Roman History Final Exam
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Fordham University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
MISC
Subject
Political Science
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
8
Uploaded by HighnessWolverinePerson1061
Understanding Historical Change: Rome
Final Exam Questions.
Please choose 20 out of the following questions, and write a minimum of one
substantial paragraph response (5 to 7 sentences) for each.
1)
Could the Senate have prevented the formation of the First Triumvirate?
What was the effect of the course of action which the Senate ultimately
embarked on? The Senate may have avoided the establishment of the First Triumvirate by
addressing the Republic's underlying political and social issues. The Senate's
failure to adjust to changing circumstances and its aversion to sharing power
with growing political forces contributed to the development of the Triumvirate,
which included Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus. Instead of tolerating ambitious
leaders like Caesar, the Senate's attempts to limit their influence and retain
conventional power structures contributed to the development of the
Triumvirate. This strategy resulted in a breakdown in confidence and a power
vacuum, which the Triumvirs exploited. Finally, the Senate's incapacity to
interact with altering dynamics and its dogmatic approach to governing aided
the formation of a new power structure that played an important part in the final
transition from Republic to Empire.
2) What criteria did Rome apply in determining the status of subject
communities on the Italian peninsula in the first several centuries of its
expansion?
Rome utilized a variety of diplomatic, military, and judicial means to decide the
status of subject villages on the Italian peninsula in the early stages of its
development. The notion of "civitas sine suffragio" offered allied villages some
level of Roman citizenship without allowing them the ability to vote. These
villages frequently supplied Rome with troops and resources while remaining
politically submissive. Those who completely assimilated into the Roman state,
either via military service or other contributions, were awarded full Roman
citizenship. The criteria for deciding status were based on the community's
strategic and economic worth, as well as Rome's need for friends and men. This
tiered structure allowed Rome to keep control of its growing borders while also
giving incentives for collaboration and cooperation.
3)
Could any of the short reigns of 69 AD have been successful? What could the
emperors have done differently to secure their regimes?
The Year of the Four Emperors in 69 AD was characterized by a series of brief
and turbulent reigns. While success would have been difficult for any of the
emperors given the political volatility of the time, several moves may have
theoretically guaranteed their empires. Galba's choice to disregard the
Praetorian Guard's expectations resulted in his demise. Before opposing
Vitellius, Otho, who governed briefly after Galba, might have cemented his
position by building stronger alliances and obtaining greater military backing.
Vitellius, the third emperor that year, may have concentrated on administrative
reforms and mending military ties. The final winner, Vespasian, achieved victory
by relying on his military prowess and ability to create coalitions, something the
previous emperors lacked. To manage the complicated and turbulent political
context, any of these brief reigns would have required a combination of strong
military backing, political skill, and successful government.
4)
What features of Roman republican politics strike you as the most important
for understanding why the system collapsed and led to the institution of
monarchy?
Several significant variables in the Roman Republic's political framework
affected the breakdown of the Roman Republic and the establishment of a
monarchy. Power disputes between the Senate and numerous generals, many of
whom had their own private armies, diminished the Senate's traditional
authority and harmed the validity of Republican institutions. Social unrest and
political disintegration were exacerbated by growing socioeconomic gaps and
land allocation difficulties. Furthermore, the disintegration of political
conventions, as demonstrated by Sulla's march on Rome and Julius Caesar's
crossing of the Rubicon, damaged the Republic's stability. The lack of a system
for peacefully transferring power and resolving disagreements, along with the
rise of ambitious leaders, cleared the way for the monarchy to be established as
a means of maintaining order and stability in the face of escalating instability.
5)
What evidence is there that Hadrian’s elevation was a fraud?
Hadrian came to the throne following Trajan's death in August 117 AD. Trajan,
his predecessor, was a respected and successful military administrator. Trajan,
on the other hand, left several problems and potential challenges about
succession unanswered. Trajan's closest and most trusted counselors, most
notably his wife Plotina, were also involved in Hadrian's succession. Plotina, who
had a strong influence on her husband, is supposed to have played a key role in
Hadrian's ascension to the throne following Trajan's death. Despite the fact that
Trajan issued no official directives, Plotina's influence most certainly led to
Hadrian being regarded as the true heir. Following that, three Roman
ambassadors perished, casting significant doubt on his survival.
