Joseph Rudyard Kipling Essay Example for Free

Joseph Rudyard Kipling Essay The study room was surprisingly empty. The door was crying out for some one to come open it. The papers lying on the table were rustling out loud, almost as if giving a signal to use them. Beside were pens lying and whispering for someone to pick them up. The chair was looming for someone to come and use it for comfort. Slowly the door opens with a crack. There, enters a man: always with a look of confidence and pride showing away to everyone. A man loved by everyone for his work which was presented to the public. This person was none other then Kipling: a poet, novelist and not to forget an imperialist. The time period was around the 18th century when British established their rule over India. Another term for taking over was known as IMPERIALSIM: when a strong nation like British takes over a weaker region like India. Once they take over, they dominate the regions politically, economically and culturally (Imperialism 8). As every country wants to keep their own culture and have their own rule, India was against British rule. The only people who supported them were the Sikhs. When countries took over foreign lands, they expected the natives to practice their culture inferior to their own (Imperialism 9). This was called the white mans burden. Later on there was a popular poem named the same written by Kipling. Joseph Rudyard Kipling was a blessed child born to be an English writer and a Nobel Prize winner to John Lockwood Kipling: an artist, a scholar and a capable writer, and to Alice Macdonald. Kipling was a man who wrote novels, poems, and short stories, mostly set in India and Burma (now known as Myanmar) during the time of British rule. He was born on December 30, 1865 in Mumbai, India. His first name Joseph which was never used as it was his fathers father name, except for his baptism in the cathedral. His second name Rudyard was named after the place, Rudyard River where his father and mother first met. As a child of a rich family, he never got the tender love and playing time with mother like most middle or low class children would. Instead he was bought up by an ayah. As being raised by native servants meant affection and intimacy, and that intimacy meant, above all, that he learned their language, Hindustani (Rudyard Kipling 19). He was sent to England for better education at the age of six to a foster home. There he received unkind treatment which he later expressed in the short story Baa Baa Black Sheep in the novel The Light That Failed. At the age of 13, Kipling entered Services College: an institution specialized in training for entry into military academies. Unfortunately his poor eyesight and other factors shredded his hopes for a military career. He returned to India at the age of sixteen. In 1882 he started working as a journalist in Lahore for the Civil and Military Gazette: a local newspaper where he wrote and edited short stories. Gazette was an excellent way of building up the knowledge of India that was going to make him as a writer (Rudyard Kipling 42). In 1887 he was promoted to the staff of the Allahabad paper, Pioneer: a sister paper with much higher standard then the Gazette as an assistant editor. India and Kipling had been made for each other. She gave him what no other English writer was ever to experience in comparable fullness and intensity; .. As her mark was set on him for life: with the exception of some travel pieces, seven or eight stories and a few dozen poems all his best work reflects or remembers India (Rudyard Kipling 52). This statement shows us that he had a passion for India: all the colors and sounds and smells made an impression on him that was distinctive as well as deep (Rudyard Kipling 20). Almost every novel he wrote, short stories or poems were all connected to the life he spent in India. He loved his child hood days he spent in India give me the first six years of a childs life and you can have the rest (Something of myself). His novels described the setting (India) very well especially, its beauty as a country, the culture and the distinct features it has as a diverse country. Kipling was an imperialist. He believed it was right and proper for Britain to own India and rule the people (www. english-literature. com). He accepted the Empire as it stood and he approved the