Were the Julio-Claudians really as bad as they seem?
The Julio- Claudians were not as bad as they seem, they were simply a large family that controlled many generations of Rome. The first descendant was Augustus, who kept Rome's empire instead of a republic. He was not favored by the Roman people but married off his daughter to a son in law to find someone to rule the throne. His son in law was Tiberus, he had already gained power from his father and did not need to prove himself. There later was a struggle for power between Tiberus' heirs. Tiberus named the two different successors equal heirs, Tiberus Germella and Germanicus. These two emperors lead to many other successors, such as the famous emperor Claudius. The family of the Julio Claudians were simply two families combined, with many successors throughout Roman history. Many of these people were influential, Claudius is just one example. Claudius is famous for the death of Germanicus, which lead to him ruling the throne. Treason and drama also occured in this large family, this contributed to their influential image through Rome.
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Week 5 Part 2 Blog 3
Was Rome better off as an 'empire' than as a republic?
Rome was better off a republic because it allowed its citizens to think for themselves, also not one person had all the power. Having a empire also changed a lot, due to the fact that many rulers wanted power, causing a change often. Many feared this huge family because of the great influence they had over Rome. Also the family was almost never ending, since it was so huge they reigned for a while during a certain time period. It is also very unfair to have on particular person decide. This can cause many problems, like revolution because no common ground is found between different views. Republic's also thrive more, many world powers are republic such as the U.S. We have a very successful country. Another republic is England, which is also a world power. Many countries that are in a empire do not thrive as well, such as China. China is like an empire, the rulers enforce rules without much freedom for their people. An example is of how in China, when one person speaks against their leaders they are cut out of society.Rome was better off as a republic, allowing the people freedom and decision.
Rome was better off a republic because it allowed its citizens to think for themselves, also not one person had all the power. Having a empire also changed a lot, due to the fact that many rulers wanted power, causing a change often. Many feared this huge family because of the great influence they had over Rome. Also the family was almost never ending, since it was so huge they reigned for a while during a certain time period. It is also very unfair to have on particular person decide. This can cause many problems, like revolution because no common ground is found between different views. Republic's also thrive more, many world powers are republic such as the U.S. We have a very successful country. Another republic is England, which is also a world power. Many countries that are in a empire do not thrive as well, such as China. China is like an empire, the rulers enforce rules without much freedom for their people. An example is of how in China, when one person speaks against their leaders they are cut out of society.Rome was better off as a republic, allowing the people freedom and decision.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Week 5 Part 2 Blog 2
Why do many historians consider Hadrian to have been the "best emperor"?
There are many different reasons why historians considered Hadrian to be the best emporer. One reason is he in all had a very smooth rule. He was also a very fair leader. He was a good influence to many people of Rome and built many famous monuments. He was a humanist, that wanted to help those of the people, who were in need and create prosperity among the Roman people as well. He traveled to all parts of his kingdom and made it easy for his people to relate to him. He slept among his soliders and humbled himself to them. Hadrian, might have been born into power, but made sure that he showed how honor he was to posses such power. Hadrian might have often been an admirer of the military, but truly believed in "peace through strength". Another reason he was a rare case of an emperor was he thought highly of the arts and cherished them. Hadrian had many valid reasons to why many historians considered him the "best emperor".
There are many different reasons why historians considered Hadrian to be the best emporer. One reason is he in all had a very smooth rule. He was also a very fair leader. He was a good influence to many people of Rome and built many famous monuments. He was a humanist, that wanted to help those of the people, who were in need and create prosperity among the Roman people as well. He traveled to all parts of his kingdom and made it easy for his people to relate to him. He slept among his soliders and humbled himself to them. Hadrian, might have been born into power, but made sure that he showed how honor he was to posses such power. Hadrian might have often been an admirer of the military, but truly believed in "peace through strength". Another reason he was a rare case of an emperor was he thought highly of the arts and cherished them. Hadrian had many valid reasons to why many historians considered him the "best emperor".
Monday, March 21, 2011
Week 5 Unit 2 Blog 1
Do you think Caesar's killers were justified in their actions?
I do not think Caesar's killers were justified in their actions because he did not do anything wrong or to try and hurt the Roman people he cared so much about. It was also unfair because when Caesar was killed he did not even get the chance to go to his trial. Caesar only meant to help his people, but because the senate did not like his ways, they acted against him. Caesar also had an unfair advantage when he was murdered because it was a group of men against one. These killers were not justified in their actions, Caesar was willing to go on trial and never had the chance. So therefore he was really assasinated for no reason because if he had gone on trial he probably would have been executed anyway. This murder was just to make sure that he did not survive. There was no reason for these killers to assasinate him because all he did was threaten their power, he could have easily brought his army against them. It was very wrong and unneeded in the killing of Caesar, just because he wanted to change Rome to benefit its people does not justify the murder's actions.
