Please read the Preface and Book I of Livy's History of Rome (also available here). Read the preface carefully. Skim through Book I, concentrating on stories you find particularly interesting.Choose one (1) character from one of the Livy stories that you think would be particularly appropriate as one of the "Question 1" ID terms. How does the story of this character illustrate the possibilities/difficulties for analyzing early Roman history? What parts of the story do you think really happened, and what parts do you disbelieve? Why? How is the story of this character important for understanding Roman history/subsequent history?
I believe that a good idea term would be “Sabine women”. These characters would help to analyze History in the way that women are usually more accurate in remembering things and events. Women also help to make things peaceful which could help to lead to better societies. What would make the story of them difficult to study would be that they were stolen from their families and forced to marry these other men. They could have altered their stories to make things worse than what they really were.
ReplyDeleteI am not sure how much of the Sabine women’s story can believed, it was written many years after the fact and sometimes things get forgotten, or they are made to be more impressive than they really are.
I do however believe that the men did in fact “take” all the eligible women from surrounding towns, this to me sounds like something that would happen. They probably did this so that they could prosper and develop into new generations.
What I have trouble believing is that the women would literally run out in the middle of a battle to plead with husbands, fathers, brothers, etc to stop the war at hand. From my own experiences I know that getting into the middle of two guys fighting is usually a very bad idea. It’s also usually hopeless, if they are determined to do something they will do it.
The story of this character is important for understanding Roman history because without women they wouldn’t be able to reproduce and the history of these town and people would just slowly disappear and be forgotten. If they had disappeared and been forgotten Rome wouldn’t have had the chance to be the power-house that it was.
I believe that a good term would be "Tullus Hostilius." He was the King of Rome and he helped expand Rome and grew the Senate.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure how this illustrates seeing the difficulties of analyzing early Rome. The only difficulty I could see is if the story wasn't true, which there is no way to prove it is true. However, I believe that most of the story is true. Nothing seems to far fetched in it. I believe that he did lead Rome to a victory over Alba. The thing I don't believe is how easily is seemed for the Albanians to forget their culture and their Gods and adapt to the Roman ways because it is never that easy to change a way of living.
Tullus Hostilius is important because he helped expand Rome and he grew the Senate. He was a strong leader who helped Rome grow in power.
As far as difficulties in analyzing early Roman history is concerned, Aeneas would be a prime example. The story of Aeneas is very similar to the story of one of the kings of Greece. This could be because the Roman culture used Greek history as a sort of outline to create stories of their own.
ReplyDeleteSome difficulties with the story of Aeneas. 1. Aeneas ended up in North Africa and later in Lauretian territories. How did Aeneas communicate with these people? Is Jon Adam correct when he says it is because they only had 10 words at that time? Jon thought of it so it probably isnt true. 2. There are two different versions of what happened when Latinus met Aeneas. One says that Latinus was defeated in battle and the other that Latinus was overcome by the story of Aeneas and accepted him without battle. Which one is the truth?
I'm not sure if the story of Aeneas is important to understanding Roman history. The main point of his story seems to be that Rome was established because of Divine intervention. This would give the Roman people a sense that Rome was created for a specific purpose.
There is a line from the "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance" that might best describe writing history 700 years after the fact. "When the legend becomes fact, print the legend."
I would choose Lucretia for a couple of reasons. Mainly because, based on Livy’s historical account, it was Sextus forcing himself on her that led to the revolt that overthrew the monarchy and ushered in the Roman Republic. Thus making it one of the biggest historical moments in Roman history. I also think her story is interesting because it brings to mind the story of David and Bathsheba from the Bible. There are differences, of course, but quite a few similarities.
ReplyDeleteIt’s hard to say what parts of the story really happened; although it’s very possible that it’s entirely true since it definitely sounds like it could have happened in this way – very plausible. One of the things to keep in mind is that Livy felt that stories about the founding and building of Rome were “more fitted to adorn the creations of the poet than the authentic records of the historian, and I have no intention of establishing either their truth or their falsehood.” Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the accuracy of the history he wrote.
He also sought to have his readers focus on “…the life and morals of the community; the men and the qualities by which through domestic policy and foreign war dominion was won and extended. Then as the standard of morality gradually lowers, let him follow the decay of the national character…” This leads me to think that he’s trying to present history in such a way that it can be used teach lessons in morality – kind of like Aesop’s Fables. So, do I think that the story is true? Possibly, at least it’s plausible…I believe it somewhat more than the Easter Bunny, but much less than the story of David and Bathsheba.
I think it’s important because the Romans BELIEVED it to be true and based their past on it (like you mentioned in class). So, this was the “conventional wisdom” during Roman times on how their ancestors got rid of the kings and founded the republic. For that reason, if none other, I think this story is very important and interesting to boot.
I feel that the story of Lucretia would serve as a ID term on an exam. This story seems to give an answer to the fall of monarchy in Roman history and gives us understanding of the change of hands and a beginning of a new era. What gives this story difficulties for explaining Roman history is how believable is this story? Was she really raped by Sextus Tarquin? Did she really commit suicide after the incident? Was this the reason for the fall of Roman monarchy? Along with every story in ancient Roman history it is very difficult to prove this story factual and difficult to fully understand and believe this tale. Although this story may in some ways be difficult to fully believe, it gives us an understanding of what happened in Roman history and how things came to be the way they are now.
