History, Ethnography, And Eulogy Of Agricola

Julius Caesar, a Roman general, dictator, and leader, is considered to be one of history 's most influential and powerful rulers to this day, in which his rise to power, conquest of Europe, and controversial downfall all remain to be told during modern days. The play Julius Caesar written by William Shakespeare, portrays the events leading up to Julius Caesar’s assassination, and how those who conspired against him banded together and plotted Caesar’s demise. Many of those conspirators assassinated Caesar due to his quick rise to absolute power, his “acts” of disrespect against the senate such as his failing to stand to receive the title of becoming a “god,” and pure jealousy and anger towards Caesar’s success and rule over the Roman empire. Caesar, an ambitious man, was able to conquer many lands and peoples for Rome through successful military campaigns in which he became one Rome’s best generals due to the amount of successful battles he had won and the amount of blood he had shed for Rome’s expansion. However, Caesar’s trait of ambitiousness would prove to be a double edged sword.

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

Tacitus also shows distrust towards Augustus in his exiling and killing of anyone deemed to be a political enemy – a taste which her masterfully called the proscriptions, and advertised to the public as a

Tacitus’ motivations for writing The Annals are multifaceted. First, he was promoting the stance that the empire, despite its shortcomings, was necessary for the stability of Rome at the time. Secondly, he wanted to give an honest and fair account of Rome during the reigns of four emperors of the principate: Tiberius, Gaius, Claudius and Nero.

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

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

Tacitus believes that Roman Imperialism has a variety of attributes that include prosperity, cruelty, and jealousy. He is more so critical of conquests attempted by people he does not favor. Tacitus is a great source of the Roman imperialist results as he lived through emperor’s who were thought to be effective and others who were unsatisfactory to say the least. He favored the Trajanic regime that he was serving under while criticized Domitian’s reign undoubtedly. Overall, his opinion on imperial rule was mostly negative since it promoted the corruption of the ruler and the ruled, increased secrecy, paranoia, cruelty and moral downgrades in the emperors, and an increase in greed, hypocrisy, and cowardice in the subjects. While he talks

“Agrippina was a formidable adversary. She had political allies at all levels, acquired during Claudius’ reign, and she knew how to exploit her Augustan lineage and descent from Germanicus to the full.” – Griffin

54) Despite his success, Agricola never let people’s high opinions of him go to his head. As a result, he treated soldiers under his command fairly and for that, they confided their trust in him. Agricola’s leadership was also great because of his ambitious and passionate nature. Early in his youth, he had a passion for military glory, which Tacitus described as “… thankless in an age in which a sinister construction was put upon distinction and a great reputation was as dangerous as a bad one.” (p.55) Because of his well-disciplined upbringing and humility, however, this passion became motivation to succeed in Roman conquest, not his own. Together, those qualities made Agricola an adept leader who did not accept the glory that leaders traditionally receive. Conversely, Rome had been ruled during and around A.D. 98, when the Agricola was completed, by tyrants who governed for their own benefit. Tacitus’ book shows, however, that Agricola nevertheless served the interests of his legions and the Roman Empire, not its emperor.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

In this unit’s text, we learned about modernization of society and how agriculture permitted nomadic hunt-and-gather groups to become stabilized and centralized in one location. The text and supporting video clips introduced both positive and negative anthropological effects of the rise of agriculture. Three positive outcomes include stabilization, improved nutrition, and food surplus. For each of these positive instances, there is an alternate and negative impact as well: habitat destruction, feast and famine cycles, and health concerns. This essay will briefly expound on each positive outcome and its counterpart, and will relate the sustainable agrarian achievements of the people of the Gamo Highlands to these effects.