Gaius Marius

This essay will attempt to explain the motives that have led to the rise and fall of the brothers Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus in the late second century B.C. Although very few sources remain of these accounts, which are based mainly on works of the historians Appian and Plutarch, the Gracchi have been the subject of study by several scholars. If on the one hand earlier historians tend to represent them as heroes and revolutionaries, on the other, more recent ones have regarded them as two controversial figures which were politically motivated by personal gains. They proposed and passed a series of legislations and the most controversial one is the agrarian law about the redistribution of the land. It can be argued that their motives have been certainly and thoroughly selfless for the good of the people of Rome in the specific period of history which spans from 133 B.C to 121 B.C. On the contrary, as it will be explained below, their methods have not always been ‘orthodox’. There could be three main areas that will help this essay to conclude if they were truly heroes of the people or political opportunists; the first is to evaluate what their true motives were, the second is to assess if there was an agrarian crisis and the third to establish who the beneficiaries of their legislations were. Overall, as all political figures, the Gracchi have to be taken in the context of the specific roman society of their time.

One of these generals was Marius. He won great popularity among the Romans while fighting in Africa against Jugurtha. As a result of this newfound popularity, Marius left Africa to go back to Rome where he was elected consul. He left the armies in control of his

Romans were a civilization that originated after the Greek culture. They, like Greeks, saw an extreme significance in the idea of a love for one’s country and loyalty. The Romans, however, were more concerned with public affairs such as education, sanitation, and health. They held a strong connection with their ancestors and wished to imitate what the ancient Romans did. Although Romans rejected the idea of a Rex, or king, they favored the common hero. They wanted a leader who a “regular Joe”, someone who was average and could still led an average life after doing extraordinary things. The Romans also had a very defined government that was broken into consuls, senate, and assembly. There were two consuls who served in place of the king as the leaders of the Roman Empire. Next in succession was the senate, comprised only of patricians who debated and passed legislation. Finally, there was the assembly made for the plebeians to approve laws.

Julius Caesar (100-44 BC) was one of the most outstanding leaders in history. He was the first ruler of the Romano-Hellenic civilization and achieved his goals with great success throughout his life of 56 years. He was assassinated by the conspirators, who accused him for practicing tyranny. This essay will discuss whether it was right for the conspirators to murder Caesar and what its consequences were.

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

In The Assassination of Julius Caesar, Michael Parenti highlights the many significant people and events that characterized the late Roman Republic. Specifically, he focuses on the time period between the election of Tiberius Grachus, to the rise of Augustus, the first emperor of Rome. In this account of history, Parenti presents the social, political, and economic aspects of the Roman culture from the perspective of the Roman commoner, or plebeian. Using this perspective, he also spends a great amount of time examining the causes and effects of the assassination of Julius Caesar. The views that Parenti presents in this book stand in sharp contrast with the views of many ancient and modern historians, and offer an interesting and enlightening perspective into class struggle in the society of the Roman republic.

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.

From a rather humble beginning Lucius Cornelius Sulla rose to become a great politician and a powerful general in the Roman Republic. As a general, Sulla lead Roman armies to many victories. As a politician he became a powerful dictator and yet was responsible for bringing about many reforms. This essay will prove how he was a great dictator, politician and general, through discussing his background, his military and political career, his dictatorship, and his accomplishments in his later years.

Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus was the son of a Roman aristocrat whose family had regularly held the highest offices of state for the past century. Tiberius achieved much in his life and was a man of high distinction in political circles. He was a man with a prominent background- coming from very powerful families. It seemed also, that many had high expectations of him, and his potential was not seen to its full extent. To a few of us here today, this is a solemn and most momentous occasion. Today I will be critically analysing and assessing the significance of three key areas which have been the crux of historical debate for centuries. Today I will be touching on Tiberius' family background, education, and early career to 134BC, the aims

To begin this story, we must begin at the beginning. Gaius Julius Caesar was born into the Julii family, an old and ancient family. His father was the elder Gaius Julius Caesar, and his mother was Lucius Aurelius Cotta. The new baby also had two sisters, Julia Major, and Julia Minor. Since his father died when Caesar was sixteen, Gaius Julius Caesar Junior had to be a man of the house and provide for his family. At sixteen Caesar was also nominated to be made chief priest of Jupiter, and soon married his uncle’s friend’s daughter, Cornelia Cinna. Caesar’s uncle, Gaius Marius was hostile with the current dictator, Lucius Cornelius Sulla, and Sulla had decided to extend his wrath to Caesar by stripping him of all his property, his and his wife’s, and his priesthood. Sulla also ordered Caesar to divorce his wife, but Caesar refused to and decided to flee Rome to serve under Marcus Minucius Thermus in the Roman military force in Asia.

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.

Roman values and their importance to the state play a central role in Julius Caesar. These values are portrayed as integral to the success of Rome, because the majority of these virtues act in favour of the state. Each person in Roman society has their own role which is part of a more important collective whole. Characters in the play seem to identify more with being a citizen or “soul of Rome” rather than a unique individual (Shakespeare, 2.1.323). The play emphasizes Rome as “an alien society” and analyses the relationship “between Rome and the Romans, who see themselves as ‘citizens,’ rather than ‘men’” (Miles, 2). Shakespeare emphasizes the importance of the state over personal thoughts or feelings: “not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more” (Shakespeare, 3.2.21-22). Each of the Roman virtues arises out of a sense of duty to put the state over the self. Following this duty evokes a necessary recognition of

Julius Caesar is perhaps the most well known in the history of Roman Emperors, yet there is no denying that his reign was filled with controversy, no reason more so than his devious rise to power and his mischievous ways of suppressing the senate. There is no doubt that in ruling as a Dictator; Caesar lost the support of the Roman people, who had fought for freedom against an Etruscan King, a role in which Caesar was playing. His death in 44BC coincided with what many believe to be the year in which the Republic completely its eventual ‘fall’ that it had been plummeting to since 133BC, and it is only by looking at the differences in the end of his reign to that of Augustus’ in 27BC that

Augustus' familial ties with Caesar are perhaps most important in his ascension to power. While just a boy he had no public image or standing therefore he had no power according to Roman culture. He was not recognized as anyone of importance in the eyes of the senate or citizenry of The Republic. However when taken under the wing of Caesar, one of the most powerful and loved men in all of Rome, he marches with him in the victory parades of Caesar's military conquest of Africa, Rome's newest conquest which included Egypt and it's infamous Queen Cleopatra. He also accompanied Caesar into battle in his final conquest of Spain. These events placed Octavius into the spotlight of public life where according to the Roman ideologies of courage, bravery, strength, loyalty, military conquest, glory and honor he won their praise and acceptance. He was also a noted scholar, tactician and aristocrat; a gifted orator, he embodied everything it meant to be a citizen of Rome, honorable, courageous, brilliant and cunning.

Galinsky adds a new dynamic to the telling of Augustus’ life with his interpretation and depiction of the leadership and the progress made at the time. He is attempting to show the reader a more rounded picture of the life of this young emperor. The strict structure of the overall book is great in reminding the reader that this is a recount of historical events. This along with the inset boxes may at times dry out the entertaining aspects of the story being told. That being said this book is well put together and unlike the average historical text has foudn a way to keep audiences engaged while keeping structure, and fact in unison.