Tacitus Analysis

In the early first century AD, the Roman Empire was subject to autocratic rule and the old Republic was long dead. Augustus had been ruling for forty years and most of that time he was loved and praised by the Senate and the people of Rome. Throughout his reign, Augustus had the one lingering problem of finding a successor to take over the role of Emperor. He had chosen 3 different heirs in his time of rule; however, they all passed before they had the chance to inherit Augustus’ esteemed power. His fourth choice, Tiberius, was the one to succeed Augustus. He was often referred to, by Augustus, as an outstanding general and the only one capable of defending Rome against her enemies. The statement, ‘Tiberius is condemned by many ancient

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

Back at the war, Tiberius seems to be more confident and more involved into the politics, he seemed to be quite shy and nervous not sure of what to do and quite clumsy on doing things himself. Though once crowned it gave him more strength and wanting to do more to help others and to feel that sense of winning something again. His mother Cornelia wants to be known as the mother of Tiberius Gracchus to help him boost his confidence but to also be well known in the military life, to be more successful and to be a good name for Rome. During this time Tiberius is realizing what it is like outside of the upper class people of Rome but now realizing what it is like for the lower class people. A good example is when he is traveling on the road to visit Marcus Octavius at his home who is a tribune for Rome, where they are able to do voting for laws of Rome. On his way to visit him he notices a woman yelling and screaming over her cart being flipped over by military men. The cart had her belongings of what she needed and food, basically all she had due to her husband dying at war. The military men/guards flip over her cart and yells out loud. Tiberius hurries over to her asking what is wrong and for being upset people are just taking her land he tells them to fix her cart and to give her food as well. He reaches to where Octavius is and enjoys his time until he realizes that Octavius is among the many who just take the people’s lands

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

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

Nero and Tiberius both started off as great leaders of Rome. Throughout their leadership many events occurred that caused the general publics view to change on both of them. Comparing Nero, the careless leader to Tiberius, the leader with great accomplishments I found that they are complete opposites. Analyzing the accomplishments, treatment of people, and the overall personality of Nero and Tiberius it can be concluded that Tiberius is a better leader than Nero.

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’ 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.

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

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’ Agricola, though it traverses a significant part of Rome’s conquest of Britain, is primarily about the man from whom the book takes it title. Tacitus used British conquest to show the reader Agricola’s many virtues, and he explained why Romans should strive to follow Agricola’s example. At the same time, however, Tacitus echoed Agricola’s virtues to Rome, which, before and during the writing of his book, endured several tyrannical emperors. Tacitus’ book, besides praising an individual, suggested hope for an improved future to many troubled Romans when the virtues of the empire had decayed, and freedom that they once loved had largely disappeared.

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.

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

Julius Caesar was a very influential figure in Roman history. Many features of the Roman Empire came from his reign as dictator. But what, specifically, were some of those great achievements? In this research paper, I will explain Julius Caesar’s youth, the Roman Republic before Caesar came to power, the Roman government before Caesar became dictator-for-life, the effects of Julius Caesar, the reasons for his assassination, and what affects there were when the public learned about his assassination.

Livy’s The Rise of Rome serves as the ultimate catalogue of Roman history, elaborating on the accomplishments of each king and set of consuls through the ages of its vast empire. In the first five books, Livy lays the groundwork for the history of Rome and sets forth a model for all of Rome to follow. For him, the “special and salutary benefit of the study of history is to behold evidence of every sort of behaviour set forth as on a splendid memorial; from it you may select for yourself and for your country what to emulate, from it what to avoid, whether basely begun or basely concluded.” (Livy 4). Livy, however, denies the general populace the right to make the same sort of conclusions that he made in