---
# System prepended metadata

title: The Influence of Rome on the American Constitution
tags: [' philosophy', ' history', johanna]

---

---
tags: johanna, history, philosophy, 
---

# The Influence of Rome on the American Constitution

<!--See also my notes on [Bryan Ward-Perkins, The Fall of Rome and the End of Civilization](https://hackmd.io/@alexhkurz/BydudcYqs).-->

(draft)

The Influence of Rome on the American Constitution
Author(s): R. A. Ames and H. C. Montgomery
Source: The Classical Journal , Oct., 1934, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Oct., 1934), pp. 19-27 Published by: The Classical Association of the Middle West and South, Inc. (CAMWS)
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3290141

## Interpretation

One reason I find this article interesting is that it sheds  light on how to interpret the Constitution through the original opinions of the Framers.

As the article shows that the Framers were deeply influenced by the Roman Republic. 

But one may wonder whether the current state of the US does not resemble more the Roman Empire of the 3rd century AD, which was already approaching the collapse of the 5th century.

This suggests that while the Framers were framing an America on the rise, we now need to revisit and think about how to best reframe in order to avoid a future collapse.

## Excerpts from the article

Context (written in 1934):

- In the past few years the usefulness of the constitution has been questioned as never before. Today, when our chief executive is exercising authority so complete, it may be doubted whether it fulfills its intended function of restraint of power. The mushroom growth of European dictatorships and the possible permanence of the present Russian government tend to magnify criticism of our own governmental system as concerns its ability to conend with an increasingly chaotic economic and political situtation. It seems, therefore, a peculiarly fit time for a consideration of the origin and nature of the inner structure of our government.

Roman influence on the American constitution:

- The fact that the structure of our own government is similar to that of Republican Rome, though obvious even to casual students of Roman history, has attracted but little general attention. It is the purpose of this paper to show that certain basic likenesses did not arise by chance and that we have borrowed more than mere terminology for our political functions
- The generally accepted assumption in regard to the origin of constitution is that its principles were drawn from the English constitution and from English political philosophers, notably from Locke. An unprejudiced view readily admits this in so far as innumerable details of our government are concerned, but its fundamental, underlying principle, that of check and balance through division of power, the constitution of the United States owes nothing to any source but that of Roman government and the concept of a Roman historian, Polybius.

Classical education of the framers:

- The first step in tracing the constitution to Rome may well be a demonstration of the close acquaintance of the "Constitutional Fathers" with ancient thought through their various educations.

Historical references to Rome and Greece during the The United States Constitutional Convention 1787:

- C. Edward Merriam says that "the colonists claimed no originality for the fundamental doctrines they preached; in fact, they declared that these ideas were at least as old as the days of Greece and Rome.
-  R. M. Gummere, "John Adams Togatus," Philological Quarterly xIII (April, 1934), 203: "Parallels are, of course, deceptive; but one who has read carefully in colonial literature and oratory will come to the conclusion that there was seldom an epoch when the leading men were so imbued with the classical tradition." And ibid., 204: "... just before the Revolution speculation was galvanized into superactivity; people read wide and deep; the talk ran to history. Statesmen hunted out parallels to support independence and revolt against dominating authority."

A long list of quotes from Madison and others follows.

The  article then looks at how these ideas were transmitted through history from antiquity to the time of the Framers.

- "To the 'Fathers,' " says Merriam "the great lesson of history was that government always tends to become oppressive and that it is the greatest foe of individual liberty." They sought, therefore, and put into effect a system designed to restrain, decentralize, divide, and balance the powers of government so that no part of it might gain dangerous predominance of control. This system, as in use in the United States, is commonly known as the system of "checks and balances." It is, simply, the theory of division of powers into independent executive, legislative, and judicial functions as exemplified respectively in our president, congress, and supreme court. It is the theory of Montesquieu and of Polybius from their observation of the Roman Republic.
- Montesquieu showed that Roman government reached its best when this same tripartite division of powers had fullest exercise. He is well established as the thinker from whom the members of the Convention secured this theory.

There is an interesting discussion about how the American system is different from the English. American presidents have veto power and fixed length of term; the prime minister can be voted out by parliament at any time. American judges can interprete laws and review their constitutionality. The conclusion: the English system could not have been the model for either the American constitution nor for Montesquieu's theory.

But where did Montesquieu get the threefold division of powers from?

- Polybius himself wrote as follows: As for the Roman constitution, it had three elements, each of them posessing sovereign powers: and their respective share of the power in the whole state had been regulated with ... a scrupulous regard to equality and equilibrium. ... For when any one of the three classes becomes puffed up and manifests an inclination to be contentious and unduly encroaching, the mutual interdependency of all three and the possibility of the pretentions of any one being checked and thwarted by the others, must plainy check this tendency. ...

The authors conclude as follows.

- In our opinion the evidence is conclusive. We have shown that the framers of the American constitution were likely, by education and experience, to turn to Rome for inspiration. We have indicated that Montesquieu is accepted as the oracle of political theory for that time. We have demonstrated the extreme improbability of Montesquieu's having developed his doctrine from observation of a government so signally lacking in one of the essential organs of his theory. We have pointed out the exact likeness between the political philosophy adopted by Montesquieu and later by the Americans who molded the constitution.
- It seems, then, that we are left no alternative and must turn again to Rome with another acknowledgment of her aid to us - this time in the field of government.