6)
Who was responsible for starting Rome’s worst civil war: Caesar, Pompey, or
the optimates
?
A complicated combination of causes involving Julius Caesar, Pompey, and
numerous political groups, especially the optimates, triggered Rome's deadliest
civil war, known as Caesar's Civil War. The competition for power and influence
inside the Roman state fostered the tensions between Caesar and Pompey. While
both parties contributed to the battle, the efforts of the optimates, a conservative
Senate party, were critical. The optimates' opposition to political reforms and
attempts to obstruct Caesar's ascension to power drove him to cross the Rubicon
and challenge the Senate's authority. While it is difficult to pinpoint a single
group accountable for launching the civil war, power conflicts involving Caesar,
Pompey, and the optimates all had a role in kindling the battle that ultimately led
to the Roman Republic's demise.
7)
What aspects of Catiline’s conspiracy of 63 BC are the most illuminating for
the state of Roman Republican politics?
Catiline's 63 BC plot reveals deep-seated difficulties within Roman Republican
politics at the time. Catiline spearheaded a scheme to overthrow the Roman
authority by a violent insurrection. This gathering emphasized the rising
unhappiness among the lower classes, which is being driven by economic
inequality, corruption, and political marginalization. It exposed the magnitude of
social and economic turmoil that ambitious leaders might use to threaten the
established order. Furthermore, the Senate's reaction to the plot, which included
Cicero's famous remarks and the proclamation of a state of emergency,
underscored the difficulties in preserving stability within the Republican
framework. Catiline's plot showed the flaws in the Roman political system,
emphasizing the urgent need for reform and addressing the problems of the
underprivileged population.
8)
How did Rome measure up as a major power on the eve of its expansion
overseas, circa 270 BC? What advantages did it have for the coming
struggles?
Rome was already a strong power in the Mediterranean by 270 BC, with considerable geographical holdings and a well-trained military. Its rule over much of
the Italian peninsula offered a stable foundation for future growth. Rome's strengths
were a strong governance structure, effective administration, and the capacity to integrate conquered territory into its legal and political framework. Furthermore, Rome's military strength and organizational structure enabled it to project authority beyond its ever-expanding frontiers. Its alliance structure, as demonstrated by the Latin League, aided in gaining support from surrounding communities. The capacity of Rome to integrate new areas, extract resources, and maintain relative security inside its borders laid the groundwork for its ultimate international expansion and formation as a strong empire.
9)
How do you account for the instability of the third-century crisis? What
factors – political, economic, military, and social – were involved?
The third century crisis, which lasted roughly from 235 to 284 AD in the Roman
Empire, was caused by a mix of political, economic, military, and social causes.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
The repeated changes in leadership and the killing of emperors resulted in a lack
of political stability and competent government. Economic difficulties, such as
excessive inflation and currency debasement, destroyed the value of money and
led to financial insecurity. External invasions and internal warfare among army
factions damaged the empire's fortifications and disturbed order. Social
elements such as diminishing civic involvement and imperial loyalty also played
a role. These interconnected pressures generated a perfect storm of problems,
straining the empire's ability to sustain cohesiveness and stability.
10)To what degree did Roman political domination of Italy entail a cultural
domination of the peninsula?
Although the quantity of cultural impact varied among areas and groups, Roman governmental dominance in Italy did include a substantial degree of cultural influence. As Rome's influence grew, it tried to incorporate conquered lands into its cultural and societal standards. Roman law, language, and administrative systems were frequently incorporated, instilling a feeling of Roman identity in subjugated peoples. The spread of Roman architecture, religion, and other cultural features also
aided in the transmission of cultural impact. It is crucial to remember, however, that
local cultures and customs frequently coexisted with Roman practices. The degree of cultural dominance was determined by factors such as the length of Roman occupation, local groups' readiness to accept Roman customs, and the level of opposition to assimilation.
