Emperor Claudius Of Rome

297 Words2 Pages
The passage and the lecture disagree about their views of emperor Claudius of Rome. While the passage states that Claudius was an important and good ruler, the professer disagrees with the same. The professer states that the traditional historical accounts which mention the 'vicious foolishness' of Claudius are much closer to real truth than the subsequent revisioned accounts. He gives several reasons to assert his view. First, the professor refutes that Claudius did good deeds during his reign as an emperor. The professor tells that Claudius bribed the army to kill his father, so that he can come into power. And similar processes occurred later which led to civil war in Rome. While the passage talks about the good deeds done by Claudius