Use of army for political purposes? (1 Viewer)

[youarefree]

Hi everyone,

Just wondering if you could help with answering this question:

a) Analyse the role of the army and the way it was used for political purposes in this period (25)

So to answer it I would have to talk about how Pompey and Caesar used it for intimidating the Senate etc. but how am I supposed to write a whole 25-mark essay on that?? What other points would you guys discuss??

Thanks for the help!

 

[AsyLum]

Intimidation was only ONE role that the army was used for.

The role of the army must be traced back to Marius, and his reforms of the personal army. Understand this point, for it is the key shift from the army of the republic with 2 consuls at its helm to the possibility of a personal, self-autonomous army loyal to one person. So the shift is fundamental in understanding this whole topic.

Secondly, underline the use of violence and of the army by Sulla in his reign and what precedents these set. The crossing of the Rubicon, the sacred connotations of no arms/army within these gates, and the significance of Caesar not crossing the Rubicon, but for the army to wait in the Field of Mars.

Thirdly, Pompey's ability to raise an army without a title, to command them, and then fight a war with them.

You're on the right track, just make sure that you understand that these developments or uses/functions/roles weren't borne from a singular vacuum.

 

[youarefree]

Thanks for that asylum...I didn't know about the stuff that Marius and Sulla did because I do the the period of the Fall of Rome, 78-28 BC. But it's really good now that I can add this extra info into my essays.

Thanks again!

 

[AsyLum]

Yeah i dont know why they don't cover 133 - 28 BC in the fall of the roman republic, it makes so much more sense when you understand why it failed like it did.