Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
Decline of rome empire
Decline of the roman empire
Political system in roman republic
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Decline of rome empire
Decline of the roman empire
Political system in roman republic
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In his 39th year, he is ready for elections for a praetorship. He maintains relations with Pompey and agrees to take on the case of Marcus Fonteius, the former governor of Further Gaul being prosecuted for corruption. Cicero agrees so he can end the rumors that he supports foreigners above his native people. Back in the court, he wins the case against the Gauls but is distraught by the death of his cousin, Lucius. Tiro knows he commits suicide, as well as his father.
No nobler cause, but none more dearer to a Roman noble who could not conceive life without a public career, or life wherein his digintas was degraded." Caesar had no difficulty exculpating himself. Only no one had believed in his concessions; they were suspect, tainted fruit. His enemies believed that his second consulship in 48 would give him the opportunity to order the state according to his will. He would make himself a tyrant.
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
These mythical individuals show characteristics that are both valued and those that could be seen as inferior. In Sallust’s Conspiracy of Catiline, Catiline, the antagonist of his own story, is described as having some of these characteristics and how he displays them changes others perspective on him. With each of these characteristics that a Roman would have seen as positive were painted in a negative light because Sallust tells the audience instances where Catiline used these gifts in harmful ways. In contrast Aeneas, in Virgil’s Aeneid, is described and assigned what are thought of as the same Roman attributes, but these are held a positive approach compared to Sallust’s description of Catiline. The first example of this can be seen in the fifth section Sallust tells the audience of Catiline’s noble upbringing and is described as intelligent, ambitious, and as a brilliant solider.
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.
Cato strived to develop in his political aspirations. He would take a stroll through the marketplace and help whomever asked for his assistance. He would freely do this, but expected that these people would grant him political support. Clientage is the act Cato performed. Clientage is a "roman custom whereby free men entrusted their lives to a more powerful man in exchange for support in public life and private matters” (p. 125).
In her chapter on the historiography of Roman exemplarity, Christina Shuttleworth Kraus examines this loss of power through the transition of exempla as the res gestae populi Romani to the res gestae divi Augusti (Kraus, 2). In early Roman history, exemplarity rested in the hands of popular consciousness; the citizens of Rome had the sole power of deciding which events or people to raise up to the status of exempla. This system of exemplarity that is explained in detail by Matthew Roller’s four stage model of the creation of exempla by public discourse (Roller, 216-217). However, Roller’s framework begins to collapse when Augustus intentionally influences exemplary power through his coercive Res Gestae. Rather than looking to the past for the great deeds of common people like the Sabine women or Lucretia, Roman citizens of the Augustan period had their attention directed towards the persona of one man, an exemplar in the form of an emperor.
In this story written by Cicero, he is ridiculing, (rightfully so), and explaining every reason to Catiline why he deserves punishment and negative sanctions. Catiline’s intentions were to destroy Italy and all the people because of a feud that happened between him and Cicero. The feud was that the two of them were running for a consul position, but because Catiline’s intentions were known to everyone, he was banned from running, therefore, he got mad. While ridiculing and explaining to Catiline, Cicero wouldn’t allow him to speak, but then again, what would he have said? How would he respond to: “You need to die!
William Shakespeare, in his tragedy Julius Caesar, uses the rhetorical devices of a rhetorical question, repetition of the word ambitious, and direct reference in Antony 's speech to instigate the plebeians and persuade them to rebel against the conspirators. Antony pulls on the pathos, ethos, and logos of the audience to get them to exile the conspirators. Shakespeare uses a rhetorical question in Antony’s speech to get the plebeians to notice the wrongdoings of the conspirators and excite them to rebel. Antony discusses the money that Caesar left to the countrymen, and with sarcasm he states, “Did this in Caesar seem ambitious?” (3.2.99).
Through the lenses of Psalm 104 and Job 38 through 39, one can begin to grasp the polarity of God’s dispositions: He is not only an affectionate caretaker of creation but also a dictator ordering nature to fulfill His demands. This dualism is in complete contrast to American society’s vantage of a stoic and omnibenevolent God. In Psalm 104, God is illustrated as a protector and keeper over creation. He provides, “Gives water to all the beasts of the field; the wild donkeys quench their thirst.”
If I were in Catalines position I would simply tell Cicero that he didn 't have any proof of anything that he was accusing me of, Cicero is using rhetoric to make wild accusations against Cataline and pretending to restrain himself from punishing Cataline, telling the senate, and exposing him when he doesn 't actually have anything to expose him of. Since Cicero was a high ranking official in the roman senate he was able to make claims against Cataline because who would believe a possible conspirator or a high raking official.
Some scholars have questioned the credibility of Salllust’s work by regarding it as a product of afterthought. Robin Seager suggested that Sallut’s writings were considerably influenced by Cicero which may have affected the accuracy of his records of history, thus, rendering it questionable. His chronology concerning Bellum Catilinae is also questionable. It is worth noting that Sallust’s hasn’t pointed out any differences among the two conspiracy plots allegedly hatched by Catallin, he talks about the same conspirators with similar action plans. Moreover, Sallust was infamous for his immorality and the mora tone of his writings are in sharp contrast with his
Another way Caesar and napoleon can be compared was their political mind. Caesar as well as Napoleon were both able to achieve vast political power as a result of being very politically savvy. Both realized that in order to take complete control of the government, you must have the support of the army which they had as a result of being generals. With the support of the army both future dictators enacted coup de tats. In the case of Caesar, after being fired from his position of governor of Gaul(modern day France), took the army which had been loyal to him, entered the Roman Senate building and took control of the Roman Republic.
Julius Caesar was the Dictator of Rome in 42 BC who accomplished many things. Many people believed that he was a hero, but Julius Caesar was a very ambitious dictator and was more of a villain than a hero. Julius Caesar was a villain because he didn’t think first before doing something, he forced the Senate to name him dictator for life and he also was a glory hound and put his needs before the republic. To begin with, Julius Caesar was a was a glory hound and put his needs before the republic. Caesar used his power as dictator more towards his advantage instead of helping the people in Rome.
In 62 BC, he was elected praetor in Farther Spain. In 61 to 60 BC he served as governor of the Roman province of Spain. Then, in 59 BC, Caesar was elected as a consul, the most significant political post, through his alliance with Pompey. As soon as he became consul, Caesar waged a successful campaign against some tribes in Lusitania. He was awarded the right of triumph for his victory despite the fact that many of his enemies accused him of provoking the war.