Short Paper Analysis With the onset of an imminent war with the Volscians, Rome found itself in a double danger as threatening differences between its various classes also spurred into internal struggle and conflict. The internal struggles were prompted when the masses of Rome were discontent with the relationship between them and the richer ruling class that they felt were being oppressive and maltreating. This example of double danger within the first century of Roman history gives way to prevailing themes and topics precedented within the Roman civilization however. First and foremost, the internal struggle between the various classes in Rome were inevitable due to its non-egalitarian societal structure, in which classes of people …show more content…
With this dispute and protest even in front of the Senate steps, “[senators] were too much alarmed by the way things were going to even venture into the streets”. Even with the prevailing threat of imminent invasion by the Volscians, the masses were more delighted in humiliating the ruling classes and just letting “the Patricians, they argued, do the fighting” rather than themselves. With many Senators staying away from the streets due to the fear of being in danger by the masses, the decision fell to both Consuls of Rome during the time, Appius Claudius and Publius Servilius. Both consuls however, had different views about the two prevailing issues and what to conclude as a solution. While Claudius held more of an authoritative view upon his subjects, even suggesting to arrest some of the protestors in hopes of dwindling down the discontent masses, Servilius was “inclined to less high-handed measures” and even suggested using persuasion rather than force. Servilius was described to being more “[sympathetic] with the popular cause”. While this difference turned out to not be detrimental to the Roman people as they won the Roman-Volscian wars, tensions between equal partners …show more content…
Looking at examples such as the relationship between Julius Caesar and Pompey or even Octavian and Marc Anthony showed more of the detrimental effects of having tension between equal partners in Roman history. However, even with the differences between Claudius and Servilius, edicts such as making it illegal to imprison Roman Citizens to prevent service or to sell property of soldiers during active service were enacted. This then led to many of the masses into taking the military oath. With ongoing internal and external pressures, this is what Rome did in order to respond to this situation of civil unrest for inclusion that did affect its military actions. However, with the hierarchical shape of Roman Society, the two consuls were able to make amends with the discontent protesters. Last but not least is the prevailing theme of Rome’s absorption of different communities and individuals. Even with the advantage of internal strife and struggle within Rome, the Volscians failed in their attack against the Romans and were routed. Rome still had an army ready due to the compromise between the masses and rulers just before. On the
In Ancient Rome, noble families grew tiresome of their kings’ have hasty behavior. Due to this, they revolted in 509 BCE, establishing the creation of the Roman Republic. The Republic was not strong enough to withhold the force that accompanied influential men and that led the creation of an Empire. The Roman Republic fell into crisis because of the internal unrest provoked by various leader’s reckless behavior and greed.
The Imperators and the Augurs were contemplating whether to reestablish Rome as a Republic or to remain as an empire. The Imperators were in favor of reverting back into a Republic while the Augurs wanted to keep things the same. The Augurs did make a good couple of points about keeping it the same Empire, the Imperators made a better argument to return to a Republic because they used a lot of allusion and effective usages of persuasion to strengthen their argument. The Senator from the Imperator really emphasizes her ethos to point out the flaws that the Empire had endured.
Roman citizens had come to consideration that they, indeed, did have a poor government. The Roman government gave an unjust life to people based on their social rank (Document E). This led to the citizens not appreciating the government as well as the Empire. Most of the emperors in Rome were assassinated so it gives the citizens the intention that if you did not like the emperor you can just kill them (Document A).This tells the reader that it was hard to govern Rome because they constantly kept replacing emperors. Considering that Rome did not have a stable ruling system, citizens of Rome began to doubt and not depend on their government.
Juliane Smith Professor Mira Green HSTAM 302 8 July 2023 The Legacy of the Gracchi Brothers The expansion of the Roman Republic had several impacts that would lead up to the agrarian reforms of the Gracchi Brothers, Tiberius, and Gaius Gracchus, which introduced, among benefits for the general population, violence as a means of political resolution. Their deaths at the hands of the Roman Republic would expose the issues in the political system while leaving a legacy of unique social reform. Driven by mos maiorum, Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus transformed the political system with agrarian reforms that ultimately led to the use of violence as a means of political revolution in the Roman Republic.
In this essay the reason for Rome’s fall will be identified and why they caused Rome’s downfall. The primary reasons for the fall of Rome are military problems, untrustworthy government/injustice, and natural disasters/diseases. One of the reasons Rome fell is due to the fact Rome had multiple Military problems. According to Document B “because of negligence and laziness, parade ground drills were abandoned, the customary armor began to seem heavy since the soldiers rarely ever wore it” (Doc B). Also according to Document B, “soldiers fought the Goths without any protection for chest and head and were often beaten by archers” (Doc B).
