Why were classical Republics so vulnerable?

Iceland can hardly be clasified as a classical republic ... if anything Iceland had no government but a seasonal ting, which was more of a court (in a proto-feudal setting) than a government
 
And early Iceland was pretty small, looking to the population. The OP asked, why ancient republics did fail, if growing beyond such a small status.

If Iceland would have conquered at least East-America around 1000 AD, this constitution would be much more of interest ;)
And I doubt it would scale on such a bigger scope.
 
Last edited:
Didn't seem to pose much of a problem for the first near century of the US. There wasn't much of the way in a semaphore system before electrical telegraphy took off in the 1840s, and yet, the US was able to function as a republic fairly well with nearly its current borders, before the telegraph lines truly tied the nation together.

Ironically, of course, right before it tore itself apart; but in such a fashion that never threatened to undermine the basic Republican system.

In addition to the enlightenment, the US also benefited from no immediate threats. An ocean to the east and lightly populated lands to the west. The Brits were busy with Napolean while the Spanish were, iirc, occupied by France. There was no Ottoman, Persian, or other empires knocking on the door step until transportation and communications improved.

Domestically, if you couldnt find a job or didnt like your local laws, you could move further inland and isolate yourself from domestic politics or economics of the day. This eases a lot of domestic instability. Fewer hungry people leading food riots etc. Yes, you had native americans to worry about but not quite the same as the various tribes moving in from the east like the Huns or Goths.
 
Yes, you had native americans to worry about but not quite the same as the various tribes moving in from the east like the Huns or Goths.

Well during late republic, the parthians were not really a threat. For the next 3 centuries the romans should be the agressors most of the time. And the germans were not that big of a threat in these early times. The Goths were perhaps just sitting in some boats on the Mare Suebicum.

But I get your point. Comparing US and the roman republic is hard. Even if the US are the oldest modern democratic republic actually working. And don't forget, the mindset of the people changed dramatically in the 17/18th century. Therefore modern concepts are often not applicaple to ancient societies.
 
It's actually you who is conflating modern ideas of what a republic is ("Anything that isn't a monarchy") with classical concepts of republicanism. Right up until the 20th century the word 'republic' carried far richer connotations than just 'anything without a crown'.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/republicanism/

Not at all, I'm thinking specifically of those states that inspired the Aristotelian and Polybian ideal of Republics. Thats not to say that they actually achieved the balance that was sought, but they did not cease to be Republics because they shunned Democracy, viewed as a step above tyranny.
 
Top