Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The role of morality in politics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The role of morality in politics
While Suetonius’ work, The Twelve Caesars, dedicated more of his writing to the gossip surrounding the lives of the Caesars that many contemporary historians would approve of, this was not done without justification. Suetonius saw a direct connection between the private behaviors of a ruler, and their overall political effectiveness. Those Caesars who were perceived as pillars of integrity within their personal life were thought to be more able rulers than their deviant cohorts. In particular Suetonius saw a connection between the effectiveness as the sovereign and the private behavior of the individual man including, his relationship with religion, his personal pastimes, and even his personality. Traditional religion in Rome would eventually …show more content…
Following the commonality of ancient historians to present characters that were either exceptional or inadequate, with little or no options in between, Suetonius would use the way that each Caesar spent much of his personal time to evidence his greater point of their ability to rule. Perhaps one glaring example can be seen in the justification of any possible negative actions that were attested to one of the ruler’s that Suetonius saw as favorable, that of the greediness of Vespasian, whom Suetonius states “some claim that greed was in Vespasian 's very bones.” This negative aspect of this ruler that Suetonius approved of is quickly disregarded, as being trivial to his overall ability to rule. Other Caesars did not receive the same idealistic treatment from Suetonius, and for these men each pastime was scrutinized as evidence of their inability as a …show more content…
This is evident in the biography of Divus Vespasian, whom Suetonius saw as being a man of upstanding character. Vespasian’s biography stands out as being one of overwhelming positive approval from the ancient historian. Mentions are made to his clemency and his work effort. Perhaps one of the most telling parts of Vespasian’s persona is the mention of how he “was nearly always just as good-natured, cracking frequent jokes.” Especially as the writings on Vespasian are rather short, it is telling that this attention to specific aspects of personality are
Shakespeare uses Cassius’ characterization in Julius Caesar to prove that Caesar is justified in his concerns about Cassius. Through means of indirect characterization, it is presented that Cassius is willing to act somewhat sycophantic to acquire what he finds necessary. When Cassius is speaking to Brutus in an attempt to sway his opinion concerning his loyalty to Caesar, he compares Brutus to Caesar and praises his equivalent status, stating that Brutus’ name is “as fair a name,” “it is as heavy,” and “will start a spirit as soon as ‘Caesar’,” and even rhetorically asks “upon what meat doth this our Caesar feed that he has grown so great?¨ (Shakespeare I. ii. 144-150). By providing reasoning behind his belief that Brutus is “as fair a name”
During the Republic, the people of Rome had a major disinclination towards any sort of Royalty, which is why when Caesar attempted to lead undemocratically indefinitely, he disrupted one of the core stances that romans shared communally. Caesar over indulged in power when he retitled himself as ‘dictator in perpetuo’. “And as Caesar was coming down from Alba into the city they ventured to hail him as king. But at this the people were confounded, and Caesar, disturbed in mind, said that his name was not King, but Caesar, and seeing that his words produced an universal silence, he passed on with no very cheerful or contented looks…..But the most open and deadly hatred towards him was produced by his passion for the royal power.” Caesars egotism and self-importance made him uncherished by members of the senate. “Everybody knew that Caesar's ego would never allow him to play second fiddle to another senator, and it was equally well-known that another famous military leader, Pompey the Great, had similar ambitions. In January 49, more or less at...
What follows is a further isolation of Plutarch's opinions and lessons from within The Lives of Crassus and Caesar. " Certainly the Romans say that in the case of Crassus many virtues were obscured by one vice, namely avarice; and it did seem that he had only one vice, since it was such a predominant one that other evil propensities which he may have had were scarcely noticeable. " Beginning the Life of Crassus with this statement, Plutarch starts the reader off with a negative feeling of who Crassus was. This statement is very strong because it not only points out Crassus's largest shortcoming, but also implies that it was so prevalent that it outweighed all his virtues as well as his other faults.
It was during Sulla’s service under Marius’s command in the military, that many of Sulla’s character traits were cultivated that contributed to the way he ruled. His character traits are listed in three main accounts by authors A.J. Koutsoukis, Erik Hildinger, who are both current impartial historical non-fiction writers, and Plutarch. Plutarch was a Greek historian, biographer and essayist, who is most famous for his work Parallel Lives, where he focuses on all of the contributing rulers of the Roman Republic. Plutarch is very even handed and focuses on the influence of character and moral lessons that can be learned from these emperors, good or bad.... ... middle of paper ...
Tranquillus, Gaius Suetonius. Lives of the 12 Caesars. Translated by Joseph Gavorse. Reproduced by Livius: Articles on Ancient History. http://www.livius.org/caa-can/caesar/caesar_t09.html (Retrieved 26 January 2014).
For thousands of years people have been talking about the great powerful Caesar. He is one of the greatest known dictators known to people today mostly because of all of the things he was able to accomplish during his rein as emperor. After reading primary sources about Caesar, it has given me a better understanding of what other people thought of him during this time period. It’s safe to say that Caesar was obsessed with power and respect from other people that would explain his thirst for war and land, which is one of his greatest strengths and helped in making Rome a great empire.
