Essay Compare And Contrast Severus And Valentinian III

Machiavelli, when explaining how a prince must avoid being hated or despised by the people, explains that an effective ruler is both a lion and a fox: he must be ferocious and belligerent, never afraid of a fight, but he must also be clever and cunning and use his wits to beat others. The Roman emperor Severus is described as successfully being both a fox and a lion, capable of tricking the people into loving him while simultaneously earning the respect of the Roman army. He is the only emperor listed who succeeded as a ruler and thus avoided being deposed, and the description of him is used as a positive example to contrast the failures of other Roman emperors. Machiavelli describes how Severus marched into Rome after the assassination of

In “The Deeds of the Divine Augustus” Augustus portrays Rome as a dignified cut above the rest. In this reading, we learn about the ruling of Augustus and how he feels entirely responsible for all the successes of Rome. I believe that this writing is not a display of the “real Rome” but rather a depiction of its author. Throughout “The Deeds of the Divine Augustus” Augustus repeatedly refers to himself in the text and how all these successes are a result of his leadership. An example of this is when Augustus states, “In my nineteenth year, on my own initiative and at my own expense, I raised an army with which I set free the state, which was oppressed by the domination of a faction.” There are

In examining the histories presented by Livy and Tacitus, it is crucial to take into account the agendas of the respective authors. While both set out to portray as accurate of a historical representation as possible, it is evident that both renowned historians and rhetoricians intended to deliver several significant messages regarding their thoughts on Rome. Both authors do, indeed, acknowledge the greatness of Rome and champion the core of Roman values; however, Livy and Tacitus tactfully elaborate on different troubles that face the Roman Empire. The histories put forth by these great men aim to present the past as an aid to promote

The accounts of emperor Tiberius’ reign by both Suetonius and Tacitus have qualities that serve to show how differing authors viewed Tiberius in various flattering and unappealing ways by their personal reasoning and desire to preserve truth as much as possible in scope of their respective intentions to provide scholars with treatments of him that give a through picture of his traits, strengths and weaknesses. Overall, by examining both accounts of Tiberius’ reign, readers are able to form independent judgement of Tiberius and if each description is biased beyond any semblance of objectively. Overall Suetonius and Tacitus leaves books that differ in style and accuracy but both do indeed want the residing public to understand the true

Unfortunately for the Roman Empire, most of the emperors were not favored by the people of Rome in their years of decline. According to Document A, about 22 emperors ruled Rome in a span of 50 years without including the time of 260 to 268 BCE which there is no recorded information about. Out of the 22 emperors, about 90% of the emperors were assassinated. Another factor that contributed were suicides. As The Roman Empire weakened, there were many invaders aiming to assassinate the emperor. Therefore certain emperors chose to take their own lives before anybody else could. Now with the confusion and violence from the poor leadership in Rome, the once-prosperous-empire was coming to it’s

One of the main shortcomings of Rome is bad leadership. Often during the empire period, rulers who inherited the throne were brutal, ineffective, unstable, or all of the above. Some, like Nero or Tiberius, were incredibly intolerant to certain groups such as Christians. They provided brutal punishments and abused people who identified with Christian ideas. (Doc 2) This obviously produced a large amount of civil unrest and led to a decline in the empire’s prowess. A very detailed account of this was provided by another Roman historian by the name of Tacitus. The people he was trying to get to with this account was the people of Europe. He wanted to describe intolerance and bad leadership to the majority of Europe’s population in order to warn them about the dangers of intolerance. In addition to these brutal leaders, towards the end of the empire rulers were dying at an increased rate. Many emperors were killed either in battle, by assassination, or by disease. (Doc 5) The increased rate in which emperors died could be indicative of bad leadership or more unrest. It certainly led to more unrest in the empire. While there were a few examples of great leaders in Roman history, the majority of the leaders towards the end of the civilization were subpar accelerating its

Although they were father and son, the reigns of Alexander II and Alexander III took off in completely different directions. Alexander II was committed to his empire by vowing to reform Russia, making it more in line with nineteenth-century western society. His son, on the other hand, was the unprepared tsar, whose actions were literally reactions to his father’s unexpected assassination. Consequently, Alexander II went down in history as much more productive in the field of domestic policy; in dealing with revolutionaries; and in his foreign policy than his son Alex III would ever be.

