribunicians of the Plebs who tried to up end the old order ending in a lot of violence and turbulence.
 

AoM

Member
Aug 8, 2012
2,237
1
0
I know, and I'm pointing out that one of the two predominant political factions during the era of the Republic was an explicitly populist party, that the cursus honorum did almost nothing to rein in, and ultimately brought about the end of the Republic. So what's the lesson here?

That someone who wants to attain the highest office in a given political system should be required to have experience in said political system before reaching said highest office.
 

RiZ III

Member
Jun 6, 2004
7,976
0
0
A system of government that led to the rise of a permanent dictatorship isn't really a good role model. Yea it's nice in a way that a person had to rise through the ranks before obtaining the highest office, but the Roman Republic had plenty of shitty people make their way up the ladder. Sulla, Caesar, Augustus, etc..
 

sphagnum

Banned
Oct 26, 2009
14,213
0
0
Trump strikes me more as one of the Gracchi; the populist Tribunicians of the Plebs who tried to up end the old order ending in a lot of violence and turbulence.

Nah, there's a reason the Soviets liked the Gracchi. Trump would never redistribute land (or in a modern context, property might work better).
 

danm999

Member
Jul 15, 2014
10,832
0
0
Nah, there's a reason the Soviets liked the Gracchi. Trump would never redistribute land (or in a modern context, property might work better).

Oh certainly not in policy. Trump isn't going to embark on any wealth redistribution anytime soon (at least, not TOWARDS) the disadvantaged.

But the populism, the disregard for rule of law, the hostility towards political elites, the restorative animus they made to a bygone era where Rome was greater than it was to their day, etc.
 

The Boat

Member
Sep 22, 2010
9,850
2
615
Thanks for the graphic and the write up, fascinating. I love Roman history but never visualized the political structure so clearly.



This is basically arguing that all populists are Donald Trump tho? Cause none of the men mentioned in the first few paragraphs bare any resemblance to Trump other than being populists.

I thought the article did a pretty good job in explaining the similarities between those men and the context, they're not saying they're exactly the same. Just thought it was interesting.
 

Sulla1980

Member
Jan 18, 2009
674
0
0
But the populism, the disregard for rule of law, the hostility towards political elites, the restorative animus they made to a bygone era where Rome was greater than it was to their day, etc.

I hadn't considered that before; certainly works with the populism/ant-elitism.

I am always reminded of the constant Roman cry for a better bygone era when I hear "Make America great again."
 

SRG01

Member
Jan 29, 2007
18,607
0
0
The idea that only a specific class could attain political power goes against the idea of democracy itself.
 
Dec 25, 2006
297
0
830
I've been reading some Greek history recently and they had another method of protecting their democracy - Ostracism. They would simply just exile people that were deemed a threat to society. This is the source of the same word we use today for the act of shunning someone.

Though it was typically used to put down potential tyrants, it wasn't always the case and wasn't always considered a punishment. Sometimes someone came along who wasn't necessarily a bad dude, but had just gotten too popular and threatened to rock the democracy boat, so they would just ship him out to calm the waters.

Basically, each year the assembly would hold a vote on if they wanted to conduct an ostracism. If that succeeded, it would then go to the public (i.e. men), who would then each vote on a person to be removed from society and be exiled from Athens.

Any person that got 6000 votes would have to leave for 10 years on penalty of death. The ostracized kept their property and all their rights were restored when they returned after their exile period.

Basically, the 'vote them off the island' approach.
 

AoM

Member
Aug 8, 2012
2,237
1
0
Roman political system was built on a philosophy of basically eternal conquest

Maybe in theory but in actuality Romes political system was way worse than what we have.

Definitely not disputing these. Just highlighting one specific aspect.

The idea that only a specific class could attain political power goes against the idea of democracy itself.

I agree, but it's a tricky thing to balance and has two sides (the corrupt career politician vs. the guy with very little political experience).
 
Jun 9, 2011
16,645
0
0
www.neogaf.com
I don't like this result one bit, and I personally think this is as great a challenge as we've ever had to the dignity of our Presidency, but something like this would be worse.

Trump is just a signal that we've entered a new age in America - a return to terrible 19th century politics and politicians and less global relevance. We had our century, it's time to be just another Democracy half the world laughs at again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.