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.
The military strength and wealth he gained through his conquests in Gaul would pave his way to a successful career. He was so successful in his campaign that he became famous for his phrase “I came, I saw, I conquered” and the modern historian H.H Scullard even describes him as a man with “outstanding abilities”. Thus the Gallic Wars played a significant role in Julius Caesar’s Career, both politically and militarily. Caesar’s reputation as a General, who is considered to be more prominent than Pompey the great, was not comprehended until the Gallic Wars. Instead he was known to be one of the ablest orators and “most adroit politicians of the day”[F.B Marsh] and his military skills were most likely not rated very highly.
His attempt to revive the Roman Empire was a successful one, both in terms of power and longevity. Justinian’s legacy would be that of the most successful Emperor of the Byzantine Empire. The empire expanded under Justinian because of his ability to pick exceptional advisors. The men that he gave power to owed this to him, and were very loyal. Despite many periods of financial and military crisis where the empire faced threats from all sides, it always managed to come through, often due to the Emperor’s advisors.
Owen Connelly’s book “Blundering to Glory” is about a brilliant man without limits, having a gift from God never seen before, the greatest commander of all time…Napoleon Bonaparte. “Blundering to Glory” goes into great details covering Napoleon’s childhood to his quick rise to fame. Napoleon Bonaparte had a great impact on most of Europe. He was a “scrambler” with no sense of when to stop. The author also puts a lot of emphasis on Napoleon’s mistakes or “blunders.” He had many victories because he never stopped attacking his enemies by using the ignorance of his enemy’s commanders.
Joseph Jordan Nero Debate Paper Roman History The reign of Nero has been generally accepted to be a period of insanity and darkness in the Roman empire, however there is also new light being shed on this period of Roman history. It is true that Nero was a determined and violent man who was willing to smash any obstacle in his path in order to secure his throne, but did this necessarily make him any worse than his predecessors? If anything, atleast for a period, Nero was one of the more humane Roman leaders. Politics, whether it is in ancient Rome or even in the modern day, is a dirty game that demands certain reprehensible actions in extraordinary situations. The company one keeps plays a huge role in a leader’s actions as well, when
In fact, he carefully pieced together a patchwork of powers that allowed him to be an absolute ruler and yet avoid the hatred Caesar aroused as dictator. In Latin, the name Augustus implies both political authority and religious respect. The Romans had for some time called Octavian imperator, a title once awarded to victorious generals that soon became associated with the ruler and thus led to the English word emperor. In 27 BC he was first called princeps (leading man of the state), which later became the official title of the Roman emperors. His imperium, or military authority, extended throughout the empire and was greater than the power of any other governor or
Livy is also very quick to complement Hannibal and tell the reader just how great a leader he was. This is done so that when one looks back at Hannibal they say that if Hannibal was such a great leader Rome must have been far superior to be able to defeat him. This sense of modesty was how the Romans were supposed to treat the Carthaginian General but they did not. It is very interesting to see that all the evil qualities Livy talks about that are in direct contradiction roman were said to be traits of Hannibal, but for the most part were actually how the Romans themselves had acted. Hannibal’s actions constituted such a threat to the Roman way of life not because of the physical threat to the Romans but because he did the impossible and made it to the gates of the city of Rome.
Alexander, the intelligent, tactical and ambitious young man was the greatest military leader of all time because he led his army to many great victories without suffering devastating amounts of casualties. Alexander was a very intelligent. First of all, he was tutored at a very young age by Aristotle who already educated his mind about warfare. Aristotle educated Alexander in such a way that he would think like an adult by the age of 15. He made sure Alexander strived more than he average teenager boy.
Roman strategies allowed Rome to control their towns with ease. The Roman imperial army was undefeated in any major campaigns. Records have even shown Roman feats when they were outnumbered. The soldiers’ desire for recognition and promotion played a big factor in this of course. The soldiers would charge off to fight by enemy forts afraid of what the other men would think of them.
Here Brutus illustrates his love Rome, “not that I loved Caesar less, but I loved Rome more” (citation). Brutus explains to the crowd that he did love Caesar, but he loved Rome more and he had slain Caesar because he thought it would be for the better of Rome. Not only did these men use much emotion and logic in their eulogies, but they also use ethnical reasoning