11)What factors in Vespasian’s pre-imperial career prepared him well for the
throne?
Vespasian's pre-imperial career was defined by a string of military victories, administrative expertise, and political insight that served him well in his ascension to the throne. During the Roman conquest of Britain and the Jewish Revolt, he established himself as a skilled and devoted military commander, demonstrating his
leadership and strategic abilities. His administration of provinces such as Africa and Judaea developed his administrative skills and provided him with insight into the complexities of administering various territory. Vespasian's reputation for financial honesty and efficiency helped him gain favor with both the Senate and the Roman people. Furthermore, his ability to manage the complicated web of Roman politics, forge strategic alliances, and preserve stability in times of crisis made him a viable contender for the imperial crown.
12)On what criteria was Roman society during the Republic stratified into social
classes? What was the function of clientela
?
During the Republic, Roman society was stratified largely by money and
ancestry. The senatorial aristocracy was the highest class, followed by the
equestrian class (equites), and last the common citizens (plebeians). Ancestry
and familial ties, as well as property ownership and political activity, all played
important roles in establishing one's social rank. In exchange for loyalty and
political support, affluent and powerful persons (patrons) offered assistance and
resources to those of lesser rank (clients) through the clientela system. This was
a mutually beneficial arrangement in which patrons earned power and votes
from their clients while clients obtained security and support from their patrons.
By establishing networks of dependency and reciprocity, the clientela system
contributed to the Roman Republic's social cohesiveness and political stability.
13)What was the outline of the Boudiccan revolt, its causes, main actors, and
effects?
The Boudiccan insurrection, also known as the Iceni revolt, occurred in Roman
Britain between AD 60 and 61. It was headed by Queen Boudicca of the Iceni
tribe, who, together with other downtrodden Celtic tribes, rose up against
Roman power in response to harsh treatment, high taxes, and abuse of
Boudicca's family. The insurrection destroyed numerous Roman settlements,
including London and Colchester, and caused high deaths among Roman
soldiers. The Roman ruler Gaius Suetonius Paulinus finally overcame Boudicca's
soldiers. The insurrection emphasized the conflict between Roman colonialism
and indigenous cultures, as well as the possible implications of Roman abuse of
conquered peoples. It momentarily disturbed Roman power in Britain and
influenced Roman attitudes toward the region.
14)Could Sulla’s restoration have been successful at stemming the tide of the
Roman Revolution, and restoring Senatorial dominance? If so, how? If not,
why not?
Sulla's restoration, characterized by his dictatorship and a series of prescriptions
aimed at eliminating his political opponents, attempted to reestablish senate
control and limit the strength of popular groupings. While it provided some
order at first, it was eventually unable to avert the fundamental difficulties that
sparked the Roman Revolution. Sulla's ruthless techniques alienated many
people, resulting in severe societal conflicts. His attempt to consolidate senate
authority and roll back some reforms was greeted with opposition from those
who profited from the measures. Furthermore, Sulla's actions established a
precedent for using military force to obtain political power, inspiring future
leaders such as Julius Caesar. The underlying socioeconomic imbalances and
power battles remained, ultimately contributing to the Republic's demise. As a
result, while Sulla's restoration provided temporary stability, it was unable to
address the underlying reasons of the Republic's downfall.
15)What similarities and differences can be identified in the histories of the First
and Second Triumvirates? What, in particular, do the differences tell us
about the progress of the Roman Revolution?
The alliances created by strong Roman politicians to challenge the existing
political order were known as the First and Second Triumvirates. They
attempted to strengthen their own positions while balancing the Senate's
authority. There were, however, significant disparities. The First Triumvirate
(Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus) functioned informally and without legal
authority, depending on personal ties. The Lex Titia granted official recognition
to the Second Triumvirate (Octavian, Antony, and Lepidus). The Second
Triumvirate was even more clear in its goal of removing political opponents,
which resulted in the proscriptions and killings of several senators. These
distinctions reflect the changing character of Roman politics throughout the
Revolution. The more direct use of force by the Second Triumvirate, as well as its
long-term influence on the Republic's institutions, underlined the escalation of
conflict and the disintegration of conventional institutions.
