Ancient Roman politician and army general Marcus Antonius (Marc Antony in English; 83–30 B.C.E), was an ally of Julius Caesar. Although Antony played a significant role in turning Rome from a republic to an empire, his efforts have been overshadowed by Caesar’s achievements as the head general. A direct descendant of the great Roman Emperors Caligula, Claudius, and Nero, Marc Antony was destined to be a leader. Much of Ancient Roman history revolves around Julius Caesar’s dictatorship—and everything seemed to cease after his assassination. After Caesar’s death, Marc Antony actually went on to lead much of the Roman Empire before his suicide with Cleopatra in 30 B.C.E.
Plutarch, a Greek biographer and essayist, was quoted to saying that …show more content…
This helped empower not only the public, but also helped Antony bring a stable and competent rule all whilst having the public support. He set up the Second Triumvirate and brought Egypt closely into the fold with Rome. Here, Egypt, being so vital because of its grain production, was a sort of necessity to form an alliance with. Further, without Antony, there could have been a turn back to a possible Republican style government. Although he did have a disagreement with Octavian, Antony supported a Caesar-style government, which was an …show more content…
However, it was still impossible for an empire to be entirely peaceful, as the empire could be attacked from the outside, or through their conquest to expand their territories, inevitably leading to wars. In addition, an empire would be more prosperous due to its ability to function as an extensive free trade zone. Trading during the ancient times would mostly require the people to travel long distances, but with a well-established empire, the fear of being attacked during a long distance trading would be reduced significantly. Furthermore, within a republic, there would be many city-states, which then would require taxes to be paid during trading. In addition to that, different city-states would have different laws as well. But with an empire, there were no taxes and different laws implemented during trading, therefore it would lead to a significant increase in trade, resulting in the abundance of
Plutarch, a Greek biographer and essayist, was quoted to saying that …show more content…
This helped empower not only the public, but also helped Antony bring a stable and competent rule all whilst having the public support. He set up the Second Triumvirate and brought Egypt closely into the fold with Rome. Here, Egypt, being so vital because of its grain production, was a sort of necessity to form an alliance with. Further, without Antony, there could have been a turn back to a possible Republican style government. Although he did have a disagreement with Octavian, Antony supported a Caesar-style government, which was an …show more content…
However, it was still impossible for an empire to be entirely peaceful, as the empire could be attacked from the outside, or through their conquest to expand their territories, inevitably leading to wars. In addition, an empire would be more prosperous due to its ability to function as an extensive free trade zone. Trading during the ancient times would mostly require the people to travel long distances, but with a well-established empire, the fear of being attacked during a long distance trading would be reduced significantly. Furthermore, within a republic, there would be many city-states, which then would require taxes to be paid during trading. In addition to that, different city-states would have different laws as well. But with an empire, there were no taxes and different laws implemented during trading, therefore it would lead to a significant increase in trade, resulting in the abundance of