From Rome to America
The Evolution of the Rule of Law and the Cycle of Empire
The rule of law has been the foundation of successful civilizations, ensuring that leaders are held accountable and governance is based on legal frameworks rather than arbitrary power. This principle evolved over centuries, beginning with the Roman Republic, developing through the Kingdom of Aragon, maturing in England, and culminating in the United States Constitution. Each civilization refined the legal advancements of its predecessors, strengthening checks on power, representative governance, and individual rights. However, history also reveals a pattern: great republics rise, but when they abandon the rule of law, they collapse into tyranny or decay.
The United States is often compared to the Roman Republic, both in its legal foundation and global influence. Yet, if history is a guide, America may face the same fate as Rome—decline due to overextension, corruption, and the erosion of civic responsibility. To understand this trajectory, we must examine how Rome, Aragon, and England shaped the American legal system and the risks that threaten its stability.
I. The Roman Republic: The Birth of Rule of Law (509–27 BCE)
The Roman Republic was one of the first civilizations to establish a legal system that limited the power of rulers. Before Rome, governance was often dictated by personal decree, but the Romans institutionalized legal standards to ensure that all citizens, including leaders, were bound by the law.
One of Rome’s most important contributions was the Twelve Tables (450 BCE), the first codified system of laws that applied to both elites and commoners. By writing laws down, Rome prevented magistrates from abusing their power through arbitrary rulings, a concept that would later influence England’s common law and the U.S. Constitution. The Romans also pioneered separation of powers, dividing government into three branches: the Senate (legislative), Consuls (executive), and Tribunes (representatives of the people). This model directly influenced the tripartite system of government in the United States centuries later.
Despite its strengths, the Roman Republic ultimately collapsed, transforming into an empire under Augustus in 27 BCE. Corruption, political gridlock, and excessive military expansion weakened its institutions. Powerful generals bypassed legal structures, and citizens prioritized luxury over civic duty. These factors led to the fall of the republic and the rise of a dictatorship—offering a stark warning to future governments, including the United States.
II. The Kingdom of Aragon: Constitutional Monarchy and Early Checks on Power (1031–1578)
Following Rome’s fall, Europe saw the rise of feudal monarchies, where kings ruled with near-absolute power. However, in 1031, the Kingdom of Aragon emerged as one of the first constitutional monarchies, placing legal limits on royal authority.
The Cortes of Aragon, a representative legislative body, played a crucial role in governance. Much like England’s future Parliament and the U.S. Congress, the Cortes was composed of four estates: clergy, nobles, knights, and townspeople. The king was required to consult the Cortes before raising taxes or enacting laws, ensuring that he did not rule arbitrarily. Additionally, Aragonese kings took an oath before the Cortes, swearing to uphold the laws and protect the rights of the people—a tradition that later influenced the idea of popular sovereignty in both England and America.
Despite its early commitment to constitutionalism, Aragon eventually fell into absolutism by 1578, as monarchs consolidated power and weakened the Cortes. This decline mirrored Rome’s trajectory—when legal checks eroded, the system shifted toward dictatorship. The fall of Aragon’s constitutional monarchy demonstrated the fragility of balanced governance and served as a lesson for later political systems.
III. The English System: Refining the Rule of Law (1215–1689)
England inherited and expanded upon the legal traditions of Rome and Aragon, gradually limiting the power of monarchs and strengthening the role of representative institutions.
The Magna Carta (1215) was a turning point in the development of constitutional government. English barons forced King John to sign this document, which established two crucial principles: no one, not even the king, is above the law, and citizens have the right to due process. These ideas would later influence the English Bill of Rights (1689) and the U.S. Constitution’s Fifth Amendment.
By the Glorious Revolution of 1688, Parliament had further constrained the monarchy, culminating in the English Bill of Rights (1689). This document restricted the king’s ability to suspend laws, levy taxes, or raise an army without Parliament’s approval—principles that directly inspired the U.S. system of checks and balances. It also protected individual liberties, such as freedom of speech and protection from cruel and unusual punishment, later enshrined in the U.S. Bill of Rights.
England’s evolution from absolute monarchy to constitutional governance set the stage for the American Revolution. The British legal tradition of representative government and individual rights was transplanted across the Atlantic, where the American colonies sought to further refine and improve upon these principles.
