What explains the success of the "five good emperors”?
The five good emperors had many avenues of success. The five good emperors ran the empire in a carefully and equally way. Unlike Augustus, the five emperors were men that ruled the Roman Empire as a bureaucracy, which is a system of government where decision-making were made by state officials. The five good emperors’ strategy was to win wars and maintain a peaceful community, thus over shadowing some of Augustus’ best days as leader of Rome.
The success of five good emperors began in 117 AD when Hadrian a native of Spain became one of the five good emperors (McKay, 166,187). Hadrian allowed men with little talent to serve in the army as administrators for the empire. This adjustment
…show more content…
allowed the Empire to run more smoothly knowing that every man would be assigned to his correct job. Hadrian and the the rest of the good emperors ran a sophisticate and disciplined empire. The five good emperors would further enhance their Empire by expanding the Roman Empire into other countries. The Romans would build roads that travel through the Mediterranean. To conclude, the success of the five good emperors led to well assembled and well disciplined Roman Empire. The five good emperors ran the Roman Empire more successfully than some great rulers of the past such as, Caesar and Augustus. What was life like in the “golden age” of the Roman Empire for those residing in Rome?
How did this compare to life in the provinces?
Life in the golden age could be described as lively. Rome consisted of an enormous population, around 500,000 to 750,000. Rome was divided into classes. The Roman wealthy and privileged citizens were owners of great businesses and owners of large pieces of land. Poor citizens, noncitizens, slaves and freedmen were all part of the largest Roman class, the low class, made up not only of working classes but also of doctors, musicians, actors, teachers, and philosophers.
In Ancient Rome, a province was the basic was the Tetrarchy (please clarify, awkward) and the largest territorial and administrative unit of the empire's territorial possessions outside of Italy. Civilization in Province were more strict and in order. In the province, citizens generally spoke a variety of languages such as Latin, Italian, French and many more. The idea behind learning different languages was to observe the evolution of a new culture. The villa was a country state that involved heavily on political life. The villa can be compared to the capital building in the US. Both are the center of their respected countries and cities. To conclude, the golden age of the Roman Empire can be described as lively. The province was better lead and
…show more content…
stricter. Read Document 23 (Suetonius, the Life of Augustus).
How does Suetonius portray Augustus and his accomplishments? What were his skills? What was the response of Rome? How might Suetonius's account have been biased or limited?
Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus was the descendent of a knightly family who was exposed to military and diplomatic services before entering the government. After he became interested in history he shaped his public career as the secretary of the emperor. He would soon be dismissed and spend the rest of his life writing biographies. In the book entitled The Life of Augustus, Suetonius spoke on how he portrayed Augustus’ accomplishments. He also discovered what skills Augustus had as well as how the Romans responded to learning Augustus’ skills, while describing his thoughts as bias or limited.
Suetonius portrayed Augustus as a brutal leader that governed his community as a monarchy. Suetonius also portrayed Augustus as a selfish ruler that refused to let any other country or empire to rule over the Roman Empire. For example, Suetonius believed that Augustus would work his soldier endlessly and they were unable to visit their wives regularly. Suetonius believed that Augustus accomplished many things but risk the state of the Empire to achieve that accomplishment. Augustus’ skills that he obtained over his life were the skill to lead. After Caesar assassination, Augustus made it his duty to not only find his uncle’s assassin, but to also defeat him in
combat. He would lead three of the best lieutenants to defeat the assassins and later lead the Roman Empire to victory against Cleopatra’s Egyptian Navy and Army. The response that Augustus receives from Rome is appreciation. Rome wished happiness and prosperity on Augustus family. I believe Suetonius was being biased and limited. He was biased because he rather point out the bad things that Augustus had done. Even though it is believed that the Romans were very fond of Augustus as a leader. Suetonius cannot deny that Augustus was one of the greatest Roman leaders to rule the Empire. To conclude, in the book The Life of Augustus Suetonius discuss the accomplishments and skills of Augustus, while discuss the response of the Romans toward him.
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.
Augustus Caesar was very ambitious leader. He is best known for bringing peace to Rome. Augustus was considered the first great roman emperor, because He didn’t care about wealth and fortune. Augustus cared about the people of Rome. He was a great military leader and was successful in most of his missions. He showed people that being a good ruler requires a lot of hard work and dedication. He was a very generous man. Augustus was greatly admired by the Roman people.
