Galgacus: On Roman Imperialism Essay

     Rome's vast empire lasted for an amazing one thousand-year reign. Half of it referred to as the republic, and the other as the empire. However, after its fall in 5oo-a.d. Rome has still remained in existence through its strong culture, architecture, literature, and even religion (Spielvogel 175). Even after its disappearance as a nation Rome left behind a legacy that will never be forgotten. Its ideals and traditions have been immolated, and adopted for over two thousand years. Whether, it is through its language of Latin, its influence of religion, or its amazing architectural ability Rome has influenced almost every culture following its demise. The heritage of Rome has

The War with Veii played a significant role in the expansion of the Roman Empire. The war, which ended in 410 B.C., set in motion an entirely different Roman army. No longer was the army a volunteer militia, instead it became a paying and contractual organization. The “Roman victory brought an end to Rome’s most threatening neighbor and began its rise to prominence in the central Italian peninsula” (www.warandgameinfo.com).

Unlike Livy, Tacitus uses his history to critique the widespread abuse of power by Rome's leaders. Tacitus was virulently opposed to the great concentration of power in the hands of Roman emperors. It was Tacitus' belief that the Roman emperor had so much power in his hands that no man could occupy the throne without being corrupted by that power. In his writings, Tacitus tries to paint every emperor as a corrupt despot in order to deliver his message that "absolute power corrupts absolutely." His writing is full of tales of corruption, government scandal, and innocent people being destroyed or having

Ultimately the tone of each account is tremendously different; Suetonius is more concerned with its relation to history while Tacitus is intertwining his own spin on it by blaming the emperor for his unreliability and foolishness.

The era dominated by Roman empire is one the most well-known and influential periods of history, home to famous names from Julius Caesar to Jesus Christ. At its height, Rome’s territory stretched from the Atlantic coastline to the Middle East, reigning over 60 million people, one-fifth of the population of the ancient world. However, the Roman empire’s treatment of their conquered people’s and their own citizens ultimately led to the permanent downfall of Rome.

Additionally, Brutus presents a series of rhetorical questions that have no grounds to persuade the audience. He asks, “Who is here so rude that would not be a Roman?” Here he makes it clear that one who does not understand the reason behind Caesar’s necessary death should not be considered a Roman. But, the audience, once again, does not have reason to acknowledge this statement as Brutus does not have sufficient evidence that the murder was, in fact, a necessity.

Tacitus is ecstatic about the current and last regime slowly bringing back freedom to the empire, but acknowledges that it is an extremely sluggish process that can be inhibited more easily than furthered. Roman imperialism can be a two-headed beast, one bringing joy and prosperity while the other rains down fire and brimstone. However, Tacitus could be viewed as hypocritical considering he condemned Domitian’s desire for military glory while loving the reign of Trajan. Obviously, this is partially because the former wanted to steal glory from Tacitus’ father-in-law. Tacitus finishes with, “Yet I shall find some satisfaction, even with the unskilled and unpractised voice, in recording the servitude we once suffered and in gratefully acknowledging the blessings we now enjoy.” He understands that living under an imperial leadership relies heavily on the individual currently in possession of power and that the outcome can differ greatly. Although imperialism is quite terrible at times, he acknowledges that it can lead to a variety of positive outcomes. Similarly, conquest and integration of conquered peoples is a process

The Roman Empire falling due to disasters and diseases was a theory which was a top three reason for the fall of Rome. Natural disasters and diseases were responsible for many lost lives in Ancient Rome. In Document F, the text stated, “In the second year of the reign of Valens (366 C.E.)... the Roman world was shaken by a violent and destructive earthquake…” This quote represented an example of one of the natural disasters that hit Rome which was a destructive earthquake. This massive earthquake was responsible for the isolation of citizens weakening the Roman Empire. Another example of a deadly natural disaster was also located in Document F. It stated, “[F]ifty thousand persons had lost their lives in the flood [in the city of Alexandria

The purpose of this research paper is to analyze the Roman Empire and the culture within that civilization from 43-306 C.E. Centrally located in the Mediterranean lies Italy, one of the three great peninsulas that can be seen from the south of Europe. The Roman Empire and its civilization has always been one to be admired by people and leaders all around the world. When the thought of this illustrious empire comes to an individual’s mind, one might assume that they may think of the great Julius Caesar and his tragic death, Marc Antony and Cleopatra, or even the great philosophers that flourished during this time. Thousands of years later the romans are still being praised for their advances in the sciences, philosophy, and government.

