GOVERNMENT The Autonomous Republic of Crimea is an integral part of Ukraine. Has a government - Council of Ministers and Parliament - Verkhovna Rada. The ARC has its own Constitution and its own symbols - the Coat of Arms, the Flag and the Anthem. The capital of the ARC is the city

16. The political structure of the Roman Empire.

The Roman Empire (lat. Imperium Romanum, Res publica Romana (Roman Republic), Greek Βασιλεία Ῥωμαίων) is a post-republican phase in the development of ancient Roman civilization, feature which had an autocratic form of government and large territorial possessions in Europe and the Mediterranean. The chronological framework for the existence of the Roman Empire covers a period of time starting from the reign of the first Emperor Augustus, until the fall of the empire in the West, that is, from 27 BC. e. to 476 years. In the East, the Roman Empire continued to exist, gradually transforming into Byzantium.

The periodization of the history of the Roman Empire differs depending on the approach. So, when considering the state-legal structure, two main stages are usually distinguished:

1. Principate - a form of government that combines republican and monarchical features, existed in the 1st century BC. e. - 3rd century AD e. The period of the Principate can be divided into the following stages:

a) The reign of the Julio-Claudian dynasty and the formation of the principate system (27 BC - 68 AD)

b) Year four emperors - a large-scale crisis of power (68-69)

c) The reign of the Flavian and Antonine dynasties - the heyday of the principate system (69-192)

d) The reign of the Sever dynasty - the beginning of the formation of the military-bureaucratic system (193-235)

e) The crisis of the III century - a full-scale socio-economic and political crisis of the Roman Empire (235-284) historical literature to refer to the specific form of monarchy that developed in ancient Rome during the period of the early empire (27 BC - 284 AD), combining monarchical and republican features. The holders of supreme power were mainly called the title of princeps, this emphasized their status not as an autocratic monarch, but as the first among equals.

In historiography, the title "emperor" was fixed, although the head of state had the main powers as a people's tribune and princeps.

The principate system began to take shape under Augustus, whose power was based on the combination of various magistracies. Augustus and his successors, being princeps of the Senate, simultaneously concentrated in their hands the highest civil (life-long people's tribune) and military power. Formally, the republican structure continued to exist: the Senate, comitia (people's assemblies), magistracies (except for censors). But these institutions have lost their former political significance, since the elections in them and their activities were regulated by the princeps. The real power was concentrated in the hands of the trailer-emperor and people close to him, his personal office, the staff of which was constantly growing, and the scope of activities was expanding.

The term "principle" in the historical literature corresponds to the term " early empire”, which is considered more accurate. The principate was replaced by a domination, where monarchical features are much more clearly visible, and republican institutions for the most part abolished, some reorganized into monarchical.

2. Dominate (284-476) - a political system closer to the monarchy. Within the period, the following stages can be distinguished:

a) The reign of Diocletian and Constantine I - the formation of a system of dominance, administrative, military and socio-economic reforms (284-337)

b) Empire of the 4th century AD. e. - a fairly stable existence of the system, a tendency towards political delimitation of the western and eastern parts of the empire (337-395)

c) The final division of the empire into Eastern and Western (395-476)

Dominat (Latin dominātus "domination", from dominus "lord", "master") - a form of government in ancient Rome that replaced the principate and established by Diocletian (284-305). The period of tetrarchy is included in the dominant.

The word "dominate" usually refers to the period of the history of Ancient Rome from the 4th to the 6th century AD. e. In another way, this period can be called "Late Antiquity" "Late Empire". The term "dominate" comes from the usual address to the emperor for that time - Dominus et deus noster sic fueri iubet (literally "lord and god" (dominus et deus)). Domitian was the first to call himself that. If at the end of the 1st century such a claim of the emperor was met with very hostility by the Romans, then in end III century, the term dominus was perceived by society rather calmly.

The word dominus can also be translated as "sovereign".

Dominate became the next phase of the gradual transformation of the Roman Republic into an absolute monarchy - with unlimited power of the emperor. During the period of the principate, the old republican institutions were preserved and formally continued to function, and the head of state - the princeps ("first") - was considered only the first citizen of the republic.

