PlanetPapers.com RSS Feed

Marc Antony

2007-03-05T06:02:28-05:00

Marc Antony, Military Leader · Born: 83 B.C. · Birthplace: Rome · Died: 30 B.C. (suicide) · Best Known As Cleopatra's ill-fated lover Latin name: Marcus Antonius Marc Antony was a general in the army that Julius Caesar ruled. Mark Antony was a part of an old aristocratic family in Rome. When he was 25 he joined the army and served honourably in Palestine and Egypt. After he joined Julius Caesar in Gaul and became one of his lieutenants. Because Marc was close to Julius he was appointed to different types public offices. At the battle of Pharsalus Julius made him head of a division. After Caesar was killed in 44 B.C. Marc tried to control Rome. (At the funeral of Julius he spoke out strongly against the assassins) Marc joined up with Julius's adopted heir Octavian to get rid of Rome’s common enemies. They formed the Second Triumvirate with general Marcus Lepidus and split up the empire with Marc being given control of Egypt. There he met and became the lover of the Egyptian queen Cleopatra. When they meet each other Cleopatra dressed as the love goddess Venus and arriving on a beautifully decorated ship. Antony and Cleopatra joined forces and the triumvirate ended. At the battle of Actium in 31 B.C. the followers of Octavian dug out the naval forces of Antony and Cleopatra. So Mac and Cleopatra were defeated by Octavian at Actium (Cleopatra hid while the battle was still on) A year later with Octavian's forces nearing Alexandria Antony committed suicide by falling on his sword. Cleopatra also commit suicide by letting a poisonous Egyptian snake bite her. And Octavian was left control of Egypt and Rome. Cleopatra had been in love with Julius Caesar before becoming the lover of Antony. Antony had been married in order Fadia, Antonia (his direct cousin), Fulvia and Octavia (her brother is Octavian) and a number of children. 1. Marriage to Fadia 2. Marriage to Antonia Hybrida According to Plutarch, Antony threw his cousin out of his Roman House because she slept with his friend the tribune Dolabella. 1. Marriage to Fulvia · Marcus Antonius Antyllus · Iullus Antonius 2. Marriage to Octavia Minor · Antonia Major · Antonia Minor 3. Children with Cleopatra · Alexander Helios, the sun (twin) · Cleopatra Selene, the moon (twin) · Ptolemy Philadelphus Marc Antony was hansom, athletic and gracious but not equal to Octavian’s efficiency, energy and in particular unwilling to grasp the moment for action. But he still was a great leader of men and a

Marc Antony

2007-03-05T06:02:17-05:00

The position of the Etruscans in late prehistory

2005-11-02T03:36:23-04:00

Many years before continental Europe was united by the enveloping grasp of the conquering Romans, in a fertile region just north of Rome, Central Italy, a fascinating population existed. Known to modern archaeologists as the Etruscans, their origin, like much of their history, is disputed. Due to a dearth of archaeological evidence and lack of surviving literature, much of what we can conclude regarding their existence is little more than supposition. Luckily, however, subsequent civilizations literature has survived, literature that speaks explicitly of the Etruscan empire, and it is from this that we are able to draw conclusions. Using these sources along with the sparse but fascinating archaeological evidence that does exist, we are able to establish life in Etruria in late prehistory, tracking their influence on the development of Celtic (Gaul) and Roman societies before they were eventually subjugated by the Roman Empire. In the Bronze Age, 900 ï¿½ 700 BCE the Italian peninsula was settled by a group of small-scale agriculturalists, known to archaeologists as the Villanovans. Within two hundred years the Etruscan civilization had begun. Whether this resulted from an adoption of new ideas by the Villanovans (Scullard, 1967) or from a migration of peoples from Lydia, Asia Minor, is unclear. They called themselves Rasenna but are known to Archaeologists as the Etruscans. In the 7th century BCE Etruria emerged suddenly (compared with the pace of much of prehistory) (Hamblin, 1975) as a great Mediterranean civilization and achieved the peak of its power in the 6th and 5th centuries BCE (Macnamara, 1991). This period was known as the Orientalizing Period which was followed by the Archaic Period 600-400 BCE, Classical periodï¿½ 490-300 BCE and finally the Hellenistic Period 300-1 BCE when Etruria was incorporated into Roman Society. Before the domination of Rome the only power to affect a partial ethnico-political and a wider cultural unification of Italy was Etruria (Pallottino, 1955). Archaeologists who suppose that the Etruscans are of Lydian decent believe that the area first settled was the coastal side of the Tyrrhenian Sea (Pallottino, 1955). The region that may be considered to be the heartland of Etruria, being the area that the twelve Etruscan cities were constructed, lies between the Tyrrhenian Sea and the rivers Tiber and Arno, this is Etruria proper (Pallottino, 1955). All of these cities were built north of where

Roman Architecture

2004-04-05T15:38:07-04:00

The Roman society, like any other, had its humble beginnings. The history of their architecture runs virtually in step with the history of their empire to an extent. As the Empire expanded so did the architecture, and as Romans became more magnificent their architecture followed. Roman architecture had its humble beginnings as a form of worship. The first Roman architects were the ancient priests and dwellers who made areas of sacrifice and worship for their gods. At first, their homes were simple huts but as they grew smarter and more aware of their surroundings, they erected monumental sites for their gods. ‘“This space shall be for worship and for nothing else; it shall be four-square; … whatever is done or said in this holy space the gods shall be aware of; whatever comes … shall be a sign from the gods.’” (Brown 10) So, like many arts, Roman architecture’s roots are embedded in the worshiping and homage paid in religion. The Romans were, of course, not the first to unveil and practice many of their building philosophies; however, they built like no other society before them. Their methods incorporated efficiency and sophistication to construct a whole new look. So with the rise of the Romans and the everlasting hail of Caesar after Caesar and Emperor after Emperor, Roman architecture expanded and influenced building over the world. Unlike the Empire, though, Roman design did not die at the hands of the Germanics, or rather at the hands of self-destruction; it continued to expand and play a part in every major style throughout history. Today, a look at any bridge, tunnel, skyscraper and most buildings will reveal a Roman influence. Even through its empire’s own tribulations and defeat, architecture has stood as an everlasting symbol of what Rome once was, and what the rest of the world is today. To conclude, Roman architecture cannot be looked at as a mere time period or cultural event, for its ramifications lie beyond cultures and beyond time itself. Roman architecture is not a variable, it is, and forever will be, a constant. Unlike cultures before them, the Romans were not intimidated by the curve, “Greece, like the Orient, had been shy of the curve.” (Brown 20) It had proven very difficult for predecessors to successfully negotiate an angled surface; it not only took great skill, but the right kind of material and design. The

