The brief readings that I picked were “ the capture of the sabine women” and “ the rape of lucretia” , I picked these readings because they showed how the women in each passage were being treated. In the first passage “ the capture of the sabine women” the women that were captured from sabine were captured because rome was experiencing a decline in reproduction and women and in order to revive their population they abducted women that were invited to rome with their families as a means to fix their problem and a war broke out for this as well and the women tried to take the blame for the war saying that they are the ones that should be punished. In “ the rape of lucretia” although lucretia was the victim she killed herself because she was no longer pure and was dishonored although she had done nothing wrong and it was Sextus Tarquinius who was in wrong and was lead by his selfish behaviour. These two passages show that the women in Rome were not being treated as equal partners rather they were being viewed as objects for pleasure or for reproduction but when something went wrong the blame would be put on them as if they had any control when in fact they didn't.

The reading I picked was 'The Twelve Tables', there was no partiucalr reason why it jumped on me I just foynd the laws and rules of the table interesting for a society like Rome and how structred it was. One thing that stuck with me was in Table X number 5. "If one obtains a crown himself, or if his chattel does so because of his honor and valor, if it is placed on his head, or the head of his parents, it shall be no crime." from Table X. This stuck with me because the romans were notoriously anti-monarchy but they made an exemption for things like valor and honor. Which I think shows a lot about them as people. They place emphasis on honor and personal glory and if you get that through a crown, you won't be punished. They're against absolute monarchs because those monarchs just have the power with no real basis so they avvepv this though its not a true monarchy its a symbolic thing. How were they treated after the initial excitement of their glory faded? Did they get to keep the 'crown' and did that influence politics in any way?

I chose Livy’s The Capture of the Sabine Women for my online response this week. The reading intrigued me because it highlights a pivotal moment in Roman mythology where the practical challenges of state-building intersect with violence, culture, and identity. Livy’s narrative justifies the abduction of the Sabine women by framing it as a necessary step for Rome’s survival and growth. The women, initially portrayed as victims, ultimately become agents of reconciliation, transforming the story from conquest to unity. This shift underscores the Roman ideal of integrating outsiders into their community and presents abduction as a means to secure a strong and cohesive state.

Livy’s account conveys themes of pragmatism, retroactive justification, and the power of integration while acknowledging women's role in state-building. The resolution of the conflict, mediated by the Sabine women, symbolizes the fusion of disparate peoples into a single Roman identity. Their actions demonstrate how foundational myths often use morally complex narratives to validate state formation and expansion. I am curious to explore how later Romans interpreted this story and whether alternative perspectives existed. Additionally, comparing this account to similar origin myths in other cultures could reveal universal patterns in justifying conquest and assimilation.

• I chose "The Rape of Lucretia" / Livy. The story of The Rape of Lucretia has staying power, combining timeless moral and power themes with underlying insights into the human condition. The story of Lucretia is but one of a personal tragedy coupled with social upheaval. Her rape by Sextus Tarquinius, a roman royal family member, and her suicide caused outrage that resulted in the fall of the monarchy and the establishment of the Roman Republic.
• The passage that jumped out at me when I read the document was her strong commitment to honor after her violation and her desire to take her life in order not to destroy her legacy. Equally dramatic was the vow of Brutus to overthrow the monarchy, which managed to tie her personal tragedy to Rome's political transformation.
• The author tried to express themes of virtue, justice, and resistance to tyranny. The story of Lucretia is one of perfect honor and morality, but it also provides the mythic foundation to the Roman Republic-how personal sacrifice can be used to inspire political transformation.
• I would like to find out more about the historical accuracy of Lucretia's story, what role and expectation lay on women in ancient Rome, the broader context of Rome's transition from monarchy to Republic, how Lucretia's story has been interpreted and repurposed across history and Brutus's role within the story and his historical significance

I chose The Rape of Lucretia because it highlights a pivotal moment in Roman history, transitioning from monarchy to republic, and reveals much about Roman values regarding honor, virtue, and governance. One passage that stood out was Lucretia’s insistence on her own suicide, stating, “Though I absolve myself of sin, I do not free myself from punishment.” This detail reflects the Roman ideal of chastity and the weight placed on personal and familial honor. The author seems to communicate the moral standards of Roman society and the collective responsibility individuals felt to uphold societal values, even at great personal cost. I would like to explore more about how this story influenced later Roman attitudes toward leadership and the way it shaped their political identity during the republic.

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

I chose this reading because rape is an extremely sensitive and complex topic, so I was interested in how it would be taken in Roman culture to see if it was as looked down on then as it is today. I also had heard the name Lucretia before, and so this was a chance to read more about her.

• What passage or detail in particular jumped out at you as you read through it?