During the period of dominance, the Roman Senate turns into an estate with decorative functions. The main title of the head of state instead of "princeps" ("first") and "emperor" (originally an honorary title of military leaders) becomes "August" (Augustus - "sacred") and "dominus" (Dominus - "lord", which meant that all the rest are his subjects, being in relation to him in the position of subject sons or slaves).

The emperor Diocletian is usually considered the founder of the dominate system, although others can be called its predecessors. emperors III century, in particular, Aurelian. Diocletian established at his court customs borrowed from the East. The main center of power was the bureaucratic apparatus, focused on the personality of the dominus. The committee in charge of collecting taxes was called the committee of "sacred (that is, imperial) bounties" (sacrarum largitionum).

The emperor issued imperial laws, appointed officials at all levels and many officers of the army, and, until the end of the 4th century, bore the title of head of the college of pontiffs.

Despite the strengthening of the power of the emperor and the even greater sacralization of his power, some republican traditions continued to exist. So, there were still such old republican magistracies as consuls and praetors - however, which in late antiquity were only honorary titles. The tradition of Roman popular assemblies continued to exist in the army (Roman army contiones), which the emperors were forced to reckon with.

An important detail that did not allow calling the regime of domination a classical monarchy was that the principle of heredity of power was not fully established in Rome. To belong to ruling dynasty was a rather important argument in the struggle for power, but was not a mandatory characteristic of the applicant, and the emperors, in order to ensure the legal transfer of power to their descendants, appointed them as their formal co-rulers in childhood.

The date of the end of the history of the Roman Empire is debatable. For the West, the date usually given is 476 - the year of the deposition of the emperor Romulus Augustulus, or 480 - the year of the death of Nepos, the last legally legitimate emperor. For Eastern empire, whose statehood existed, changing, for about thousands years, dates are called - the end of the 5th century, 610, 1204, 1453 and others.

in the assimilation (assimilation) of conquerors and conquered, Roman and provincial elements;

in changing the unifying power itself;

in uniting the parts with the whole by means of a state administration first created for this purpose;

in bringing together legal legal ideals and

in unifying moral ideals.

This unification process, fruitful and progressive, reaches its full development towards the end of the second century. But he also has reverse side: it is accompanied by a decrease in the cultural level and the disappearance of freedom, which manifests itself in the III century. Meanwhile, a religious union is taking place. ancient world on the basis of Christianity, whose triumph over paganism fills the 4th c.

During the 5th century Rome is repeatedly attacked by the barbarians, who in 476 will forever destroy classical Roman civilization. In the new dualism, a new historical period is born on Roman soil. The success of social unification and assimilation of the heterogeneous national elements of the provinces is especially evident in the history of the emperors themselves, whose personal fate and character becomes the most prominent factor in the history of the empire.

The oldest type of communal organization in Rome was the clan, whose members considered themselves descended from one ancestor. They were united by a common cult, land ownership and legal proceedings. The owner of supreme power in the community of Rome was the king - a representative of one of the most noble and powerful families, with patriarchal power, and subsequently an elected dignitary with emergency powers.

2.1. Public relations

In the most ancient era of the history of Ancient Rome, there is no pure tribal system, that is, a system in which the genera would be independent of any organization. From the beginning of its history, Rome has been a community. Nevertheless, traces of the tribal system are numerous. (21) The clan retains all its significance as a religious union: the members of the clan are united religious cult. This means that the clan can issue decrees, impose punishments on the guilty members up to complete excommunication, etc.

In the field of civil, property relations in more ancient times there was a tribal community of real estate, a community of land ownership. In the historical era, this community no longer exists. It was transformed into family property, leaving only traces in the right of patrimonial inheritance and patrimonial guardianship. According to the laws of the XII tables, if the deceased left no relatives, then the inheritance and guardianship pass to the clan, to persons belonging to the same clan with the deceased.

