Procopius of Caesarea was a famous scholar in his time period, and produced three important historical works, which were History of the Wars, Secret History and The Buildings of Justinian. The duality of Procopius of Caesarea for the reign of Justinian the Great depends on his historiographic interpretations about Justinian the Great, and it is totally related to what Justinian did for his empire and what kind of a man he was during his time period because “he was the last Roman emperor, and very important to his period. While Procopius of Caesarea, who was a famous historian in his time period, was declaring, mentioning, and giving clues to his audience about the duality of Justinian the Great, he produced historical works and put his objective …show more content…
He praised the victories and wrote about the information about both sides. His interpretations about the wars are still reasonable. Procopius gives us a full picture of what Justinian the Great did in the war and how he fought till 560 A.D., and his style while performing narrative history is accepted clear and true. He also describes emperors, warriors, actions and places in his historical work, and gives details about them. For example, he put in his book how Vittigis gave his speech after losing Naples in 536 A.D. because Belisarius had captured Naples. With his description of the event like the king gives a speech to his people, he was indirectly praising the emperor and his achievements. As seen, Procopius praised the Roman warriors and, of course, Justinian the Great because of their heroic wars. The satirical praises are acceptable, but some historians have questions and doubts about the connection between the historical events that Procopius stated in his books. According to Kaldellis, there was a number of unrelated and unconnected sections in Procopius’ writings, Kaldellis accepts that this is vague and will not give solid information about relations between the historical events. In the book of Buildings, Procopius praises the conquests of new places by the emperor and his warriors. In the Buildings he mentions that the praise for the honorable works will …show more content…
This was a dilemma for him, but he did. According to Kaldellis, Procopius used his praises for empowering the religious in the Buildings, and he mentioned in the Secret History that the emperor’s passionate belief in the religious had him done a number of crimes. Those crimes were against his people, so he criticized about them in the Secret History. He also criticized Belisarius, and Antonina, who was Belisarius’ wife, and he stated that their wives were holding the power of the reign. In the Secret History Procopius criticized them as if he was taking revenge on them. This was the duality of his interpretations about the emperor and others. In my opinion, this was related to moral and governing ethics that Procopius wanted to expect them without any faults. Moreover, he described them as unreliable, performing double standard, disobeying laws, and bribe taker. According to Kaldellis, Procopius just wanted to deliver what best fit the regime. So, it does not look that Procopius took revenge on Justinian the Great, and he just declared a reality about the regime. In a tyrannical regime, of course, the emperor, his relatives, and his government would get benefits from the power of their regime. So, Procopius just wanted the emperor to be fair and perfect to govern his empire. Otherwise, Procopius could have used his negative criticism against Justinian the Great and others. He
Did Justinian impact life as we know it because he is such a great ruler, or is he just a follower who keeps trying to hold on to the loose threads of a fallen empire? Some might say that without Justinian, humanity is a step further back. Others may argue evermore that Justinian is a two-faced liar who you cannot trust (Doc. 2). Contrary to many beliefs, Justinian creates a new Byzantine Empire after the fall of Rome that is influential to many different cultures, more advanced and educated than Rome, and more economically thriving than the Roman Empire.
Even if you do not like Suetonius' style, you must agree that he has achieved his goal of adequately exploring the lives of these 12 men. He wrote more than an adequate biography; he wrote an exquisite history of a very important period in the Roman world. Suetonius wrote so accurately that many historians today use his writings to describe the lives of the Caesars.
Comnena documented his life and campaigns he did. She also spoke highly of her father, making Emperor Alexis an honorable and courageous man. Pope Urban II had his objectives on Jerusalem known as the holy land and to help liberate Christians in the east.
Emperor Justinian of the Eastern Roman Empire, also known as the Byzantine Empire, was one of Rome’s greatest leaders. By building numerous churches, schools, and hospitals throughout the empire, Justinian not only managed to revive Roman society, but he also preserved Roman culture for over a thousand years. Justinian’s brilliant leadership led the Roman Empire to conquer lands in Europe and Africa and expand to its greatest size. Additionally, he unified and strengthened the empire by moving the capital to Constantinople and establishing a single faith. After his death, Justinian left a legacy that allowed Rome to continue thriving. Under Justinian’s rule, Rome flourished into a culturally rich civilization.
Claudius was a significant ruler of the early Roman imperial era. He reigned from AD 41-54. He was easily influenced by those with questionable agendas, such as his last two wives and his freedmen, yet his principate was deemed successful. His expansion of the empire, his new reforms and his control over the senate were all beneficial to the state and and his rule was one which paved the way for those who ruled after him.
