The Legacy Of Claudius Nero By Marcus Tullius Cicero

The military campaigns of the Caesars made Rome one of the largest empires of the ancient world. Suetonius conveys through his writings that being a good military leader and a good Caesar were synonymous. Augustus, who Suetonius thought an excellent leader, reunited the eastern and western halves of the Roman Empire ( 51) and greatly expanded Romes territory (53). Augustus “showed not only skill as a commander, but courage as a soldier” in the eyes of his contemporaries (47). On the other hand, both Caligula and Nero, considered poor leaders by Suetonius, had very limited military success and aspirations. Only once did Caligula initiate a military exploit, and it was rife with his madness. His campaign into Germany was on a whim and all he accomplished was receiving the surrender of a

Nero and Tiberius both started off as great leaders of Rome. Throughout their leadership many events occurred that caused the general publics view to change on both of them. Comparing Nero, the careless leader to Tiberius, the leader with great accomplishments I found that they are complete opposites. Analyzing the accomplishments, treatment of people, and the overall personality of Nero and Tiberius it can be concluded that Tiberius is a better leader than Nero.

How was it possible that under the dictatorship and after the deification of Julius Caesar the Roman republic fell, when it had been structurally sound for four centuries before? When the republic was established around the end of the 6th century B.C.E., the Romans made clear that they wished to avoid all semblance of the monarchy that had ruled for two centuries before. (T.J. Cornell, The Beginnings of Rome: Italy and Rome from the Bronze Age to the Punic Wars (c. 1000-264 BC), London and New York: Routledge, 1995; p. 215) The rule of the Republic was to be split into powers of the senate and consuls, a system that worked for over four centuries. The republic would face problems with the rise of the first triumvirate in 60 B.C.E.,

“Tiberius was the second emperor of Rome and a highly-successful soldier whose reputation for arrogance and debauchery is probably unfounded” (BBC History)

Cicero’s essay, titled On Duties, presents a practical approach concerning the moral obligations of a political man in the form of correspondence with his young son. Essential to the text, the incentive for Cicero to undertake On Duties emerges from his depleted hope to restore the Republic within his lifetime. Cicero therefore places such aspirations in the hands of his posterity. The foremost purpose of On Duties considers three obstacles, divided into separate Books, when deciding a course of action. Book I prefatorily states, “in the first place, men may be uncertain whether the thing that falls under consideration is an honorable or a dishonorable thing to do” (5). Cicero addresses the ambiguities present under this consideration and

I am now going to discuss Cassius. I would say that Cassius was a very

Emperor Nero, infamously known as one of the most malevolent, oppressive, and tyrannical leader throughout history, was the last ruler of the Julio-Claudian Dynasty. He was born outside Rome in Antium and his mother married his great uncle, Emperor Claudius, in order for her son to be the next Emperor of Rome. It wasn’t apparent that her son was to become one of the most feared and cruel leaders in Roman history from 54 CE to 68 CE. By examining his achievements and failures as an emperor, his influences and changes over the entire economic, political and social spectrum are revealed.

Both Marcus Aurelius and Cicero try to create a guide, based on their stoic views, on how a person is supposed to live a purposeful life. Marcus Aurelius was an emperor and Cicero was a politician, so both serve somebody or something. In Cicero’s “On Friendship” he bases his guides on what he has learned from important people in his life. In Marcus Aurelius’ “Meditations” he bases his guide off of what he has learned as an emperor with stoic views. Some of what he Aurelius has learned is different from Cicero’s view of stoicism; an example of this is in section seven of Meditations. Section seven of Meditations is about what Aurelius learned from his tutor. He states, “Endure hardship, and have few needs; to do things for myself and not

In ancient history there have been many great leaders who had saved the Roman Empire from destruction and demise. The leaders and heroes of the Roman Empire are countless, but one leader stands out from all the rest. Augustus Caesar’s contributions to Roman history helped make Rome the dominant empire we know of today. Augustus Caesar was without a question the greatest political leader in the history of the Roman Empire.

The later Roman Republic and early Roman Empire controlled most of modern day Europe through Northern Africa to Asia Minor. This time of complete dominance over much of the known world propelled Rome into a new era of wealth and prosperity that allowed Romans to look past military expansion. The Roman state now turned towards betterment of society and the “craving for a good education.” Education was seen not only as a tool for the furthering of personal careers, but as a way to improve Rome. Education passed along virtue and the skills necessary to run the Republic and early Empire. This knowledge began in the home, transferring from father to son through the role of fathers as paterfamilias or head of household. Fathers were in charge of ensuring the best possible education for their sons in hope that they would further the ideals and goals of a glorious Rome. Education, through the different steps of the informal Roman education structure and through the influence of the father, furthered the ideal of Roman virtue and ensured generations of virtuous leaders.

The Roman Republic began in 509 B.C.E. with the overthrow of the Etruscan monarchy. In 27 B.C.E the Roman Empire began with Octavian Caesar becoming the emperor, this ended almost 500 years of republican self-government. There is much debate over why Rome became so powerful so quickly. Many think it had to do with Rome's military strength. Others think that it was because Rome knew of and controlled most of the trade routes. Still others believed it had to do with the technology that was advanced during the Roman Republic. All of these factors played significant roles, but which one played the most important role?

Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus was the son of a Roman aristocrat whose family had regularly held the highest offices of state for the past century. Tiberius achieved much in his life and was a man of high distinction in political circles. He was a man with a prominent background- coming from very powerful families. It seemed also, that many had high expectations of him, and his potential was not seen to its full extent. To a few of us here today, this is a solemn and most momentous occasion. Today I will be critically analysing and assessing the significance of three key areas which have been the crux of historical debate for centuries. Today I will be touching on Tiberius' family background, education, and early career to 134BC, the aims

Rome became a powerful empire engulfing much of Europe, North Africa, and parts of Asia and what seemed like this great entity called the Romans were always in the search of more territory and land to conquer and assimilate into their ever growing vast empire. However, this was not always the case, before Rome became one of the greatest empires in all of history, Rome was a republic. They were government consisted of a Senate who much like our country today represented certain classes of the citizens of the Republic. During the growth and rise of the Roman republic conquering neighboring territories and competing for land grabs was not Romans primary objectives. Romans

"Let Nero be ever before your eyes, swollen with the pride of a long line of Caesars… an Emperor condemned by his own people… Nero will always be regretted"

The accounts of emperor Tiberius’ reign by both Suetonius and Tacitus have qualities that serve to show how differing authors viewed Tiberius in various flattering and unappealing ways by their personal reasoning and desire to preserve truth as much as possible in scope of their respective intentions to provide scholars with treatments of him that give a through picture of his traits, strengths and weaknesses. Overall, by examining both accounts of Tiberius’ reign, readers are able to form independent judgement of Tiberius and if each description is biased beyond any semblance of objectively. Overall Suetonius and Tacitus leaves books that differ in style and accuracy but both do indeed want the residing public to understand the true