Roman Architecture

2004-04-05T15:38:03-04:00

Tragic Hero Antigone

2004-03-20T07:26:24-04:00

Tragic Hero What qualities generate a hero? Must heroes possess superhuman abilities? In the Greek era, heroism was much more practical. According to Aristotle, a tragic hero must be royal. He/she must be a good, moral person. Yet, every tragic hero must exhibit flaws. His/her flaws must lead to downfall. A hero must be punished or experience suffering. He/she must invoke catharsis into the audience. A tragic hero must recognize his/her wrongs and accept all consequences. Beyond all doubt, Antigone is a tragic hero. Obviously, Antigone is royal. She is Eteocles, Polyneices and Ismene’s sister. Plus, she is Creon’s niece. However, a tragic hero must be a good, moral person. Antigone has family pride. She is loyal and honorable. Antigone’s conscience would not allow her to leave her beloved brother to be scavenged by animals. “But I will bury him; and if I must die, I say that this crime is holy: I shall lie down with him in death and shall be as dear to him as he to me.” (Prologue, Line 55). Antigone’s pride and loyalty for her family uphold her morals and good nature. Being human, Antigone exhibited flaws. Antigone demonstrated impressive loyalty and bravery to bury her brother. Yet, becoming a martyr for the cause was extreme. Deciding to transgress the King’s law was a significant faux pas. When Antigone decided to bury her brother, not even the Gods’ ominous whirlwind could defer her. Overpowering pride and loyalty led to Antigone’s ruin. Importantly, Antigone received punishment. Creon sentenced Antigone to death by nature’s hand. Antigone was imprisoned in a stony tomb where starvation would execute her. After suffering without provisions, Antigone performed euthanasia on herself by committing suicide. Therefore, Antigone was a good person with flaws. Antigone’s imperfections ended her. Despondently, Antigone invoked catharsis into the audience. The audience felt the combined feelings of pity and fear for Antigone. They felt sympathy and pity for her when she could not bury her brother. They felt fear for her because her death sentence was undeserved. For both of these feelings, the audience could relate to Antigone and could imagine how

Roman Architecture

2004-02-18T08:56:02-05:00

Roman Archaelogy

2004-02-18T08:18:08-05:00

I, Claudius and Claudius the God - a comparisson essay

2003-12-13T22:11:14-05:00

The Claudian Era, a record of the most scandalous time in history, took place during the 13-year rein of Tiberius Claudius Drusus Nero Germanicus as Emperor of the Roman Empire. During this time of ambition and deception, there was a blatant lack of value for love. However, Romans did possess an obvious commitment to their spiritual beliefs. This aspect of the Roman culture is just one of the many that are portrayed in two novels set during this era, I, Claudius and Claudius the God, both by Robert Graves, The combination of both works tells a magnificent auto-biography. I, Claudius explores the life of Claudius before he became emperor and describes the development of his character as he overcame the scandals and murders of his family. Claudius the God depicts the life of Claudius as emperor and narrates his transformation from a fool to a “god”. Both of these novels touch on the themes of ambition, deception, love, and spiritual beliefs. Both I, Claudius and Claudius the God depict the Roman times as an era of intrigue, lust, perversion and bloodshed. One aspect of the Roman culture that depicted the Roman times as an era of intrigue, lust, perversion and bloodshed was the Roman peoples’ ambition. This aspect of ambition is one of the themes portrayed in both I, Claudius and Claudius the God. This theme can be observed through Livia and Claudius, the main characters of I, Claudius and Claudius the God respectively. Livia and Claudius both set particular goals for themselves. In I, Claudius, Livia aspired to become the First Lady of the Roman Empire. She was, at first, married to Drusus Nero. When Nero refused to take part in Livia’s schemes to make him emperor (which would make Livia the First Lady), Livia divorced him. She then married Augustus, a man who was far more ambitious that Drusus, to increase her chances of a position in power as the Emperor’s wife. In Claudius the God, Claudius also set certain goals, one of which was to construct Ostia. During Ostia’s construction, Claudius perversely refused to listen to advice from engineers about the immense cost and time it would take to build Ostia. Claudius even tricked the Corn Ring into lending him a large sum of money to build Ostia. However, Ostia was merely one of Claudius’ aspirations; Claudius followed several other ambitions. To pursue his ambitions, Claudius studied

The Significance of the Gracchi

2002-08-05T14:00:00-04:00

“When Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus sought to establish the liberty of the common people and expose the crimes of the oligarchs, the guilty nobles took fright and opposed their proceedings by every means at their disposal” – Cicero. The Gracchi brothers were clearly well intentioned men who had the interests of Rome at heart, instead of their own, which was a common attitude amongst the other senators. The reforms of the Gracchi were long over-due and their programs were genuine attempts to deal with Rome’s problems. During the Gracchi’s existence, Rome was facing a number of social, political and economic problems. They were frustrated with the conservatism and selfishness of the oligarchy and so adopted methods which threatened the balance between the senate, the magistrates and the people which had existed for a very long time – in this way they can be regarded as revolutionary. It is likely that they interpreted the problems far too simply, and they failed to see that Roman society had changed. The Senate also failed to see these changes and reacted to the Gracchi’s actions in the only way they could – violence. The senate felt threatened by the Gracchi’s methods, and as a result violence was used for the first time in Roman politics. In order to understand why the Gracchi attempted to solve these problems, one must examine the circumstances of Rome at the time, as well as the background of the two brothers. After the Second Punic War, the Senate became the supreme power and as a result, many changes occurred throughout Rome. Most notably, the ruling Oligarchy (specifically the nobiles) abused their power, caring more for their own material interests and gloria than the welfare of the republic. As a result major problems occurred throughout Rome. Serious economic social problems occurred, both rural and urban, causing grave distress among many Roman citizens. There was a military crisis, with lack of eligible recruits for the legions, aggravated by the Spanish and Sicilian wars. There was tension in the oligarchy between leading factions (Claudii / Sempronii and the Scipios) as they struggled for political superiority. And amongst all these problems was the failure of the ruling nobility within the senate to deal with these problems. In order to determine the significance of both Gracchi, one must examine both Tiberius’ and Gaius’ actions and the effects they had at the time. In 133, Tiberius

Explain the formation and the break down of the First Triumvirate

2002-08-03T14:00:00-04:00

The formation of the First Triumvirate took place because of the political motives and the personal motives of the three ruthlessly ambitious power brokers in Rome. These men required the co-operation of the other two in order to further their political careers. During the time of the First Triumvirate many extraordinary powers where obtained and in some cases these where unprecedented. There are some key factors that have to be considered towards the break down of the Triumvirate. The most powerful and influential people, the Optimates became increasingly dis empowered, and a sense of desperation to regain power is felt with the use of Pompey in an a final attempt to restore power to the Senate. “By uncompromising refusal to meet the demands of Pompey, Caesar and Crassus the senate naturally drove them into each others arms. The three men agreed to form a political amicitia …..” Pompey upon return from his successful campaign in the East, disbanded his army probably to diffuse tension in Rome and prove to the Optimates in Rome he had no intention of over throwing the Government. This suggests Pompey’s political naivety and the fact that Pompey thought he had done enough in order to get recognition and acceptance from the Optimates to gain land for his veterans and to have his innumerable arrangements in the East ratified. Cato also refused Pompey’s offer of marriage to one of his nieces. According to Bradley “Cato was a staunch conservative, and distrusted Pompey’s motives” Crassus had a problem with his supporters. He supported a request from a company of tax gatherers (Equites), that after realizing Asia had been economically raped, and virtually un-taxable due to the Mithradatic campaign, could not possibly make money from taxes, so the request he supported is that the Senate should adjust the bad bargain to on a third rebate which they had made in contracting for the taxes of Asia. This request according to Scullard was rejected under Cato’s leadership which had led to the stagnation of Crassus’ political career. Thus Crassus needed some support of Pompey and Caesar to kick start his career and eventually lead to the formation of the First Triumvirate. Caesar, who had been Propraetor in Spain during, 61BC, hoped to return to Rome in 60BC and stand for the consulship for the following year. On his return he wanted a triumph and the consulship, but since he could not as

