Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
About the second triumvirate
Role of senate in rome
First triumvirate summary
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: About the second triumvirate
The First Triumvirate
"3 paragraphs, why did Caesar, Pompey and Crassus need the (amicittia) First Triumvirate."
Crassus' motives for the need for the First Triumvirate according to Scullard are as follows,
"Crassus supported a request from a company of tax-gatherers that the Senate should adjust a bad bargain which they had made in contracting for the taxes of Asia."
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.
Pompey's motives for the need of the First Triumvirate are according to Scullard both political and personal. As Scullard seems to suggest,
" ... Pompey had been rebuffed by the Optimates in both his private and public life. Cato rejected a suggestion that Pompey should marry one of his relations, but of greater importance was Pompey's double request that his eastern settlement should be ratified by the Senate and that land should be provided for his veterans."
Pompey who had promised his veterans land. The way he disbanded his army and approached the Senate alone requesting his reasonable requests seems to suggest that he was fairly confident that he had achieved enough, and that the Senate would pass the request, but instead the Senate rejected his requests. A few attempts where made to pass the land bill for his troops with the use of Afranius and Metellus Celer both proved ineffective. His political career had too stagnated and hit the wall, this would be going nowhere. The senate rejecting the ratification of the eastern settlement, which is perfectly normal due to the fact that sources suggest that Pompey did it on his own, will and did not consult the senate, so the even though what he did was an extraordinary achievement the Senate can say no and so they did.
Caesar upon arriving back from his outstanding success, in Spain he paid back his enormous debt to Crassus and still a multi millionare. On his return he wanted a triumph and the consulship, but since he could not as a commander enter the city to stand for election, he asked the Senate for permission to stand in absentia.
"Though there were precedents, the Senate refused."
Caesar abandoned his triumph and entered Rome as an ordinary candidate.
Caesar presently had. Brutus is a supporter of the republic government. Brutus says, " We
...ion this all showed that style of governing and ruling an empire started a century long pattern of events that eventually lead to the fall and destruction of the old oligarchy led by the Senate. The combination of desire for personal gain and glory of a politician or general was what weakened the Roman customs and the Senate. This was a cycle among the Senate, to find themselves stuck in a problem and to find others to fix with of course military means but in turn make everything more corrupt with their disruptive practices such as Pompey and Julius Caesar. But they were not the only ones there were others who were to blame for causing such decay and corruption such as Marius, Sulla, Gaius and Tiberius Gracchus. They were the ones who kept this corruption cycle going and it was Augustus Caesar who finally broke the cycle and brought stability and order back to Rome.
In order to understand why the Gracchi attempted to solve these problems, one must examine the circumstances of Rome at the time, as well as the background of the two brothers. After the Second Punic War, the Senate became the supreme power and as a result, many changes occurred throughout Rome. Most notably, the ruling Oligarchy (specifically the nobiles) abused their power, caring more for their own material interests and gloria than the welfare of the rep...
In previous years, Caesar had relied upon the wealth and prestige of others in order to further his own political and military ambitions. Before his governorship of Cisalpine Gaul, he relied heavily upon the financial support of Crassus (whom was his main creditor) to gain favour with the Roman public. However, with his appointment as proconsul of Cisalpine Gaul and Illyricum in 58 B.C.E, Caesar saw an opportunity to increase his own wealth and prestige without relying upon the support of others. To his command of Cisalpine Gaul, he was also later given the command of Transalpine Gaul. His command of the Gallic region had several advantages. Firstly, the Po Valley was an excellent recruiting ground for troops. Secondly through Gaul, Caesar had an opportunity to acquire great wealth, which would be needed to fur...
In fact, Machiavelli’s morals are as questionable as those of Ferdinand II. Because Machiavelli believed that “it [was] unnecessary for a prince to have all the good qualities [he had] enumerated, but it [was] very necessary to appear to have them” (62), Ferdinand II seemed to be an excellent example of the advice given in the book. However, Machiavelli fails to see that Ferdinand II’s actions opposed one of his primary beliefs. Machiavelli specified that princes did not have to avoid cruelty and dishonesty if and only if their actions benefited the state, and that a prince must consider every action he took based on its effect on his country. As previously stated, Ferdinand II’s actions exclusively benefited himself. Considering the fact that this was a principal theme throughout Machiavelli’s book, why he saw Ferdinand II as such a “great and extraordinary” ruler is baffling. His love of the king is as hypocritical as the King’s character. There is a strong possibility that Machiavelli had a bias towards Ferdinand, considering he was the ruler when he wrote The Prince, and Machiavelli did not see his rule’s final outcome. This presents the question of how Machiavelli’s partiality affects his credibility. Provided he did, in fact, have that bias, what does that say about the rest of his work? Since Machiavelli did not have a neutral stance on politics, he may have steered Prince De’ Medici and all other political leaders who read The Prince in the direction of his own opinions, thus singlehandedly shaping history into his
...ransoms did the general coffers fill” Act3 Scene2 line#87, “When that the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept” Act3 Scene2 line#90 and “I thrice presented him a kingly crown. Which he did thrice refuse. Was this ambition?” Act3 Scene2 line#96 All these refutations indicate Caesar wasn’t ambitious but rather, he was full of compassion and sympathy. He didn’t use any sly skill but well-chosen facts and this turned the tables.
