The text begins with the death of Augustus followed by Tiberius’s reign, a period of Roman Republic. The Senate played a huge part in this aristocratic government, leading to competition for control of the Republic; With the assassination of Julius Caesar, Augustus began to modify the system. He discussed important matters with other senators although it was obvious that only his decisions counted. Tacitus, however, decided to write about the period after Augustus’s death, when the rule of Tiberius, Gaius, Claudius and Nero were falsely outlined.
Tacitus, author of Tacitus the Annals of Imperial Rome, was known to be a Roman public speaker and official. He was born in southern Gaul and later in his life, he was trained to work in administrative …show more content…
It starts off with the introduction of Augustus, how his rule was unchallenged. Tacitus questions Augustus’s rule through the actions portrayed, “Indeed, he attracted everybody’s goodwill by the enjoyable gift of peace. Then he gradually pushed ahead and absorbed the functions of the senate, the officials, and even the law” (page 32). There is an admiration for the old senatorial system where censors and the senate itself could influence the decision of the ruler. Augustus’s actions proved to cause corruption as the government became engulfed with violence and bribery, leading to uncertainty amongst people. He displays a large sense of vanity because not only does he takes advantage of the weary public, but he also plans ahead to continue this one man rule. The text then states that the successors Augustus had chosen happened to die, leaving only Tiberius to succeed. There is a sense of uneasiness within Tiberius’s rule, especially since it started off with the assassination of Agrippa Postumus. However, he ignored the issue, deterring the blame towards Augustus, “Tiberius said nothing about the matter in the senate. He pretended that the orders came from Augustus,” (Page 34). In the scenario, Tiberius proves to be deceitful and unjust. It put into question how much control an individual should have. Because no one stopped him, Tiberius was
Tacitus, author of Tacitus the Annals of Imperial Rome, was known to be a Roman public speaker and official. He was born in southern Gaul and later in his life, he was trained to work in administrative …show more content…
It starts off with the introduction of Augustus, how his rule was unchallenged. Tacitus questions Augustus’s rule through the actions portrayed, “Indeed, he attracted everybody’s goodwill by the enjoyable gift of peace. Then he gradually pushed ahead and absorbed the functions of the senate, the officials, and even the law” (page 32). There is an admiration for the old senatorial system where censors and the senate itself could influence the decision of the ruler. Augustus’s actions proved to cause corruption as the government became engulfed with violence and bribery, leading to uncertainty amongst people. He displays a large sense of vanity because not only does he takes advantage of the weary public, but he also plans ahead to continue this one man rule. The text then states that the successors Augustus had chosen happened to die, leaving only Tiberius to succeed. There is a sense of uneasiness within Tiberius’s rule, especially since it started off with the assassination of Agrippa Postumus. However, he ignored the issue, deterring the blame towards Augustus, “Tiberius said nothing about the matter in the senate. He pretended that the orders came from Augustus,” (Page 34). In the scenario, Tiberius proves to be deceitful and unjust. It put into question how much control an individual should have. Because no one stopped him, Tiberius was