annexation of Upper Burma (Rudyard Kipling 52). He was one of the few people who approved the right of British to rule India. He wrote books and poem supporting the fact that British has the right to rule. Famous poem was the white mans burden and a popular novel named KIM. It is a novel that embodies his attitude towards British rule in India which these days are wholly unacceptable and unpalatable (www. english-literature. com). Even though he resided in India and was an Anglo-Indian he still supported British. Though he considerable colonial experience in India as well as sympathy for Asians, his writing clearly reflects the British and imperial attitude (Rudyard Kipling 67). Enough comments were made about the novel KIM such as a master work of imperialism .. Rich and absolutely fascinating. But nevertheless profoundly embarrassing novel (Edward, www. english-literature. com). Kipling is the man who is remembered for his celebration of British imperialism and heroism in India and Burma (Rudyard Kipling, 53). He is the man who is still remembered by everyone including kids by reading his wonderful work of writings written for us. Common examples are Jungle book, KIM, famous short stories such as Rikki-Tikki-Tavi, the Naulahka are to name a few. His love for India was incomparable to any Anglo-Indian, it shown in almost every novel which had a setting of India. Kipling should be as thankful to India as India should be thankful for him. Kipling introduced a new type of story and brought out the knowledge of India more to other people around the world by having it included in his stories. He made a difference in the world of writing by producing great novels such as Barrack-Room Ballads, etc. Kiplings life and work are extraordinary unlike those of any other English writer (Rudyard Kipling 1). He was the first Englishman to receive the Nobel Prize for literature. Kipling is man who left marks in the world of today by using his ability to remind about him and his works constantly. BIBLIOGRAPHY Book Amis, Kingsley Rudyard Kipling and his world. Great Britain, 1975 Handout given my Mr. Quan for Imperialism. Websites  http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A5316798

La Grotte Cosquer :: Pre-Historic Art Essays

La Grotte Cosquer Not too long ago Henri Cosquer was swimming, 110 ft. below sea level, through a long, narrow, and treacherous entry passage, the warm Mediterranean waters closing in all around him. The darkness was so thick he could almost feel it. Finally, after what seemed an eternity, Henri pulled himself out of the murky waters and onto the rough, dry floor of what seemed to be a large cave. After his eyes focused and his breathing had settled back to its normal rhythm, Cosquer beheld a sight not seen by human eyes in over 12,000 years: an unmolested, unspoiled cavern last occupied by the mysterious Cro-Magnons who painted the spectacular designs on the soft stone walls of what would later be known as La Grotte Cosquer. Cosquer cave was first discovered in 1985. Professional deep-sea diver Henri Cosquer discovered the 175-meter tunnel below Cabo Morgiou near Marseilles, France (â€Å"The Cosquer Cave†). It was not until 1991, when Cosquer returned to the grotto, that he noticed a single hand print silhouette that lead to the discovery of several dozen prehistoric paintings and engravings (â€Å"Grotto Cosquer†). As soon as the cave was reported to authorities at the French Ministry of Culture, Jean Clottes and Jean Courtin were sent to oversee the research of this incredible find. Jean Clottes currently serves as General Conservator of the National Heritage and Advisor on Prehistoric Art to the French Ministry of Culture and the French Community. Jeans Courtin was previously in charge of antiquities in the Provence region of France and Co-Director of Research for the National Center for Scientific Research (â€Å"The Cave Beneath the Sea†). Under Clottes and Courtin many facts about the origin of these paintings have been uncovered. Apparently the creators of these prehistoric works of art used a pallet of colors consisting of hematite or ochre for the red mineral pigment, and manganese dioxide for the charcoal black pigment. Only about one third of the total artwork in Cosquer is done using paint; the others are engravings done in the cave’s soft limestone walls (â€Å"Grotto Cosquer†).

