How was the Struggle of the Orders influential on later Roman politics?

           Struggle of the Orders fought to make the Plebeians politically equal with the Patricians. In the early 400s B.C., the Patricians were the most well-known people in society. They had most of the wealth in Ancient Rome at this time and they lived in luxurious palaces. They were the aristocrats in society. On the other hand, you had the Plebeians. The Plebeians were the “rest of society” and were made up of the common and regular people in society. But in society, the Patricians had all of the power and they only used it for themselves. Patricians also made up the whole political office, at first. But over time, the Plebeians got sick and tired of the Patricians having all of the power. The Plebeians then argued with the Patricians because they wanted to be represented in the Roman Senate. So after long periods of arguing, the Struggle of the Orders finally gave the Plebeians a spot in the political office. This position was called the Tribune of the Plebs, where one Plebeian represented all of the Plebeians in the Roman Senate. But this position was even more important because this one Plebeian had the deciding power in the Senate. So if the Plebeian did not agree with a bill from the Patricians, he could turn it down immediately. The Tribune of the Plebs helped all of the Plebeians in Ancient Rome get politically equal with the Patricians. This helped the Patricians show more respect for the Plebeians because after all, they had the deciding power in the government. So this is how the Struggle of the Orders helped shape Roman politics in the future with the Plebeians and Patricians being equal in the political aspect of life. 

Daily Number 1 Week 5

 What elements of the Roman Republican political and legal system appear present in the systems of modern democracies? 



           There are many examples of the Roman Republican political and legal system that appear in the systems of modern democracies today. One instance is that both modern governments and the Roman Republican government had constitutions that they followed, allowing the people to abstain by an orderly set of rules and regulations that were agreed upon by the people. Like the United States constitution, the Roman Republican constitution centered on the aspect of checks and balances and the equal distribution of power among leaders. Thus, allowing each person to have the same amount of power and responsibility. Eventually the Roman Republican government also elected one person to represent their people, the princeps, or also known as the imperator. The United States has had one single leader for almost as long as its existence and other countries have and or are starting to, do the same. The Romans had many similar government organization technics that the United States shares also, for example both have Senates and Councils. The Senate of the Roman Republican government was made of Senators who passed decrees on what they thought of certain matters of the time. Like today, Senators had certain requirement that they had to meet in order for them to be on the board. For example a Senator had to be born a patrician, or nobleman, and the person would have had to have held a seat in public office once before. The Senate today has requirements for the senators that are elected for their positions too, like a Senator must be a U.S. citizen for at least nine years and they have to be at least 30 years old. The more a person looks into the formation and makeup of the United States government the more they might find 
link back to the times of the Roman Republican because there are many similarities. 

Alexander the Great Essay

Alexander is known as the greatest military commander of all time. Through his military expeditions he had conquered most of the known world and proclaimed that he himself was the son of God. He had an unusual sense of personality and he is known for his lack of care for life. His expeditions gave him a vast numbers of treasure and fortunes but they come with a price; that if things were ever to go awry they face the consequence of never returning to their homeland, to their loved ones and families. Despite losing the company of his friend and family in Greece, Alexander still had a lot to be proud of, I think that Alexander the Great had gain more than he had lost because of his expeditions, he was known as the son of God and no one want to be in his way.

To fully understand the reward of Alexander’s expedition to the ends of the world, you need to look at his greatest achievements, and the most important one was creating his own myth. His first step of taking of proclaiming that he was indeed the son of God was to untie the Gordion knot. The legend behind the ancient knot was that the man who could untie it was destined to rule the entire world. Alexander simply slashed the knot with his sword and unraveled it. (http://faq.macedonia.org/history). The next big step for Alexander was his military expedition to Egypt. The Egyptians, unlike the Persians, welcomed Alexander to their kingdom and even made him the pharaoh.  In the spring of 331 Alexander made a pilgrimage to the great temple and oracle of Amon-Ra, Egyptian god of the sun, whom the Greeks identified with Zeus. The earlier Egyptian pharaohs were believed to be sons of Amon-Ra and Alexander, the new ruler of Egypt, wanted the god to acknowledge him as his son. The pilgrimage apparently was successful, and it may have confirmed in him a belief in his own divine origin. (www.historyofmacedonia.org/AncientMacedonia/AlexandertheGreat.html). While in Egypt, Alexander spontaneously decided to make the dangerous trip across the desert to visit the oracle at the temple of Zeus Ammon (Alexander is known for his courageous yet impulsive actions).  At the temple what Alexander did was unclear but most historians agree that he had spoken with a priest who had told him he was destined to rule the world.  (www.notablebiographies.com/A-An/Alexander-the-Great.html).

Alexander had a great success of creating his own myth. If that was not enough he had vast monetary resource to supply him with whatever he need. How he had gotten the wealth was through his military expeditions. His most famous one was the conquest of Persia.  The greatest of his battles was of Persepolis (also known as the battle of the Persian Gate), the capital of the Persian Empire. The battle strategy used by Alexander is still studied and used by military generals today. He had split his army in two to circle the city and ambush them from behind were they were less defended. The Persians were getting from all sides and had to rely on their inner defenses which did not last very long against the might of the Macedonians. (www.Gaugamela.com). With the victory of Persepolis, Alexandra had gained an abundance of wealth and now he could pay all of his military expenses.  Alexander was ruthless to the civilians of Persepolis, he had given the order to plunder the city and to kill all the men. After he had done that he burned Persopolis to the ground as if it had never existed. (www.gaugamela.com). Darius escaped but when Alexander had caught up with him it had turned out that he had been assassinated by Besus. Alexander made it his immediate goal to kill him and he did, brutally. With the death of Besus Alexander was now the king of all of Persia.

