• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Why didn't the Romans conquer crime?

Extracts from this document...


? Intro: What type of crimes did they have? Romans had many types of crimes. Here are some examples: >theft >murder >fraud (selling underweight goods e.g. bread) >keeping streets clean. Some of these are similar to today's crimes and some are different. There is still theft, murder, and fraud today. Keeping streets clean isn't a crime today but it can't be too dirty otherwise its unhygienic. How did the Romans try to stop crime? The Romans had detailed laws covering all aspects of life. For example, the crimes were outlined clearly, >Murder >Theft. >Dangerous buildings. >Cheating in trade. >Keeping streets clean. Over time the laws got more and more detailed. The Twelve Tables and The Digest of the Roman Laws were introduced. They also had different courts for minor and major crimes. ...read more.


They didn't have prisons, as there was no police force. Who caught the criminals? The victims and their families had to catch the criminals and find evidence on them. For example, if a theft was committed the victim had to gather evidence and summon the defendant to court. There were 2 types of cases minors and majors. These were held in different courts, magistrates court and jury trials. The minor cases, such as theft, the victim had to gather their own evidence and take the culprit to the Magistrates courts, but for major crimes, such as murder, the defendant had to be heard before a jury. It was hard for the poor as it isn't easy to catch a criminal as an individual. Also not many people would believe them, as they didn't have much money. People may have thought the poor wanted compensation money. ...read more.


In Britain the evidence was taken to the local centurion to try the case. We also know that the crimes in Rome and in Britain were similar, such as theft, murder, mugging, and etc. The laws, courts and punishments were all the same in Britain and Rome. Conclusion: Why didn't the Romans conquer crime? The Romans didn't conquer crime for many good reasons. The harsh punishments were enough for some people; the detailed laws, the courts and the juries were part of the reason for not conquering crime. The other part was because the Romans didn't have a police force as they thought it wasn't their responsibility to prevent crime. It was also too difficult to catch the criminals and prosecute them, as it was hard to get enough evidence. I think the main reason the Romans didn't conquer crime was because of the harsh punishments. By Shikha Dave ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Law essays

  1. Why didn't the Romans conquer crime?

    The core of the police was riot troops. The Roman Empire did not have an effective enough police force. They had three different types of police force but none of them were capable to prevent crime. There were Urban cohorts, who were three thousand soldiers; their main job was to keep order by stopping riots.

  2. Worlds Apart: Orientalism, Antifeminism, and Heresy in Chaucer's Man of Law's Tale

    of the patristic era and the last three centuries of the Middle Ages, the first no doubt resulted from the historical struggle that took place to define Christian dogma and defend it against its competitors. The second period, however, may have resulted from the Church's attempt to envision itself as

  1. Is Diminished Responsibility Relevant?

    This edge will then become a part of social discourse about the law and about such issues as diminished responsibility , which may then influence the development of the law further. In this hot-house atmosphere whether or not we know philosophically what an act is enters the debate only at the edges.

  2. Justices of the Peace - Magistrates Courts

    So far as gender is concerned they are quite successful - 481/2 per cent of magistrates were female at the beginning of 1999, and women outnumbered men in the new appointments for 1999-2000 - but in other respects success is coming only slowly.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work