The Nature Of Rome 's Relationship

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.

1. Read "Cincinnatus Saves Rome: A Roman Morality Tale" (5-1b). In this excerpt, does Livy's story appear to be historically valid? Why or why not? Why were the "common folk" less pleased than the officials at seeing the Dictator? Were their fears accurate and what were their views of him likely to have been twenty days later? What elements of this story inspired later generations to hail Cincinnatus as "the noblest Roman of them all"?

Before Augustus’ reign began, Civil war had ravished the basic principles of the Roman people. Piety, the warning to “fulfil our duties towards our country, our parents, or others connected with us by ties of blood” was undermined by faction. The duty towards country, parents and relatives was less of a bond because faction determined duty rather that Pietas. Thus Rome, a city founded in pietas, was that foundational principle. internal faction undermined the principles of pietas and corrupted its role in the city. Rome needed a moral reform towards pietas; Rome needed a refocus on the roots of the empire, its duty towards its ancestors, and unity based in pietas. Commissioned by Augustus, Virgil constructs the Aeneid to portray the cruciality of pietas by redefining Greek epic heroism to include pietas. Each comparison of aeneas to another greek hero emphasises the pietas within him, showing how he is better because of it and combining the heroism of all the Greek heroes into Aeneas. By doing this, virgil shows that to unify Rome through pietas is to harness Rome’s power. Thus, Virgil reveals to the Romans a virtue which allows the individual Roman citizen embody and partake in the glory of Rome.

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.

It is clear that the dynamics that characterized Rome’s society during the Republic were never easy. There was a constant push and pull of intentions and interests between Patricians and Plebeians. The Patricians always wanting to maintain economic and political supremacy while the Plebeians were in constant

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

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.

The first story that Livy introduces sets the scene for Rome, as we are shown the two founding brothers: Romulus and Remus. It starts out simple enough,

Roman’s had an idealised view of what their politicians should be. From their ancestry to their attributes. In this essay I shall be looking at Gaius Marius. How did he live up to the Roman ideals? What are those ideals? I shall a number of these ideals one by one. But first I shall discuss what ideals the Romans have and why.

In “The History of Rome” by Livy, he tells of the Volscian Army’s attempt to conquer Rome. Livy chooses to write in detail about how those in debt rose up in riots which led to civil unrest and the disunification of Roman life during a military crisis. These uprisings pushed for social change which eventually occurs in Rome when the unrest impacts the military system’s ability to enlist and send out soldiers for Rome’s protection. The civil change desired by the common people comes from the debt system that places them into states of bondage furthering the inequality found across Rome through a non-egalitarian state. In this paper, I will argue that civil and social change occurred in Roman society not out of a desire for social equality but rather to

Before Augustus came to power, Civil war had ravished the basic principle of the Roman people. Piety, the warning to “fulfil our duties towards our country, our parents, or others connected with us by ties of blood” was undermined by faction. The duty towards country, parents and relatives was less of a bond because faction determined duty rather that Pietas. Thus Rome, a city founded in pietas, was that foundational principle. internal faction undermined the principles of pietas and corrupted its role in the city. Rome needed a moral reform towards pietas; Rome needed a refocus on the roots of the empire, its duty towards its ancestors, and unity based in pietas. Commissioned by Augustus, Virgil constructs the Aeneid so that it portrays the cruciality of pietas by redefining Greek epic heroism to include pietas. Each comparason of aeneas to another greek hero emphasises the pietas within him, showing how he is better because of it and combining the heroism of all the Greek heroes into Aeneas. By doing this, virgil shows that to unify Rome through pietas is to harness Rome’s power. Thus, Virgil reveals to the Romans a virtue which allows the individual Roman citizen embody and partake in the glory of Rome.

In Mary Beard’s book, The Roman Triumph, she explores one of the most interesting victory celebrations of the ancient world. Instead of having a small gathering, or even a raucous party, Romans brought what they had seized and carted it through the city. They even brought some people they had captured so that the crowd could know exactly who they triumphed against. This celebration gives historians a view into the Romans lifestyle. Roman triumphs also show what values were important to the Romans and where they found their significance. Using Mary Beard’s book I will demonstrate the nature of Roman triumphs by giving examples from Pompey’s triumph in 61BC, what these triumphs tell historians about the Roman world and why they are significant, and what they tell us about the values the Romans held dear.

The roman republic’s political structure was defined by the roman constitution, SPQR-senate and the people of Rome. There were three branches of government, the senate, the assemblies and the magistrates. “Her annually elected magistrates” (Livy), consisted of; 2 consuls who were the most important, their functions included being commander-in-chief of the army and to implement the senate’s decisions, the senate ‘’passed decrees to the magistrates with was usually obeyed’’ (Byrd), praetors were judges who administered Roman law and quaestors who managed financial matter.

The last century of the Roman Republic holds two of greatest political alliances in history, the First Triumvirate, created in 60 BC, and the Second Triumvirate, created in 43 BC. While the circumstances and actions of these two unions are very different, they tend to have vey similar trends. Three men come together to increase their political power, take control of the Republic, and fight against a particular group that opposes them. First, we shall look at the creations of these two alliances, as they seem to have distinct similarities. The characters that fill these two coalitions, a brilliant politician, a military commander, and a successful senator, share similar qualities in themselves. Finally, they both end in a similar fashion, as the two more successful men fight for control of the Roman State.

Titus Livius (commonly known as Livy) is one of the most prominent ancient historians who wrote 142 books of Roman history called the Ab Urbe Condita (Gill, 2013). This essay seeks to assess the work of Livy if it qualifies as a work of history; the assessment will be based on two points namely, unbiased telling of the story and use of myths in ancient history.