Why Rome?

[jimmy olsen]

Inclusive citizenship and resulting manpower advantage.

I agree, this was the largest factor.

[PRC]

A culture of ambition and insatiable hunger for glory.

[Richard Hakluyt]

Inclusive citizenship and resulting manpower advantage.

I agree strongly with this view.

The Romans had plenty of other plus points of course, but so did their competitors, the inclusive and rapidly expanding citizen base gave them a huge advantage. So the 2nd Punic war was a country vs a rich city and its mercenaries, Philip V of Macedon's manpower pool was about 1/14 of the Roman pool etc etc

[Martinus]

That's it. Rome rose because they knew how to drain swamps.

The reason why Hungary never became a superpower.

[Martinus]

Yeah, unlike many other ancient cultures (including the Greeks), Romans practiced what we today call diversity. Even their women had more rights than women in other cultures of the era.

[MadImmortalMan]

Uh weren't the Romans total homophobes and prudes?

[Martinus]

Uh weren't the Romans total homophobes and prudes?

I meant diversity in the ethnic, religious, cultural (and to a much smaller degree, gender) sense. I think even in modern language diversity took to include inclusiveness of other sexual orientations very late - it used to be used mainly to denote ethnic, cultural and racial diversity.

[Martinus]

And to be clear (because this is Languish so anything will always be interpreted by someone in the way most adverse to intended meaning), I am not saying that Romans were practising diversity by modern standards - but by the average standard of the era.

I think the development of their worldview matches quite closely that of the US, to be honest. I would say the French are more like Greeks.

[Razgovory]

I'm not sure how inclusive Rome was as it rose up.  When Hannibal invaded Italy he took advantage of the resentment that the other Italians had of Rome.  It should be also noted that Roman citizenship was graduated.  Some citizens were more equal then others.  Particularly those living in the city of Rome rather then in the country side.  Roman citizenship expanded after domination, not before.  Citizenship was given to Italians only after they rose up in rebellion.  Outside of Italy it took much longer.

[Razgovory]

Yeah, unlike many other ancient cultures (including the Greeks), Romans practiced what we today call diversity. Even their women had more rights than women in other cultures of the era.

The head of Roman family could kill his wife and sell his daughters into slavery.  That's not exactly strong women's rights.  The rights of women in surrounding cultures is extremely unclear since not a lot of records are left from German tribes or the city of Carthage.

[Maladict]

All roads led to Rome.

But were the roads there before Rome?  And don't lie, or I'll know.

Yes. It's a last place where the river is fordable, there would have been roads/tracks there first most likely.

[Scipio]

All roads led to Rome. So it was a rather obvious location for centralized rule.

All roads led from Rome, as well.

[grumbler]

I think that you guys have identified the key:  inclusive citizenship, which created a much larger pool of people willing to fight for the state.  Even pre-Marian-reform, the property requirements for serving as a soldier were lower than that of, say, Athens or Syracuse.  And I don't know of a contemporary society where former slaves could become full citizens.

[Valmy]

Uh weren't the Romans total homophobes and prudes?

Roman society had many contradictory things true at the same time

[Martim Silva]

The Roman Republic, especially before Sulla, did not have an inclusive citizenship at all. And citizenship was only given to non-Italians in 212 AD. Pre-Marian Republican Legions actually meant a 'Roman' legion and a similar legion of other Italians (who did not enjoy the same rights).

(Many posters here seem to be trying desperately to see the triumph of modern values in an ancient state).

For a more detalied of the actual why of the fact that Rome won, check the population density of the Italian peninsula vs. everywhere else in from the 3rd century BC to the 1st century AD. Also see the development of military discipline and doctrines.

Also check recruitment rosters: by mid 1st century BC, Rome had at its disposal more adult males of military age than the whole population of Gaul.

And these are raw numbers, not inclusive stuff - for that matter, many of the nations that Rome fought would accept solderis from wherever they might come, since their own populations simply were not large enough to face the Romans, irrespective of the level of 'inclusion' (the Romans fought literally every single tribe in Gaul at the same time - the battle at Alesia was the biggest one Europe would see in terms of sheer number of participants until WWI).

Uh weren't the Romans total homophobes and prudes?

What? No.

What there was is a different set of morals (Roman women were to cover their breasts at all times, and it was seen as immature for men to be attracted to those, as they were 'to feed babies'), but the comparison cannot be done.

And Homosexuality in those days cannot be compared to the modern idea of the term.