The passage and the lecture talks about the debate whether Claudius should be considered as a great emperor or not. While the text suggests that he was a fair,wise and innovative emperor ,the professor in the lecture denies that idea. He gives relevant counter arguments to argue against the examples that are presented in the passage. First, the passage talks about the fact that Claudius was not elected as a ruler but it does not say anything about how he became the emperor.The professor on the other hand says that he used his power and killed the previous emperor to gain the kingship. The passage says that Claudius should be praised for his wisdom, however the professor in the lecture says that his son was elected as the next emperor and who