The First Triumvirate

2002-08-03T14:00:00-04:00

“3 paragraphs, why did Caesar, Pompey and Crassus need the (amicittia) First Triumvirate.”

Crassus’ motives for the need for the First Triumvirate according to Scullard are as follows, “Crassus supported a request from a company of tax-gatherers that the Senate should adjust a bad bargain which they had made in contracting for the taxes of Asia.” His supporters had found out that Asia had been ‘economically raped’ due to the Mithradatic wars, where Asia was sandwiched. Cato, basically turning Crassus’ political career towards the wall and going nowhere, rejected the one-third rebate. This was really bad in political terms his career had stagnated for such a politically ambitious man. Pompey’s motives for the need of the First Triumvirate are according to Scullard both political and personal. As Scullard seems to suggest, “ … Pompey had been rebuffed by the Optimates in both his private and public life. Cato rejected a suggestion that Pompey should marry one of his relations, but of greater importance was Pompey’s double request that his eastern settlement should be ratified by the Senate and that land should be provided for his veterans.” Pompey who had promised his veterans land. The way he disbanded his army and approached the Senate alone requesting his reasonable requests seems to suggest that he was fairly confident that he had achieved enough, and that the Senate would pass the request, but instead the Senate rejected his requests. A few attempts where made to pass the land bill for his troops with the use of Afranius and Metellus Celer both proved ineffective. His political career had too stagnated and hit the wall, this would be going nowhere. The senate rejecting the ratification of the eastern settlement, which is perfectly normal due to the fact that sources suggest that Pompey did it on his own, will and did not consult the senate, so the even though what he did was an extraordinary achievement the Senate can say no and so they did. Caesar upon arriving back from his outstanding success, in Spain he paid back his enormous debt to Crassus and still a multi millionare. On his return he wanted a triumph and the consulship, but since he could not as a commander enter the city to stand for election, he asked the Senate for permission to stand in absentia. “Though there were precedents, the Senate refused.” Caesar abandoned his triumph and entered Rome as an ordinary candidate. Caesar’s career

The Roman Family: Center of Roman Society

2002-03-25T13:00:00-04:00

The Roman family after the advent of Christianity has been widely discussed in Roman History. Different historians have looked at the topic in different ways. There are two articles at hand, which deal with this very topic. Brent Shaw, The family in Late Antiquity: The Experience of Augustine and Douglas O’Roark, Parenthood in Late Antiquity. Both historians are looking at the family in late antiquity, after the time that Christianity was introduced to the Roman society. Through an analysis of the two essays and references to the classical period it can be seen that: The Roman family has always been an important institution in their society, it’s composition, roles and the functions changed little after the advent of Christianity.

The Essays

Each of the historians has a solid central argument, and their essays are laid out well. Shaw seeks to show the structure and the functions of the Roman family in late antiquity. He also seeks to clear up misconceptions of the Roman family. O’Roark’s argument seeks to show the closeness of the parents and children in the Roman family. The important thing to realize is that both of these essays are looking at the Roman family in the same period, late antiquity, after the advent of Christianity. Also important to note is both of these essays to not specifically talk about the impact of Christianity on the family. The essays can be used to reference against each other and against the Roman family in the Classical period. Information on the Classical period is given in G. Nathan’s article: Two Traditions. With the three essays one can come to a good conclusion about the impact of Christianity on the Roman family. In interest of paper length the essays have been narrowed down to include only central topics. First looking at similarities, then differences.

Children

This is the first main aspect of the family that both historians look at. The first point Shaw brings up is that main purpose of childbearing. This was for the wife to produce a heir for the husband . The father organized the whole house around this, in preparation a son to take everything over when he died . O’Roark states that a major factor in having children was to love and to care for them . He however cannot deny that before this the realization is that the father must have children to pass everything on to . In

Fall of Rome - the military's role

2002-03-03T13:00:00-05:00

The Military’s Role in the Beginning of the End of Rome

The fall of Rome occurred over many centuries and was caused by several factors including military decay, barbarian invasions, and the failure of the government to respond to these problems. While these problems existed to a greater of lesser degree, since the end of the 2nd century, their effects were accelerated by the reforms of the emperors Constantine and Diocletian. These reforms changed Roman life as well as the face of the Roman army, moving it away from its classical infantry-based structure to a more cavalry-based system. The army was reorganized into lightly armed troops called “limitanei” who defended the border, and large mobile armies composed of troops called “comitatenses”. The border troops were given land to live on around forts they protected. This structure led to farming becoming the job of the border troops so that they could feed as well as protect those on the frontier. Over time, this in turn led to out of date weaponry and neglect in training. The weakness of these troops meant that more mobile troops were needed to compensate, and an easily penetrable border as a result of the weakness led to the need for highly efficient mobile armies. Since the cavalry were the most mobile unit of the army, they began to be the favored military unit. With forces strung along the border and concentrated large mobile armies, an increased number of recruits were required; however, land owners were reluctant to let themselves or their kin be recruited because that left less workers for their farms. At the same time, the division of the empire into outer imperial provinces and inner provinces controlled by the Senate had its own effect. Since the armies largely remained in the outer imperial provinces, the people of the inner provinces were out of touch with the army and were no longer attracted to service, again reducing the available pool of recruits. One reason that many avoided Army service was because Roman citizenship was now offered freely, where in prior times military service had been a path to citizenship. The result was less manpower available for Rome. The Roman army was left with no choice but to recruit barbarians, who could in this way both find employment where they had no skills, and hope to obtain Roman citizenship. At the same time the weakness of the

