In ancient Rome, there existed great politicians, philosophers, and thinkers who changed the history of humanity. Marcus Tullius Cicero and Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus were two men who faced problems of the old society and created a solution for the people of Rome.
In the treatise "On the Laws", Cicero shows a fictional conversation between himself, his brother Quinto, and his great friend Attic. The theme of the debate is the spirit of the Roman laws, the way in which they are approved by the assemblies, and the legitimacy of the various institutions. The main problem Cicero faced was between natural law and civil law. He wondered what law human beings should be willing to fulfill, which law was first and which was the consequence of the
…show more content…
Suetonius wrote about the life of Cesar Augustus, the emperor of Rome. Suetonius tried to justify his dictatorship to the people of Rome, so that future generations would have no contradictory ideas towards the government. In this way, Rome would maintain peace, and people would follow and take as an example the government of Cesar Augustus as the best of all. The solution of Suetonius was to give a good image to the readers with the actions and facts that the emperor did at that time, “Found it on brick, but left it on marble” (Suetonius,115). Suetonius made the emperor look like a perfect person, who governed rigidly but obtained an efficient and honest administration. He described the emperor as a dictator but who never abused his power. In addition, Suetonius spoke of his good physical condition and his good looks, and that the "only negative thing" of the Emperor Cesar was his disordered hair, and his ordinary clothes.
In conclusion, Cicero and Suetonius faced problems of the old society and created a solution for the people of Rome. Cicero explain that natural law is first and more important than civil law, and Suetonius justify the dictatorship of the emperor Augustus in order to maintain the peace of the future generations of
If true, Cicero’s letter provided a large insight into the minds of the higher class and their relationship and views of those in the lower
Cicero also knew that the quality of our lives was fully reliant on the quality of our government. Which supports his doubtfulness of a popular government, that is over-ruling on the people in the community. Cicero also favored term limits so that no one person was in charge for a substantial long period of time. He feared that with a dominant ruler, that they may become over bearing, taking advantage of the system to benefit themselves rather than the people within the community. Cicero had many ideas that are commonly found in governments all over the globe.
Suetonius, Cassius Dio, and Tacitus are our three best sources for the time of Nero. Suetonius and Cassio Dio are in agreement that the latter part Nero’s reign was an utter disaster, summarizing it with the following quotations: It might have been possible to excuse his insolent, lustful, extravagant, greedy or cruel practices (which were furtive and increased only gradually), by saying that boys will be boys; yet at the same time, this was clearly the true Nero, not merely Nero in his adolescence. & Nero had the wish – or rather it had always been a fixed purpose of his – to make an end of the whole city in his lifetime. Ultimately, the verdict is that Nero’s bad days have not been left out by our sources because these tyrannical actions were who Nero always was and would be, before and during his reign.
Julius Caesar was a political and military leader whose reign marked the beginning of the Roman Empire and the end of the Roman Republic. Caesar did not always follow the law to get the power that he obtained. Caesar once stated, “If you must break the law, do it to seize power; in all other cases, observe it.” If Caesar saw a way to get power, he took the opportunity even if it meant breaching the law.
While Tacitus provides a detailed account of the fire and its devastating impact on the city, Suetonius offers a more personal and intimate perspective on the actions of Nero during the crisis (Tacitus, Annals 15) (Suetonius, Nero 38). Tacitus and Suetonius are both important sources for the final Julio-Claudian emperor, but they differ in their approach and style of writing. Tacitus is known for his historical works, particularly the Annals and the Histories, which provide detailed accounts of the reigns of the Julio-Claudian emperor. He is known for his critical approach and his tendency to emphasize the negative aspects of the emperors' reigns, particularly their cruelty and corruption. On the other hand, Suetonius is known for his short bibliographies of well known Roman leaders during this time period.
The great Empire of Rome, the greatest power to have ruled the Mediterranean. The Roman empire thrived in the time of Julius Caesar around 47 BC. Caesar had made Rome into an empire, but after he died, Rome started its downfall. It was unthinkable. The great Roman empire’s reign was over.
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.
An account written by Suetonius says that “ Caesar urged them rather to propose to the people that he be permitted to stand for a second consulship
The concept of exemplarity was used extensively throughout Roman literature as a tool to give guidance and enforce authority. By providing an ethical framework of societal precedents, exempla served to govern all facets of Roman public life. The system of exemplarity had an inherent power in Roman society, allowing it to be exploited for personal gain by rulers such as Augustus. Through his monumental literary biography, Res Gestae Divi Augusti, Augustus manipulated exemplarity in order to translate his coercive power into benevolent authority over the people of Rome.
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.
In the Roman republic power lay under twenty families that “Commanded Armies, governed provinces and governed provinces and guided the policies of the senate”. Young served the Roman republic as a soldier and a general, as an orator and senator that achieved many great and honourable deeds. In the old republic a man’s skills and talents in the military and politics are an important asset and scipio aemilianus was known for his skilful orator, which earned him the expression “summa eloquentia”. His accomplishments set the ideal for a roman noble and what they can achieve. His overall ambion was to be an outstanding man which led him to state these word as a reminder of what a Roman noble should be : “from innocence is born dignity, from dignity honour, from honour the right to command, from the right to command
Brutus and Cassius are two prominent conspirators in the play Julius Caesar; one of these two fits Aristotle's depiction of a tragic hero. The difference between a normal hero and a tragic hero is that the latter will have a tragic flaw that keeps them from succeeding. These characters are often sympathetic and will cleave to the reader's pity. Firstly, we shall discuss Cassius. He was a man of questionable character.
Caesar had his flaws, but he was only human. Caesar was seen as a serpent who was ready to strike and create a society that revolved around himself and would keep him at the top. On the contrary, even though the conspirators claim to have had the best intentions of Rome in their conscious and actions when assassinating Caesar, Rome still plunged itself into a civil war that disrupted the peace in the nation. Therefore, was Caesar a menace to society even though he led Rome to victory over Pompey, brought peace and created a sense of nationalism in Rome, and enforced the laws strictly in the case of Metellus Cimber in Act 3, Scene
“If you must break the law, do it to seize power: in all other cases observe it”- Julius Caesar, the man who is known as one of the most fascinating political figures of all time. The one who through his military genius, expanded the Roman Republic to include parts of what are now Spain, France, Germany, Switzerland, and Belgium. Although the hero had many followers and admirers, he was ultimately stabbed to death by his own fellow politicians. Caesar was born in July, 100 B.C.E to Gaius Caesar and Aurelia. The family claimed a noble history but hadn’t produced many influential people till then.
4. Political and Law Environment- Titus begins after the death of Rome’s emperor and the citizens of Rome are arguing on which of the two sons should take the throne. Marcus Andronicus,