Greek vs Roman Theatre

Historic playwrights such as Sophocles, Euripides, Aeschylus, and Seneca were described as prolific philosophers and geniuses of their times. These men actively participated in the politics surrounding them, and were respected and revered in their society. Each had their own individual style and portrayed their personalities through each of their noted works. Nevertheless, as with a majority of playwrights throughout history, most fodder for their plays have been adaptations of previous plays written by their predecessors or based off mythological events. Unfortunately, this had lead to many speculative accusations and criticisms, as is the case with Senecan tragedies versus their Greek counterparts. Senecan and Greek interpretations of the plays Oedipus, Agamemnon, and Medea bear similar themes, being the inescapability of fate and dike, and the lack of clarity between right and wrong. Nevertheless, they differ culturally, politically, and philosophically due to the differences in society as well as the eras in which the writing of these plays took place. Culturally, Greek and Roman theatre vary in a multitude of ways. Firstly, a major difference is the role of actor within their cultures. The introduction of the actor sparked the creation of tragedy, because of the ability to have back-and-forth discussions. Within Greek culture, to be an actor was a most honourable position as they were considered as icons because â€Å"the good actor, who rises to the challenge of providing a good and consistent performance, can be a model for how to live† (Easterling 382). In contrast, within Roman culture, the actors’ conditions were mean and contemptible (Theatrehistory). A secondary difference is the amount of actors used by Seneca and his Greek counterparts. Seneca stressed the importance of consistency of character stating, â€Å"It is a great thing to play the role of one man† (Easterling 382), suggesting that he seems to disapprove of those who play multiple parts. This is a reason as to why Seneca changed the number of speaking parts in plays to encompass four speaking roles. Agamemnon, for example, has four speaking parts during its final scene involving Aegisthus, Electra, Clytemnestra, and Cassandra (lines 981-1012). Oedipus similarly requires four actors at once for the second act involving Oedipus, Creon, Tiresias, and Manto (lines 201- 402) (Boyle 83). Another cultural difference is in regards to the importance of the masks worn by either the Greeks or Romans during the theatrical performances. The Greek mask was important because it allowed actors to play multiple roles and with the help of the onkos or high headdress, it portrayed the characters, as they ought to be or as better than they are (Wiles 68). The rule of the mask is never in question with Sophocles or Aeschylus as its function was to represent a neutral face. Hence, eliminating all the peculiarities that distinguish each character from another as author John Jones stated, â€Å"The audience could have had a few simple, conventional signs determining rank and age and sex† (Wiles 68). This neutral mask allowed the audience to judge Oedipus and Agamemnon by his actions and not solely on his appearance. It also forced the actor to externalize emotions by using his whole body (Wiles 69). Nevertheless, the conventions of tragic masks do come under pressure by the tragedies of Euripides. Classics professor Froma Zeitlin states that Euripides’ â€Å"repertory of tragedy and epic provides, as it were, a closet of masks for the actors to raid at will, characters in search of identity, a part to play,† which is a main theme in Euripides’ Medea (Wiles 69). In contrast, the cultural context of Roman mask was very different from the Greeks, who believed masked performances were a great source of pride. For a Roman, it was unthinkable that dancing in masks was a source of pride during public celebrations. The use of masks centered on the ideologies of the Roman culture and its concern with the after-life (Wiles 129). The Greek observer Polybius wrote that Roman religion, which was even bound up by death, was â€Å"theatricalised in order that the masses could be controlled by unseen terrors and suchlike tragoidia† (Wiles 129). Therefore, while the Greeks put on masks to create new forms of life, Romans put on masks to resurrect a dead being (Wiles 129). Professional actors received training in life to imitate these dead beings, a reason as to why Seneca disliked the premise of an actor playing multiple roles because actors specialized in one character (Wiles 130). These masks veered away from neutrality to more stock characteristics, much like commedia dell’ arte, and remained as such for recorded history, and because there is records of Seneca performing his work, there is no proof that he used different masks. A final cultural difference is the