Marcus Tullius Cicero

2002-03-02T13:00:00-05:00

“We are in bondage to the law in order that we may be set free” Marcus Tullius Cicero came into philosophical fame during the Roman Republic era. At a very young age, Cicero, who came from a modest home, made it his ambition to hold a high political position in Rome. Unfortunately, his middle class ancestry restricted his ability in achieving his goals. As a result he sought a military position to gain authority. Cicero proved to be an ineffective soldier, which gradually lead him to select a career in law. In 63 B.C. he moved up in the Roman oligarchy by acquainting himself with many politicians who aided him in obtaining the title of “consul”, the highest Roman office. In three years an effective rebel occurred against the Republic from the First Triumvirate of Julius Caesar, Pompey and Crassus. They seized control of the Senate and enforced the ideals of the Roman Empire. Cicero was meant to be included because of his influence, but he clung to the old Republic ideals, which lead to his exile, and he was forbidden to take part in politics. During his exile, Cicero furthered his studies in philosophy for a year. Cicero still dreamed of the reincarnation of the old Republic, and wrote about the republic and on laws. During this time, it is most likely that the above quote was uttered. Philosophy and jurisprudence were directly related in Cicero’s studies. His studies included his despise of the Roman lifestyle, which consisted of low morals and disrespect for life. This lifestyle built the foundation for the laws that were set to keep Rome in order. Cicero’s quote that in order to be truly content and limitless to the world, citizens must abide by the laws made by the Senate. “We are in bondage to the law…” suggests that as a group, the citizens of Rome were slaves to a greater influence, the laws that made Rome an exceptional kingdom. The laws made by the Senate were made to respect and protect the foundation of Rome and the interests of its people, “…in order that we may be set free.” Cicero implies that, if the citizens of Rome follow the laws, they will be able to live their lives without being looked down upon by the rest of the citizens who follow the laws. In Cicero’s political career, he held an important position in the

Hannibal - Hannibal Crosses the Alps

2001-12-13T13:00:00-05:00

The march of Hannibal across the Alps onto Italy is thought to be legendary. Having read this book, that mere sentence is reiterated to its full extent. He had to fight his way through a Roman army, cross the Pyrenees (themselves a difficult range of mountains), then fight his way across southern France, for this area was under Roman control, then cross the formidable Alps. The scope of this accomplishment is often overlooked for Hannibal did much more than cross the formidable Alps. Hannibal Crosses the Alps by John Prevas, in my view, successfully accomplishes in crossing that visible line. He successfully captures every militaristic, psychological, and humanistic aspect of the second Punic War. His book successfully foretells the events leading to the demise of Carthage and the history of the ever brewing hate for the Romans. “The mountains were a dreadful sight before their eyes, high peaks, covered with snow and stretching to the sky, and all around them everything was stiff with cold. Shaggy, unkempt men perched on the crags above, more horrible to look upon than words can tell. All this renewed the fear of the column.”- Livy. By now Hannibal had abandoned his Spanish base with his army of 100,000 mercenaries and embarked on one of the most daring maneuvers in military history. He had successfully crossed the treacherous Rhone River, avoided a confrontation with the Roman army, and replenished his troops on “the island” by following the river northward [it is still uncertain to what Livy’s “the island” may refer to]. With guides provided from Brancus, the tribe leader of “the island”, he was successfully guided to the foothills of the Alps. Hannibal had now come to the Alpes du Dauphine. Although formidable mountains of from four to five thousand feet high, behind them, miles and days ahead loomed the most difficult part of the march at even higher altitudes and over more dangerous roadways. Eventually, after being ambushed by the shadowing allobroges and a three-day march, Hannibal’s army had reached the Durance river valley in full sight of their grave. The aforementioned quote by Livy was used by Prevas to describe the sight seen by the army of mercenaries. The last and the most difficult leg of the march laid in full view for the army to stare at awe. The Carthaginian column now stood at the valley of the Hautes Alpes, the highest and

The Civil War of Rome

2001-12-07T13:00:00-05:00

The Civil War in the eyes of most people is not glorious, but rather one of the worst crimes you could possibly commit when the state is all-important. Only under the most extreme circumstances should one be allowed to (in the eyes of the people that is) begin a Civil War with just cause. Caesar took this into consideration, but too many things were going wrong in Rome for him not to begin the war. The first of many problems was the collapse of the Triumvirate. The Triumvirate was one of the main parts of the government of Rome, with which there were three leaders, which at the time were Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus. This was never truly working all that great, but held itself together by the marriage of Caesar’s daughter Julia, to Pompey, and the friendship Caesar and Crassus shared. But, all this came to an end when Crassus was killed in a battle against a Parthian army. Then, not too long afterwards, Julia was murdered by someone who had broken into her home. This, destroyed the bond between Caesar and Pompey, and made them drift apart. Caesar seeing all this taking place, attempted to restore the bond by proposing to Pompey’s only daughter, but was not allowed to by Pompey. To only make matters worse, Rome was slowly slipping into total anarchy. The government was becoming corrupt with bribery. The elections were being stopped, and there wasn’t a consul elected in 53 or 52 B.C. Most authority was lost, the streets became rioted, and unsafe. During this time, Pompey tried to annul the Law of Ten Tribunes without notifying Caesar. If this happen, it would of removed a lot of Caesar’s power. Caesar saw what he was trying to do, and stopped it before this action took place, and now knew for sure that Pompey was no longer his ally, but instead an enemy. Pompey tried another devious act against Caesar, which this time worked. He had the senate pass a law that made Pompey and Caesar both give up troops, and send them to the East, where they were supposedly needed against the Parthians. This seemed fair, but it made Caesar lose two legions, one that was lent to him by Pompey in the Gallic Wars, and one of his own. Once they were positioned there, Pompey decided they were no longer needed, and sent them to Capua (a

Claudius

2001-11-11T13:00:00-05:00

The emperor, Claudius, was a man with great integrity, individuality, common sense, patriotism and determination. From his struggles as a child to his death, was a remarkable journey. Many historians today and ancient Rome have placed him amongst the greats of all time. Despite his physical disabilities and background, Tiberius Claudius Nero contributed much to the greatness of the Roman Empire. Tiberius Claudius Nero is the youngest son of Nero Claudius Drusus and Antonia (Daughter of Antony and Octavia), giving him royal blood. He was born on August 1st, 10BC, in the city of Comata, which is in the Region of Lugdunum (Modern Day Lyon, France). He was an unwanted child since birth. It is said that he had a sick and ugly appearance, with cerebral palsy. Yet, against the odds, he became an emperor, made many contributions to the benefit of the Roman society. According to many sources, Claudius was rejected from his own family due to his appearance; even his mother frequently mocked him. He would have been the normal choice to succeed Tiberius, had the monarchical family not thought him, unfit for the office. However, only Augustus thought Claudius as not stupid and granted Claudius a non-governmental priesthood position. Claudius was trained as a scholar, by the historian Livy and wrote several histories and literary works in Latin and Greek. (None of his work has survived, although there are inscriptions and fragments that provide some insight into his thinking). Claudius was considered a fool and kept out of public life until his insane nephew, Calligula, became emperor and appointed him as consul (alongside Calligula's horse) as a joke. After the assassination of Calligula, Claudius was found hiding in the palace, scared for his own life. The Praetorian Guards, interested in keeping their job as the Emperor's bodyguard, declared Claudius as emperor and forced the Senate to do the same. The soldiers, courtiers, freedman and foreigners were his main followers. Nevertheless, they did not dream that Claudius would be known as one of the greats. Claudius' reign is marked with the expansion of the Roman Empire. He had great sympathy for the traditions of the old Roman Republic than previous rulers of the house of Caesar. But a futile revolt in the Senate, within a year after he became emperor, made him favour the army. In 43AD, he conquered Britain, where his troops accepted him as a god (Smith, Mahlon. H,

