From a variety of sources, I've been pondering the late Republic. And I don't think there is any way you can get around it - change and reform was necessary to include more of the Roman allies and classes other than pure Roman aristocrats in the corridors of power. And, from at least 150 BC onwards, the Roman 'constitution' (misnomer than that is) proved, again and again, that it did not have the flexibility to incorporate change within the system. Literally, people who tried to change things were murdered. Whenever you get a situation like this, whether in ancient Rome or 18th century France, or 20th century Russia, where continued efforts have been made to make changes in a political system which continually prove to be useless - when change cannot be made without violence - then violence you get.

I've thought AROUND this point for ages, but I've never been so confident that the informal system of mos maiorum which had proved so flexible for small changes, proved impossible to encompass the necessary bigger changes, once Rome became imperial. But a necessary adjunct to that is simply that the Roman upper crust had grown so used to power, that their fingers could NOT be pried off the controls no matter how desperately people tried. In the end, they were as stupidly self-seeking and as blind to the larger good as any ancien Regime in history. And like others, they paid the price.