ReplyDeleteThe story of the Sabian women is an important aspect in the founding of Rome. This is because it was how the Roman Empire was able to flourish. This story makes it difficult to study Roman history because it would be hard to pin point an exact time frame for when the women were taken from their families. This would be especially the case if they were stolen over long periods of time rather than in the onetime Livy described.
ReplyDeleteIt is difficult to say how much of the story is actually true since it traveled through word of mouth and was not written down until long after the fact. It is also hard to say how much the story had been changed over the years. When stories are given orally it is very easy for the speaker to add more interesting events to the original story in order to make it entertaining and easier to remember.
There are parts of this story that are easier to believe than others. The fact that the men took the women is probably more true than false. It would be impossible for them to sustain their
population without them.
The part of the story that is hard to believe is that the women ran out into the middle of battle. Although, it was probably difficult for the women to deal with their fathers and brothers fighting their husbands I don’t feel it would enough to make them run into battle and risk being killed.
This story is important to Roman history because it shows how the Roman Empire started to flourish. It also shows how important it was to have the women in order to increase their population. Without the introduction of women it would have been difficult for the Romans to last as long as they did.
Tarquin the Proud becuase he was ambitious and knew what he wanted. But because he liked power so much he eliminateed anyone he saw as an enemy. i believe his stories of violence being used to solitify his power are true because thats what the did back then.
ReplyDeleteHe is important to Roman history because he was the last king before the republic was established. they knew having powere giving to one man was a bad thing so they set off to form a new style of government and they may have succeeded.
I picked a more off character as an ID term. In 1.19 Livy discusses Numa and his contributions early on. This story is important for several reasons. The being that much of what is said here is plausible and there is not a lot of conflict of interest. Nothing in the story really sticks out as being a false statement. This sections also explains things such a twelve month calendar and the temple of Janus. This character is important to Roman history because he started several traditions that stayed with the Romans for a long period of their history. From the closing of the temple of Janus during times of peace and the twelve month calendar that depicted business days and non business days.
ReplyDeleteThe story of Horatii and Curiatii. I know it's not just one character but it is one battle. It's a battle between two sets of triplets with Horatii fighting for the Romans and Curiatii fighting for the Albans. They put their life and theirs brothers lives on the line for their country. They didn't think twice about what it would be like if they were to lose the battle.
ReplyDeleteThere was a treaty before battle that indicadated whichever group of triplets won, the counrty they were fighting for would be the higher power. This is believable in the way that they are avoiding a huge war that would result in many dead over a longer period of time. With the sets of triplets fighting it's an equal battle that won't take years to finish. It's unbelievble in the sense that the brothers are unphased by the idea of loseing their fellow blood for their country. In the end the Romans won with only one surviving brother of the triplets.
I think that Romulus' wife, Hersilia, would fit in with the ID's for question 1. She has a very small part in the story, but I think the part she does play helps us understand part of Rome's foreign policy. She comes into play after the Sabine women were abducted by the Romans to become their wives. The surrounding cities were furious and they each attacked the Romans on their own. The Caeninensians were the first to attack Rome and they were easily defeated. But as Rome was busy defeating the Caeninensiane, the Antemnates took the opportunity to raid Rome itself. Romulus led his army back to Rome, defeated the Antemnates in Rome and then went on to sack their capital. It is at this point that Hersilia makes her entrance into the story. Instead of destroying all the Antemnates she begs Romulus to spare them and make them a part of the Roman state, saying it would increase Rome's strength and unity. Romulus agreed and made the Antemnates citizens. I think this helps us realize where the Roman policy of letting people keep their own identity when they were conquered by the Romans comes from. Hersilia saw the positives of letting the Antemnates live and be themselves under Roman rule adn this idea lasted throughout Rome's history.
ReplyDeleteJohn Rawerts
Romulus is a character of Livy's narration that is ripe for analysis. Obviously he is a vital part of Livy's version of the beginning of Rome, yet his story has many unlikely details. His upbringing, for example, would not likely have started by being saved by a wild animal. It does seem probable, though, that he and his brother were left out as infants to die in the wilderness and were later able to assist their grandfather in retaking the throne. The story of Romulus as told by Livy demonstrates the Roman values of honor and virtue (as well as the belief that passion is a good excuse for crimes).
ReplyDeleteIt poses possibilities because much of the story may be true...if so, we can use that information to decipher other parts of Roman history. The difficulties, though, lie in the fact that we cannot prove these stories true. In fact, they may be completely made up, and because of this, nothing is for certain.
I think that Romulus' wife, Hersilia, would fit in with the ID's for question 1. She has a very small part in the story, but I think the part she does play helps us understand part of Rome's foreign policy. She comes into play after the Sabine women were abducted by the Romans to become their wives. The surrounding cities were furious and they each attacked the Romans on their own. The Caeninensians were the first to attack Rome and they were easily defeated. But as Rome was busy defeating the Caeninensiane, the Antemnates took the opportunity to raid Rome itself. Romulus led his army back to Rome, defeated the Antemnates in Rome and then went on to sack their capital. It is at this point that Hersilia makes her entrance into the story. Instead of destroying all the Antemnates she begs Romulus to spare them and make them a part of the Roman state, saying it would increase Rome's strength and unity. Romulus agreed and made the Antemnates citizens. I think this helps us realize where the Roman policy of letting people keep their own identity when they were conquered by the Romans comes from. Hersilia saw the positives of letting the Antemnates live and be themselves under Roman rule adn this idea lasted throughout Rome's history.
ReplyDeleteJohn Rawerts