I had a mid-year crisis over this essay. I think it was the fourth book I read about Sulla which caused it, as it had a completely different take on the dictatorship to the other material I had, causing me to completely rethink my essay structure. The main thing I'm trying to convey through it is that Sulla had good ideas, but nobody liked the more crucial ones, despite their benefits, once he was gone and so they repealed them, meaning that all his efforts to stabilise the Republic were for naught, an ultimate cost of his dictatorship. I feel that the Great Proscription deserves its own paragraph, because it was largely separate to his other measures, and it composed of so much that I'm not sure I could put it in another paragraph if I tried.
Without further ado, I present Emily's Essay Plan Mark 2.
'Sulla's dictatorship had both benefits and costs for Rome'. Discuss this statement.
Suggested word counts are next to titles. 100 words spare because I have a tendency to go over.
Paragraph 1 - 500
The Great Proscription - mostly benefited Rome, as it allowed money to flow once more into the state, despite the harsh criticisms it received with regards to its morality.
Paragraph 2 - 500
Political benefits for Rome in the short term - 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
Political costs for Rome in the long term - though his measures created stability and removed threats in the short term, they ultimately cost Rome its republic, with Sulla's mere position as dictator serving to show predominance could be successful in the Roman environment, leading to the rise of the Roman Empire.
Conclusion - 200
Overall, it is clear that there is both benefits and costs. Generally, Rome as a whole benefits from the Dictatorship in the short term, but within half a century many of his more important reforms are reverted back to their pre-Sulla state, allowing Caesar to become dictator and for the concept of the Roman Republic to fall.
Do you change your question to something like:
ReplyDeleteTo what extent was Sulla able to stabilise the Roman Republic? or To what extent was Sulla's dictatorship beneficial to the stability of the Roman Republic?
I think that would work well, as practically all his measures were an attempt to stabilise the Republic to some degree. I believe I could also keep the same essay plan, just focussing it more on stability, allowing me to keep within the word limit and discuss ideas more.
DeleteI think I'll go with the second version of the question for now, but I'll see how my essay turns out. Thank you!