Roman Women and Their Mythology

2001-08-24T14:00:00-04:00

Throughout the ages myths, legends and fairytales have been used to teach people basic moral and educational lessons. For example, mothers and fathers use the childhood story of “Goldilocks and the Three Bears” to teach their children that stealing and snooping is wrong. In the end, Goldilocks was either eaten or she ran away, depending on your bloodthirsty nature. By using this comparison between myths and reality the Romans were able to “control” their women, and to discourage them from vain, romantic and adulterous actions. Women themselves had a very low place in Roman society, and could be bought and sold like cattle or slaves. Despite their low legal status, women had immense power and influence over their fathers, brothers and husbands. These myths and legends were society’s guidebook, which provided women with a manual about correct conduct. Despite being a guidebook for all women to use, the Romans couldn’t simply say, “Look what happened to that mythical person. You shouldn’t do what she did.” This would have led to a very depressing and boring set of myths, so the Romans spruced them up a bit. They portrayed both good and bad pictures of women, including the Goddesses. Some of these stories were funny and some sad, but every single one had a lesson which could be learnt and acted upon. For example, the Amazons were a legendary race of warrior women who despised all men. They killed all the male babies that were born, and kept the female ones. In fact, it was said that the Amazons used the men from a nearby village as sex slaves, so that they wouldn’t die out. One day, Hercules came along, and wanted to borrow the Queen’s belt. Hippolyte, being a woman and all, fell madly in love with Hercules and readily agreed. But the other Amazons weren’t impressed, and thinking that Hercules was trying to kill their Queen, charged towards him. Hercules seized Hippolyte and slew her, then ran away with the belt. Needless to say nothing much else was said about the Amazons. This story was used to teach the folly of women who thought they could survive without men. They were dependant on the nearby village, and weren’t very well organized. They were much better off sticking to their own place in society. But as I said not all depictions were bad. Some were quite nice. The Muses were the

Fall of Rome

2001-04-05T14:00:00-04:00

Essay: Why was it possible for Rome to become an empire and last so long. What were the reasons for it’s fall? Rome was one of the greatest empires of the ancient world. The early Roman state was founded in 509 B.C. after the Romans drove out the hated Etruscan king. By this time Rome had already grown from a cluster of small villages to a small city. Little did the settlers know that this was the beginning of one of the greatest and largest empires ever known. After Rome established itself, they were determined to never again be ruled by a monarch. The Roman setup a new government called a republic. Romans thought a republic would keep any individuals from gaining too much power. Later Romans looked back with enormous pride on the achievements of the early republic. Between 509 B.C. and 133 B.C., Rome adapted the government to fit the need of the people it served. It also developed the military power to not only conqueror not only Italy, but also the entire Mediterranean world. In the early republic power was controlled by the patricians, the land holding upper class. Senators, who served for life, interpreted laws and issued decrees. In the event of a war the senate might elect a dictator who ruled for only six months in time of emergency. Julius Caesar emerged. He was able commander who led many conquests for Rome. In 59 B.C. Caesar set out for a new conquest. After nine years of constant fighting, he finally conquered Gaul. Pompey grew jealous of his achievement and had the senate order him to disband his forces and return to Rome. Caesar secretly crossed the Rubicon and killed Pompey then entered Rome. After crushing many rebellions, Caesar forced the senate to make him a dictator. Caesar launched many reforms such as public work programs and giving land to the poor. According to legend those in the senate murdered Caesar on March 15. Caesar’s Grandnephew, Octavian, and Marc Anthony joined forces to capture his killers. However bitter feuds grew it soon became a battle for power. After the Pax Romana ended, the next 100 years were in political turmoil. In one 50-year period, at least 26 emperors reigned and only one died of natural causes. At the same time high taxes used to support the armies began to anger the people. During this Germanic tribes were attacking the outskirts

Roman Religion in A Romans Everyday Life vs. Religion's Effects on Today

2001-02-17T13:00:00-05:00

"We Romans", said Cicero, "owe our supremacy overall other peoples to our piety and religious observances and to our wisdom in believing that the spirit of the gods rules and directs everything." Roman rites and observances took two main forms. One was the domestic reverence of the spirit or genius of the family. The other was the public attitude to the gods and goddesses by whom the destiny and welfare of the Roman people as a whole were supposed to be guided and controlled. During the Classical period, religious observance accompanied all important private and public events and transactions and, no successful outcome went without a vow of thanks or public dedication. Temples, priests and sacred rites were provided by the State. Nothing in the nature of religious services as we know them, in which the body of worshipers as a whole were able to participate, seems to have been celebrated in the temples. Any set forms of prayers, hymns or chants were performed solely by the official priests whose secrets they remained. The ordinary Roman man or woman had little personal part to play in such rites (Handbook To Life In Ancient Greece). While they were being undertaken and fulfilled it was the duty of the ordinary citizen not to interfere or make any disturbance and to refrain from any business affairs. When religiously minded Roman dropped in to a temple in order to worship the god or goddess whose house it was , they had some practical object in view : some personal favor or advantage. They came and perhaps burn incenses. When praying they stood with upturned palms. Sometimes they got as close to the image of the god as they could in order to whisper their pleas; the feet of some of the images were worn by the kisses of generations of worshipers. In addition to paying a fee for admission, the grateful petitioner for divine aid also brought sacrifices and thankful offerings to the temples. Enormous numbers of livestock and cattle went to augment the wealth of the temples, and to swell the incomes of the priests and attendants, many of whom became extremely wealthy. Temple worship was no essential part of Roman life. If it had been, it is difficult to understand why there were not more than about a hundred within the city confines, which is no large number in a city of

Has Slavery Changed since Ancient Times?

