If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website.

If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.

Main content

The Roman Republic


  • Rome went from being one of many city-states in the Italian Peninsula to being the center of the most powerful empire in the world between the fifth century BCE and the first century CE.
  • During the Republican period of Rome, political offices and institutions were designed to prevent any one man from becoming too powerful. These systems began to break down in the first century BCE.
  • Rome was able to gain its empire in large part by extending some form of citizenship to many of the people it conquered.
  • Military expansion drove economic development, bringing enslaved people and loot back to Rome, which in turn transformed the city of Rome and Roman culture.

Political institutions

How did Rome go from being one of many city-states in the Italian peninsula to being the center of the most powerful empire in the ancient world? Part of the answer lies in the political institutions that Rome developed early in its history. As Rome expanded its influence over more and more areas, its political institutions proved both resilient and adaptable, allowing it to incorporate diverse populations.
According to Roman tradition, the Republic began in 509 BCE when a group of noblemen overthrew the last king of Rome. The Romans replaced the king with two consuls—rulers who had many of the same powers as the king but were elected to serve one-year terms. Each consul could veto, or reject, the actions of the other consul. Although the office of consul probably did not exist in its final form until around 300 BCE, the idea behind this change—to prevent any one man from becoming too powerful—was present early on in Roman thought and shaped many of Rome’s political institutions.
Roman political institutions reflected Roman society, which was divided into two classes: the patricians, wealthy elites, and the plebeians, the common people. Initially, only the patricians were able to hold political office and make important decisions. For example, plebeians could not join the Roman Senate—an advisory body unable to create laws on its own but whose recommendations were taken seriously by the consuls. To become a senator, a Roman had to have held a political office, and plebeians could not. Over time, however, the plebeians were able to gain more influence in the political system.
Between the years 494 and 287 BCE, new political offices for plebeians were created and access to higher office, including the consulship, was opened to them. Voting assemblies and councils were established that gave plebeians more say in the politics of Rome. In 287 BCE, a law removed the last barrier to plebeian political participation by abolishing the requirement that proposed laws had to be approved by patrician senators before the Plebeian Council could consider them.
The Plebeian Council had real power and influence in Roman politics and some plebeians gained power and wealth under these new arrangements, but many remained poor. One reason that political rights did not lead to major changes was that the Comitia Centuriata—the main voting assembly that elected consuls and other important officials—was organized based on wealth. Each century—or voting group—had one vote, but the wealthy were split into smaller groups than the poor, giving the vote of a wealthy Roman more influence.
In what ways did the Romans limit the political power of any one man?
How did Roman political structures limit the influence of the poor?


Although the voting system might appear a deliberate strategy to empower the wealthy, it was actually a reflection of the Roman military structure. The Comitia Centuriata was named for the century—literally a group of 100 soldiers, though in practice the division was never so exact—which was the standard Roman military unit under the kingdom and most of the republican era. Men were divided into classes based on their wealth because soldiers had to provide their own equipment. Only wealthy Romans could afford high-quality weapons and armor, which made them more effective soldiers. Men without property were not eligible for military service and these poorest Romans, though the largest class in numbers, were placed into the smallest number of centuries for voting.
Part of the reason that the Romans saw no problem with allowing the wealthy to have greater political influence was because they believed that those who had the most wealth also had the most to lose from Roman defeat, so the wealthy had better motivation to be good soldiers and a better sense of what was good policy for Rome.
What was the reasoning behind dividing the military into units based on wealth?

Foreign policy and expansion

The Romans did not set out any deliberate plan to build an empire. Instead, Rome expanded as it came into conflict with surrounding city-states, kingdoms, and empires and had to create ways to incorporate these new territories and populations. The Romans did not try to turn everyone they conquered into a Roman. For the most part, cities and regions that came under Roman control were allowed to maintain their existing cultural and political institutions. The only major requirement that Rome imposed on its defeated enemies was that they provide soldiers for military campaigns. In the ancient world, military victory usually meant a share of the loot taken from the conquered, so participating on the winning side of a conflict offered incentives to Rome’s new allies.
Most conquered enemies were offered some level of Roman citizenship, sometimes with full voting rights. Because a person had to be physically present in Rome to vote, the extension of voting rights beyond the population of the city itself did not drastically alter the political situation in Rome. However, the offer of citizenship did help to build a sense of shared identity around loyalty to Rome.
In order to manage the new territories that came under their influence, the Romans created formal provinces and appointed former political officeholders to manage them. Given the distance between most provinces and Rome, these governors often had considerable power and flexibility in dealing with local issues. The Romans tried to create a balance between giving governors enough power to control their provinces and preventing governors from becoming so powerful that they could challenge Rome’s authority.
Why might Rome have offered conquered people some level of citizenship?

