1. Weigh the positive and negative aspects of the military role in Rome's success, and suggest ways in which the benefits might have been retained without as many of the pitfalls.
Part of Rome's success is its military force. From its existence as a Republican towards being an Empire, the role of the Roman Military was vast in attaining this unmatched success. For more than one thousand years, the Roman military remained undefeated and unmatched in any battle. Its highly-trained legions and military people were motivated for personal glory. The success of Rome has led to its world dominance when it comes to economy, possession, and area to the aspects of language, art and laws. Roman military has also a great part in Rome's political and civil aspects. Ironically, the success of the Roman Empire has also led it to its own downfall and defeat. There were positive and negative roles of the Roman Military to Rome's success.
On the positive side, Roman Military was highly-disciplined and strong military ethic even before they conquered the captive Romans, Barbarians and the Huns. Their discipline increased their chances of conquering their greatest opponents from the known world conquering Germany, Africa, Spain and some other European territories. Roman soldiers are landowners in Rome. During the time when the soldiers have completed their tour, there was an abrupt need of replacement. They used the Barbarians and the Huns as the new Roman soldiers. These newly hired soldiers were tasked to fight against their own tribes. Covertly reluctant, they connived with the Huns to an undisciplined legion the Roman Empire had.
Several ways could have been done to continually earn the benefits and preclude the occurrence of pitfalls. They could have had some amicable and fair settlement with their neighbouring civilizations. At the same time, they could have not used a foreign soldier as replacement of their soldiers who have completed the tour.
2. What were the most useful benefits of Roman citizenship? Were there other, less 'pragmatic' reasons to value it? If you lived in a Roman territory, would you pursue citizenship? Why or why not?
Roman citizenship during the ancient times was considered as a privileged political and legal status given to free-born individuals in the aspects of law, property and governance. One of the main reasons, aside from the strong military protection, why Roman citizenship is highly prized it is because of the full legal protection under the Roman law. However, residents of the ancient Rome were divided into several classes and on this divisions vary as well the amount of citizenship that each class could receive. The benefits of a Roman citizen vary according to the class of citizenship a certain individual holds.
Some of the most important and useful benefits that a certain Roman citizen could attain are being able to vote, to stand to a public or civil office, the right of immunity from several taxes and other legal obligations, the right to have a legal trial - to appear in the court and defend oneself - and many others. Roman citizenship also has a great value and prize to residents of the acquired territories. Being deemed as slaves and political nomads, Romanization would give them the amount of freedom to distinguish themselves as slaves.
If I would live on a Roman territory which means that everything is controlled by the Romans, do I have to pursue citizenship? The first question to be answered is that what will be my nature if I will not pursue citizenship? Basically, for a conquered territory, its residents like the Huns and the Barbarians will most likely to become slaves and limited of rights and privileges. Seen this way, I would most likely pursue citizenship for legal protection and to obtain the rights that I must have. A borderless territory does not preclude the idea of law, justice and rights.