The Agricola and Germani is a novel that serves two purposes: The Agricola is a eulogy praising Tacitus's father-in-law, and commander of Britian, Agricola. The Germania is an ethnography on German people. Both stories are told through the eyes of Tacitus as he indirectly criticizes Roman politics and society. His reason for snaking in these criticisms in such a crafty manner had been due to his friendship with high ranking Roman officials whom he did not want to upset. His criticisms were derived from his experiences with Agricola, speeches given by Calgucus, and his ability to compare and contrast cultural differences of Rome and Germania, targeting

Many anthropologists and historians have speculated about the different causes and effects of the fall of the Roman Empire. Some have even stated that Rome did not fall but instead, was merely transformed. However, there were many causes that did end this prodigious empire. Many seemingly small decisions made by powerful emperors over the course of just over a century lead to its destruction. In this paper it will be established that the Roman emperors, in an effort to save their political power, made adjustments to warfare/treaty practices and made political changes which over time lead to the inevitable collapse of the realm, this caused a drastic regression in the living standards of the Roman citizens, implying that the Empire did indeed collapse and not transform.

A Review of Edward N. Luttwak, The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire from the First Century A.D. to the Third.

The Roman empire is considered one of the most powerful and longest lasting empire of all time by most historians. At its peak the Roman empire managed to take control and rule nearly the whole inhabited world at the time. Though their military achievements were outstanding the Romans also excelled at legislature. The Romans ran a governmental system which was most like a republic which the power was in the hand of the senators and patricians. The senators and patricians were mostly extremely rich elders of the community who linked themselves to gods. Though the people were the ones who voted for the senators the rich always voted who they wanted because they were the first to vote which made the senate corrupt since the lower classes barely got a say. Although the Roman empire was extremely successful historians are always doing research to figure out what elements led to its collapse. However, the Roman legislature, use of propaganda to sway public opinion, military power to conquer lands, and philosophy were essential reasons for the extended survival of the Roman empire.

Brutus, a conflicted senator obsessed with his civic duty, convinces the people of Rome that his motives in killing Caesar were just and noble by rhetoric. Brutus is the only conspirator to have impersonal motives in killing Caesar. In fact, his motives are trying to find the best solution for Rome, and in the end, he must make the hard choice of killing his best friend for his homeland. As early as Brutus’ conversation with Cassius in Act I, Brutus exhibits this deep love and respect for Rome and how this love is conflicting with his love for his friend, Caesar: “[P]oor Brutus, with himself at war, / Forgets the shows of love to other men” (I.ii.51-52). Brutus brings up this internal conflict again when he tells the crowds that although he did love Caesar, he loved Rome and its people more. After Brutus’ murder of Caesar, he realizes that the issue of the public opinion of Rome is of the utmost importance. Because of this love for Rome, Brutus uses rhetoric to persuade these plebeians to approve of him and his cause. When Cassius warns Brutus about “how much the people will be moved / By that which [Marc Antony] will utter[!]” (III.i.252-253), Brutus tells Cassius that letting Marc Antony speak “shall advantage us more than do us wrong” (III.i.261). In these cases, Brutus demonstrates his awareness of

The Romans were on one of the greatest people of all. They had power, wealth, and even a half of the world. They built one of the strongest and vast empire that world has ever seen. They came from nothing to something awesome. It started of as a city and ended up being one of the greatest empire of all. This essay is going to focus on the Roman Empire from the rise to the fall and the government, architecture, mythology, Family Structure, and Food of the Romans.