Thus, the emerging state, embracing independent clans, weakened the meaning of clan ties, divided the clans into elements. Such elements are families - familiae. (3) This element is strong in the face of the state. The ancient Roman family is a closed, closely knit circle of people. The state deals only with the head of the family, who closes the family to the outside civil world. He is responsible for her, but on the other hand he enjoys all the rights within her, de jure he is the unlimited ruler here. The family circle includes: the householder's wife, his children, grandchildren, etc. Familia is everything that is under the authority of the head of the family, the entire sphere of his private possession and domination. Within this sphere, the head of the family rules unlimitedly: he has the right of life and death over everyone, the right to sell, etc. Only politically, adult family members who are able to bear arms are independent: they participate in the national assembly on an equal basis with their householders and, therefore, , have all the then known rights of a citizen. (fourteen)

Over time, people appeared on the territory belonging to the clans who were not included in any of them. These were freed slaves or their descendants, foreigners, artisans and merchants, people expelled for violating tribal customs, forcibly resettled from conquered cities. These people in Rome were called plebeians. These were also immigrants to Rome, but from such communities and tribes that enjoyed civil law reciprocity. Such are the communities of the Latin Union. Latins were not considered foreigners. They could acquire property, make deals with citizens, and act on their own behalf in court. Therefore, a Latin, moving to Rome, did not need the patronage of wealthy Romans, but he did not have any political rights, since he did not belong to any of the genera that make up the curiae and tribes. With the growth of Rome, the number of such immigrants increased, they remained to live in Rome from generation to generation. Thus, next to the layer of indigenous Romans, a layer of a new population gradually grew, which became known as the plebs. (nine)

The indigenous people who lived in clans were called patricians. Returning to the question of the origin of the Roman estates, we can take as a basis the "complex theory":

Patricians were indeed indigenous citizenship. They were a full-fledged "Roman people";

In direct connection with them were clients who received land, livestock from them, enjoyed their protection in court, etc. For this, they had to serve in the military detachments of their patrons, provide them with financial assistance, and perform various work;

The plebeians stood outside the tribal organization of the patricians, i.e. did not belong to the "Roman people", did not have access to communal land and were deprived of political rights. The patricians became a closed group of nobility, opposed to the broad mass of the plebeians. (32)

The main sides of the Roman social order ancient period are: clan, family and curia. The entire civil and political mechanism is designed only for citizens belonging to one or another of the clans and enrolled in one or another curia. Outside of belonging to one of the clans, it was impossible to be a full citizen. Consequently, the patricians, in their original idea, are by no means a class of the rich or aristocrats, this name denotes only the indigenous and therefore full-fledged inhabitants of Rome.

Introduction

In his control work I want to consider such a topic as "The State Structure of Ancient Rome."

Ancient Rome - it is one of the largest slave states, which left the brightest mark in the history of mankind. His cultural legacy had a profound impact.

The state is one of the most perfect, complex and contradictory creations. human civilization. Most of known from the history of peoples - this is a picture that tells about the formation, clashes and death state formations, about a sophisticated and cruel struggle for power, in which people did not spare either their own kind or themselves.

The duration of Roman history is estimated at 12 centuries. During such a long existence, the Roman state and law did not remain unchanged, they went through a certain path of development. It is customary to divide the history of Roman society and the state into 3 main periods:

• 1. The royal period (VIII-VI centuries BC).
• 2. Republican period (VI-I centuries BC).
• 3. Imperial period (I-V centuries AD).

The heyday of classical slave relations continued into the early early Roman Empire. AT recent centuries its existence was observed decomposition slave system. Slavery became a brake on further development.

Literary data on the emergence of Rome are legendary and contradictory. This is noted by the ancient authors themselves. So, for example, Diosinius of Halicarnassus says that "there are many disagreements both on the question of the time of the founding of the city of Rome, and on the personality of its founder." The history of the formation of the ancient Roman state is to be studied on the basis of existing myths, legends and traditions, which presents a certain complexity and subjectivity in the presentation of historical assumptions.

roman society slaveholding curia

The ancient settlement of Rome lived in clans ruled by elders. The genus was originally a close-knit team, connected common origin, common ownership of land, as well as veneration of ancestors.