The passage that jumped out in particular was the part where Lucretia explains that she did not want to be an example of dishonour, and so kills herself in a sad but noble 'in an ancient times' way. It was upsetting that she felt that it had to get to that point but she clearly thinks so highly of her family and her husband's honour that her suicide was the only way to preserve her image as well as the others around hers.

• What do you think the author was trying to communicate? 

How important it was for women to be pure for their husbands and how egregious of an act rape was. In this passage the rape looks to have defiled the poor woman. The idea of revenge against the rapist shows how incredibly painful this crime was for everyone involved, but of course most psychologically damaging for Lucretia.

• What would you like to find out more about? 

Did Lucretia's family and husband get their revenge on the rapist? What was the price for such a crime in this society?

The passage that jumped out at me was Lucretia's speech to her husband and father, where she says:

"How can anything go well for a woman who has lost her honor?... My body is greatly soiled, though my heart is still pure, as my death will prove."

This passage stands out because it highlights Lucretia's strong sense of virtue, honor, and moral integrity. Despite being a victim of rape, Lucretia takes responsibility for her actions and chooses to end her life to prove her innocence and maintain her family's honor.

The author tries to communicate the importance of virtue, honor, and moral integrity in ancient Roman society. Lucretia's story catalyzes the downfall of the Roman monarchy and the rise of the Roman Republic. The author highlights the flaws of the monarchical system and the need for a more just and equitable form of government.

I want to find out more about:

Lucretia's story's historical context and transition from the Roman Kingdom to the Roman Republic.

The cultural and social norms of ancient Rome, particularly regarding women's roles and virtue.

The symbolism and significance of Lucretia's character in Roman mythology and art.

The reading I pick is "The Rape of Lucretia" by Livy. One reason it interested me is because A man of power took advantage poor woman. I shocked. The detail in particular, jumped out at me as I read through it "Then he took up his sword and went to Lucretia’s bedroom, and placing his sword against her left breast, he said, “Quiet, Lucretia; I am Sextus Tarquinius, and I have a sword in my hand. If you speak, you will die.” Awakening from sleep, the poor woman realized that she was without help and very close to death". I think the author was trying to communicate is men in power take advantage of poor women. I would like to find out more about if Sextus Tarquinius got punished for his crime or not.

I choose the "Rape of Lucretia" because it was a turning point in Roman History where it led to the end of the monarchy and the establishment of the Roman Republic. The story also explores concepts such as dignity, morality, and righteousness, which captivate individuals whatever the moment or nation as a whole.

One of the passages that stood out to me from what Lucretia went through was when she said "My body is greatly soiled, though my heart is still pure, as my death will prove. But give me your right hand in faith that you will not allow the guilty to escape. It was Sextus Tarquinius who returned our hospitality with enmity last night. With his sword in his hand, he came to take his pleasure for my unhappiness, but it will also be his sorrow if you are real men.” I found this passage very important because after she was raped, Lucretia made her husband and father swear an oath of vengeance against the Tarquins and then killed herself in shame. Enraged by her death, Junius Brutus led a victorious rebellion against the Etruscan king and freed the Romans from Etruscan rule, marking the beginning of the Roman Republic.

I believe what the author was trying to convey is how Romans forsake atrocious acts and were ready to protect the value of Lucretia and her role as a woman and morality with Rome. I'd like to learn more about whether this was the sole case that came to light during that time and had an important effect on a nation.

I have selected this reading because it provides an interesting plot about individual grief and significant transformation in the history. The historical context of Lucretia includes the overthrow of monarchy in Rome and the rise of the republic. Aside from this, the story also tackles archetypes such as honor, virtue and justice entertaining the audience regardless of the time and culture.

One agony of the moments was how Lucretia who is still mourning jealously says, “My body is very ashamed while my heart is still pure, and that after my death it shall be shown why.” For the first time, the woman expresses both her internal tension and her role as a female in patriarchal ancient Rome. Although, she is a person wronged, she chooses to end her life to salvage her self-respect and prevent her name from being cited as an example of shame by narrators. This explains the situational ethics of that time, which was quite bad indeed, a woman’s integrity was everything. 

Several meanings seem to be uttered in the bosom of the author. In Lucretia, there are themes on the danger of power without check and corruption, represented by Sextus Tarquinius. In addition to that, it underlines the Roman ideals of honor, loyalty, and the common good. The tragic figure of Brutus swearing that he would never allow monarchy in Rome is thus followed with the birth of a new social order, in which Lucretia’s death was not in vain and only led to the creation of better.

Perhaps one can explain how early Roman society viewed women and what functions stories like Lucretia ‘s could possibly have served for Roman society. However, I am more interested in how this story has been received in different periods and what this suggests about the shifting ideas of honor, agency, and justice.

