Cato also refused Pompey's offer of marriage to one of his nieces. According to Bradley "Cato was a staunch conservative, and distrusted Pompey's motives" Crassus had a problem with his supporters. He supported a request from a company of tax gatherers (Equites), that after realizing Asia had been economically raped, and virtually un-taxable due to the Mithradatic campaign, could not possibly make money from taxes, so the request he supported is that the Senate should adjust the bad bargain to on a third rebate which they had made in contracting for the taxes of Asia. This request according to Scullard was rejected under Cato's leadership which had led to the stagnation of Crassus' political career. Thus Crassus needed some support of Pompey and Caesar to kick start his career and eventually lead to the formation of the First Triumvirate.
Although Pompey’s quest for power through military achievements was harmful to the Republic, this power was bestowed upon him by the Senate. Thus the already weakened Republican system must bear some responsibility for its own demise. According to the modern historian Williams, after the Gracchi, there was a “slow but discernable decline in both the prestige and authority of the Senate”. This indicates that the Senate had already lost some of its power after being challenged by these reformist brothers, which suggests its inability to stand up to the power of individuals. According to the same author, after showing “remarkable initiative by raising an army to support Sulla and fighting the supporters of Marius in Sicily and Africa, Pompey demanded a triumph” despite being well aware that he was underage and had held not military position.
The French helped America out with their Revolutionary War and asked for basically nothing in return, except that America would help them if they ever decided to go to war, too. America agreed and accepted France’s help. However, years passed and the King they’d made the Treaty with died, and France decided that was the best time to go to war, and America was still just a new nation. When Franc called on them for help, Washington instead shrugged them off and decided that since the king was dead, there was no point in them joining in. Washington also felt that now that the king was dead, there wasn’t any good side to help.
Just because someone says that they are doing something for their country doesn’t make it okay. The Roman Senate realized that and didn’t want him in charge of their nation. Julius declared himself dictator for life. ("Internet History Sourcebooks.” ) He was not chosen by the people to rule, but by himself. In Rome, kings were not well remembered and people worried that Julius Caesar was becoming as a king.
Public opinion did eventually shift away from MacArthur after his Senate hearings, but the controversy had already taken its toll on the President. As such, President Truman did not aspire to be reelected. Robert Taft and the Republicans had attacked his administrations foreign policy for some time, and they would succeed in getting their man, Dwight D. Eisenhower, into the oval office. Perhaps General MacArthur was correct in his belief that the Chinese could be beaten without risking nuclear war with Russia; nevertheless, his challenging of the President’s authority as Commander in Chief not only provoked, but required, Truman to dismiss him.
Henry had somewhat childish fantasies of being the great warrior-king and the hero on the battlefield. He wanted ... ... middle of paper ... ...never made it to Suleiman. This enabled Charles to defeat and capture Francis at Pavia with Henry's minor help. Charles could now dictate peace and he believed he owed Henry nothing. Once again Henry was used by his ally and emptied England's treasury for nothing.
He says he is “not an orator,” when clearly he is. He tells the crowd “not to seek vengeance,” all the while knowing they will. He disproves the idea that Caesar was ambitious by reminding them that he refused the crown three times and reading the will which left Caesar’s property to the citizens. In this way, if the conspirators confront him for inciting the riot, he can truthfully say “I told them not to seek vengeance and I told them you were honorable.” It absolves him of responsibility for the riot, when everyone knows his sarcasm is the very thing that sparked it. Work Cited Shakespeare, William, Barbara A. Mowat, and Paul Werstine.
Marius made a major step in pushing the Republic towards constitutional upheaval when, in 107 B.C., he abolished the property requirements for military service (Meier, 29). Not only did these impoverished soldiers depend on their commander rather than the State for their fiscal support, but they were also promised land in newly conquered provinces upon the completion of the service. While enlarging the pool from which the Roman Army drew its volunteer soldiers, this change in policy brought about a dangerous shift in political power. It was for this reason that the Senate opposed nearly every land law placed before it. If a gifted commander was able to enrich his soldiers through plunder, and give them land to settle after the campaign, “the soldiers might feel a greater obligation to their commander than to the Senate (Meier, 29).” This circumstance is an essential ingredient for civil war, more so, possible, than any other.
When Caesar was a consul, he laid down laws that strengthen the rights of plebeians and weaken the power of the Senate. Reforming the uneven distribution of land has long been a serious issue; several Roman Politician even lose their lives because of the radical group against the reform. To solve this problem, Caesar wisely considered the concerns from both the nobles and plebeians and set up a land distribution policy benefited both of these groups. “The volatile political of land in Campania would not be offered to Pompey’s veterans or the Roman poor, but rather unused land in other parts of Italy would restored and offered instead” (First Triumvirate). At the same time, Caesar also showed his political talent diplomatically.
In addition, by accepting the crown it would have supported the army's charges of hypocrisy and ambition. Therefore, some historians believe that Cromwell was deterred because the majority of his senior officers were against the idea of the crown, as shown by R. Hutton (in Source 5), "Lambert, Fleetwood and Desborough all told the Protector that they would resign", this shows that there was a threat from the senior officers, particularly by those who "loved him". However, other historians find it difficult to believe ... ... middle of paper ... ...seen throughout the Protectorate. There were 'fatal internal contradictions' in the sense that there were too many conflicting interests to please, and that the Cromwell was far too closely associated with the army and its politicisation. There were further conflicts between establishing godly rule for which Cromwell needed the army and arriving at political settlement which would be long-lasting.