Over time, people appeared on the territory belonging to the clans who were not part of any of them. These were freed slaves or their descendants, foreigners, artisans and merchants, people expelled for violating tribal customs, forcibly resettled from conquered cities. These newcomers in Rome were called plebeians.

The original population, who lived in clans, was called patricians. Patricians were full citizens. They split into three tribes. Each tribe consisted of 100 genera. Every 10 births formed a curia. The curia formed the general popular assembly of the Roman community (the curiat comitia). It accepted or rejected bills proposed to it, elected all senior officials, acted as the highest court of appeal in deciding the question of death penalty declared war.

The main elements of the ancient state structure of Rome are the king, the senate and the popular assembly.

The king (rex) is the supreme ruler of the state; all the functions of state power are concentrated in his hands. He is both the supreme commander of the people and the guardian internal order, and a representative for the people before the gods. As a commander, he commands the military forces of the people, appoints commanders, and so on. As the guardian of internal order, he has the right to judge and punish all citizens up to the right of life and death.

Rome is not, however, a dynastic monarchy. It is possible that in the prehistoric era, Rome also knew royal power, which was inherited in some way, but, in any case, from the very beginning of the historical era, there can be no talk of such heredity.

After the death of the king, at the time of the interregnum sovereignty in the state passes to the Senate. The Senate chooses from its midst 10 people who take turns (for 5 days each) govern the state until a candidate for king is selected. The scheduled candidate is proposed by the next senate to the people's assembly, which vests him with power. To acquire the right to communicate with the gods, the newly elected king still needs a special dedication.

In the exercise of his power, the king may appoint assistants to himself; but whether anything like a permanent magistracy was formed already in the tsarist period, it is difficult to say. Undoubtedly there were commanders of individual military units; it is possible that during his absence the tsar left someone in the city as his deputy, but permanent judges for criminal cases, in all likelihood, date back to the era of the republic.

Next to the king stands the senate (senatus), which consisted of ancient times of all the tribal elders, who were, thus, as representatives of the clans, members of the senate. Ha, this is indicated by the previously mentioned coincidence of the number of senators with the number of births according to Roman tradition, as well as the name of the senators "patres". Later, however, with a gradual decline in the importance of childbirth and with an increase royal power, this principle of tribal representation disappears and the senate is constituted by the appointment of the king.

The role of the senate in relation to the tsar is purely deliberative: the senate discusses certain issues at the tsar's proposal, and its conclusions are of fundamental importance as councils, which are not legally binding for the tsar, but, of course, have enormous actual force.

In relation to the people, the senate plays the role of guardian. Ho and beyond that, everyone new law, adopted in the people's assembly, still needs approval for its reality.

The third element of the state structure is the popular assembly, that is, the assembly of all adult (able to bear arms) full-fledged citizens (ie, patricians). The organization of these people's assemblies is based on the division into curia, the people's assembly is convened on the initiative of the king, who makes his proposals there. These proposals are not debated in the assembly, but are simply accepted or rejected by an open oral vote (a simple "yes" or "no"). The majority of the votes in a given curia gave the vote of the curia, and the majority of the votes of these latter gave the decision of the popular assembly. The subjects of the department of popular assemblies can hardly be defined with sufficient clarity. It can be assumed that all new laws that affected more or less significantly legal system society. In the popular assembly, further, there is the admission of someone to the composition of the patricians, as well as some of the most important acts of private legal life - adoption and testament.

Finally, probably, in the meetings they also decided critical issues current domestic and foreign policy - for example, the question of declaring war, concluding peace, etc.

But, in general, whether or not to refer this or that issue to the decision of the people's assembly depended entirely on the will of the tsar, for the very people's assembly could not take place without his will.

The patriarchal nature of the ancient Roman state system eliminates the idea of ​​any legal (constitutional) rights of popular assemblies in relation to the king. In fact, of course, the tsar in all the most important cases had to seek support from the people, but legally his personal will, his supreme power was not bound by anything.