Economic development

Although Rome had little interest in managing the daily affairs of its allies, it had to adapt as its influence spread. Roads were a way to extend Roman military and economic power; they made the movement of both soldiers and goods easier and faster. The Romans also minted coins as their influence spread, and in 211 BCE they introduced a small silver coin called a denarius, which became the standard unit of currency for much of the Roman period.
A standardized currency facilitated trade across the growing Roman world. Coins could be exchanged for any goods or services and were easy to transport. Currency made it easier to relocate and direct resources, and this in turn encouraged more economic interactions.
The Romans also engaged in trade across the Mediterranean Sea. Their network of trading contacts expanded along with their political influence since trade relations were usually dependent on good political relations. The combination of fighting piracy, building roads, minting coins, and extending military protection over an increasingly large area created many opportunities for economic interactions and growth.
Map showing Roman expansion up to around 100 BCE; by this time, Rome controlled much of the western Mediterranean. Image credit: Ancient History Encyclopedia
Like all ancient societies, Rome’s economy was based on agriculture, which was incredibly labor intensive. As Rome fought more foreign wars, many small landholders were away serving in the military for longer periods. If they failed to return or their farms went bankrupt in their absence, wealthy Romans bought their land, creating larger and larger farms, known as latifundia. Further, it was common practice to enslave and sell war captives; the increasing number of military conquests brought many enslaved people into the Italian peninsula. Because of economies of scale and because enslaved people could be be made to work longer and harder than free Romans, this trend further increased economic production. The increased income from expansion supported development by creating demand for greater supplies of agricultural produce. Some owners of large farms even switched from growing staple grains to high-value crops, such as olives and grapes, or raising animals—this wouldn’t have been an option for small family farms.
Review the map above. How might Roman expansion have impacted trade patterns?
War captives were often sold into slavery. How might this practice have connected Roman military expansion with economic development in the Italian peninsula?

Urban development of Rome

Even as the empire expanded, all important political decisions for the empire were still made in Rome, and the city itself grew and changed with its empire. An increasingly large urban population required the development of sanitation systems to maintain a minimum level of public health. The Romans had developed a sewer system early in the city’s history. The first aqueduct—a structure to deliver water to the city over long distances—was built in 312 BCE, as was the first road, the Via Appia.
Map showing the route of the Via Appia, Rome’s first road, in white. Image credit: Wikimedia, public domain.
Remains of the Aqua Claudia in Rome; water flowed through the channels near the top of the structure. Image credit: Wikimedia, Diana, GFDL or CC-BY-SA-3.0
The ability to collect taxes in currency, growth of economic production and trade, and military victories all provided funds for building projects in Rome. Besides roads, aqueducts, and sewers, the Romans built temples and political buildings. Victorious generals would dedicate temples to particular gods, and they paid for these temples with the loot they captured on campaign.
How did military expansion abroad directly impact the city of Rome?
Why would a road system have helped Rome militarily? How would a road system have encouraged economic activity?
A Roman road in modern-day Turkey, near Tarsus. Image credit: Wikimedia, Nedim Ardoğa, CC BY-SA 3.0


Rome became the most powerful state in the world by the first century BCE through a combination of military power, political flexibility, economic expansion, and more than a bit of good luck. This expansion changed the Mediterranean world and also changed Rome itself. New institutions, such as provincial government, were created to deal with the management of empire; culture was transformed as outside influences, especially from Greece, came into fashion in Rome; and the city itself was physically transformed by the influx of loot and people brought by successes abroad.

Want to join the conversation?