The Romans emerged from Italy and formed their culture that can find its roots among an array of native tribes and Greek colonies that populated Italy. There are two parts of the foundation of a Roman’s identity that stemmed from the cultural influences that produced the Romans, their culture and their ideals. The first component of the foundation of the Roman identity is the usage and the incorporation of others’ myths into their own etiological myth. The second part stems from these myths that made the Romans believe that their existence and success was the result of fate. By looking into Virgil’s Aeneid and Sallust’s Conspiracy of Catiline one can see that this two-part foundation produced a society and people that embodied this idea that they were the best parts of all the cultures
Reasonable and noble concepts on the surface, however, were underlying with their own contempt for the Senate and optimate party. What could be seen on one side as an attempt to rectify a dangerous and debilitating social system was viewed on the other as nothing more than a power grab and a flagrant attack on the Republican institutional ideas of the time. The goal of the betterment of society as a whole was lost, and victory became the only objective. As ambition and personal motivation became the predominant theme of the Late Republic, the social fabric that long-held Rome together, against all odds, was being torn apart due to the reforms that were set in
The upper class of Rome gradually became more selfish and turned away from their jobs that once originally characterized their empire. Cultural decline caused by new commitments of the upper classes and lack of political authority also lead to the downfall of Rome. All these conflicts resulted in a spiral that steadily worsened. Explaining why the fall pf Rome left a bigger impact than the fall of the Han.
Augustus Caesar established the Roman Empire in 31 B.C.E. after inheriting the throne from his great-uncle, Julius Caesar. At the time of his rising to power Rome was in shambles due to multiple civil wars. In order to bring unification back to Rome, “Augustus allied with Marc Antony to reunify Rome by killing off most of its enemies in two of the bloodiest battles in the history of the Roman Empire” (Blackwell). Through many hard fought and costly battles Augustus never gave up however, and pushed his forces to keep on fighting.
Ancient Rome is recognized for strength in war and battles, so the ideal citizen would be strong and willing to fight. Hunt explains that in Rome “one man’s loss was another man’s gain” (177). The culture of Ancient Rome was aggressive, as the men were trained to fight and be devoted to their country. “Male elites had to be on guard to defend against and avenge any slights to their personal, family, and state honor” (Hunt 177). In The Aeneid, Virgil writes “Roman, remember by your strength to rule //
These devices strike sympathy in the plebeians for Caesar, but also a strong displeasure towards Brutus. By talking about his friend’s death in a tragic way, Antony not only persuades the plebeians to side with him instead of Brutus, but he also causes the plebeians to come together in a massive horde and become a violent riot through
It seems that the fall of the Roman Republic was not a singular event that occurred instantaneously, but rather a long process that saw the increasing use of methods outside of Republican institutions to settle conflicts between members of the aristocracy over political power. Even as the Roman government transitioned form Kingdom to Republic and then to Empire, the competition between aristocratic families remained a relative constant in across the centuries. So too has the desire to mythologize the past. The romans attributed both the fall of the Kingdom of Rome and the fall of the Roman Republic to moral rot, while a more reasonable assessment might place the blame on a dissatisfied and competitive elite class and an inefficient and unresponsive governmental system that was unwilling or unable to address their concerns. In much the same way, modern observers of the Roman Republic have tended to mythologize the fall of the Republic in the service of creating a moral narrative about the unconscionable tyranny of Cesar and the righteousness of the Senate, or whatever alternative narrative is befitting of the historical moment and audience.
The Life of Marius, written by Plutarch, is a fascinating ancient source detailing the career of the Roman Gaius Marius, 127-86BC. While there are interpretive and reliability issues, the Life of Marius is a particularly useful and significant source. It is our only extensive primary source on Marius, who was a key political figure of late Republican Rome. Additionally, Plutarch’s work indicates not only many crucial military and political development in Rome in the time period, but also gives a reflection of Plutarch’s own Rome and its values and political climate.
The Gracchi brothers, Tiberius and Gaius, had intentions of making Rome the best it could be, which contradicted the visions of the Senators. The two brothers grew up during a tough time in the Roman Empire, but they took it upon themselves to make a difference. “The Empire went through tremendous growth, through both acquisition of land, slaves, and various citizen classes.” This drastic growth ultimately led to a fall in the Roman political system. Tiberius, the older brother, founded the idea of the agrarian laws, which was later continued by his younger brother, Gaius, after his death.
This book has given me a greater understanding on the Classics as a whole. The book touches on a plethora of classical topics in chapter 2, and often compares the western civilization to our west. The author also gave me better understanding of the time periods. I didn’t know slaves had better treatment than the free people in Persia at the time, or that war was an enormous role in Classics age. From the western civilization class I’ve took earlier this year, this books discuss the importance of money in a war, when Sparta beat Athens, or when Rome beat the Carthaginians because of the new money they received to build ships.