In view of the presence of all three described elements, general character Roman state structure of this period is controversial. In view of the fact that the senate and the people's assembly stand next to the tsar, the state system may seem to be a constitutional monarchy; on the other hand, due to the absence of any legal restrictions on royal power, it can be understood as an absolute monarchy; Finally, taking into account the elective nature of royal power and the comparative fullness of the powers of the later republican magistrates, especially dictators and consuls, one can also consider ancient Rome as a republic, only with a dictator for life. Equally, the internal character of this structure is also debatable: some put forward the military element in the royal power, others - the religious, theocratic element.

All these disputes find their explanation in the fact that the state structure of this period still contains all these elements together and that our current theoretical categories cannot be applied to a system that has not yet taken shape. And if it is desirable to give this system some general definition, then the most correct would be "patriarchal".

Conclusion

The expansion of the power of Rome, introducing into it more and more new elements, created two layers in the population - the dominant and the subservient. Such a dualism appears to us already in ancient, prehistoric Rome, manifesting itself in the antagonism between patricians and plebeians. The struggle between patricians and plebeians is a fact that dominates the history of the state structure, social life and legislation. ancient rome.

The Western Roman Empire ceased to exist. New states arose on its ruins, new political entities, within which the formation of feudal socio-economic relations began. And although the fall of the power of the Western Roman emperor, who had long lost prestige and influence, was not perceived by his contemporaries as major event, during world history The year 476 became the most important frontier, the end of the ancient world, the slave-owning socio-economic formation, and the beginning of the medieval period of world history, the feudal socio-economic formation.

List of used literature

• 1. Krushilo Yu.S. "Anthology on the history of the ancient world" Moscow 1980.
• 2. Struve V.V. "Anthology on the history of the ancient world" Moscow 1975.
• 3. The third volume of the history of the ancient world. Moscow 1980
• 4. Reader on the history of ancient Rome. Moscow graduate School 1987
• 5. Utchenko S.L. " Political doctrines ancient Rome III-I centuries. BC" Moscow 1977
• 6. Kuzishchin V.I. "History of Ancient Rome" Moscow, Higher School 1982
• 7. Skripilev E.A. History of state and law Ancient World. Tutorial- M. 1993
• 8. Krasheninnikova N.A. History of state and law foreign countries. Textbook - M., 1994

Public relations

Already in the most ancient era of the history of ancient Rome, we do not find in it a pure tribal system, that is, a system in which the clans would be sovereign, independent of any supreme organization. Already on the threshold of its history, Rome is a community - and even, as we have seen, a complex community. Nevertheless, traces of the recent tribal system are still very numerous.

Thus, first of all, the clan retains all its significance as a religious union: the members of the clan are bound by the unity of the religious cult. In connection with this, there is a moral control of the clan over its members: the clan watches over the purity of morals, can issue decrees related to this, impose certain punishments on guilty members, up to complete excommunication, etc.

In the field of civil, property relations in more ancient times, apparently, there was a tribal community of property, according to at least, immovable, community of land tenure14. AT historical era, however, this generality in pure form we no longer find. It has already decomposed into family property (the property of individual families), leaving only traces of its former existence in the right of tribal inheritance and the right of tribal guardianship. According to the laws of the XII tables, if the deceased did not leave relatives whose individual relationship can be proved, i.e. n. agnats, then the inheritance and guardianship pass to the clan, to persons belonging to the same clan with the deceased.

Thus, the emerging state, embracing separate, hitherto independent clans with its highest organization, weakens the significance of clan ties, decomposes the clans into their constituent elements. Such elements are families-familiae. This element is still strong in the face of the state. The ancient Roman familia is far from what our current family is. In our modern family each individual member represents a separate independent person in the eyes of the state and law; everyone can have independent property, seek and answer in court, etc. The Roman family of this era, on the contrary, is a closed, closely knit circle of persons and property, something almost impenetrable for the state. The state still knows individual individuals; in internal relations family, it does not interfere, it deals only with the head of the family, who closes the whole family to the outside civil peace. He is responsible for her, but he enjoys all the rights within her; de jure he is the unrestricted lord here. "In terms of our contemporary ideas, the Roman family was a small monarchy - with the only difference that it could not have a territory, but was a purely personal union. This closed family circle, this little monarchy, includes the householder's wife, his children, grandchildren, etc. Familia is thus everything that is under the authority of the head of the family, the whole sphere of his private possession and domination. Here, within this sphere, the head of the family rules over everything indifferently: he has the right of life and death, the right to sell, etc. over everything and everyone. a party to the process, etc.; in everything they are only the instrument of the householder. Only politically, adult family members who are able to bear arms are independent: they participate in the national assembly on an equal footing with their householders and, therefore, have all the then known rights of a citizen.

