I know you might be shock at this news but I was honestly doing it for the better of Rome. To this very day I still think that we should have killed Mark Antony along with Caesar. As we both know, Antony was up to no good. He turned to romans against us, started a war against, and let’s not forget, he tried to kill us both. If you would have listen to me, none of this would have happen to us and would have been living in Rome, where to people loved and looked us and you would still have Portia.
You’?ve been stubborn and unfamiliar with me, your friend who loves you.|Cassius to Brutus| Cicero| ? ?A unambitious senator|Indeed, it’?s a strange time. But men tend to interpret things however suits them and totally miss the actual meaning of the things themselves. Is Caesar visiting the Capitol tomorrow?|Cicero to Casca| Cinna| ? ?A man of group of Cassius|Yes, they are.
Despite his selfish reign, Augustus is collectively referred to as one of the most dominant and ideal leaders in history due to the obvious facts that he: unified a powerless Senate, rebuilt the Capitol, and most importantly expanded the Roman Empire. However, further examination of Augustus’s personally and selfishly written deeds reveal quite the opposite when acknowledging the murder of his uncle. Through this acknowledgement, it is evident Augustus did not evolve into the ideal leader portrayed throughout the “Deeds of Divine Augustus”, but on the contrary, a vengeful dictator seeking world domination found through retaliation against his Uncle’s
Julius Caesar, a Roman general and statesman, served on the First Triumvirate that ruled the Roman Republic during 60 B.C. Although he was popular among the common people and also a great and outstanding military commander, he wasn’t a good leader to govern Rome due to his ambition and inner-weakness. One of the main reasons that Julius Caesar was not a good leader was his ambition. He was a corrupted tyrant, lusting for power. Becoming a governor in his region of Rome wasn’t good enough, he wanted to be crowned king and serve as a dictator for life, something that Rome didn’t have for five hundred years.
It also included no principles governing nature. The reason they may have took on Legalism is because the Hans probably could not think of their own way of governing. The Romans on the other hand, had senates, consuls and elections. They even shared politics to the patricians and showed interest in the people. One similarity they did have was that they both knew that their central government or emperor could not rule the amount of land conquered in their empire.
The Conquest of Gaul Gaius Julius Caesar was born 100 B.C. in Rome to the impoverished patrician Julian Clan, and know knew controversy early age. Through this conflicts he slowly but surely throughout his lifetime worked his way up the political ladder, becoming Consul and finally Dictator Perpeteus, or Dictator for life. He is deemed as one of the most influential political and military leaders of all time, a highly intelligent man and an exceptional orator. Acquiring this absolute power however, was no easy feat, and Caesar had well equipped himself through previous expeditions of Europe and the ancient world with all the resources necessary to gain power in Ancient Rome.
Lastly due to his strong and rough ruling tactics when in control of the empire, he was exiled. In Napoleons eyes, his empire was always incomplete and his constant goal was to take over more land at all costs. This goal lead to one of his costly mistakes of the Continental System. The Continental System was Napoleons attempt to blockade Britain and stop all communication between them and other countries. In turn this would destroy Britain commercially and their industrial economy allowing Napoleon to take over Britain however did not work and left Napoleon worse off then he was before.
Antony states if Caesar would have been ambitious he would have not cared for those people being held captive. Antony proved that Caesar himself appealed to the censorship of the people when he said “When that the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept;” (99). Antony showed that Caesar was sympathetic towards the people, because they believed he was ambitious. His rhetorical technique emphasized the fact that the people were oblivious to his acts of sympathy precisely because they did not truly know him. He also states that Caesar was not ambitious because “[He] thrice presented him with a kingly crown, Which he did thrice refuse.
They basically had no status whatsoever when it came to a place in this world. I also believe that Slavery was very close to becoming a part of what would be known as genocide. I believe that if the whites could have made every black person a slave they would have, and I believe that they would all have died from diseases, committing suicide, bleeding out to death, beating them to death, killing them because they disobeyed. I think what was stopping them was that in some places it was illegal. I am sure some people thank God for that because slavery very well could have taken over the world.
"I rather tell thee what is to be feared then what I fear, for always I am Caesar" (1.2.-), he cared about everyone else before himself, how noble. Clearly, his death was an awful crime committed by jealous men. It was unfair, and not right by any