3. I often waged war, civil and foreign, on the earth and sea, in the whole wide world, and as victor I spared all the citizens who sought pardon. As for foreign nations, those which I was able to safely forgive, I preferred to preserve than to destroy. About five hundred thousand Roman citizens were sworn to me. I led something more than three hundred thousand of them into colonies and I returned them to their cities, after their stipend had been earned, and I assigned all of them fields or gave them money for their military service. I captured six hundred ships in addition to those smaller than triremes.
It was written in the sixth century and takes place in Byzantine. He wrote this, because he was disgusted by the emperor and his wife Theodora. 2. What is the difference between a.. Procopius starts this document stating that Theodora is nothing more than a prostitute.
Justinian was one of the most influential rulers of Byzantium. When he came into power in 527 AD, he inherited a civilization in disarray. Justinian had a positive impact on the Byzantine Empire. Most notably, he introduced an improved set of laws and conquered many surrounding nations, nearly restoring the former glory of the Roman Empire. In addition to these contributions, Justinian also made advances with the Christian Church and Byzantine architecture.
In Titus Livius’, The Early History of Rome, Livy takes on the task of documenting Rome’s early history and some of the famous individuals who help contribute to the ‘greatness’ of Rome. Livy dedicates an entire portion of his writing to describe the reigns of the first seven kings of Rome; all who influence the formation and governance of Rome in some way. However, of the seven kings in early Roman history, King Romulus and King Numa Pompilius achieved godlike worship and high esteem from their fellow Romans. While both highly important and respected figures in Rome’s history, the personalities and achievements of King Romulus and King Numa Pompilius are complete opposites of one another. Despite the differences found in each king and of their rule over Rome, both Romulus and Numa Pompilius have a tremendous influence in the prosperity and expansion of Rome in its early days.
This was the beginning of Justinian’s famous rule, which lasted from 527 A.D. through 565 A.D. (The Reign of Justinian). The reign of Justinian was significant in many ways. First of all, it marked the final end of the Roman Empire. It was the establishment of the New Byzantine empire. It was also the beginning of Western Europe’s unique position within the civilization of the old world.
Julius Caesar is remembered as one of the greatest military minds in history and credited with arranging the basis for the Roman Empire. Caesar’s military brilliance bought Rome more land and more power, which led into the increase of size and strength of Rome. Caesar’s dictatorship helped the strength in Rome. Julius Caesar was assassinated which lead to a monarchy that was ruled by Octavin. Caesar’s death caused an effect to the collapse of the Roman Empire. Many people today in the 21st century try and follow the greatness of Julius Caesar. The assassination of Julius Caesar was a tragedy with the contributions Caesar made to strengthen Rome’s success.
In this essay I will argue that the ultimate failure of Pompey in his struggle with Julius Caesar was due to Pompey’s lack of risk-taking and his inability to predict Caesar’s strategies. I will then contrast this to Caesar’s riskier strategies which would eventually lead to his triumph over Pompey. I shall cover the major battles, Ilerda, Dyrrhacchium and Pharsalus in order to assess how and why Pompey eventually lost against Caesar.
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.
Caesar was born into a traditional influential and respected family. It is this influence that he used to make his way to the top of the Roman leadership. His use in warfare and military conquests are legendary although he had at first concentrated in pursuing political actions. He won the first elections in his political career at the early forties. He was el...
The Ara Pacis (“Altar of Augustan Peace” in Latin) is one of the most representative works of Augustan art. The monument was dedicated on 4 July 13 B.C to honor the return of Augustus after three years in Spain and Gaul, which were his last military operations, and commemorate military victories. The altar was an impressive example of the culture of Rome in general and illustration of prosperous Rome. The monument is a visual medium to represent that peace is the result of military victories and his proconsular power on the land and sea. Karl Galinsky, a Professor of Classics at the University of Texas at Austin says that the Ara Pacis is linked with the concept that pace is the result of military victories. According to him, Augustus mentioned the importance of the Ara Pacis in Res Gestae by saying, “On my return from Spain and Gaul in the consulship of Tiberius Nero and Publius Quintilius, after I had successfully arranged affairs in those provinces, the senate decreed that an altar of the Augustan Peace should be consecrated next to the Campus Martius in honor of my return, and ordered that the magistrates and priests and the Vestal Virgins perform an annual sacrifice there” (Karl Galinsky, 1996). He avoided building an altar in the senate chamber to honor his return. Instead, he ordered to build an altar to Pax Agusta in which one mile away from the sacred boundary of the city. It means that the altar was meant not only to be a monument of military achievement, but also a vision of the Roman religion. This research aims on function, structure of the altar, and reliefs on each side of the precinct wall.