More handpicked essays just for you.
The importance of self discipline essay 800 words
The importance of self discipline essay 800 words
Self discipline as a virtue
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Luxury and overindulgence were perceived by many elite Romans as a threat to the Roman Republic because it showed lack of self-discipline. Self-discipline is practiced in many forms, both on a physical level and a mental level. At a physical level you may practice it by maintaining a strong body through physical activity, or by not indulging in expensive and impractical clothing. Other physical excesses may be lavish parties with food, wine and entertainment. On the mental side, self-discipline involves not having a sense of entitlement, and being able to see yourself as equal to those who may be serving you and knowing that human beings are the same no matter their social status or financial status. Astin writes about the regimen morum, or Roman censor whose duties included registration of citizens, keeping …show more content…
Cato lived a very modest lifestyle and was a very self-disciplined man. Not only did he employ self-discipline for himself, but he expected it from those around him. When he commanded forces, he did not indulge his men with excess ration, but took only what was necessary for survival. When he was in Rome he often denounced the Roman Senate for their excesses, and bad behavior. Cato says “there was no need for them to change if they owed their importance to moral and virtuous conduct, since any change would be for the worse, but if they owed it to vicious and immoral conduct, they should change for the better since it was enough that they had become great as they were relying on that kind of conduct.” Cato believed that a good life could be lived without extravagance and that the extravagance that he saw was wasteful and weaken men. He expelled many Senators for various reasons of bad behavior, he wanted to retain the strictness of the Roman traditions that made Rome great, and wanted those in power to be strict on
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...
Horatius Cocles demonstrates Roman values with his readiness to assert himself for the good of the community despite any ramifications. He even attempts to advise his men in the direction of virtue by claiming “that it was vain for them to seek safety” (Livy, 20). These men appear to follow standards typical of the Greeks, as their personal motives guide their actions instead of the needs of others. Their lack of concern for the entire state of the Republic is an example of what individuals were not to do. The success of the individual, in this case Horatius, is a victory in Rome, which contrasts the idea of individual arete, valued by the Greeks. The greatest honor for a Roman was saving the life of another Roman whereas in Greek culture, an individual displays excellence in competition (Burger 91). For the Greeks, an individual may achieve honor at the cost of defeating another. In contrast, Romans sought to achieve honor by protecting what was best for all. Therefore, Romans valued self sacrifice while Greeks appear more self-centered (Burger 91). Horatius Cocles demonstrates the values of the Roman society in his steadfast opposition to the enemy. He is a model to the state for his courage in adversity.
...t he did not die for the republic, he died for his personal liberty. With the passage of time Cato’s suicide was transcribed over and over taking on a new life eventually becoming the martyr that died for the Republic. Upon completion of the paper it is shown how Cato should never be considered a martyr where in fact it is Cicero that is the true martyr because of what he offered to Rome in the context of the ideal statesman. The ideal statesman embodies the virtue of liberty but more importantly Cicero stressed that the ideal statesman should look to Rome’s citizens and not only for themselves. This is in stark contrast to Cato’s personal stoic act of taking his own life in the name of his own liberty. He did this without regard of the good he could have done for the Republic if he remained alive. Because of this, Cicero becomes Rome’s martyr on behalf of liberty.
His supporters had found out that Asia had been 'economically raped' due to the Mithradatic wars, where Asia was sandwiched. Cato, basically turning Crassus' political career towards the wall and going nowhere, rejected the one-third rebate. This was really bad in political terms his career had stagnated for such a politically ambitious man.
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.
In The Constitution of the Roman Republic, Polybius gives an interpretation of what he believed be a successful political system. Using his analytical skills, he sought to find reason regarding why the Romans became so prosperous. Let’s discover in what ways this assessment came to be.
The roman republic came into existence at the termination of the Roman kingship in 507 B.C.E. The last king of Rome, Tarquin the Proud, was expelled by Collatinus and Brutus, as a result of his arrogance involving the matter of one of his relations raping the wholesome Roman matron Lucretia and her subsequent suicide. The rape of Lucretia was really a representation of the frustration that the roman citizens felt regarding the kingship. The later kings had little regard for roman values and the roman populus, which they used as something of a slave labor force. Brutus and Collatinus became the first Roman Consuls, elected by popular vote.
The Roman Republic had an upstanding infrastructure, a stable social system, and a balanced constitution that solidified Rome’s greatness. Regardless of its achievements, however, the Roman Republic owes much of its success to classical Greek cultures. These cultures, in conjunction with the fundamental values of Roman society, certified Rome as one of the most significant powers the world has ever seen.
If one were to make his way through the history of the world, he or she would learn about the many forms of government, and how they came to be. In the case of Rome, many historians would note it as having a period where it was a republic, and a period where it was an empire. When examined in detail, though, the Roman Republic fails to mirror a true republic. While it had republican qualities, it was ultimately set up to give the common people a false sense of security and power in the Roman government. The ancient city of Rome was never a true republic because its traits do not emulate the definition of a republic or the republics of other ancient societies, and because of its biased political system.
With the problems starting with the dissolution of the first triumvirate and the actions of Julius Caesar, it seemed almost inevitable that the Republic would become an Empire. With the death of the true republican, Cicero, and many not remembering what the republic was like, giving power to the capable and honorable man seemed as if the best answer. Furthermore, if the Rome continue to remain a Republic the Senate could not have maintained the success or power that the Empire held. The ambition of one man made it easy to continue the growth whereas, many of the policies and disputes the country faced had face might have taken to long or complicated had the republic
“Caesar was a brilliant general, a clever engineer, and administrator of genius, and a leader who demanded and commanded loyalty. He also was a corrupt politician” (Dando-Collins 4). Caesar would go on to be a dictator and his gain in power would corrupt him. He often bypassed the Senate, taking their power away. With Caesar’s growing power the Senate feared that they would soon lose their political relevance.
“He is said to have been tall of stature… except that towards the end.” What was it that really led to the fall of the Roman Republic? There are a lot of different factors to consider when trying to determine what caused the collapse. By examining The Rubicon, The Life of Julius Caesar, and some accompanying handouts from class, this paper will discuss how the Roman Republic did not collapse because of one factor. The collapse of the Roman Republic was like that of a game of Jenga. Factors were pulled out of the Republican system just like a game of Jenga until the Republic could not stand anymore.
The Roman Republic began approximately around 509 B.C. when the nobles drove the King and his family out of Rome. This monumental incident helped shape the start to the transformation of the monarchy into a republican governmental system. This is known to have begun by that of the Roman nobles trying to hold their power that they had gained. The Republic was “[a] city-state [which] was the foundation of Greek society in the Hellenic Age; in the Hellenistic Age, Greek cities became subordinate to kingdoms, larder political units ruled by autocratic monarchs” (Perry 105)
First of all , Rome had experienced a severe decline in morals. There was an extreme increase in crime, which rapidly increased over the empire’s standing years. Immoral and promiscuous behavior including adultery also became a problem . It was not only an issue in the middle or upper class, but also in the lower class and the slaves. Their festivals showcased sacrifice, vulgar songs, lewd acts, and sexual promiscuity. Also, in the coliseums they had explicit shows to amuse