The fall of the Roman Republic was an event that forever changed the face of the Roman world. It ushered in a new age of dictatorship. Men like Cicero did not want people such as Caesar to become dictators. His letters record the events of the day and his opinions of what was happening, and his thoughts on the events of that era. Cicero felt that the Republic fell because of Caesar’s lust for power, and it was his obligation as a Roman to do his best to challenge his ideas on changing the Republic into dictatorship. He worked diligently until his death to exact change in Rome.
Cicero was a well-respected man in the Roman Republic. He had gained support through the years and his opinions were quite valued by his fellow Romans. His letters
…show more content…
He was correct in his assumptions of just what he was capable of. He saw how Caesar was attempting to take over, the effect that was going to have, the power struggle between Pompey and Caesar, and the grave danger that Caesar posed to Pompey. He was also concern for what the transition of power would hold for the Roman Republic as well. He recognized as evidenced in his writings that the Republic was falling and a new regime was to come into play. He was a good citizen who went out of his way in order to promote the Republic to the fullest extent. His ability to see what Caesar was doing and how he was trying to gain control of the empire shows he was paying attention to the events taking place in his time. Caesar was effectively destroying the republic by seizing control of everything he could. The assignation of Caesar did not end what had begun. Eventually, a new ruler was coming into play, Augustus. When Augustus came to power Cicero was killed. He had done all he could to promote the country he loved. His opinions exacted too much influence over the Roman people. He loved his country too much, and basically died for his ideas and opinions.
Cicero was a man that was destined to stand out in the Roman world as a figure of great importance. His life was one of service to his country in a time full of obstacles in which he was cast into the middle of. He gave his life in an effort to further the Roman Republic. His letters are a snapshot into the times surrounding the events of the day, and gives us a glimpse into what the Romans were struggling for, and what they did achieve during this time
From ages past, the actions of conquerors, kings and tyrants had brought the Roman Republic to a stance that opposed any idea of a singular leader, of a single man that held total power over the entirety of the state. Their rejection of the various ruthless Etruscan rulers that had previously dictated them brought the Republic to existence in 509 BC , and as a republic their prominence throughout the provinces of the world exponentially expanded. Throughout these years, the traditions of the Romans changed to varying degrees, most noticeably as a result of the cultural influence that its subject nations had upon the republic, as well as the ever-changing nature of Roman society in relation to then-current events. However, it was not until the rise of Augustus, the first of a long line of succeeding emperors, that many core aspects of the Republic were greatly changed. These were collectively known as the “Augustan Reforms”, and consisted of largely a variety of revisions to the social, religious, political, legal and administrative aspects of the republic’s infrastructure. Through Augustus, who revelled in the old traditional ways of the past, the immoral, unrestraint society that Rome was gradually falling to being was converted to a society where infidelities and corruption was harshly looked upon and judged. The Roman historian Suetonius states, “He corrected many ill practices, which, to the detriment of the public, had either survived the licentious habits of the late civil wars, or else originated in the long peace” . Through Augustus and his reforms, the Republic was transformed into an Empire, and through this transformation, Rome experienced one of its greatest and stabl...
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 codifies a means through which one can reach a justifiable decision. Subsequently, he expounds the four essential virtues—wisdom, justice, magnanimity or greatness of spirit, and seemliness—all of which are necessary to conduct oneself honorably. As a result, the virtues intertwine to create an unassailable foundation upon which one can defend their actions. Cicero’s expatiation of the four virtues, though revolving around justice and political in context, illuminates the need for wisdom among the populace in order to discern a leader’s motivations. This subtly becomes apparent as Cicero, advising his son on how to dictate decision-making, issues caveats regarding the deceptions that occur under the guise of virtue.
Cicero’s first major philosophical work is The Republic, and was completed in 54 BCE. Cicero’s book is a dialogue regarding Roman politics, written in six books. The format is in a Socratic dialogue where Scipio Aemilianus portrays a clever old man. Cicero’s written work was politically controversial. The sixth book in particular, Dream of Scipio, describes a fictitious dream of Scipio Aemilianus before he instructed the demolition of Carthage. The nature of the dream consists of the elder Scipio coming to his (adopted) grandson, and explaining the life of the good after death and the formation of the Universe from a Stoic and Neo-Platonic perspective. This gave rise to address the nature of the cosmos and conveyed a great deal of philosophy to the later Middle Ages.
“Whatever distinction a Roman Equestrian can possess—and it can undoubtedly be very great—has always been judged as belonging to Marcus Caelius in the fullest measure, and is still so judged today” (Pro Caelio 3, pg 130). This quote is taken from the early parts of the defense speech and is used by Cicero to build a foundation surrounding the character of Cicero. Cicero states himself that “he must sway the hearts of the audience” that is exactly what he is doing with this statement about the character of Caelius. He is first refuting the assertion made by the prosecution that Caelius is a vagabond of types who does not obtain the traits of a Proper Roman because of his Equestrian ancestry. Cicero utterly deny’s that and instead demonstrates that Caelius is a man above reproach who comes from an esteemed line of Roman Equestrians and that the Equestrian class is not a class to be looked down on. “Being the son of a Roman Equestrian is something that the prosecution should never have used as a slur before these jurors, or before myself as an advocate.” (Pro Caelio 4, pg 130). There is quite a bit of irony in this statement, Cicero is to an affect reprimanding the prosecution for utilizing slander in order to tear down Caelius. This is something that Cicero himself will do later in his speech when he attacks the
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., involving Julius Caesar, Crassus and Pompey. The triumvirate gained power that was intended to be in the hands of the senate and Roman assembly. This paved way to a situation in which a single man could sweep up the political power that previously belonged to the entire senate. Julius Caesar would use this tactic, following his campaigns of Gaul and Britton, to take sole dictatorship over Rome. While there were previous cases which individuals had been appointed as dictator, usually by the senate to serve for six months in a time of war, Caesar was appointed dictator three separate times.. After declining his first dictatorship, Caesar was awarded two more reigns as dictator for one and ten years, respectively. At this point Caesar was praised by the Roman people for his various military victories and had been awarded several awards and honors by the senate. Having conquered much of the surrounding territories, spanning from northern Africa to Greece, and enacting several reforms, Caesar was in the pro...
