How did the increasing power of military leaders help bring about the end of the republic?
pls help >>
my bad heres the questions
A.
The military leaders freed the slaves that worked in the mines.
B.
The military leaders refused to help the poor in the cities.
C.
The military leaders began to get more loyalty from soldiers than the government did.
D.
The military leaders forbade the poor from serving in the military.
Probably C.
The others don’t make sense with this question.
The increasing power of military leaders played a significant role in bringing about the end of the Roman Republic. Here are the step-by-step factors that contributed to this outcome:
1. Weaknesses of the Republic: The Roman Republic faced numerous challenges during its later stages, including political corruption, economic disparities, and social unrest. These weaknesses made the republic vulnerable to the rise of ambitious military leaders.
2. Military Success: Several military leaders, including Marius, Sulla, and Pompey, achieved significant military successes and became popular among their troops and supporters. Their military victories, often in foreign wars, strengthened their influence and popularity among both the military and civilian populations.
3. Loyalty of the Legions: The loyalty of the Roman legions shifted from the state to their commanding generals. This was primarily due to the extensive military campaigns and prolonged periods spent away from Rome. The soldiers developed strong personal connections and loyalty to their generals rather than the state.
4. Political Ambition: Military leaders began to use their popularity and influence to enter politics. They used their military achievements to gain support and secure positions of power within the Roman political system, such as the consulship or a seat in the Senate.
5. The Rise of Julius Caesar: Julius Caesar, one of the most influential military leaders, used his military victories and popular support to further his political ambitions. By crossing the Rubicon River and marching on Rome, Caesar effectively started a civil war against the Republic and its Senate.
6. End of the Civil War: Caesar emerged victorious in the civil war and established himself as the de facto ruler of Rome. Although he maintained some republican institutions, his autocratic rule marked a departure from the traditional republican system.
7. Assassination of Caesar: Caesar's autocratic style of rule led to discontent among some senators who saw him as a threat to the Republican ideals. Consequently, a group of senators, including Brutus and Cassius, assassinated Caesar in 44 BCE.
8. The Second Triumvirate: Following Caesar's assassination, a power struggle ensued. Mark Antony, Lepidus, and Octavian formed the Second Triumvirate to consolidate their power. They effectively controlled Rome and the provinces, dividing them among themselves.
9. Octavian's Rise to Power: Octavian, later known as Augustus, emerged as the sole ruler after defeating Antony and Cleopatra in the Battle of Actium in 31 BCE. He established the principate, marking the transition from the Republic to the Roman Empire.
In summary, the increasing power of military leaders eroded the authority of the Roman Republic, leading to political instability, civil wars, and ultimately the establishment of the Roman Empire under Augustus.
To understand how the increasing power of military leaders brought about the end of the republic, we need to look at the historical context of ancient Rome. The Roman Republic was a political system where power was vested in the Senate and its elected officials. However, as Rome expanded its territories, the military became increasingly influential.
Here's how the increasing power of military leaders led to the end of the republic:
1. Military Success: Roman generals achieved significant military victories and expanded the republic's territories. These successes earned them popularity and loyalty from their troops, enabling them to gain strong political influence. Generals like Julius Caesar and Pompey became celebrated heroes, accumulating wealth and resources through military conquests.
2. Troop Loyalty: Roman legions were often more loyal to their commanders than the state. As generals provided their soldiers with consistent pay, spoils of war, and opportunities for promotion, the loyalty of the troops increasingly shifted towards the military leaders rather than the state. This loyalty created a personal connection and dependency between the generals and their armies.
3. Political Ambitions: Military leaders began using their popularity and loyal armies to pursue their political ambitions. Some, like Julius Caesar, sought to consolidate power and undermine the authority of the Senate. They used their military influence to pressure the Senate and gain political advantage, resulting in a weakening of the republican institutions.
4. Civil Wars: As military leaders clashed with each other and with the Senate, civil wars erupted. These conflicts arose due to power struggles and disputes over control of the republic. For example, Julius Caesar's conflict with Pompey led to the Roman civil war, ultimately resulting in Caesar's victory and his appointment as dictator for life.
5. Rise of Dictatorship: The accumulation of power by military leaders and the weakening of the republican institutions created an environment conducive to dictatorship. Julius Caesar's dictatorship paved the way for subsequent emperors, effectively ending the Roman Republic and establishing the Roman Empire.
To summarize, the increasing power of military leaders in ancient Rome eroded the authority of the Senate and led to political instability, civil wars, and eventually the establishment of a dictatorship. This marked the end of the Roman Republic and the beginning of the Roman Empire.