Because she was such an influential person in his life, people believed that she had caused his death by poisoning him when he had had second thoughts about naming Nero as his successor. Emperor Claudius was both a successful and significant ruler of the Roman Empire. His control of the Senate and new bureaucratic reforms led him to improve the efficiency of the government. His most dramatic reform was the expansion of the empire and the extension of who could be granted Roman citizenship. These new reforms gained him a lot of support.
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 ...
Philosopher A: In the Republic, the Senate was the primary branch of the Roman government and held the majority of the political power. It controlled funds, administration and foreign policy, and had significant influence of the everyday life of the Roman people. When Augustus came to power, he kept the Senate and they retained their legal position. The Emperor’s rule was legitimized by the senate as he needed the senators experience to serve as administrators, diplomats and generals. Although technically the most authoritative individual in Rome, Augustus strived to embody Republican values. He wanted to relate and connect to all parts of society including Plebeians. Through generosity and less extravagance, Augustus achieved a connection with the common people.
Why was Trajan considered to be one of the five good emperors of the Roman Empire? Trajan was a visionary leader as well as an ethical leader. First I will tell you how Trajans actions during the Dacian Wars proved that he was an inspirational leader for his soldiers. Next I will tell you how Trajan, by the domestic policies he instituted as the Roman Emperor, proved to be an ethical leader. Last I will tell you about the personal relevance this has to me. More specifically I will tell you about my actions as a leader when I moved to Holloman Air Force Base. Now that I gave you an overview of what I want to talk about let’s get to my first main point.
Following the successful side of Julius Caesar leadership, Augustus hosted many games and other measures such as ensuring the Gods were frequently celebrated. Augustus made sure the water supply was improved, and public baths had been put in place, these acts kept society happy and gained Augustus’s popularity. To please the people and allow for peace, Augustus never claimed the title of “Emperor” or “King” as they were part of the reason for his uncle’s downfall. Augustus took the name of “Princeps” instead, which was a much safer and smarter option. Augustus received high office via the Senate and was also the head of Rome’s religious and political affairs. After many years of civil riots, Augustus was able to deliver peace and prosperity to Roman society and allowed for the 200 years of Pax Romana. Augustus could have put his power to use in an evil and self-serving way, but instead, he was generous with all of the society including
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.
The five good emperors’ goodness was determined by their relationships with the Roman Senate and people as well as the positive contributions that they achieved for the empire as a whole. They each provided their own way of running the empire and despite the majority of the emperors only able to maintain one of the above qualities, they were able to do a very good job in that one aspect
"Five Good Emperors (ancient Rome)." Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Encyclopedia Britannica, n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. .
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.
...e was outstanding as he was coherent to Augustus’ policy and kept the provinces content by governing them well. The financial status of the Empire was boosted 20 times that at his accession by building highways and saving money through hosting less games and repairing buildings. Tiberius followed in Augustus’ steps and made a respectful relationship with the Senate by showing courtesy to the consuls and the body as a whole. The rise of Sejanus prove devastating to Tiberius’ rule as his execution fueled Tacitus’ claim of a ‘reign of terror’ and angered the people of Rome. However, in his last years he did not let the administration of the Empire fall into appears. Through analysis of Tiberius’ rule, it is clearly seen that he treated the senate fairly, created strong economics and security in the state and boosted the empire into an unprecedented state of prosperity.
Augustus created the office of emperor with the Augustan Principate, which was “to have no institutionalized authoritarian power, no perpetual dictatorship such as Julius Caesar had had himself voted early in 44, or anything like it (Stockton, 124).” Despite his wishes the people of Rome ended up giving Augustus eternal office, and powers to control the Senate with the rights to dictate agendas and veto (Stockton, 128). The people of Rome had created a position of absolute power, the exact thing Augustus was attempting to prevent. At the time the people of Rome could not have realized what they were creating in the office of emperor, for Augustus was a great man whose leadership created a great shadow over the shoulder of any future emperor.
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
After Augustus's death, his successors had varying degrees of effectiveness and popularity. Caligula – bloodthirsty and mentally unstable Claudius – conqueror of Britannia, and Nero – uninhibited spender and disinterested ruler, all were in Augustus's dynasty. After Nero's suicide in the face of assassination in 68 c.e., the principate was held by four different Emperors in the span of 18 months.