The Letters of Pliny entail of letters written back and forth from the governor; Pliny and the Emperor Trajan. The letters portray the responsibilities of a Roman governor of a province in ancient times. Responsibilities of a governor included matters such as; public defense, construction, celebrations, citizenship, and basic law enforcement. Letters 30, 31, 42, and 43 all discuss public safety. Letters 30 and 31 describe how to deal with guarding the prisons of several cities, the question comes up as to whether Pliny should employ a party of soldiers or just to use public slave as sentries. However, Trajan cleared up the issue by stating that public slaves should be used, Trajan goes on further and states; "...And the fidelity with which they shall execute their duty will depend much upon your care and strict discipline" (31). Letters 42 and 43 discuss the matter of extinguishing fires and whether or not to have a brigade of people specifically for that purpose. Letters 34, 35, 46, 47, 75, and 76 all refer to construction, four of which refer solely to one building project. Letters 34, 35, 75, and 76 illustrate the procedures for building a public bath from gaining the emperor's approval to finding a proper building site; all is left up to the governor; "This new erection I purpose dedicating to you...I have sent you a copy of the will...I will, however, make the strictest enquiry after them that I am able" (75). Letters 46 and 47 discuss finishing an aqueduct that was left unfinished and allowed to fall into a state of ruin. The emperor ordered Pliny to discover why such funds had been thrown away and whether or not the money had been taken for private purposes. Letters 44 and 45 describe the citizens of Rome renewing annual vo... ... middle of paper ... ... Trajan was a codependent one, a worker and his supervisor. I am not shocked by Emperor Trajan's orders to kill Christians, however I do believe they were unnecessary and sadistic spurred from sheer trepidation of losing control of those he ruled. However, I am surprised that Trajan told Pliny not to seek them out or to bring anonymously posted allegations into the prosecutions. Nonetheless, Trajan's actions towards the Christians were unjust and immoral, no matter how accurate his fear might have been. Works Cited Pliny, Secundus. "Correspondence of Pliny and Trajan." Letter to Emperor Trajan. ad 111-113. Internet Ancient History Sourcebook. Web. 18 Mar. 2011. . Nietzsche, Friedrich. On the Genealogy of Morals. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1887. Print.
...icus and was therefore suspect. Tacitus was writing about Tiberius after the emperor had died and probably believed that since he was most likely killed by his nephew Caligula that Tiberius was probably justified in suspecting his relatives.
Livius, Titus. The Early History of Rome. Trans. Aubrey De Sélincourt. London: Penguin Group, 2002. N. pag. Print.
According to Thomas N. Barnes Center Ethical Leadership module “ethical leadership” is about knowing your core values and having the courage to live by them in all parts of your life in service of the common good. Trajan clearly displayed these ethical traits in his decisions to institute many programs designed to provide for poor children, restore rundown road system, build new bridges, aqueducts and public baths. (Wasson, 2013) Not only did Trajan institute these programs, but Trajan additionally exerted his influence over the way the provincial governors ruled their cities within the empire. Despite this fact that these governors were able to run their cities in whatever manner they chose, Trajan displayed ethical leadership characteristics as he involved himself into the governing of these cities. Trajan intervened in the management of these cities to ensure that the self-ruling governors followed the laws, prevented corruption, waste, and feuds between the cities as well as social conflicts within each of the cities. (Commire, 1997)??? was this the right book???? As stated earlier Trajan did not have to get involved in the management of these Roman cities his values and morals drove him to intervene for the good of the people and the
Pliny the Elder. [Letters 3.14. As The Romans Did 2nd ed.] ed. Jo-Ann Shelton. (New York:
Plutarch, Philip A. Stadter, and Robin Waterfield. "Cato The Elder, Aemilius Paullus, Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus." Roman Lives: A Selection of Eight Roman Lives. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1999. 3-115. Print.
Livy’s The Rise of Rome serves as the ultimate catalogue of Roman history, elaborating on the accomplishments of each king and set of consuls through the ages of its vast empire. In the first five books, Livy lays the groundwork for the history of Rome and sets forth a model for all of Rome to follow. For him, the “special and salutary benefit of the study of history is to behold evidence of every sort of behaviour set forth as on a splendid memorial; from it you may select for yourself and for your country what to emulate, from it what to avoid, whether basely begun or basely concluded.” (Livy 4). Livy, however, denies the general populace the right to make the same sort of conclusions that he made in constructing his histories. His biased representation of Romulus and Tarquin Superbus, two icons of Roman history, give the readers a definite model of what a Roman should be, instead of allowing them to come to their own conclusion.
Morey, William C. "Outlines of Roman History, Chapter 19." Forum Romanum. 1901. Web. 24 Apr. 2011. .
Between Pliny’s letter and Livy’s account it’s pretty easy to get the impression that Romans were fairly tolerant of many different religions up until they got in the way. The Christians were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time, and doing the wrong things. The Bacchanalians were converting elites with a religion that the Romans considered unsavory to say the least. Both the Christians and the Bacchanalians suffered horrendously at the hands of the Roman authorities, and it goes to show that they were only going to tolerate so much from either group before going out on a witch hunt for them.
Livius, Titus. The Early History of Rome. Trans. Aubrey De Sélincourt. London: Penguin Group, 2002. N. pag. Print.
Aurelius, Marcus. The meditations of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus. New York: A.L. Burt, 189.
Tacitus. The Annals of Tacitus. Edited and annotated by Henry Furneaux. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1907.
Plutus was the god of wealth. It was not always like that though. Plutus started as one who was only concerned with agricultural bounty (Theoi). He is later known to represent wealth. Here is Aristophanes interpretation.
While Suetonius’s scriptures of Nero may pose a risk of bias, similar perversions were discussed within Edward Champlin’s ‘Nero Reconsidered’. Champlin discuses Nero’s descent into debauchery and malfeasance; how his personal exploits gradually began to corrupt his political and military affairs (Champlin, 1990). Nero began alienating and persecuting much of the elite for higher interests in personal concerns, as well as neglecting military advances and affairs completely. Nero’s exorbitant personal affairs and expenditures left the treasury thoroughly exhausted. His period was riddled with deflation as shortage of money began to emerge (Champlin, 1990). Nero’s adolescence and unruly upbringing was largely contributory to his inadequacy during his years as Roman Emperor. While Nero contributed significantly to the city, his reign demonstrated the unravelling of the Roman
Melmoth, William ‘Letters of Pliny: By Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus’, Project Gutenberg [website], (2001) http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2811/2811-h/2811-h.htm, accessed 12 May. 2014
In the closing years of the 1st century, Roman authorities executed a sufficient number of Christians. In general, the provincial governors had wide discretionary powers of jurisdiction, but knowledge of Nero’s actions may have set a precedent in regards to the handling of Christians and may have also encouraged local enemies of Christians to try to persuade a governor to accept their accusations and proceed against the accused on the assumption that they were guilty of conduct detrimental to the interest of the Roman State.