Alexander had acquired so much wealth from the conquest of Persia but yet that was still not enough. However the most unusual thing had happen to him that no one ever expected; he had fallen in love. The girl that he had not even met agreed to marry him when he proposed to her out of random at a Persian hall.  His last conquests were to what is modern day Central Asia and India. This was the hardest of all his conquests and he had suffered many casualties but in the end he was victorious. Alexander described India as place of wonders and also said their customs were bizarre to say the least. The greatest of Alexander's battles in India was against Porus, one of the most powerful Indian leaders, at the river Hydaspes (http://faq.macedonia.org/history/alexander.the.great.html).  They had won the fierce battle and Alexander allowed to still rule in the local area. When they had reached the mouth Indus River Valley they had decided to go back.

Alexander had gained more than he had ever lost. He conquered to known world at the time and was considered the son of god by many. In his adventures he had gained many new allies and an abundance of wealth. The whole was at his disposal and he was not going to stop there. He had plans to go to places no man had ever seen, but unfortunately had died of sickness at the mere age of 33. His name still lives on and many respect and study the way he led his army to war and how he manage to fulfill his family’s legacy.

Weekly 4B

Power was very important to Alexander the Great in the ancient world. With it, he led to many accomplishments and became a prevailing ruler. His success in history still leads us wondering today about how a young man could conquer the entire Persian Empire. Alexander’s power definitely led him to do many unscrupulous things to people. Power was misused in the ancient world and corrupted the rulers.

            The rulers in the ancient world were fascinated by power. It led them to do some pretty crazy things. When there is no heir after a king dies, men fight for the position. They are not orderly or profession at all. Men in the ancient world just wanted the authority to have people follow them. Like Alexander the Great, many also wanted to be looked up to. They wanted to be seen as some kind of god or goddess, so people would respect them. They would also gain authority. People would do whatever they wanted.

Although Alexander the Great looked as if he were a very good leader to some people, it seemed that he did certain things for personal gain. He became infuriated with Bessus when Bessus killed King Darius III. When, in reality, Alexander wanted Darius dead anyway; he just wanted to kill him himself. Since his enemy died, he decided to make Bessus his new rival. After all, he had no one else to conquer. He gained from the power that he had, and he needed to start wars to earn it. He seemed to only care about himself most of the time and not about his followers. He was very good at accomplishing his goals. The Greeks were probably upset about his decision to become allies with the Persians because of the Persian wrongs and what they did in the past to Alexander. Alexander was, without a doubt, corrupted as a leader.

            The Persians became more Greek after their defeat. They were influenced by Greek civilization and culture. Alexander the Great made them transform into his army. Women had to leave their husbands, while their husbands became soldiers for Alexander the Great. The women had to marry Greek men. The impact of the Greeks’ power on the Persians started the Hellenistic Civilization. Alexander the Great became more Persian because the Persians were no longer his enemy. It was a new life for him. The Persians were influenced by Alexander more, though.

            In conclusion, power does corrupt. It causes severe things to happen. Some people ignore their morals just to become more powerful. Alexander the Great changed after his corruption and lacked integrity to the Greeks after he became allies with the Persians. After all, power was an important ambition that every leader wanted to have.

Describe relations between Egypt and Persia before Alexander came on the scene.

Before Alexander came on to the scene, Egypt and Persia despised and hated each other so much. Each of the two could not stand each other when they saw each other. The relationship between Persia and Egypt was filled with so much hatred and enmity that they just could not be around each other. If Persia and Egypt came across each other, they would get into a nasty brawl with each other. It just was not a good scene if Persia and Egypt saw each other before Alexander came about. But when Alexander the Great came about, Egypt accepted him as a natural leader. Egypt accepted Alexander because Alexander also greatly despised Persia since he wanted to avenge the wrongdoings Persia did in Greece, like the burning of their temples and the acropolis. So Alexander came to Egypt and was accepted as a leader because they each despised the Persians. Alexander the Great would combine with the great country of Egypt to have a great army that would destroy Darius and his army in Persia. A lot of the hatred that flowed between Egypt and Persia came from Persia not worshiping the gods of Egypt. Persia did not think these gods in Egypt meant anything so Egypt would not accept them into their own country. The ill-will flowed rapidly between the two civilizations and it was not a fun sight to see the two come between each other. This was the case until Alexander came onto the scene to permanently destroy the Persian army.

What do you think should have been done after Alexander's death?

If the all and mighty Alexander the Great died without leaving any heirs to the thrown or really any plans, at first I wouldn’t know what to do. This great powerful leader who defeats and conquers the Persian Empire and also many other large city states has just died. But the ironic thing is that he didn’t die in war, and he also was not assassinated by one of his many fellow enemies. Instead, he died from a fever. Of course, everyone else from that time who praised and worshipped Alexander the Great was very surprised. Astounded would actually be a better term to describe the people of Alexander’s empire. Who would have thought that he would die at such a young age? Then when the shock decreased a fair amount all of his generals were left power hungry, each and every one of them wanting to replace Alexander the Great. And from then on everything that Alexander the Great created and built for the Greeks was demolished over time. However if I was living back in the time when Alexander the Great died, I would have handled his death differently. For one I think that there should have been an election so all the Greek citizens could vote for who they thought was the best replacement for Alexander the Great. Then whoever got the most votes would be the Greek’s new leader. Personally, I think that would have been much more successful compared to all of his generals just striving to gain power.