Over time, people appeared on the territory belonging to the clans who were not included in any of them. These were freed slaves or their descendants, foreigners, artisans and merchants, people expelled for violating tribal customs, forcibly resettled from conquered cities. These newcomers in Rome were called plebeians.

The origin of the plebeians can best be guessed on the basis of their legal position. These were also immigrants to Rome, but obviously from such communities and tribes that enjoyed civil law reciprocity. And those, as we know, were the communities of the Latin Union. Latins were not considered foreigners; even in Rome they could acquire property, make deals with the citizens, and act on their own behalf in court. Therefore, a Latin, moving to Rome, did not need the patronage of wealthy Romans; but, of course, not belonging to any of the genera that make up the curiae and tribes, he had no political rights, in a word, he immediately became in the position that is characteristic of the plebeians. With the growth of Rome, the number of such immigrants (sometimes involuntary) increased; they remained in Rome from generation to generation, and thus, next to a layer of native Romans and a relatively small class of clients, a layer of a new population gradually increased, which became known as the plebs.

The original population, who lived in clans, was called patricians. Returning to the question of the origin of the Roman estates, we can take as a basis his "complex theory":

Patricians were indeed indigenous citizenship. They were a full-fledged "Roman people";

· in direct connection with them were clients who received from them land, livestock, enjoyed their protection in court, etc. For this, they had to serve in the military detachments of their patrons, provide them with financial assistance, and perform various work;

· the plebeians stood outside the tribal organization of the patricians, i.e. did not belong to the "Roman people", did not have access to communal land and were deprived of political rights.

The patricians became a closed group of nobility, opposed to the broad mass of the plebeians.

The main, cornerstones of the Roman social system of the most ancient period are: clan, family and curia (according to legend, they are some intermediate link between tribes and clans). The entire civil and political mechanism is designed only for citizens belonging to one or another of the clans and enrolled in one or another curia. Outside of belonging to one of the clans, it was impossible to be a full-fledged citizen. That is why such full-fledged citizens are called patricians, that is, those who can indicate their father, their family. Consequently, the patricians, in their original idea, are by no means a class of the rich or aristocrats; this name denotes only the indigenous and therefore full-fledged inhabitants of Rome.

Political system

The main elements of the ancient state structure of Rome are the king, the senate and the popular assembly.

The king (rex) is the supreme ruler of the state; all the functions of state power are concentrated in his hands. He is both the supreme commander of the people, and the guardian of internal order, and the intercessor for the people before the gods. As a commander, he commands the military forces of the people, appoints commanders, and so on. As the guardian of internal order, he has the right to judge and punish all citizens up to the right of life and death.

Rome is not, however, a dynastic monarchy. It is possible that in the prehistoric era, Rome also knew royal power, which was inherited in some way, but, in any case, from the very beginning of the historical era, there can be no talk of such heredity.

After the death of the king, at the time of the interregnum, the supreme power in the state passes to the senate. The Senate chooses from its midst 10 people who take turns (for 5 days each) govern the state until a candidate for king is selected. The scheduled candidate is proposed by the next senate to the people's assembly, which vests him with power. To acquire the right to communicate with the gods, the newly elected king still needs a special dedication.

In the exercise of his power, the king may appoint assistants to himself; but whether anything like a permanent magistracy was formed already in the tsarist period, it is difficult to say. Undoubtedly, there were commanders of individual military units; it is possible that during his absence the tsar left someone in the city as his deputy, but permanent judges for criminal cases, in all likelihood, date back to the era of the republic.