16)If Spartacus’ goal in rebelling was freedom, why did he not escape Italy when
he had the chance? While Spartacus' ultimate objective was independence, his refusal to flee Italy
despite several opportunities can be linked to a number of causes. The first goal
of Spartacus was to lead his slave army back to their homelands. However, when
the insurrection gathered traction, his soldiers grew in size, and their goals
switched to challenging the Roman state itself. Spartacus most certainly felt that
by striking at the core of Roman authority, they might rally more slaves to their
cause and perhaps topple the slave system entirely. Furthermore, fleeing Italy
would have meant confronting unknown territory, a possible shortage of
resources, and the problem of maintaining discipline and coherence among his
different supporters. Even though Spartacus remained in Italy, he was able to
use local resources and maintain his increasing armies even though ultimately
led to his defeat by Crassus' legions.
17)What eccentricities can you detect in Hadrian’s character and behavior?
Hadrian's personality and demeanor were distinguished by a number of oddities
and distinguishing characteristics. He was well-known for his love of travel,
having spent most of his reign touring the empire's provinces and regions. This
was unusual conduct for an emperor, and it demonstrated his willingness to be
intimately involved in the administration and government of remote areas.
Hadrian's enthusiasm in the building led to the creation of several large
structures, including the well-known Hadrian's Wall in Britain and the Pantheon
in Rome. He was also fascinated by Greek culture and embraced Greek practices,
which contrasted with the traditional Roman norms of previous emperors.
Hadrian's adoption and deification of Antinous, a young man with whom he had
a strong connection. After his death, raised eyebrows and generated speculation
about the nature of their bond.
18) Outline some of the discrepancies between the “myth of Masada,” and what we
know from archaeology and historical analysis actually took place there in 73 AD.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
The "myth of Masada" refers to the widely held belief that during the Jewish-Roman War in 73 AD, all 960 Jewish defenders at Masada chose mass suicide over conquest by Roman soldiers. Archaeological data and historical study, however, have found several inconsistencies in this account. While excavations at Masada have shown signs of a Roman siege and devastation, the details of the defenders' fate are more complicated. Some evidence shows that a considerable number of defenders may have surrendered or evaded arrest rather than committing suicide as a group. Masada's tale has been romanticized through time to represent a story of resistance and martyrdom, but the historical reality is likely more complicated and multifaceted.
19) What, in your opinion, were the three most important milestones in the collapse
of the Republic before Caesar’s rise to prominence?
The Gracchi Brothers' reforms and subsequent killings, the Social War, and Sulla's dictatorship were all significant events in the breakdown of the Roman Republic prior to Caesar's ascendancy. Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus, the Gracchi Brothers, proposed agrarian and social reforms that challenged the senatorial class's monopoly over land and resources. Their killings underlined the risk of violent conflict as a result of efforts to alleviate social inequities. The Social War (91-88 BC),
fueled by Italian allies' desire for Roman citizenship, uncovered schisms across classes and regions and showed the flaws in the old political system. Sulla's dictatorship (82-81 BC) set a precedent for the use of military force to take political power and emphasized the breakdown of customary values and political stability.
20) In what ways was Caesar’s career and dominance a natural outgrowth of what
had came before it in the Roman Revolution, and in what ways did it mark a radical
departure from precedent?
Caesar's career and domination were a natural extension of the Roman Revolution's events and power conflicts. Caesar, like previous leaders, used military victories to obtain political power, a strategy reminiscent of Marius and Sulla. His alliance with Pompey and Crassus paralleled the First Triumvirate's alliances. Caesar's crossing of
the Rubicon and declaration of himself as dictator for life, on the other hand, constituted a significant shift. His consolidation of power and open challenge to the Senate established a new precedent for authoritarian leadership. Caesar's actions signaled a trend toward centralized power and personal supremacy, eroding the republican values that had long been at the foundation of Rome's democratic structure.