Hi folks! What’s your impression of the transformation of the principate during this era? What does it mean to be Roman in these times, for those of the city and those of the provinces?

I chose this article because I was honestly interested in how someone would if at all address an emperor or senate. I was assuming that this speech would be of someone being unhappy with their emperor but this speech is actually Pliny emphasizing why Trajan’s is the ideal ruler. He shares so many nice things to support his thought like how, how sincere Trajan is and how his rule will restore liberty and justice to Rome. Pliny also brings up past rulers and how they thought themselves to be above the law and selfish. One quote from this excerpt is "But you we follow fearlessly and happily, wherever you call us. You order us to be free: we will be." -- to me this shows the people's devotion to the this new ruler and how they accept him as he is. Overall this speech is a celebration and overall devotion to Trajan in the most humble way this is also very straight forward and honest and just reflects peace.

I decided to read Strabo’s account of Roman Egypt since I’m interested in finding out more about what life was like for the regular person in the provinces, and the species of plants and animals that were once native to it in the distant past. It was a time when the North African Elephant still walked the earth from Morocco to Sudan, and the unsuspecting traveler might get mauled by a Barbary lion while traversing the Sinai Desert. A passage that caught my attention was the one in which Strabo mentions a kind of stork called an ibis that could be found on every street in Alexandria. He adds that, “In some respects they are useful; in others troublesome. They are useful, because they pick up all sorts of small animals and the offal thrown out of the butchers’ and cooks’ shops. They are troublesome because they devour everything, are dirty, and with difficulty prevented from polluting in every way what is clean and what is not given to them”. This passage is important because it grants us a snapshot into the experience of the regular person living in Alexandria as well as a reminder of the persistent problem of poor sanitation in Roman cities. How much of an impact did Roman occupation of Egypt make on people's lives?

I chose the reading, "The reign of Marcus Aurelius" by Eutropius because he is commonly referred to as the last of the 5 good emperors. I was interested in discovering more about what he did during his reign to earn him that reputation. This excerpt from the text, "He himself carried on a war with the Marcomanni, which was greater than any in the memory of man (in the way of wars with the Germans)—so that it was compared to the Punic Wars, for it was exceedingly formidable, and in it whole armies were lost; especially as in this reign" stood out to me because it describes something that is generally considered bad for a ruler to experience during their reign, the loss/ deaths of entire armies, comparable to such. disastrous losses Rome experienced in the Punic Wars. It somewhat contradicts this idea of Marcus Aurelius being a good emperor. Eutropius was trying to communicate the magnificence of Marcus Aurelius as a person, but also showing the political reality associated with governing an empire as although Aurelius is described as kind, gentle, and generous his entire reign was filled with non stop wars and death showing the duality of a "great" emperor. This text shows us that during this time although it was an incredibly hostile environment in Rome to govern, Roman virtue was still capable of prevailing and although it was not as common as it once was, there were still leaders that desired to carry on such virtuous characteristics. This reading relates to other ones specifically with regards to philosophy such as stoicism sine Aurelius was a passionate stoic often described as the "Philosopher- king". My question is are leaders judged by their character more than their political circumstances? We see Marcus Aurelius being described as an amazing emperor due to his generous character despite the massive death toll during his reign due to both war and plague, yet emperors like Caligula were seen as incompetent due to his unstable character even though there was relatively less internal/ external conflict and death during his reign.

Which reading did you pick? If there’s a reason it interested you, what was it?

The reading I decided to read was Egypt under the Roman Empire. I wanted to read it because I wanted to know more about Egypt and how its people lived under them, as it was a country that wouldn't allow it and fight back.

What passage or detail in particular from this reading jumped out at you as you read through it?

I didn't expect Egypt to be as peaceful as it was described; I believed it was a mess from the people to the system they followed. 

What do you think the author was trying to communicate?

I believe the author, in a way, was trying to point out the peace in Egypt as well as the problems it still had, corruption within the country. 

In your opinion, what is this document telling us about the time and place it comes from?

The document is speaking of a more peaceful Egypt where no wars are happening, living in peace. 

What about this document seems to relate to, support, or even contradict our other readings about this time and place?

I can’t recall a document we have read that supports the reading, as we don’t talk as much about Egypt and what’s happening in their country. 

What would you like to find out more about? 

Has there ever been a revolt where Egypt's army fought back against Roman rule?

