Negative Arguments About Emperor Claudis

Augustus, formerly known as Octavian, was the adopted son of dictator Julius Caesar and Emperor or Rome. Octavian set out to destroy his father’s murderers and assembled his own army in his quest for power and retribution. At the start, he shared rule with Mark Antony, however, their collaboration proved ineffective leading Augustus to pursue more and more control, culminating in the defeat of Antony in the battle of Actium and assuming rule as Emperor of Rome. Augustus did not inherit rule, his pursuit for power comprised of manipulative actions veiled under his generosity, concern for his people and charismatic tone and tenor. Res Gestae Divi Augusti expresses a sense of self adoration and honor in his quest for power and control, yet the subtext portrays a vastly different undertone, that of use of cajoling and propagandizing messages to benefit his position and accumulation of control of the republic. This Res Gestae is Augustus’ mechanism of self-promotion and adoration for his exceptional leadership qualities, concern and respect gleaned from his citizens and senate, and his military savvy to overpower and gain peace for the Romans, thus proclaiming his reign as one of prestige and importance.

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

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.

The shaky past of Athens, after the loss of the war against the Spartans and the overthrow of the democracy they loved and fought for caused suspicion in Socrates who had association to Critas, a bloodthirsty tyrant in an oligarchy called the “Thirty Tyrants” From a harmless town character Socrates influence on the youth of Athens was being questioned.

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.

Tiberius, who served as emperor from 14 to 37 AD, began his rule after the death of his father-in-law, Augustus. Tiberius was a weak ruler, and he understood that ruling Rome was like “holding a wolf by the ears.” When conflict arose in Europe, Tiberius sent his nephew, Germanicus, to deal with it. Germanicus did his job, and this resulted in Tiberius fearing the newest war-hero. To avoid the issue, Germanicus was appointed governor of the remote eastern provinces by his uncle. After the sudden death of Germanicus, people believed that Tiberius had poisoned him. He denied this, but the accusations never died. When he was in need of advice, Tiberius sought the assistance of Sejanus, a cavalry officer and town cheat. Tiberius sought the

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.

The reason for this reflection is to review what has happened in a deeper level than just summarizing what has happened over the course of this project. During the weeks learned some things, not just from the book that I was reading, but also from participating in a group. The lessons I learned led to my group being successful in the few goals that were created. All of the goals were met in different ways whether it would be just finishing the book or us getting up in front of the whole class to present the google slides that we created.

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.

Abstract: In this paper I attempt to admire the spectator’s experience while viewing the Arch of Titus, and bring to the forefront why I find the Arch of Trajan to be underappreciated. I will compare the two by first analyzing the meaning of the Arch of Titus, and then analyzing and summarizing the Arch of Trajan. The source I used for the Arch of Trajan may be among the outliers of most scholars, but I find that I agree with their analysis of the arch in that it was not simply a list of Trajan’s accomplishments, but rather outcomes of his famed policy, unrightfully credited to Nerva, of alimenta.

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.

“The Last Emperor” was a very interesting film, rich in historical truth and an accurate portrayal of past events that occurred in China during the 1900s. The story was very easy to follow and gave a more modernized approach to teaching the impacts of historical proceedings by using the English language but not forgetting to keep the facts in order. This approach gave me the opportunity to see the different actors as if it were truly identical to what this time period was all about. Given that the plot was centralized around Puyi, the last Emperor of China, and the director did an excellent job making the movie fit the timeline.