2000-09-04T14:00:00-04:00

Slavery has always been a large issue and possibly always will. The issues of today are often negative but did you know that back in ancient Roman times they were all for it? Well they were! The question that will be answered in this assessment is “In what ways, if any, has slavery changed from ancient to modern times?” I believe that slavery has changed very much from the past. Not that there may be more or less of it, but that it may be harsher and have worse conditions. In the ancient times slavery was a common and normal thing. In 70 A.D it was estimated that there were slaves in Rome. There were no troubles or controversies over it. Slavery was widespread and most families owned at least one slave. Today there is only one real way to become a slave but in Roman Times (rise of Rome) there were three. 1=Slavery due to crime committed. 2=Not being a Roman citizen. 3=Taken prisoner by Romans. An example is war. Some of these may seem unfair but it was the Romans belief in their superiority. There were many types of slaves that were good at different types of jobs. Often, rich families had so many slaves that they didn’t really have to do any work around the house at all! There were other types of slaves apart from the above. These were Statuliberi = Slaves freed by their master’s will. Servi sub unsufructu manumissi =Slaves made free by will remaining as slaves. Bona fide servientes = Freemen acting as slave to master Auctorati = Free men who were gladiators, under a contract to their gladiatorial master. Redempti = Freemen captured in war and ransomed back to non-relatives. They worked until they paid off their debt. Coloni adscripti glebae = Free persons who were tenant farmers. These slaves were not treated as a person but as an impersonal asset although they did have their rights. These were dismal rights but they were important for the slaves well-being. The rights were as follows: the slave was allowed his personal items (like money etc.), he could not be killed without a good reason. Masters had rights too of course. They could treat a slave anyway they wanted to. They could be abusive, friendly or do anything they wanted to the slave. They could defend themselves against slaves and could kill him/her if the master provided the courts with a good reason. The master could even free

Slavery

2000-08-31T14:00:00-04:00

Slavery is an issue we may never be free of, we may think this is bad but the Romans including people such as Hammurabi and Aristotle believed that slavery was essential to life and would have thought that this wouldn’t matter. This especially didn’t matter since slaves were only seen as objects or tools. Although there are still people who probably believe in what the Romans did, but now we now classify all people as equal. Anyone could have become a slave if they either: 1. Committed a crime 2. Were a prisoner of war 3. Not have roman citizenship 4. Sold into slavery These were the most obvious reasons for becoming a slave in roman times and yet only one of these points are still popular for today and that is number 4, because most slaves of today come from poor families. It is the poorer class of people today that are the target mainly because they would be so desperate that they would sell their children into slavery for a small profit. Nowadays slavery is restricted to jobs in more remote locations for obvious reasons so you wouldn’t find slaves working for or around the city, But rather in and around households in the country. Slaves back in roman times however were forced to work in the city and for anyone they were sold to. They had a huge range of jobs stretching from household slaves to field slaves and mining slaves to gladiators (Gladiators were created solely for the purpose of entertainment due to a lot more slaves). This was normal for Romans since they depended on slaves to do everything that they didn’t want to do. Today some of them are given the very worst jobs like prostitution, work in factories, sugar cane fields and even private forms of work. As I stated before, it is mainly poor families that are somewhat involved in either been taken or sold into slave labor but it can also be people from several different racial backgrounds. Many come from places like China, Africa, Russia, South Africa and Egypt. In ancient times war was a popular place for capturing people to be sold into slavery this gave the army a lot of its money and power, what I am saying is that Romans captured merciless people and sent them back to their country. Hammurabi had a basis of discipline on the slave and also one on

Christianity's Effect on the Roman Culture

2000-05-22T14:00:00-04:00

Christianity came into the world approximately two thousand years ago. It was persecuted at first, but atually became the offical religion in 381 A.D. "It is the spiritual force that conquered the Roman Empire; one of the decisive elements in the growth of Western civiliztion (Bunson 9). Throughout history Christianity has played a major role in changing our society into what it is today. "Christianity won the professed allegiance of the overwhelming majority of the population of the Roman Empire and even the support of the Roman State (Latourette 65). Not only did Christianity thrive, but it also succeeded in changing the face of Roman culture. Consider the gladiatorial fights. "The huge Coliseum at Rome seated 50 thousand people and was the scene of many bloody gladiatorial combats and even mock naval battles" (Schoder 108). "Hundreds of thousands of slaves shed their blood in the arena in Rome year after year to satisfy the perverted lust of the Roman mob" (Kennedy 148). "Although many Romans descried these blook-letting contests, there persisted a streak of cruelty in Roman public amusements which can scarcely be comprehended, far less condoned, today (81). The message of Christianity helped changed this aspect of Roman life because it gave worth and significance every life (Kennedy 149). Jesus told the multitudes to "love your neighbor as yourself" (Luke 10:27) He also told the story of the good summaritan to illistrate that any person he came in contact with was his good neighbor (Luke 10:30-37). Christianities message contains the golden rule "do to others as you you have them do to you" (Luke 6-3). "The child of today is loved and adored. But it was not so in pre-Christian times. The Roman father’s power of his child was absolute. "He could expose it to death; he could scourge it, mutilate it, marry it, divorce it, see it as a slave, or kill it to satisfy his own blood lust." Quintillion, a roman writer, said that to kill a man was often held to be a crime, but to kill one’s own children was sometimes considered a beautiful action (Kennedy 149). The message of Christianity gave value to children. Jeasus said "who ever humbles himself like this child is greatest in my kingdom. If anyone causes these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone around his neck and

The Decline of Rome

2000-04-16T14:00:00-04:00

What were the most important reasons for the decline of the Roman Empire? Why? The seemingly unstoppable Roman Empire was bound to fall after the many aspects that made Rome such a dominant empire started to fade away. Rome was the center of the world and the thought that such a worldwide power could decline was unheard of. It was not built in a day; therefore it couldn’t be destroyed in one day. The marvelous city declined for many reasons yet there are only a few major reasons that led to its diminish. Political, economic, religious, and outside forces were the major factors that led to the fall of the giant empire. Most of the problems came from within the city and were not caused by a major military defeat. Every decision that Rome made had a vast affect on city itself and the rest of the world. Many foolish decisions my terrible emperors weakened the city and eventually cause the many aspects of life to crumble. At one time a common religion was a huge factor that kept Romans united. Once the right of free worship was denied Rome became an empire of raging anger. Christianity a new religion appealed to the majority of the people of the Roman Empire. The message especially appealed to the poor and the slaves; it was also something new to put their faith in. Christianity was spread like wild fire. The Roman emperors felt that Christianity was so influential that it could be a possible threat. Around 100 AD. the first persecutions of the Christians occurred. Many of the Romans had already committed to the faith of Christianity and they refused to abandon it because it was the most important part of their life. This led to many social problems as well as a decline in the patriotism that had once lived in the hearts of all Romans. The People objected to Roman politics and became independent of the government. By the time that Constantine legalized Christianity it was much too late and the Empire was too deep in disunity to recover. The decision to outlaw Christianity was a terrible decision and caused the once united empire to crumble. Throughout much of the time that Rome existed, the Empire allowed the Germanic tribes to live peacefully within its territories. For many years the two groups lived harmoniously until the Huns pushed the tribes farther into Rome.

