Marius and Sulla were both in some ways a great Roman heroes. However, each also contributed to bringing disaster on Rome.Please read Plutarch's Life of Marius, either in the abridged version here or the unabridged version here. Then read Plutarch's Life of Sulla, either in the abridged version here or the unabridged version here.
Cite an example that helps build the case that one of these men was a great hero for Rome *or* cite an example that shows how one of these men brought disaster to Rome.
14 comments:
I believe Sulla brought disaster to rome by using his own personal army to take the city so he could make reforms to the government, by making himself dictator. He also butchered and had killed a lot of his enemies. The use of this personal army to control leads to many more generals using the same tactic and causing lots of civil wars and political assasinations to start. Any ambitious general could now become dictator. Yea he got Bocchus to hand over Jugurtha and won some battles for rome but he ended up hurting the state politically.
"The first serious battle took place at Sextilius's Waters, and after many hours of hard fighting the Romans gained a splendid victory." This victory for the Romans was a against a large number of Spanish tribes. This was one of many victories for Marius. There are several more victories that had help from Marius. I find the life of Marius to be fascinating. Here is a man who had rather humble beginnings becoming one of the most beneficial men for Rome. Many of the Roman generals were of complete patrician background and the patricians were the ones they really cared about. Marius does things that make him popular with both the patricians and the plebians. We can see that he does not work for the interest of a political class. Marius wants what is best for Rome. America has many heroes that came from poor backgrounds though eventually became important and victorius generals and leaders. Marius in my opinion would be the best description of that type of leader for Roman History. Alex Mason
I agree with keith about the example of Sulla and his personal command of his legions. Before this happened the legions were led by the consuls who gave up the spot after their year in office. This kept the position sort of fresh, new men could be brought in as generals and the door kept revolving. A consul motivated to achieve his triumph had to do it quickly and might earn the loyalty of the men doing it but rarely would he come back to do it again. When Sulla took possession of his legions and led them against his own city he set the precedent for future generals in how to maintain command and raised the level for civil war even higher which would be disastrous for the entire Roman people.
-Louis-
I feel that Marius could teach our politicians something today. In the article about Marious he was able to compromise with both political parties in order to get the support of both of them. He reformed the voting system to make the Plebians happy and opposed some laws dealing with the distribution of corn which made the Patritions happy. Although this wasn't a true compromise he did seem to understand the ability to work with both sides to accomplish something. This strategy must have worked because it got him 7 consecutive terms in office as consul.
I believe that the stories about Marius lead me to believe that he was heroic in his doings, which led him to be elected to the consul seven times in a row. His defeat of Jugurtha brought such happiness to Rome that they saw Marius as their leader and he went on to win several battles for Rome. Also what Matt talks about in his voting system that he came up with. It was but a small people that overtook him to kill him, but I think that the majority of the people liked him and his leadership.
One betrayed another in order to shield himself; all friendship and confidence was destroyed; still Marius required fresh victims every day, and revelled in the scenes of blood. Marius for all the great things that he accomplished and did for his country in the end fell victim to greed and power like so many before and after him. He corrupted his purpose and his power. I am reminded of the phrase "absolute power corrupts absolutly".
I believe that Marius was a great person for the Roman people because of his abilities to lead the Roman people. As Jordan said, he was elected consul seven times which is an amazing feat. Also, he was an amazing general who gave the Roman people many victories. The last thing that made Marius a great leader was his abilities in politics to make both the plebians and patricians happy.
Bringing his personal army into Rome to take the city and bringing about a blood-letting was certainly a disaster.
However, one could argue that Sulla's greatest disaster was the precedent he set by becoming dictator. Pompey and Caesar both tried to become dictators, following in his footsteps, which was a bloodbath in its own right.
Cassandra Stangeland
Marius seems to be pertrayed as more of a hero in these stories. I think that he is a rather vain man but he seems to be considered a great person for Rome. He was a great politician playing both sides of the table and being able to regain election year after year speaks to his appeal. I think it is kind of amazing how he was able to win because even the text says. "He courted the people's favour and ingratiated himself with the multitude by every sort of complaisance; not only derogating from the state and dignity of his office, but also belying his own character, by attempting to seem popular and obliging, for which nature had never designed him." His passion was to be thought of as great even though he wasn't naturally accoustumed to it. He did the best that he could to be remembered. It would be made into a rags to riches movie if it happened today.
"When acting as lieutenant he took Copillus, chief of the Tectosages, prisoner, and compelled the Marsians, a great and populous nation, to become friends and confederates of the Romans."
I think this speaks volumes as far as Roman values are concerned. It seems all the Noble Romans are long dead and instead in come a bunch of villains posing as Hero's. I don't think either of these men had any real heroic traits. Sure you can lead an army, but does that really make you a hero?
I think one of Marius' greatest accomplishment was the reforming of the army and the defeat of the Cimbri. The strategies that he employed allowed him to do things that other Consul's had failed horribly at. Had he not defeated the Cimbri and Teutones I think they had the numbers to easily overrun Rome, and that makes him a hero. Although I agree with Arabin in saying that "absolute power corrupts absolutely" and Marius definitely allowed power to go to his head. So while he did great things to defend and protect Rome, he also went against all it stood for by basically laying the groundwork for going back to a dictatorship.
Marius brought victory to Rome but disaster as well. Marius was an excellent general who was well versed in battle and won many victories for Rome in their wars. However, this did not make him a good politician like Metelluas was. Instead of letting Metellus be elected he sought his own ambitions and made sure that Metellus was not. I believe that just because these generals were good in battle it did not always make them good politicans. This traditions of generals moving their way up on politics because of their victories in battle hurt Rome in the long run.
Sulla definately is the one who set a bigger disaster on Rome by taking his army and becomming a dictator, he really did pave the way for others to do the same thing, instead of acting like Marius and gaining the favor of both the patriarchs and plebians, Sulla just decided to kill his enemies and take over Rome. His intentions may have been good but he definately opened the door to future dictators who realized they dont need to go through the right process if they don't want too. But Marius also after being in office that long also paved the way for dictators as well, so I guess Rome was doomed no matter which way people decided to go!
Sulla brought disaster when he marched his army into rome and proclamining himself leader. Then the travisties he commited against the slaves of his military campaigns.Also shows that he uses the military for his own personal use
Post a Comment