importance of the chorus and its use in the plays Agamemnon, Oedipus, and Medea. The chorus was not highly involved in the action of the plays. In general, the chorus’ main functions were to create a psychological and emotional background to the action through its odes. It introduces and questions new characters, as well as point out the importance of events as they occurred, to establish facts and avow the outlook of society. Finally, the chorus covers the passage of time, between events, and separates episodes (Calder 21). Within the play Agamemnon, by Aeschylus, the chorus represents the voice of wisdom of the city as well as its limitations (Novelguide). The chorus’ limitations are clear when they fail to appreciate Clytemnestra, (lines 258-63), and their wisdom is seen when they are able to see no end to the problem of dike (Novelguide). In Seneca’s Agamemnon, the chorus of men is replaced for a chorus of Mycenaean women, which is seen through lines 310, 350-51, (Calder 331). They represent enlightenment by rendering individual cases intelligible by juxtaposing the moral crisis (Seneca 113). Similar differences of the chorus can be found within the play Oedipus. In Sophocles’ Oedipus the King, the chorus positions itself within the minds of the audience as the citizens of Thebes acting solely as petitioners with no great affect on the plot. Nevertheless, as the plot unfolds the importance of the chorus grows as they take active roles in the progression of the plot. This continues until the chorus outgrows Oedipus, weaning from his dependence, and becoming the backbone that Oedipus himself uses to confront his destiny, seen in lines 1550 on (Calder 113). This development contrasts with Seneca’s chorus, in his adaptation of Oedipus, as the chorus remains on the same level yet becoming more philosophical in their understanding of fate and justice (Seneca 6). This is seen in lines 980 to 996 as the chorus explains their understanding of fate, stating, â€Å"We are driven by fate, and must yield to fate. No anxious fretting can alter the treads from that commanding spindle [†¦ ] Many are hurt by fear itself, many have come upon their fate through fear of fate† (Seneca 107). This quote demonstrates that no matter what, one will always meet his fate. Finally, differences between Senecan and Greek choruses are also seen within the play Medea as both choruses play crucial but different roles in the development to Medea’s character. In Euripides’ Medea, the chorus enters as a very sympathetic group to Medea’s plight, which is seen when they enter and state, â€Å"I heard the voice, uplifted loud, of our poor Colchian lady† (Euripides 156-7). She is a poor, unfortunate woman whose world is in shambles and the chorus echoes this (Associatedcontent). Whereas, Seneca’s chorus represents the average citizen, not pulling punches when it comes to the scandal that they are witnessing. The chorus begins the play by celebrating the marriage of Jason and Creusa, and juxtaposed with Medea still on stage the chorus states that Creusa’s beauty â€Å"far surpasses all the brides of Athens† (Seneca Medea 75). This demonstrates that the chorus is by no means sympathetic and they do not patronize Medea like the Chorus of Euripides. Seneca's Medea does not need the chorus as a crutch, which is provided to Euripides' Medea (Associatedcontent). Therefore, through the differences in actors, costume, and use of chorus, the cultural aspects of Greek and Romans times play crucial roles in the adaptations of these myths. A second way that Greek and Roman theatre vary from each other is through the political differences of their times. The fist difference is seen through the significant event that occurred during the writing or adaptation of these plays. Although, the main difference is seen through the importance of mythological figures within each play, how they are portrayed, and what they represent. Firstly, each play was written during or after seriously significant events that occurred during Greek times. For example, Aeschylus’ Agamemnon was written and during the battle of Aegina and after the death of Pleistarchus king of Sparta in 480 B.  