Tacitus And Roman Imperialism

The military campaigns of the Caesars made Rome one of the largest empires of the ancient world. Suetonius conveys through his writings that being a good military leader and a good Caesar were synonymous. Augustus, who Suetonius thought an excellent leader, reunited the eastern and western halves of the Roman Empire ( 51) and greatly expanded Romes territory (53). Augustus “showed not only skill as a commander, but courage as a soldier” in the eyes of his contemporaries (47). On the other hand, both Caligula and Nero, considered poor leaders by Suetonius, had very limited military success and aspirations. Only once did Caligula initiate a military exploit, and it was rife with his madness. His campaign into Germany was on a whim and all he accomplished was receiving the surrender of a

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

The Germania written by Tacitus served as an ethnography of Germans that lived in the lands beyond Roman control. Tacitus goes through every aspect of culture and in some cases compares Germans to Romans. He describes German culture as a whole in the first half of the reading, then moves on to discuss each individual tribe and their customs. Tacitus defines race in very broad sense, drawn from how he depicts Germans in contrast to Romans. We see that geography and culture play a large role, although they differ slightly from tribe to tribe, many maintain similar customs. Through the Germania, we see that Tacitus differentiates race on the basis of physical appearance, lifestyle, and regard for women.

The Roman Empire conquered land at a previously unparalleled rate, within the known world, affecting its institutions from the rest of the Empire’s prevalence. From Hispania to Britannia sweeping across the mediterranean, gaining Egypt, ending in Persia; the absorption of Carthage and North Africa, and finally the civil war being won by Augustus, all brought upon the negative effects of their conquest. The Empire continued to grow from the year 200 B.C.E. to the year 200 C.E.; this growth had many effects upon the Empire. Although expansion and conquest are often good, seen as liberating, or wholly expansive in mathematical, philosophic, and scientific thought, this is not inherently the case. The Roman Empire’s expansion was not entirely as powerful and awe inspiring as many claim it to be; the greedily performed collection of lands resulted in many negative outcomes. These outcomes largely presented Rome with an issue they would never be able to recover from: empiric decay. The effects of militaristic expansion, of the Roman Empire, resulted in the decay of previously prosperous economic, political, and social institutions.

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).

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

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.

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

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

Imperial Rome, during the first century A.D. was expanding it's boundaries by adding new territories. They expanded into northern Europe and Britain and conquered or attempted to conquer various types of people. Based on my reading of Tacitus' The Agricola and The Germania, I have knowledge of the life and customs of the Britons, subject of the Agricola, and the Germans, subject of the Germania. This of course being the Romans, and more specifically Tacitus,' observation and view of these groups of people.

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.

The language of Roman rule and power can be disputed endlessly, much like all else when trying to study ancient history. This is primarily a result of a multitude of interpretations that can be inferred from primary sources, which also tend to be biased, that we have available to us. Examining a source that is written from an individual’s perspective, and they trying draw conclusions about varying aspects of a certain society is especially tough and extremely subjective. Nonetheless, history remains an important field of study and reaps many benefits.

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.

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

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