Simularities In Life

Can you imagine a Rome being two to three times the size of Boise? With 500,000 citizens Rome was twice the size of Boise, and at that time was the ruling city in the world. With all of those people of course the living situation would be less then adequate. With most people living in apartment type building prone to fires. With no sewage system much of the waste was just thrown on the streets. The smell and sight is just unimaginable. In the home life the father ruled like most would figure. However it is interesting to learn that the father would obtain any assets or wealth earned by his sons as long as he lived. This of course would cause quite a bit of drama and betrayal. Women it seems were given much more freedom then that of their Greek predecessors. They were able to own property and speak their minds. Many had a direct influence on their husband’s political careers. In the early years most of the education was obtained at home, but after the Macedonian Wars the Romans were exposed to Greek liberal arts. Much of Rome's art and culture is derived from the Greeks. This is not surprising however because the Greeks were generations ahead of their time. As for slavery much of the Roman economy was based around slavery, and when manpower decreased this did not boat well for the Rome. Some say this was a significant factor in the Roman decline. That is similar to the early United States basing much of the economy around slavery, and if not for the industrial revolution we too might have not made it.

Hannibal the Great

Hannibal as it turned out was a militaristic genius who despite of being severely outmanned scored a number of victories, and in doing so scared the living daylights out of the Romans. His ability to lead and transport an army to safety was uncanny. How he was able to move that amount of men and elephants over the Alps is unthinkable. The Alps are a very harsh and unforgiving environment, and well never really know how Hannibal and his brother Hasdrubal managed to scale those mountains. It must be a family secrete. Although Hannibal was eventually unvictoriouse his legacy preceded him. He was particularly known for his cruelty, and this was evident when he made the order to hamstrung the fleeing Romans at Cannae. I have an affinity for Hannibal as it turns out. What he did was truly remarkable, and to have that lasting impression on the later Roman generations speaks volumes of his ability.

Rome Conquered for Security

It was interesting to read that Rome did not expand for greed but for protection. If they felt threatened by a neighbor they conquered them, but it is what takes place after the victory that is most astonishing. In order to keep relative peace with the newly acquired people and land Rome granted them certain rights and citizenship. Of course they still took taxes and men for their Army but for the most part they let the conquered areas or cities keep relative autonomy. They even go one step further by building a state of the art road system that assured the quick and smooth transportation of soldier and supplies to conquered areas in case of a sudden uprising. I believe it was the actions Rome took after conquering them that insured their power and stability for all of those years. By staying some what civil and intuitive Rome was able to utilize the new territories and they were able to spend more time worrying about the next frontier and not the previously conquered one. This genius involved with most successful empires is often overlooked or under appreciated. In this case I was stunned to see the impact of such a policy, and I am interested to see if future empires followed the Romans order. I am willing to bet that if those future expanding nations and empires utilized this same approach they too had a successful and lasting rule.

Wikipedia Article Analysis #1

“Battle of the Allia”
This article begins by explaining the Battle of Allia, and how Rome would eventually succumb to the Gaul’s due to this costly initial defeat. The article goes on by examining the after affects of Rome falling and ultimately the arrival of Camillus and his army signifying the recapturing of Rome. The article concludes with a brief summary regarding the Romans advancement in weapons, military organization, and important barricades. Also at the end is a very interesting story about how Rome never forgot the disgrace and humility that came with their city being sacked, and so each year on the anniversary of the battle they crucified guard dogs on the Capitoline Hill as Capitoline Geese watched seeing as their honking was the only call of warning.

1. 1,249 words
2. Gaul’s Sack Rome, exact title “Battle of the Allia”
3. I was unable to find aDisambiguation page.
4. The discussion page is a space where outsiders can voice their opinions and disagreements with the article. With this particular article there were questions regarding accurate dates, facts, and sufficient sources.
5. There have been 16 changes made to this particular article. The first being on November 25, 2006, and the last being June 2, 2008.
6. 3 external links are provided.
7. 3 references are provided.
8. There are no articles for further reading provided.

Regarding interest to the subject I would recommend this article. It gives a brief but precise account of this particular battle. Although with the lack of sources it is difficult to consider the information factual, if not reliable. With all that aside however the article will tell you what you need to know without watering it down in fluff.

Persian War and Greek Philosophy

The Persian War initially gave the impression of David verse Goliath. The Persian army outnumbered the Greeks 3 to 1 at any battle; including Marathon and Thermopylae. It was interesting to see the genius military strategy employed by the Athenian general Miltiades at the battle at Marathon. I have never heard of purposefully retreating in the center of the line in order to spread your opponents line thin and attacking their flank. I feel the risk reward factor in such a maneuver takes supreme confidence by the commander. You would think with such a monumental victory Miltiades would have become a more recognizable figure in Greek history. The movie "300" is an occurring theme in classmate’s blogs, and many students are disappointed in the many inaccuracies portrayed in the movie. I also agree that the movie emphasized fiction in the historical fiction genre; however after reading about the battle at Thermopylae the movie did a great job of portraying the bravery and tenacity of the Spartan soldiers. The Spartan soldiers could be compared to the modern day Navy Seals or Special Forces. Their fighting skills were far superior to any other city-state or empire at the time, and this of course could be attributed to their emphasis and focus on militarism in their culture. The story of how after Leonidas was killed the remaining Spartans fought their way to his body and carried him while fighting their way back to the main line. The trust and bond shared by those soldiers must have been unimaginable.
Much of what I know about Greek philosophy was learned in a high school history class, so you could say that while reading about the pre-Socratic philosophers of Miletus and the Sophist I was a little overwhelmed. It was interesting to see the progression of schooling from the Sophist to Plato and eventually the academies opened by both Plato and Aristotle. The Sophist movement reminded me of law school, and the ability of the students to talk and argue their way out of anything. With Socrates came the true evolution of thought and study. He revolutionized the way people thought, and approach the world. His dedication to his beliefs was so strong that he chose death over hypocrisy. As the years passed many great thinkers came after him including Plato and Aristotle, but little showed the dedication and true belief in what he was saying much like Socrates did. Aristotle faced also faced a charge of impiety, but was quick to flee and not face the music as they say. It’s ironic how Galileo and Aristotle shared similar beliefs, and like Aristotle when convicted Galileo recant his beliefs much like Aristotle might have done if in a similar situation.