C. Sophocles’ Oedipus was written after a horrible plague washed over Athens killing one third of the Athenian population (Bispham, Harrison, Sparkes 9). Each of these events affected the audience by tying connections to the events that were occurring around them. In contrast, Seneca’s adaptations were never performed and they were not written during significant events that affected the audience. On the other hand, a major difference came from the depiction of main characters within each play. Within both Aeschylus’ and Seneca’s Agamemnon, Clytemnestra dominates the plot, as Agamemnon himself does not enter the play until line 810. Aeschylus’ Clytemnestra is portrayed as a dangerous temptress, who represents a challenge to patriarchy unparalleled in Greek tragedy as she demonstrates early feminism (RHUL). This is seen through her jealousy of Agamemnon’s status as a man when she tells Agamemnon that he should â€Å"yield† to her (Novelguide). In contrast, Seneca’s Clytemnestra is portrayed as an emotionally unstable and sympathetic woman, as well as representing the working of the passions. This is demonstrated through her desire for a chaste marital relationship with Agamemnon, in lines 239-43 (Seneca 120). Another difference in major characters is seen in the play Oedipus, through the depictions of Oedipus. Sophocles depicts Oedipus initially as a benign ruler amidst his people, self-confident and determined (Seneca 5). This is demonstrated through his opening lines to the audience, â€Å"Deeming it unfit to hear reason from a messenger, I, Oedipus, on whom men rely, have come myself to hear you out† (Sophocles 33). Oedipus represents two enduring themes of Greek myth and drama: the flawed nature of humanity and an individual's powerlessness against the course of destiny in a harsh universe (Seneca 5). In contrast, Seneca’s Oedipus, at the beginning, is isolated and obsessed with anxiety and guilt, as demonstrated in the quote, â€Å"What I fear is unspeakable: that I may kill my father with my own hand† (Seneca 19). Oedipus’ unease is due to his possession of power and in Senecan drama, kingship is typically a source of unease for the ruler (Seneca 7). Seneca’s depiction of Oedipus keeps in turn with his dramas and their concern with mental states. The final contrast of characters and their depictions are found in the play Medea. Euripides’ Medea is seen as lone and forlorn who is portrayed as a pawn of the gods and willing to be such (Associatedcontent). She commits her crime and awaits ramifications from the gods, demonstrated by the line, â€Å"But you'll never have me in your grasp, not in this chariot, a gift to me from my grandfather Helios, to protect me from all hostile hands† (Euripides). Seneca, on the other hand, characterizes Medea as not â€Å"just a woman†, but as a vibrant and vengeful spirit who is more god-like, being in control of her destiny (Associatedcontent). When dealing with her connection with the gods, Seneca’s characterization is the polar opposite of Euripides’ as she is not as respectful and reverent of the gods. She often condemns them for their actions or lack of actions seen in the lines, â€Å"Hecate, I call so many times for your arrows for just one reason, always the same† (Seneca Medea 95). With these political differences, mainly the depiction of historic and mythological figures, it is clear to see that these differences have significant effects on characters as well as plot. Finally, the philosophies of each playwright’s era highly affect the adaptations of the each play because of the differences in philosophical language, seen through the writer’s dialogue. Each playwright’s manner of utilizing dialogue is specifically unique to each individual. Seneca’s dialogues were not platonic exchanges between characters but were treatises (ancienthistory). Seneca’s elaborate rhetoric, argumentation, and complex verbal exchanges were quite unlike the dialogue of Greek tragedy. Furthermore, the ambience of gloom, disease, insanity, and physical horror that permeates his plays is adverse to the spirit of Greek drama (Bispham 296). Aeschylus pioneered drama tension through the addition of the second actor, increasing the possibilities for dramatic dialogue. His language in dialogue is discernible with force, majesty, and emotional intensity (Britannica). Aeschylus boldly uses compound epithets, metaphors, and figurative turns of speech, demonstrated in the quote, â€Å"Winged hounds, eagles of Zeus, slew a poor cowering creature, her unborn young slaughtered with her. She loathes the feast the eagles made. Sorrow sing, sorrow, but good shall prevail with power† (Aeschylus). This description the slaughtering of an animal demonstrates Aeschylus’ rich language binding together the dramatic actions, rather than used as simple decorations (Britannica). It was also common of Aeschylus to sustain a common image or group of images throughout a play, such as the snare in Agamemnon. Sophocles’ major innovation was his introduction of a third actor, which enabled the playwright to both increase the number of his characters and widen the variety of their interactions. The extent of the conflict was extended, plots could be more fluid, and situations could be more complex (Britannica). Sophocles’ language varies depending on the dramatic needs of the current moment within the play. It can be slow and weighty or swift moving, emotionally intense or easygoing, highly decorative or perfectly plain and simple (Britannica).. This can be demonstrated through the quote from Oedipus, â€Å"One man may surpass another in wisdom, yet