An Observation of The Aeneid, Book II

2000-01-09T13:00:00-05:00

The Romans, unlike the Greeks were not gifted in abstract thought. They constructed no original system of philosophy, invented no major literary forms, and made no scientific discoveries. Yet, they excelled in the art of government and empire building, they created a workable world-state and developed skills in administration, law, and practical affairs. In the Punic Wars, the Roman republic defeated the Carthaginians in North Africa and Rome inherited the Pergamene Kingdom from the last of the Attalids in 133 B.C. Rome became heir to the legacy of the Hellenistic world of the Greeks. The Hellenistic period which lasted 300 years in is noted by the death of Alexander in 323 B.C. It is marked by its rich, sophisticated and diverse culture. Many Romans were eager to merge with this Greek culture in order to exhibit the dominance of their rule over conquered societies. This exhibition of dominance was the primary motivation of the Roman desire to possess fine works of Greek Art. Whereas, other Romans, were convinced that the pursuit of the assimilation of foreign cultures would only harm the republic. During this time, much social disintegration and unhindered individualism threatened political stability. However, the adoption of Greek art for Roman needs was very popular. An educated Roman was well versed in the history of Greek Art and was socially compelled to collect Greek art for personal embellishment. The modernization of the old Sanctuary of Fortuna Primigenia is an example of the new Roman attitude toward art and architecture as Greek artists migrated in vast numbers to the new capital of the world. Roman generals and their quest to establish Rome as the new unchallenged capital of the world justified the expense of replanning the old sanctuary. This accomplishment would bring them personal glory and uplift the majestic status of Roman people. Roman architecture benefited as the city's wealth grew as other leaders contributed to the expansion of new monuments. Lucias Cornelius Sculla, (82-78 B.C.) led the Romans is Social War and later became dictator and master of the city of Rome. He brought Corinthian columns form the temple of Olympian Zeus in Athens to renew the shrine of the Roman Jupiter in the capital. This act symbolized the transferal of spiritual power from the aristocracy of the Senate to autocratic leaders, and art began to be shaped by their preferences. This satisfied the Roman desire for grandiose architecture by being the model

Decay of the Roman Empire

1999-10-25T14:00:00-04:00

Edward Gibbon says the decay of Rome was inevitable. He writes that instead of inquiring why the Roman Empire was destroyed, it is surprising that it subsisted so long. Gibbons' argument comes down to four major arguments, divided into rulership, the abuse of Christianity, the expansion of the Barbarians, and finally the loss of the Roman military power. Edward Gibbon was one of the greatest English historians of the late 1700's. His father entered him in Magdalen College, University of Oxford but shortly after his enrollment in 1753 he decided to convert to Roman Catholicism. Magdalen college only accepted Anglicans so he was barred from the school. His father then sent him to Switzerland, in care of a Calvinist pastor, who by Christmas, 1754, had reconciled him to Protestantism. After many years in Switzerland Gibbon returned home and decided to devote his life to scholarship and writing. In 1764, while visiting Rome, Gibbon decided to write about the city's history. His work The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire was one of his greatest works and despite the availability of new factual data and a recognition of Gibbon's western Bias, Decline and Fall is still read and enjoyed. In Gibbons first argument of divided rulership, he states that there simply was no central power in the Roman Empire. He writes, "The throne of Constantinople was erected in the East; while the West was still possessed by a series of emperors who held their residence in Italy and claimed their equal inheritance of the legions and provinces. This dangerous novelty impaired the strength, and fomented the vices, of a double reign." (2) As in any historical reference, when one divides their forces it weakens their strength. Gibbons makes this out to be a very important reason for the collapse of Rome. Even thought Constantinople was strong at this time, Gibbon points out that, "The Byzantine court beheld, perhaps with pleasure the disgrace of Rome, and the misfortunes of Italy." Edward Gibbon's second argument, the abuse of Christianity, has much to do with the new virtues of society brought with the new religion. Gibbons states, "The clergy successfully preached the doctrines of patience and pusillanimity; the active virtues of society were discouraged." These active virtues of ambition and power were what made Rome great. "The church and even the state, were distracted by religious factions, whose conflicts were sometimes bloody, and

Downfall of the Roman Empire

1999-10-21T14:00:00-04:00

The Roman Empire was strong for a time. It was founded on geography, family values, military strength, and wise leadership. It flourished because of social, economic, political, military and religious strengths. However, when the very things that make a civilization flourish start to decline, the civilization will also lead to a downfall. The first reason for the fall was economic decay. The rulers of Rome had expensive lifestyles. To aid their image, they needed money. They gained money through taxation on the poor. In response to the torment of tax collectors, the poor fled to barbaric lands. The poor made up a large percentage of the Roman population. Barbarians disrupted trade on the Mediterranean sea. Rome's gold and silver were being drained into buying luxuries from China, India, and Arabia. The government decreased the silver content in money. The value of the money also decreased. Diocletion attempted to curb the inflation. He issued an edict that fixed maximum prices and wages throughout the Empire. It was an unrealistic and unenforceable idea which failed. The emperors still felt the tax issue needed to be addressed. They decided to make the hereditary class of tax collectors pay the difference. In other words, if a poor person could not pay their full share, the tax collector paid the rest. This concept wiped out a whole class of moderately wealthy people. Later, slavery split communities. Rome believed the workers of society should not benefit from slavery. Slaves then had to reason to try hard or improve. Eastern slaves started doing technical work. Thus, all technical work was looked down upon. Labor was cheap and worthless. Upper-class Romans were content with what they had become. They felt no need to improve their inventions, they were content with slaves. Another reason for the fall of Rome was political issues. Citizens no longer displayed patriotism, they were indifferent. Only the rich ran for office. Only the rich could run for office. It had become too expensive to hold office. The officers were forced to pay for public engagements themselves. The wealthy men destroyed Greco-Roman civilization. The loss of Greco-Roman civilization led to the decline of classical civilization. The general pattern of the classical civilization was based upon slavery being at the root of society. The army had proven itself to produce many leaders. The army needed to be maintained. Again, taxes were forced mainly on the poor or made more

Ancient Roman Architecture

1999-09-14T14:00:00-04:00

The ancient Romans are famous for many things. One thing is their adaptation and development of architecture. From the Etruscans and early tribes the Romans found most of their basic architectural skills. From the Greeks some components of Roman architecture were adapted. Which gives some early Roman architecture some characteristics of oriental architecture because of Greek contact with the Orient. The heart of Roman architecture was the Roman forum, which was really being constructed under the rule of Octavian (Augustus) Caesar. As time progressed the Roman architecture went into a stage of Greek like buildings. After this Roman architecture as we know it today was starting to take form. Etruscan architecture was really the beginning of Roman architecture. For example in Etruscan tombs people would find many types of architectural traits found in many Roman buildings. Like the fact they had vaulted entrances. Some cities had an influence, such as the fortified city of Norba. After this Greece started to gain control in Italy that greatly affected the Roman architecture of this time but not as much as Etruscan does in the future. When the Greeks came in Rome was building their new buildings in the classic Greek vaulted construction with Doric style columns. The start of this was in 179 B.C., it started with the planing of the Temple to Fortuna Virilis. This was completed in approximately 100 B.C. Then shortly after the completion of the Tabularium built in the time of Sulla. In this period under the dictator Sulla, Hellenistic architecture flourished in Rome, with the buildings Lindos, Cos, the acropolis at Pergamon, Fortuna at Praeneste, the sanctuary of Hercules Victor at Tibur, and the temple of Jupiter Anxur at Terracina. Though all these buildings were noticeably Hellenistic, they retained the Roman's own unique architectural style. Such as the cylindrical shape of Forum Boarium, this was an original shape for the Romans along with the roof. Eventually the Hellenistic architecture was being pushed out by Romanization. When Rome gained leadership over Neighboring countries and was starting to unite the cities, in about 300 B.C. Rome started to gain it's own unique architectural culture. When Rome was expanding they build grids of roads, and with this advance Rome had a much greater ability to build massive projects. Such as Octavian (Augustus) Caesar's Forum, aqueducts, temples, jetties, safe ports, bridges, marsh drainage and the first truly planned cities. These cities were

