What do you think was the point of no return for the Roman Republic? Where would you say either the economical, political or social situation was such that the death of the Republic as such and the rise of the Empire was more or less unstopable, if ever? The Marian reforms? The huge input of slaves from the Punic wars and those that follow? Was there a chance for a stable Republic even at Philippi?
I know it's a vague question, but I'm interested in this more or less in the same way people wonder about the eventual decline of the Empire.
>>2772911
It became inevitable as soon as the Second Punic War ended.
>>2772917
T. Brainlet.
Hasn't heard of the Grachhi obviously
>>2772921
>Hasn't heard of the Grachhi obviously
Who the hell hasn't heard of the Gracchi? It's a cliché.
>>2772928
T. Contrarian. Land reforms would have solved a huge permanent issue.
Second punic war was before sulla, before caesar and before the marian reforms. You are reaching way too far back with that.
>>2772921
>>2772935
This. The lynching of Tiberius Gracchus set the precedent that it is ok to use violence for political expediency. Sulla marching on Rome was the logical conclusion to this, and that ofc set the precedent that the army dictates who rules Rome not the Senate nor the People
>>2772975
Interesting point.
>>2772911
Expansion outside of the peninsula. They could have kept their republic in a smaller geographical area, but once they got too big and needed more complex governing mechanisms it wouldn't last
Sulla set the precedent, but really they had it coming because of what the Gracchi campaigned against : The senatorial class was very much removed from what the average citizen lived like, so the republic was pretty much an oligarchy.
>>2772935
>>2772975
I think there is fair argument in saying that it was the empire that destroyed the republic. There were too many territories from which ambitious generals could use as bases to grow their power. I don't think the republic was inevitably doomed after the Second Punic war, but I think the argument that the process began with it is pretty sound.
>>2773113
The empire definitely set the stage for the political breakdown that followed. The fact that most of the Mediterranean was governed by what in effect was a city council was bound to be marred by inefficiency, cronyism, and corruption.
The cronies got too powerful through the newly acquired empire, and someone like Tiberius Gracchus was too threatening to their positions so he had to be taken out at all costs. The rest is history.
Sulla and the Marian reforms.