Answer:
The Roman Republic (509 BC-27 BC) was not a democracy. But if something more like what we call democracy today came to mind, it is a more complex conversation.
Many 20th century historians renegated Polybius. Popular power would have been a facade to cover up who really commanded: the oligarchy.
There was the Senate, which was indirectly elected, and the assemblies of the tribes, curias and centurias. And these had their inequalities: of the 35 existing tribes, four brought together the city's poor workers, while the other 31 were owners.
At the end of the 20th century, the positive side of the Roman republican system was once again defended by British historian Fergus Millar - for whom the power of the people in Rome had been more direct and effective.
In fact, the laws had to be passed by popular vote in the assemblies, in which every citizen had the right to attend. “In addition, nobles interested in making a political career had to win the support of the people. This indicated that the common people did have the power to influence political decisions. ”