The Roman Empire

1999-09-13T14:00:00-04:00

Greek culture laid the foundation for the Roman Empire. The Roman people wanted to be like the Greek people. For example the Romans made a sculpture of the Greek goddess Aphrodite. The Romans recognized the Greek art and architecture to be very

Julius Caesar

1999-07-29T14:00:00-04:00

When the name Julius Caesar is heard, it can only trigger the image of a great leader that led Rome into prosperity. Caesar's military excellence brought more power and more land; that lead to the increase of size and strength in Rome. His dictatorship helped the stability and prosperity in Rome. Caesar's assassination lead to a monarchy that was ruled by Octavin. His death lead to a domino effect ending in the ultimate collapse of the Roman Empire. Many people of the 21st century follow the path of Julius Caesar and try to be as great as he was. The assassination of Julius Caesar was a tragedy due to the contributions he made to Rome's prosperity during his life, and the chaos that occurred in Rome after his death. The contributions that Caesar made towards the strength of Rome's success, and the chaos and collapse of Rome after his death made the assassination of Julius Caesar a tragedy. Julius Caesar was assassinated by his own senate on March 15 44 BC; also known as the Ides of March. As he was walking in to the senate house, a man told him to beware the Ides of March. He ignored this statement and walked into the senate house. At this time some of the Senate members surrounded Caesar in a stealthy manner and tugged on his toga. As he looked around he was stabbed by many of the senate members multiple times. He collapsed to the ground and lay on the marble floor dead, next to the feet of Pompey's statue. (Nardo 94) Caesar's military eminence helped Rome prosper into one of the greatest and most memorable civilizations in history. His campaigns helped Rome grow larger in size and in power. His victories in Egypt, Pontus, Gaul, Africa, and parts in the Asia Minor were some of Caesar's greatest honors, (Bruns 99) and is considered "the most powerful national leader in history"(Nardo 73) because of his conquests. The major reason for his strong army was due to the fact that the senate favored him. The senate gave him three provinces for the span of five years, instead of one province for one year. With this ruling, he had "a chance to build a stronger personal army"(34). The strategies and tactics used by Caesar made his death even more tragic because of his excellent leadership and planning. Caesar planned wars by legionary

Peace of Westphalia

1999-01-22T13:00:00-05:00

The two treaties of Münster and Osnabrück, commonly known as the Peace of Westphalia, was the culminating element for the Holy Roman Empire in the Thirty Years' War. It established a final religious settlement and provided for new political boundaries for the German states of central Europe. The impact of the Peace of Westphalia was broad and long-standing, as it dictated the future of Germany and ex-territories of the Holy Roman Empire for some time to come. The Peace of Westphalia put down the Counter Reformation in Germany and instituted the final religious arrangement the German states had been crying for. It renewed the terms of the Peace of Augsburg, namely that each state of the Empire received the liberty to be either Lutheran or Catholic as it chose; no individual freedom of religion was permitted. If a ruler or a free city decided for Lutheranism, then all persons had to be Lutheran. Similarly in Catholic states all had to be Catholic. In addition to re-instituting the Peace of Augsburg in its traditional form, the Peace of Westphalia included Calvinism to Lutheranism and Catholicism as an acceptable faith. On the controversial issue of church territories secularized after 1552 the Protestants won a complete victory. With the advent of the Peace of Westphalia, the squabbling between Protestants and Catholics was finally put an end to. The Holy Roman Empire was officially dissolved with the Peace of Westphalia. This had been advanced with the drawing of internal religious frontiers in the days of Luther, although now it was confirmed. Borderlands of the Empire fell away. The Dutch and Swiss established themselves as independent, as did the United Provinces. The western frontier of the Empire was carved up among France, Sweden and the Dutch. France took control over three Lorraine bishoprics which they had occupied for a century. The Swedes received the bishoprics of Bremen and Verden and the western half of Pomerania, including the city of Stettin. Sweden enlarged its trans-Baltic possessions, and in addition claimed the mouths of the Oder, Elbe, and Weser rivers in Germany. The Dutch obtained only the mouths of the Rhine and the Scheldt. On the interior front of the Empire, both Brandenburg and Bavaria increased their statures. Brandenburg lay claim to eastern Pomerania, the large archbishopric of Magdeburg, and two smaller bishoprics. Bavaria received control of the Palatinate and a seat in the electoral college, increasing the Empire's

Were Romans Obsessed with Violence?

1999-01-01T13:00:00-05:00

In many modern books written about Ancient Rome and her people, the Romans are often portrayed as brutal and unforgiving people who enjoyed violence and thought it amusing to see people being injured and killed to the point of obsession. It is my aim to establish whether this classification is justified or if it is simply an exaggeration of what a small group of people enjoyed. While it is known that in Rome there were gladiatorial fights, public beatings and the keeping of slaves was legal (and common), it is also important to understand just exactly how advanced the Romans were. The Longman Dictionary of the English Language defines civilised as "of or being peoples of nations in a state of civilisation." And then defines civilisation as "a relatively high level of cultural development; specifically the stage of cultural development at which writing and the keeping of records is attained." I think that by this definition, the Romans were civilised, the educated being able to write and detailed records being kept by many historians. The Romans also had written laws and government, including (later) an assembly for the poorer classes. In fact, their system of law was actually quite advanced (even if it was designed to help the rich) - "The idea was accepted that a man's intentions ought to be taken into account, and there was less importance attached to what he did and what he meant to do. The next thing to become established was the notion that all men must be treated equally." This way of thinking was very advanced and not barbaric or uncivilised at all, in fact the same notion that all men should be treated equally was not established in America, Australia and other countries for many years. It is now common knowledge that, in Ancient Rome, people often attended (and enjoyed) gladiatorial fights to the death, wild beast hunts, naval battles and chariot racing, all which often had religious origins. During the reign of Caesar, thousands of men and animals were butchered just to make a Roman holiday! The Romans also enjoyed pantomimes and plays which too were often very violent in nature - "It was not uncommon for a condemned criminal to be executed [on stage] as part of the play." In modern sources, it is often portrayed that slaves were treated more harshly than was actually the case. Slaves in Rome actually did have