Marcus Aurelius was born on April 26th, 121 AD. He was born as Marcus Annius Verus. His family was a very wealthy family who claimed that they were descendants of Numa, The Second King of Rome. His father was Annius Verus and his mother was Domitia Lucilla.

Two of the more memorable emperors to the Romans were Augustus Caesar (27 BC to 14 AD), and Caligula (37 AD to 41 AD). Although only having ruled the empire by a separation of 23 years and belonging to the same family (through marriage and adoption), their empires couldn’t have been more different. It is possible to determine the impact of an emperor’s rule based on their many vices and virtues, as well as the choices that they make in relation to them. The author Suetonius expressed in his writings the many vices and virtues that put into perspective the kind of leaders that these emperors appeared as to their polis. As we explore the concept of vices and virtues, as well as what kind of ideals these two rulers represented, we will begin to be presented with a clearer picture of what an ideal emperor would have looked like. A vice can be described as an immoral or wicked behavior; while a virtue can be described as a behavior showing high moral standards. Suetonius and the Roman people had a high interpretation of the concept of virtue and vice, as well as their role in the ruler’s life.

Suetonius wrote The Twelve Caesars as a biography about twelve Roman Caesars. This essay will compare and contrast two of them, Divus Julius and Nero. Even though the two men both became Emperors who ruled Rome, they could not have been more different. Both had certain authority and public powers during each of their reigns. Their lives were also scattered with times of virtue and scandal. This was a different time from today. Human behavior and morals played a significant role in those ruling over others. Some had them and some not so much. In the end, their stories will ultimately give the reader an illustration of these two men and what their stories tell us about the lives of Roman emperors in the first century.

civilization has had a range of great people; two of the most brilliant and influential leaders were Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar. The turning points in history they were involved in were their individual conquests and their unfortunate deaths. Alexander's greatest victory was over the Persians; Caesar's greatest victory was his defeat of Pompey. Their actions and beliefs had their influence on their society and society of today.

Tsar Alexander II and III while father and son had very different ambitions as Tsar and different view for the future of the empire. Alexander III succeeded to his father’s throne in 1894. His reign is looked upon by most historians as a time of repression that saw the undoing of many of the reforms carried out by his father. Certainly that was a time of great economic and social change but these had led, in the West of the nation, great pressure on political system. However Alexander was deeply suspicious of the direction in which his father had taken Russia and the internal reforms that he instituted were designed to correct what he saw as the too-liberal tendencies of his father's reign.

He had now reached a state of political perfection. A state he arguably and narcissistically deemed necessary to establish a Rome of greater equality, efficiency and profitability, a state in which he could covertly dictate. The Principate was made a permanent establishment; his rule would only end in death. Changes were still required, past mistakes must be corrected, time was poor. His mission was nearing completion. Rome was now under the autocratic rule of Augustus, the senate and the people were none the wiser. The republic was far from restored, the republic could not be restored, the republic was flawed. The people and the senate must not know.

Emperor Nero, infamously known as one of the most malevolent, oppressive, and tyrannical leader throughout history, was the last ruler of the Julio-Claudian Dynasty. He was born outside Rome in Antium and his mother married his great uncle, Emperor Claudius, in order for her son to be the next Emperor of Rome. It wasn’t apparent that her son was to become one of the most feared and cruel leaders in Roman history from 54 CE to 68 CE. By examining his achievements and failures as an emperor, his influences and changes over the entire economic, political and social spectrum are revealed.

His murder in AD 192 was followed by a civil war by rivals to the throne. A series of rulers under what was known as `The Severan Dynasty' ensued. Lucian Septimius Severus who became emperor in AD 193 severely weakened the imperial defenses when he disbanded the Praetorian Guard and replaced them with his own troops. While Rome remained a large empire there was a complete lack of constitution. After Septimus Severus all power derived from the army, which led to corruption in a quest for power. Between 235 and 284 there was a series of insane emperors who were frequently assassinated.