until I see the prophet’s words proved true never will I agree when Oedipus is blamed; for once the winged maiden came against him and he showed himself wise be the test and good to the state† (Sophocles) . His mastery of form and diction was highly respected by his contemporaries (Britannica). Euripides’ style of dialogue and language is best described as chatter, alluding to both its comparatively light burden and to the talkativeness of his characters of all classes. In spite of this, Euripides’ dialogues have considerable charm and sweetness. This chatter is best described in the quote from Medea, during the scene when she is killing her sons, â€Å" Help me†¦ help†¦ Did you hear that? Did you hear the children cry? That wretched, evil woman! What do I do? How can I escape my mother's hands? I don't know, dear brother. It's over for us† (Euripides). Although this quote does not demonstrate Euripides’ charm and sweetness, in later works, his lyrics underwent a change, becoming more emotional and luxuriant, and this demonstrates the chatter (Britannica). With such contrasting styles and use of dialogue and language, the philosophical differences between Seneca and the Greek playwrights are evident. The differences found within the Greek and Senecan interpretations of the plays Oedipus, Agamemnon, and Medea demonstrate the significant shift of societies and era in which the plays were written and/or adapted. This demonstrates itself through many differences such as the cultural diversity dealing with the actors and their performance, the costumes in respect to the importance of masks, and the movement dealing with the changes in chorus. Political changes demonstrate the differences through the significant events during the staging of the production, whether or not it affected them in any way, and the depiction of historic figures in regards to their portrayal within the play. Finally, philosophical ideologies demonstrate the difference between Greek and Senecan tragedies through the expression of the playwrights through the characters, with the philosophical language of the unique dialogue in which each playwright perfected. Nevertheless, interpreters put their own personalities within the plays and this is what shined through, no matter the criticism. Bibliography http://www.theatrehistory.com/ancient/bellinger001.html http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/seneca/a/Seneca.htm http://www.novelguide.com/Agamemnon/essayquestions.html https://www.britannica.com/biography/Aeschylus-Greek-dramatist?anchor=ref393561

The Rise Of The Roman Empire Essay - 1875 Words

Constantine was the first Roman Emperor to convert to Christianity. He started his reign in 307 AD. During this time the Roman Empire was still composed mainly of pagans. Although the population of Christians was on the rise, in the beginning of the fourth century, Christians made up only 10 percent of the population in the Roman Empire. There were approximately five million Christians in the Roman Empire meaning that they were still the minority (Waldron). His conversion was an important turning point not only for Christians but also for the Roman Empire as a whole. Although most Romans still believed in Greco-Roman religions, Constantine decided to become a Christian because he knew that it would be beneficial for his role as emperor. His conversion was prompted by his desire to end the tetrarchy structure of the Roman Empire and to become the sole ruler of the Roman Empire. The story of Constantine’s conversion was told through Eusebius of Caersera. His recount of the story is skewed by his bias. In order to show a more holistic view of the story I will be comparing his account to the account of another historian named Andreas Alföldi. The comparison will show that Constantine had other motives for converting to Christianity. Constantine’s decision to become a Christian was influenced by numerous external factors. He emulated the monotheistic nature of Christianity and used it as the foundation of his reign and used Christianity to advance his political agenda. WhenShow MoreRelatedThe Rise Of The Roman Empire973 Words   |  4 Pagessee how empires grew and became successful. Many empires were so successful because of their leaders and their philosophies. Empires often had good runs and would be running successful until a stronger and more powerful empire would bring them down. One empire that was known as the most advanced both socially and politically in the western civilization was the Roman Empire. At about 285 CE the empire was so gr eatly advanced that the Roman central government could no longer rule the empire on its ownRead MoreThe Rise Of The Roman Empire2740 Words   |  11 Pagesone thing comes to mind, the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire was one of the greatest empires of all time. The span of the Roman