Rome

Rome, at its peak, was regarded as one the greatest and most powerful empire in history. But like most great things, it had to start somewhere small .The Roman Empire wasn’t always powerful. In fact, it was unremarkable as was even called, ‘a warrior state.’ Only through alliances did Rome grow, gradually and slowly. As Rome continued to expand through the Mediterranean, it got involved in many wars. There was the first Punic War, against the North African cities, which was successful. The second was with the Carthaginians, who were led by Hannibal. Its great armies won Rome’s previous victories. But armies were not enough to defeat the Carthagians. So, Rome allocated its soldiers to become sailors. This strategy, though risky, led them to victory. Even before its majestic state, Rome’s resourcefulness and superb military was already evident. Rome’s type of government was plutarchy and oligarchy. Consuls were always a line of males from wealthy families. Generals, regardless of their outstanding exemplars, did not possess long-term positions and not all were willing to relinquish this power. Among them, was Julius Caesar. As Rome continued to grow, it became more ruthless. They killed civilians and men were in automatically enlisted for the military. Rome’s mentality of brutality takes precedence over aspects. Even their entertainment was brutal. It was large-scale but violent and bloody. Corruption also started to grow. The Roman dominance allowed oligarchies unrivaled power and importance and priority were guaranteed to the elites. Not all emperors expanded through wars. Hadrian subtly conquered other Greek states by accepting their culture. He tried to infuse both Greek and Roman culture, which made it look like a sort of alliance. He built temples with Greek gods but with Roman elements. Personally, I think it was an effective way of brainwashing subjects without them knowing it. As they accept Roman culture, they slowly disregard their own. This account reminded me of how Ovid uses both Roman and Greek aspects in his poem. Something that caught my attention was the similarity of how the people worshiped gods and emperors. The common people see and treat their emperors as gods. Maybe this was their way of trying to understand how one person could do many great things, like creating an empire. The emperors must’ve been gods in order for them to achieve so much. But people closer to the emperor didn’t consider him as divine as provincials did because they were able to point out his flaws. This was probably the reason why Ovid’s characters were unrelatable. It was because the emperors were also unrelatable. I would have to say that Ovid’s writing could’ve been a satire, a satire about governance and the emperor.