IV. The U.S. Constitution: The Culmination of Legal Evolution (1787-Present)
The U.S. Constitution (1787) was the ultimate synthesis of legal principles from Rome, Aragon, and England. Unlike England’s unwritten constitution, the United States formalized its legal framework in a single written document, preventing arbitrary rule.
One of the key innovations of the U.S. system was its separation of powers. While Rome had Consuls and Tribunes, and Aragon’s kings played a judicial role, the U.S. fully separated executive, legislative, and judicial functions to prevent the concentration of power. The Bill of Rights (1791) further strengthened individual freedoms, borrowing directly from England’s legal traditions.
Unlike Britain, the U.S. also established a republic rather than a monarchy, ensuring that leadership was elected, not inherited. However, like Rome, America became a global military and economic power, raising concerns that it too might fall into the trap of imperial overreach and internal division.
V. America as the New Rome: The Cycle of Empire
As the world’s dominant superpower, the United States now mirrors the Roman Republic in its strengths—and its vulnerabilities.
Rome fell when military expansion drained its economy, political corruption eroded trust in government, and civic virtue declined. The U.S. faces similar challenges:
• Military Overreach – Endless wars and a trillion-dollar national debt parallel Rome’s unsustainable conquests.
• Political Corruption – Partisan gridlock, corporate lobbying, and declining faith in institutions mirror Rome’s Senate dysfunction.
• Erosion of Civic Engagement – Declining voter participation and political polarization resemble Rome’s societal decay.
If the U.S. continues down this path, it risks transitioning from a republic to an empire, just as Rome did. Already, executive powers have expanded, Congress struggles to legislate effectively, and economic inequality grows—reminiscent of the late Roman Republic before its fall.
VI. Preserving the Rule of Law
The rule of law has evolved through Rome, Aragon, England, and America, ensuring stability and justice. However, history warns that when nations abandon legal principles in favor of centralized power, they collapse into tyranny or decay.
To avoid Rome’s fate, the U.S. must:
1. Reinforce constitutional checks and balances to prevent executive overreach.
2. Limit military and economic overextension to maintain long-term stability.
3. Encourage civic engagement and national unity to preserve democracy.
If America does not heed history’s lessons, it may follow the fate of Rome and Aragon, proving once again that even the strongest republics are not immune to collapse. The survival of the United States as a free nation depends on whether it can uphold the rule of law—or succumb to the cycle of empire.
VII. American Pride and Contemporary Threats to the Rule of Law
American pride is a double-edged sword. On one side, it unites citizens around shared ideals of freedom, self-reliance, and resilience. This pride has spurred progress, innovation, and a commitment to the rule of law that defines the nation. On the other side, excessive pride can foster national exceptionalism. When pride turns inward, it may breed a dismissive attitude toward external critique and a reluctance to acknowledge institutional failings. This tendency, at times, undermines the self-correction mechanisms that are crucial to sustaining a republic. In this light, pride can both reinforce commitment to legal principles and, if unchecked, contribute to a climate of entitlement that risks sidelining accountability.
The presidency of Donald Trump has become a litmus test for these dynamics. Critics argue that Trump’s rhetoric and actions, from challenging established norms of transparency to questioning the legitimacy of judicial processes, threaten the rule of law. They point to incidents where his statements and executive actions appeared to undermine traditional checks and balances. Supporters counter that his approach reflects a challenge to what they view as an entrenched, elitist system that has ignored the will of the people for too long. They contend that concerns about his impact on the rule of law are overstated and driven by partisan bias.
Historical perspectives suggest that any significant deviation from established legal principles, especially at the highest levels of government, should invite scrutiny. Whether Trump represents a genuine threat or merely an unconventional politician who challenges the status quo remains hotly debated. However, the broader lesson remains: a republic must vigilantly guard its legal institutions. Both excessive national pride and unchecked executive power carry risks. If American pride transforms into unyielding exceptionalism, and if leaders disregard constitutional limits, the nation may well echo the decline of past empires. The challenge lies in balancing a healthy sense of national identity with an unwavering commitment to the rule of law.
Further Reading
• American Exceptionalism and Its Discontents
By Noel | Fowklaw
