'Sulla's dictatorship had both benefits and costs for Rome'. Discuss this statement.
suggested word counts are next to titles. 100 words spare just in case.
Paragraph 1 - 500
Economic benefits and costs for Rome - the treasury was depleted due in part to the conflicts between Sulla and Marius. The measures he took, such as the Capital Levy and the Great Proscription allowed money to flow once more into the state.
Paragraph 2 - 500
Political benefits and costs for Rome - as Dictator, Sulla could remove the political instabilities presented by certain factions, either by their complete removal, as in the case of the Samnites, or by the reduction of their ability to influence decisions of the state, as he did with the populares.
Paragraph 3 - 500
Benefits and costs for Rome on the individual level - removed the wealth of individuals in favour of its use for the state. Turned around the fortunes of individuals for the worse - forced to flee their homes for fear of execution, with a near impossibility of assistance from others who owed them a favour, due to the extension of the threat of execution to all who aided them.
Conclusion - 200
Overall, it is clear that there is both benefits and costs. Generally, Rome as a whole benefits from the Dictatorship, both politically and economically, but on the individual level, many costs were experienced for those in positions of power and wealth.
I feel the need to have another paragraph on the impact of Sulla's reign on the Roman military, but currently, I have seen little information on this. I'm hoping that somewhere in my reading I will find something, but for the moment I will stick with this. Watch this space.
The plan looks fine. Really important that you look at the perspective of moderrn historians and the Romans. Can't use reign as that term is applicable to monarchs.
ReplyDeleteSo discuss whether the Romans considered something a benefit, and whether it is considered such by today's historians?
DeleteYes. How is the draft coming along?
Delete