  • duskpin sapling style avatar for user Chartist 12345
    How did the Death of Caesar bring about the end of the Rome republic? i know this wasn't in the text, but I'm just curious.
    (17 votes)
    Default Khan Academy avatar avatar for user
    • duskpin ultimate style avatar for user Samson Mathias
      The Death of Caesar sparked a power vacuum in which the 2nd Triumvirate made up of Augustus Caesar, Marc Anthony and some other guy. So the other guy dies. Creating a war between Marc and Augustus where Marc went to Egypt with Cleopatra and Augustus to the East. Augustus wins and he eliminates the power of the senate though it is there. It doesn't have power and acts as advisors.
      (8 votes)
  • blobby green style avatar for user camcdowe
    Did the Romans invent Roman Nuemerals or are they called that for another reason?
    (5 votes)
    Default Khan Academy avatar avatar for user
    • aqualine tree style avatar for user David Alexander
      Like the Greeks, the Romans had no specific set of symbols to use for numbers, so used letters from their alphabet. It took the influence of the Arab Muslims to bring to the west the numerals we now use worldwide, AND the concept of "zero", which Roman (and ancient Greek) systems lacked. Thank you, Muslims.
      (14 votes)
  • starky sapling style avatar for user mattcat402
    Why are humans so cruel? I actually cant stop thinking about it. Everything I do comes at the expense of another living being, human or animal. The parts of my phone, mined by slaves. Buying meat? Supporting the suffering of animals. Some farms put them in tiny cages, where they never see the light. Tyson has farms where chickens are cramped together, some dropping dead and no one caring. Some people hunt animals for sport, taking their pelt or other parts and leaving their bodies to rot. Piles of corpses, just because some idiot thinks its fun to shoot animals. I'm so disappointed in humanity. This world would be cleaner and happier if we didn't exist. I mean, I want to live....but come on. Nothing can change the suffering of people or animals, because we benefit from it. I feel guilty, and there's nothing i can do to help it. Animal conservation jobs are hardly paid. You know why? Because they want fewer people to work the jobs. They lose money! God forbid!! I can't stop thinking about it! It makes me so sad, so angry. I just want to stop being human, to be reincarnated in a world where humans don't exist. History makes me even madder. Learning about the things we did makes me want to ball up, lay in bed, and shift away to another reality where i'm an animal, not a stinky human
    (4 votes)
    Default Khan Academy avatar avatar for user
    • spunky sam red style avatar for user Shafqat91
      First of all, about all the sufferings you said animals have, there are are also humans in this world who have the same sufferings, so humans first. Because if you were an animal, you couldn't have possibly made this comment.
      Then you said that buying meat is supporting the suffering of animals, bro, has the stock of goats, cows or sheep ever got drastically down? (or pigs')
      Hunting animals for sport is 100% wrong but buying meat isn't, or if no one buys meat, then just imagine how much there population would grow. For example, lets take india, where eating cows is banned, millions of cows run astray, some get bumped into trucks, some die by eating polyethene's, some die because of hunger and they lay dead here and there.(so that wouldn't be suffering or what?)
      I feel guilty that humans are ready to help a dog or a monkey by keeping them as pets and leaving millions of helpless humans begging and letting them die because of hunger!
      About humans, you are totally right that many humans have to suffer because of us.
      (4 votes)
  • blobby green style avatar for user cameliashakti
    I have one question. I know it says that abandoned farms were bought by wealthy romans and land amassed. But I did not understand what facilitated the jump from staple grain production to olives and cattle. And why was this option not available for smaller farms? I
    (5 votes)
    Default Khan Academy avatar avatar for user
  • male robot johnny style avatar for user luke crowl
    in urban development it says Romes ability to collect taxes in currency, growth of economic production and trade, and military victories all provided funds for building projects in Rome what does that mean
    (1 vote)
    Default Khan Academy avatar avatar for user
  • spunky sam blue style avatar for user Bekzod Kimsanboev
    So, the name Italy comes from "Viteliu" and Greeks as "Joseph Williams" explains. So then, what people in Rome and whole Roman Republic called themselves ? Romans?
    (3 votes)
    Default Khan Academy avatar avatar for user
  • leaf red style avatar for user Elisabeth
    Who was the emperor of Rome in 100 B.C.?
    (1 vote)
    Default Khan Academy avatar avatar for user
  • blobby purple style avatar for user 20016484
    How does Rome do so good in war?
    (2 votes)
    Default Khan Academy avatar avatar for user
  • aqualine sapling style avatar for user Amelia Dubrovsky
    Sorry this isn't about the actual material in the text, but I'm using this document as evidence for an essay I have to write. I was wondering what the date of publication was for this document?
    (2 votes)
    Default Khan Academy avatar avatar for user
  • duskpin ultimate style avatar for user Ibrahim S M
    As stated above, under Economic Development, "if small farm landowners went to war, and their holdings went bankrupt or they did not return, the farms would be taken up by nobels." So how would this motivate people, especially farmers, to join the army?
    (2 votes)
    Default Khan Academy avatar avatar for user