Much of Rome perceives Caesar as a superior being and immortal, but Cassius holds a contrasting perspective of Caesar. There is a point in his story where Caesar is crying for help, “Help me, Cassius, or I sink!” (111). Cassius also reveals a time when Caesar fell ill in Spain and how Caesar was completely taken over by this sudden sickness, “And when the fit was on him, I did mark/ How he did shake-’tis true, this god did shake,” (120-121). Cassius tells of Caesar’s weakest points, exposing moments in which Caesar does not seem godly at all. By illustrating the time in which Caesar fell ill Cassius proves that Caesar is not a celestial because become gods do not become ill, only normal citizens do. Cassius diminishes Caesar’s godly nature by illustrating how this great immortal being, cannot swim or can become terribly ill, just as any other commoner. Cassius, by exposing these moments in Caesar’s life, demonstrates to Brutus that Caesar is not fit to be a leader and is not the god Romans perceive him to be; his actions create a different person than his words. This supports Cassius’ point that Caesar is not fit to be a leader because Caesar is deceiving the people of Rome. Cassius continues to elaborate on his episode when he informs Brutus that he was crying for others to bring him water, “Ay, and that tongue of his that bade the Romans/Mark him, and write his speeches in their books,/Alas it cried, ‘Give me some drink, Titinius” (125-127). The great Caesar, whom others admire and document his words, is now begging for a drink to help him recover from the sudden illness. Cassius emphasizes how Caesar is not divine since he cannot manage sudden, challenging events. He reveals how Caesar whose words can persuade the citizens of Rome is now begging for someone to help him. This diminishes his godly nature because it demonstrates how weak Caesar can become in an instant.
On that first fateful day, when Romulus struck down his own brother Remus, the cauldron of Rome was forged in blood and betrayal. The seeds on the Palatine hill cultured one of the most potent and stretching empires of human history. Though this civilization seemingly wielded the bolts of Zeus, they were infested with violence, vanity, and deception. Yet, one man—or seemingly “un”-man—outshone and out-graced his surroundings and everyone within it. He brought Rome several victories and rescued his beloved country from an early exodus, thus providing her a second beginning. This man was Marcus Furius Camillus, and against a logical and emotional mind, he was oft less than loved and celebrated. At times he was disregarded, insulted and even exiled—irrevocably an unwarranted method to reward Rome’s “Second Founder.” This contrast of character between hero and people was perhaps too drastic and too grand. The people were not yet ready to see Marcus Furius Camillus as a model of behavior to be emulated—to be reproduced. Hence, much of Livy’s Book 5 provides a foundation for the Roman people to imitate and assimilate a contrasting, honest, and strong behavior and temperament
Julius Caesar, even though he is considered great, turns out to contain many flaws. He believes himself to be untouchable, and has a confidence that he cannot be harmed, even though that is not the case. He says so when he says, “Caesar shall forth. The things that threatened me ne’er looked but on ...
After analyzing the play of “The Tragedy of Julius Caesar” I found that the characteristics of betrayal, deception and exaggeration were abundant in the character of Cassius. Cassius was the leader of the conspirators against Caesar. There are similarities between Cassius and Adolf Hitler. Both had a hunger for power and control over their respective nations.
Julius Caesar is the leader of Rome and is seeking to become king in a matter of time. Though he is a good military strategist, he lacks knowledge in running government and is too greedy to have any concern for the peasants when he is alive. Caesar is all about conquering and power and he is afraid of nothing. Before he is murdered, he says “The things that threatened me ne’er looked but on my back. When they shall see the face of Caesar, they are vanished” (II, ii, 575). Th...
“Assumptions are normally the mother of all mistakes,” a quote by the philosopher Eugene Fordsworthe. In 58 B.C., Julius Caesar was a Roman General who ruled Rome along with two other men, Crassus and Pompey. Caesar was renowned for his numerous victories against the Gauls. He even defeated one of his alleged partners Pompey, which ultimately gave Caesar full reign of Rome. Caesar was a brutal leader; he even appointed himself dictator for life. Many feared he would become king, and the Roman Republic would have to resort to the past ways of the Roman Monarchy. A group of ‘nobles’ took it upon themselves to assassinate Caesar. Caesar may have been a brutal ruler, but he was accused and judged for actions that had not taken place yet. Therefore, the ‘nobles’ should not have killed Caesar. The first reason they should not have killed him was the fact that they were basing their decisions and anger off of assumptions made about Caesar. Secondly, the death of Caesar created animosity among the Roman people spurring mobs. Lastly, all of the conspirators ended up on the same road as Caesar, and that road was death.
Julius Caesar was a strong leader of the Romans who changed the course of the history for the Roman world decisively and irreversibly. With his courage and strength, he created a strong empire and guided the empire for almost 20 years. His life was short, but had many adventures. I will tell of some of this man’s remarkable life. He did many things, therefore, I will only discuss a few. His name, part of his reign, one of his greatest battles, and his death will be told.
In Shakespeare's play Julius Caesar, Brutus and Cassius are both considered honorable men by the public. But, like all traits, honor is in the eye of the beholder. Honor is defined as evidence or symbols of distinction. Those who are placed in power are often chosen because of their traits, which include being honorable. If those in power have any faults, it could diminish their position in the eyes of the public.
The ambition possessed by each character, leads Caesar, Brutus, and Cassius to power. It will be the same ambition, that quest for power, that makes each one susceptible to their own weakness. For Caesar, it will be his ego and inability to heed warnings, Brutus his love of Rome, and Cassius his dedication to power. These qualities prove that although intentions may be noble, ambition can make a person ruthless and blind them to their original goals. Ambition kills those who lose sight of their conscience and although it may prove beneficial in many instances, in this case, it leads the characters to lose all that they