The reading I chose for this week was, On the Virtue of Antoninus Pius by his son, Marcus Aurelius. Antoninus is vastly different from other rulers we’ve learned about, he's fairer and doesn't resort to brutality like many rulers before him. Throughout the reading, Marcus portrays his father as a kind man who displayed the qualities of a true leader. A lot of what Marcus writes about Antoninus can be deemed biased due to his relationship with Antoninus but based on what we've learned about Antonius, Marcus’s image of his father correlates with how he is historically represented. Marcus writes, “He was not easily moved and tossed up and down, but loved to be constant, both in the same places and businesses; and after his great fits of headache he would return fresh and vigorous to his winter affairs.” This quote may highlight Antoninius’s disciplined personality, he was not portrayed as someone who was normally unpredictable. Hadrian most likely chose Antoninus as a suitable successor because he knew that due to his pragmatic nature, he'd uphold his effective system. 

For this week, I chose the reading Roman Educational Practices/ Various, it interested me to learn more about how education was viewed and practiced in the Roman Republic. In the reading I learned that education was highly valued in the Roman Republic, despite the absence of free public schools. One detail that stood out to me was when Horace shares his story of his father that prioritized his son's education by bringing him to Rome to study liberal arts. Horace emphasizes his father's constant guidance in his educational journey. Horace's father wanted to preserve his virtue as well as protect him which Horace was very grateful for. Also I feel like the author was trying to communicate the importance of local education and parental involvement. He believed children should be educated where they grew up under the guidance of their parents. Pliny writes a letter to Tacitus that suggests parents having control over the process of hiring teachers to prevent corruption and ensure the quality of education. This suggests that during that time, there was an emphasis on how much parents should be involved in their children's education. Pliny's approach highlighted his concerns about corruption in Rome.

I would like to learn more about what challenges might have existed in implementing this approach in the Roman Republic?

Also how did the emphasis on education in the Roman Republic influence the development of the Republic's political and social structures?

For this week's reading, I chose "The Reign of Marcus Aurelius" by Eutropius. The passage portrays Marcus Aurelius as a Roman Emperor celebrated for his humility, education, and philosophical approach to leadership. He treated everyone as equals and ruled with kindness. His reign was marked by a difficult conflict against the Marcomanni, which came with significant losses and a devastating plague. In a remarkable act of sacrifice, he sold his possessions to finance his soldiers instead of imposing additional taxes on the populace. Once victory was achieved, he allowed those who purchased his items to return them for refunds.

This reading is interesting as it underscores Marcus Aurelius's character and leadership style, often seen as an example of wisdom and virtue. His ability to balance military demands with a profound sense of humility and compassion is particularly striking, since it emphasizes how a leader can prioritize the welfare of their people and make personal sacrifices for the greater good. A notable detail that stood up to me is Marcus Aurelius's choice to sell luxurious personal belongings to support his soldiers during the war. This selfless act highlights his dedication to his troops and his desire to avoid placing extra burdens on the citizens.

Similarly, I believe the author was trying to illustrate the remarkable qualities that defined Marcus Aurelius as a leader and philosopher. Through his life story, themes of humility, generosity, and the significance of moral character in leadership are illustrated. Additionally, this passage emphasizes a society that valued self-sacrifice and generosity from its leaders. Marcus Aurelius's decision to sell his personal belongings to support his troops is a perfect example of a ruler's commitment to the common good, resonating with the ideals of civic duty and responsibility that were central to Roman identity.

Finally, I’m curious to learn more about the historical context of his reign, including the specific challenges he faced during the wars and the impact of the plague on Roman society

This week, I chose Pliny the Elder's "The Grandeur of Rome." I chose this reading since Rome has always had breathtaking architecture, from the Colosseum to its buildings for politics; I've always been fascinated with how civilization advances with time. In this reading, Pliny speaks vividly about the rise of Rome on an immense scale from an architectural perspective, speaking in retrospect from the modest settlement with three gates with Romulus to the vast metropolis with massive buildings and expansive walls encompassing the seven hills. Pliny mentions that Rome, under Vespasian, is now 13 miles in circumference and divides into 14 districts with a street network stretching 70 miles long. Pliny marvels over Roman engineering feats, such as the massive embankment of Tarquinius Superbus and the city's ability to engulf surrounding towns; he also highlights other structures, like the Circus Maximus that can seat 160,000, the Basilica of Paulus, the Forum of Augustus, and the Temple of Peace which were massive investments both in land and illustrated the wealth of the city. He also praises innovations like the sewer systems and aqueducts. Both provide a perspective on changes within Roman morality, like the rise in private dwellings with sewer systems. And for aqueducts, he praises one restored by Agrippa and Marcius Rex. Overall, as a source, I feel Pliny does a significant job of documenting all these changes while providing commentary on the changes and the people.