I chose “Twelve Tablets” for the response because I was curious to compare it to Hammurabi’s code, another foundational legal system. Both civilizations distinguished noblemen from commoners and slaves, but the punishments were different (in Old Babylon, they were more severe). It looks like Romans created their laws to tell people about their rights, and not for crimes and justice.

The main thing that I noticed and wanted to discuss was women’s status in Roman society. Tablet V says that “Females should remain in guardianship even when they have attained their majority”. Romas saw women as incapable of managing financial and legal matters, depended on men, and tied to family and the reproduction role. Women are also mentioned in Tablet VI which seems to be the section about the property: “ Any woman who does not wish to be subjected in this manner (moveable property) to the hand of her husband should be absent three nights in succession every year, and so interrupt the usucapio of each year”.

I just keep thinking how much potential was lost because of treating women like good-for-nothing (except household matters) objects. It was normal in most of the ancient civilizations we studied. Were men that afraid and insecure to share their power? Spartan women are the example, that women can be strong, Egypt showed that women can manage business and even rule the state. So why in Rome, in particular, where science and culture developed so rapidly, women were still nobody?

What stands out in the Capture of the Sabine Women to me is the treatment of women’s roles in the founding of Rome, the relationship between violence and state-building, and the way this myth reflects both the brutal realities of ancient politics and the idealized vision of unity and reconciliation that Rome sought to project. The myth invites readers to think critically about the costs of empire and the often fraught roles of women in shaping history. This raises interesting questions about agency, victimhood, and power. The women, after being abducted, are central to the resolution of the war between the Romans and the Sabines. Their actions pleading for peace and stopping the fighting suggest that in some way, the myth views women as essential to both the domestic and political cohesion of the state, even though they start as pawns in a male-driven power struggle. The detail that most jumps out to me is the moment when the Sabine women, having been taken as brides by the Romans, intervene to stop the war between their fathers and husbands. This shift in the narrative is striking because it underscores a turning point where the women who were initially powerless, abducted and used as bargaining chips become the saviors of both families and, by extension, the city-state of Rome itself. The Capture of the Sabine Women seems to communicate several important ideas 1. The Necessity of Sacrifice for the Greater Good: The abduction of women might be seen as a metaphor for the painful sacrifices sometimes required for the survival and growth of a society, 2. The Importance of Women in Nation-Building: The story may also be interpreted as a commentary on women's foundational role in the political and social order, even when they do not have direct power, and 3. The Role of Violence in Political Formation: The myth could be read as a reflection of Roman values surrounding warfare and conquest. I would like to find out more about how did the Capture of the Sabine Women myth evolved over time? How does this reflect Roman attitudes toward gender, family, and the role of women in the public and private spheres? How does it compare to other ancient cultures' portrayals of women in political or foundational myths?

I chose Lucretia's story due to the factor that amongst reading all of them it interested me more, despite the wrongfulness that occurs to her; I really enjoyed her strength to continue on and see Tarquinius death but she would then take her life before she could see it amongst her eyes. The passage or detail that particularly jumped out at me was when after the aftermath of the harm, and her husband and father have appeared before her; Lucretia tells them this: “how can anything go well for a woman who has lost her honor? There are the marks of another man in your bed, Conlatinus. My body is greatly soiled, though my heart is still pure, as my death will prove. But give me your right hand in faith that you will not allow the guilty to escape. It was Sextus Tarquinius who returned our hospitality with enmity last night. With his sword in his hand, he came to take his pleasure for my unhappiness, but it will also be his sorrow if you are real men.”

I like that despite being harmed by this royal of Rome, she still tries to obtain her regality and strength - I didn't really think she would have harmed herself in the end but reading this line, I can see that she states that her death will be proof of such an act to be taken place.

I think the author was trying to convey the means of why Rome turned solely for the Republic due to the actions of Tarquinius as a single ruler for the sake of Rome, but I also think they wanted to share the importance of Lucretia and her aspect of a woman and a virtue to Rome. I would like to find out the means of the time prior to Lucretia's marriage to Conlatinus or even her aspect as a virtue and a noblewoman.

The passage that interested me most was “The Capture of the Sabine Women” because of how women are seen in Roman society. The quote that interested me most was this “Then it was that the Sabine women, whose wrongs had led to the war, throwing off all womanish fears in their distress, went boldly into the midst of the flying missiles with disheveled hair and rent garments. Running across the space between the two armies they tried to stop any further fighting and calm the excited passions by appealing to their fathers in the one army and their husbands in the other not to bring upon themselves a curse by staining their hands with the blood of a father-in-law or a son-in-law, nor upon their posterity the taint of parricide.”, I found this interesting because that while they are seen as powerless, they were acted to stop the conflict at hand, taking on the role of the men to mediate this war. I believe that the author's message was to tell how while integral women are in their society, they are still seen as tools to their society instead of people. I would like to see more about their importance in their society outside of war and their stereotypical women roles.