Next to the king stands the senate (senatus), which in ancient times consisted of all tribal elders, who were, thus, as representatives of the clans, members of the senate. Ha, this is indicated by the previously mentioned coincidence of the number of senators with the number of births according to Roman tradition, as well as the name of the senators "patres". Later, however, with the gradual decline in the importance of the clans and with the strengthening of royal power, this principle of clan representation disappears and the senate is constituted by the appointment of the king.

The role of the senate in relation to the tsar is purely deliberative: the senate discusses certain issues at the tsar's proposal, and its conclusions are of fundamental importance as councils, which are not legally binding for the tsar, but, of course, have enormous actual force.

In relation to the people, the senate plays the role of guardian. But besides that, every new law adopted in the people's assembly still needs approval in order to be valid.

The third element of the state structure is the popular assembly, that is, the assembly of all adult (able to bear arms) full-fledged citizens (ie, patricians). The organization of these people's assemblies is based on the division into curia, the people's assembly is convened on the initiative of the king, who makes his proposals there. These proposals are not debated in the assembly, but are simply accepted or rejected by an open oral vote (a simple "yes" or "no"). The majority of the votes in a given curia gave the vote of the curia, and the majority of the votes of these latter gave the decision of the popular assembly. The subjects of the department of popular assemblies can hardly be defined with sufficient clarity. It can be assumed that all new laws that more or less significantly affected the legal system of society needed the sanction of the people's assemblies. In the popular assembly, further, there is the admission of someone to the composition of the patricians, as well as some of the most important acts of private law life - adoption and testament. Finally, the most important issues of current domestic and foreign policy, for example, the question of declaring war, concluding peace, etc., were probably decided at the meetings.

But, in general, whether or not to refer this or that issue to the decision of the people's assembly depended entirely on the will of the tsar, for the very people's assembly could not take place without his will.

The patriarchal nature of the ancient Roman state system eliminates the idea of ​​any legal (constitutional) rights of popular assemblies in relation to the king. In fact, of course, the tsar in all the most important cases had to seek support from the people, but legally his personal will, his supreme power was not bound by anything.

In view of the presence of all three of the described elements, the general nature of the Roman state structure of this period seems debatable. In view of the fact that the senate and the people's assembly stand next to the tsar, the state system may seem to be a constitutional monarchy; on the other hand, due to the absence of any legal restrictions on royal power, it can be understood as an absolute monarchy; Finally, taking into account the elective nature of royal power and the comparative fullness of the powers of the later republican magistrates, especially dictators and consuls, one can also consider ancient Rome as a republic, only with a dictator for life. Equally, the internal character of this structure is also debatable: some put forward the military element in the royal power, others - the religious, theocratic element.

All these disputes find their explanation in the fact that the state structure of this period still contains all these elements together and that our current theoretical categories cannot be applied to a system that has not yet taken shape. And if it is desirable to give this system any general definition, then the most correct would be "patriarchal".

Government positions and substitution

Patricians were full citizens. They split into three tribes. Each tribe consisted of 100 genera. Every 10 births formed a curia. The curia formed the general popular assembly of the Roman community (the curiat comitia). It accepted or rejected bills proposed to it, elected all senior officials, acted as the highest court of appeal in deciding the issue of the death penalty, and declared war.

By the 4th century BC. plebeians won the right to hold public office. In 367 B.C. The law of Licinius and Sextius established that one of the two consuls (highest officials) was to be elected from the plebeians, and a number of laws of 364-337. BC. they were granted the right to occupy other government positions.

In 494 BC. Tribune of the Plebs was created. The plebeian tribunes, elected by the plebeians in an amount of up to 10 people, did not have managerial power, but had the right to veto - the right to prohibit the execution of an order of any official and even resolutions of the Senate.

The affairs of direct management, the development of bills, the conclusion of peace were within the competence of the Roman Council of Elders - the Senate. It consisted of the elders of all 300 clans and that is why it was called so. These elders constituted the hereditary aristocracy of the Roman community, since the custom had taken root that they were chosen from the same family of each kind.

Military leadership, supreme priestly and some judicial functions belonged to the "king" elected by the assembly of curias, who was called rex. Historical legends call the first rex of the Roman community Romulus, there are seven rexes in total.