The Roman Republic (Res Pvblica Romana) was a form of republican government that was established in 509 BCE to replace the monarchy government that had reigned over Rome since the founding in 753BCE (Steele, 2012). The Failure of the Roman Republic was inevitable as it was an unjust system of government and it was left vulnerable after the attempted changes instigated by the Gracchi, as the Gracchi exposed the weaknesses in the political structure allowing future politicians to manipulate the system. The sources used throughout the essay, which include Plutarch, Appian, Florus and Velleius, will need to be examined closely as each source will demonstrate different views on the Gracchi, as the authors purpose of writing will differ. The Gracchi had set out to change Rome for the better, however in the process; they exposed the internal flaws of the government which resulted in the beginning of the decline of the Roman Republic.
Gaius Julius Caesar, born 100 B.C.E. in Rome to the impoverished patrician Julian Clan, knew controversy at an early age. Nephew to Populare Gaius Marius, he was earmarked by the Optimate dictator Sulla for prosciption after his refusal to divorce his Populare wife, Cinna. Fleeing Rome, and not returning until after Sulla’s resignation in 78 B.C.E, upon his return he gained a position as a pontificate, an important Roman priesthood. Slowly but surely throughout his lifetime he worked his way up the political ladder, eventually becoming Consul, and finally Dictator Perpeteus – Dictator for life. One of the most influential political and military leaders of all time, Caesar was also a highly intelligent man and an exceptional orator. However, acquiring this absolute power was no mean feat, and Caesar had well equipped himself through previous expeditions with all the resources necessary to gain power in Ancient Rome.
Much ink from the historians’ pens has been spilled seeking to explain the reasons behind the fall of the Roman Republic. As Gruen notes, “from Montesquieu to Mommsen, from Thomas Arnold to Eduard Meyer…the Republic’s calamity has summoned forth speculation on a grand scale. How had it come about?” (1) Certainly, from one perspective, it can be said that the attraction of this event is to a degree overstated: it is based on the belief of the stability of political systems, of the deterrence of the possibility of radical changes in political worldviews and general social arrangements and structures. Furthermore, it marks a decisive shift, in the political arrangements of a grand civilization of Ancient Rome: in other words, it marks an instance where even within the continuity of a singular civilization, such as that of Rome, there can be the presence of political turbulence and abrupt changes of directions regarding the form which political power and hegemony ultimately assumes. Yet, what is perhaps more important from the perspective of the historian is the precise sense in which the events of the collapse of the Roman Republic still remain ambiguous, arguably because of the multi-faceted manner in which this fall occurred. Hence, Gruen writes: “the closing years of the Roman Republic are frequently described as an era of decay and disintegration; the crumbling of institutions and traditions; the displacement of constitutional procedures by anarchy and forces; the shattering of ordered structures, status and privilege; the stage prepared for inevitable autocracy.” (1) In other words, the collapse of the Roman Republic is complicated because of the multiple dimensions in which such degeneration ultimately happened: it was not mere...
As Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon and took the Roman Republic, many came to love and praise him. Being a man of great prestige from his war campaign in Gaul, he was easily excepted by the Roman citizens. Cicero, a public enemy of Caesar's power, wrote, “They fear the man they once trusted [Pompey] and adore the man they once dreaded
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 Roman Way is basically an informal history of Roman civilization as Edith Hamilton interprets the writings of the greatest literary figures from around the time of 200 B.C. to 100 A.D. Some of these writers include Cicero, with his vast assortment of letters; Catullus, the romantic poet; and Horace, the storyteller of an unkind and greedy Rome. They are three affluent white men from around the same period of time, although each of them had very different styles of writings and ideologies. Edith Hamilton does a great job in translating the works of many different authors of Roman literature, discussing each author's exclusive stance in...
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.
Cicero, was truly a man of the state. His writings also show us he was equally a man of
The Roman Republic ultimately failed due to the lack of large-scale wars and other crises that had united the Roman populous early in the history of the Roman Republic. Roman leadership and honor became compromised. In the absence of war and crisis, Rome’s leaders failed to develop the honor and leadership necessary to maintain the Republic.
In The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, by William Shakespeare, the story revolves around the various individuals who would vie for control of the Roman Empire. All of these individuals exhibit various attributes, values, and techniques in order to facilitate this goal, from Cassius’ intelligence, Brutus’ charm and honor, to Antony’s gift to drive a crowd. And although all three desire to become the new strongman leader of Rome, it is Antony who succeeds gaining the most control through his own specific talents, most specifically noted at Caesar’s funeral. At the funeral scene, Antony exhibits several qualities beneficial to a Roman leader, such as oratory and appeasement skills. The dialogue depicted in Act III, scene ii provides a valuable and insightful perspective on how these values were desirable for leadership in the late Roman Republic.