Empire grew from itself outward to the countries of England, Africa, Spain, and even Syria. The Roman Empire covered a vast area of land, with ambitions of continued growth. The Roman Empire rose to glory in 27 BC. The rise of the Roman Empire began with its military forces and its many emperor’s reign. The society and life of Romans were also affected by the empire’sRead MoreThe Rise Of The Roman Empire1494 Words   |  6 Pagescentral Europe and occupied by several Celtic tribes in pre-Roman times. The land was claimed by the Roman Empire once the Celtic tribe Noricum fell to the Empire and became a providence. Once the Roman Empire gained control of the area, it soon set up a Military camp on the eastern side of the providence calling it the Upper Pannonia providence which was the home for 50,000 people for nearly 400 years. After the fall of the Roman Empire; Charlemagne, King of the Franks, had control of the land atRead MoreThe Rise Of The Roman Empire2506 Words   |  11 PagesOne of the greatest empires to have existed in ancient human history is undoubtedly the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire maintained very sophisticated governmental policies. Not only were they responsible for groundbreaking political systems, Rome was very technologically advanced as well. Rome would lay a foundation for civilizations to come with the innovative political and technological breakthroughs they experienced. Unfortunately for Rome, the higher the rise also meant the harder the fall. RomeRead MoreThe Rise Of The Roman Empire2137 Words   |  9 Pagesas the Roman Empire was nearly compromised after the German Visigoths and their leader, Alaric, invaded it in 410 AD. This invasion of the newly Christian Empire that was supposed to be invincible shattered the confidence of the Romans and subsequently led them to question the power of their new single God. The Roman Empire has previously been a Pagan empire, but Constantine the Great converted the empire to Christianity less than a century before the Visig oths captured Rome. Many Romans were skepticalRead MoreThe Rise Of The Roman Empire1864 Words   |  8 PagesJulius Caesar , a Roman general and statesman he turned the Roman republic into a powerful Roman Empire. A coup ended his reign , and his powerful life , on the Ides Of March. He played a critical role in the events that led to the demise of the Roman Republic and the rise of the Roman Empire. In 60 BC, Caesar, Crassus, and Pompey formed a political alliance that was to dominate Roman politics for several years. Their attempts to amass power through populist tactics were opposed by the conservativeRead MoreThe Rise Of The Roman Empire1428 Words   |  6 PagesThe Roman Empire is widely regarded as one of, if not the most dominant government to ever exist. Early civilization in Europe was dominated by the Romans, and their constantly growing empire. With the help of Greek political ideas, the Romans adopted one very similar where supreme power is held by the people from their elected representatives. These representatives were a part of the Senate, where all political laws were made and enforced, very similar idea to the type of Senate that existsRead MoreThe Rise Of The Roman Empire1224 Words   |  5 Pagesinfluence to affect the Roman world. Constantine came to power in the Western provinces of the Roman Empire as an advocate of religious toleration. Constantine’s advocacy for religious toleration alongside his conversion marks a turning point of the Roman world and drives the spread Christianity. With Diocletian’s abdication in 305 A.D., Constantine’s troops acclaimed him as Caesar. The age of persecution began in 303 A.D. under Diocletian as an effort to rid the Roman Empire of Christians. It wasRead MoreThe Rise Of The Roman Empire863 Words   |  4 Pagesanyone who did not speak Greek. During the decline of the Roman Empire, many barbaric tribes took the opportunity to attack. The migration of barbarians closer to Rome put stress on an already stressed Roman government. The increased tension eventually lead to an outbreak of wars. In 410 Rome was sacked by the Visigoths—lead by Alaric—and was attacked again in 455 but the Vandals (â€Å"Dining With Attila the Hun, 448†). Attacks on the Roman Empire by the Huns did not start until the middle of the 5th centuryRead MoreThe Rise Of The Roman Empire1611 Words   |  7 PagesRome was an empire with extremely high aspirations and expectations from. Its founders chose to steal women from neigh boring villages, in order to grow its population. These aggressive and expansionary ideologies remained within the personalities of every Roman, living inside the great empire 755 years later. And yet despite its vast military presence and growing cities and towns, the Roman Empire and its capital still succumbed to a barbarian takeover. This was widely regarded as one of the greatest