The The Flaccus family was greatly assisted politically by Claudia, Marcus’s wife. Similarly to Flaminia in arc 1, the familial ties of the wife are crucial to the political connections of the man. One aspect of Roman politics that was well illuminated through gameplay was the use of clients to political advantage. In the game, clients can do menial tasks, do business, or spread support of a candidate. These actions are not written of in the texts, but the gameplay illustrates some odd similarities between Roman campaigning and current political campaigning. Marcus Fulvius Flaccus is serving alongside Tiberius and he supports his land reform, and with the help of his clients, he establishes dignitas. This is accomplished by sending a letter from a nobile to a man with whom he is feuding. The dignitas of a character is vital to his auctoritas in that the man will not be heard in any capacity if he does not have the respect of the senators. This is another example of how the gameplay teaches beyond what is covered in
Newspaper articles and websites about those organizations and the people connected to them instructional leadership. Examples of organizations such as Michelle Reed, Teach for America, and The New Teacher Project are a few (Rigby, 2014). The focus was on three out of the eight Dimensions when writing the memo notes. Number one focused on the underline assumption that all leaders share a commitment to bring educational opportunities to all students. Number two, leaders focused on the practice of instructional leadership. The third Dimension is the role of the teachers. Teacher’s characteristics have the biggest or largest impact on student learning inside of schools. The research shows that school leaders influence teachers such as with their type of their instructional leadership style they should develop trust and professional community. Majority of principal’s instructional leadership action is focused on the teachers through direct interaction such as observations and feedback (Rigby, 2014). The three largest instructional leadership research found that there was an assumption that the primary role of the principle is that of instructional leader how it is conceptualized and what it looks
Steers, T. M., Mowday, R. T., & Shapiro, D. L. (2004). Introduction to Special Topic Forum: The Future of Work Motivation Theory. The Academy of Management Review, 29 (3), 379-387.
John C. Maxwell is spot on when he says “Leadership makes a difference.” Not only does leadership make a difference, it is the difference between success and failure, especially when it comes to a school. Granted Maxwell is more of business person, his knowledge, wisdom, and experience can easily translate into any setting, especially the education field. After reading Maxwell’s book, I sat down with my mentor and discussed a few of these nuggets of Leadership Gold.
Ever since the beginning of Organizational Psychology, work motivation has been a big topic of discussion and research. Based off of what I learned in class lectures, motivation is a complex force that drives people to behave in certain ways. Motivation is an effort expenditure that energizes, directs, and sustains, however, it is not the same thing as performance or ability. Over the course of this discussion, I have formed a variety of ideas about workplace motivation and have better equipped myself to define what I believe creates a motivated, productive, and engaged workforce. Looking at all of the different motivational theories, I believe Herzberg’s two-factor theory, job characteristics theory, the equity theory, the equity theory,
Thomas Sergiovanni (2015) describes three essential dimensions of leadership as “the heart, head, and hand of leadership.” The heart describes those characteristics within the school leader that reflect personal “beliefs, values, and dreams.” The head of leadership refers to the practice of teaching and educating. The hand of leadership reflects actions taken by school leaders with respect to management behaviors. (p. 5) Within these elements, there is room for personal choice in how leadership is practiced and it is incumbent on new principals to find an individual leadership style that responds to the uniqueness of each school.
Motivation is the force that transforms and uplifts people to be productive and perform in their jobs. Maximizing employee’s motivation is a necessary and vital to successfully accomplish the organization’s targets and objectives. However, this is a considerable challenge to any organizations managers, due to the complexity of motivation and the fact that, there is no ready made solution or an answer to what motivates people to work well (Mullins,2002).
Keeping workers motivated in today workplace can be not just a job, but also an adventure. In many organizations this is a challenge because the workplace is made up of a diverse cultural environment. Managers are still the driving force for any business and the responsibility and demand to ac...
Marston, Cam. (2007). Motivating the “what’s in it for me?” workforce. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.