I do not think Caesar's killers were justified in their actions because he did not do anything wrong or to try and hurt the Roman people he cared so much about. It was also unfair because when Caesar was killed he did not even get the chance to go to his trial. Caesar only meant to help his people, but because the senate did not like his ways, they acted against him. Caesar also had an unfair advantage when he was murdered because it was a group of men against one. These killers were not justified in their actions, Caesar was willing to go on trial and never had the chance. So therefore he was really assasinated for no reason because if he had gone on trial he probably would have been executed anyway. This murder was just to make sure that he did not survive. There was no reason for these killers to assasinate him because all he did was threaten their power, he could have easily brought his army against them. It was very wrong and unneeded in the killing of Caesar, just because he wanted to change Rome to benefit its people does not justify the murder's actions.
Friday, March 18, 2011
Week 5 Blog 4
What elements of the Roman Republican political and legal system appear present in the systems of modern democracies?
There are many similarities in our political and legal system to the Roman Republic. One similarity is we both have military. Military is also a very big part of our country, as well as the Roman Republic. Another similarity is we both have a senate or people who represent different areas. Also not only one person made a single decision, other people had to have input or the majority vote. Another similarity is trial, a person could not just be put to death, they had to go through a trial just like in the U.S. Another similarity is of how the ruler, does not have all the influence and must be voted on. There are many similarities between the Roman Republic, and our governments or democracy's today.
There are many similarities in our political and legal system to the Roman Republic. One similarity is we both have military. Military is also a very big part of our country, as well as the Roman Republic. Another similarity is we both have a senate or people who represent different areas. Also not only one person made a single decision, other people had to have input or the majority vote. Another similarity is trial, a person could not just be put to death, they had to go through a trial just like in the U.S. Another similarity is of how the ruler, does not have all the influence and must be voted on. There are many similarities between the Roman Republic, and our governments or democracy's today.
Week 5 Blog 3
Imagine you are a Roman in the year 264 BCE (the year of the 1st Punic War). What does your future look like? Then, look at the world around you today. What does your future look like? Think about politics, technology, culture, dominance, balance.
If I were a Roman during this harsh time period, I probably would not have a very strong looking future. The war going on was very hard, confining people to their particular areas. It was also a evenly matched war and almost confusing. This was a very difficult time to grow up in, especially for women. Many people lost family members because of large numbers lost in battle. Rome was in favor to win these battles because of their massive army. Politics were strewn everywhere since the war brought on new ideas. Technology was also pushed to the next level because of different ways to use things were established. Technology was greatly affected by the war, more war machines were created, opening opportunities. The balance, was very hard because each force was equal to the other.
If I were a Roman during this harsh time period, I probably would not have a very strong looking future. The war going on was very hard, confining people to their particular areas. It was also a evenly matched war and almost confusing. This was a very difficult time to grow up in, especially for women. Many people lost family members because of large numbers lost in battle. Rome was in favor to win these battles because of their massive army. Politics were strewn everywhere since the war brought on new ideas. Technology was also pushed to the next level because of different ways to use things were established. Technology was greatly affected by the war, more war machines were created, opening opportunities. The balance, was very hard because each force was equal to the other.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Week 5 Blog 2
Please write a brief biography of Hannibal and explain whether or not you think his reputation (in Roman eyes) as a monster was deserved.
Hannibal was known as one of the most talented war leaders in history. Hannibal made his mark when he took on the Roman army, when they attempted to take over Carthage. Hannibal's troops were completely out numbered by the Roman empire. The Roman's gathered their best troops for this battle, thinking they could finish them off. Hannibal did the unexpected and retreated some of his calvary causing the Roman army to be surrounded. This was one of the most embarrassing battles for the Romans. It was also very high in casualties because of the huge slaughter the Romans underwent. Hannibal showed that he was a strong leader and very capable of leading an army, with this famous battle strategy. After this huge battle the Roman's were scared of Hannibal because of how he conquered and slaughtered their huge army with one swift movement. Hannibal's reputation as an monster was very well deserved because he slaughtered the Roman army with his small force. He also caused a great embarrassment to the Roman army, this made him an even scarier figure. Hannibal did deserve his reputation as an monster, since he was such a feared leader in the war.
Hannibal was known as one of the most talented war leaders in history. Hannibal made his mark when he took on the Roman army, when they attempted to take over Carthage. Hannibal's troops were completely out numbered by the Roman empire. The Roman's gathered their best troops for this battle, thinking they could finish them off. Hannibal did the unexpected and retreated some of his calvary causing the Roman army to be surrounded. This was one of the most embarrassing battles for the Romans. It was also very high in casualties because of the huge slaughter the Romans underwent. Hannibal showed that he was a strong leader and very capable of leading an army, with this famous battle strategy. After this huge battle the Roman's were scared of Hannibal because of how he conquered and slaughtered their huge army with one swift movement. Hannibal's reputation as an monster was very well deserved because he slaughtered the Roman army with his small force. He also caused a great embarrassment to the Roman army, this made him an even scarier figure. Hannibal did deserve his reputation as an monster, since he was such a feared leader in the war.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)