The Roman Republic

Alright, so we're going to begin talking about Rome this week. We'll be talking about Rome and the rise of its Republic. And if you'll notice the dates, this is kind of coinciding with some of the Greek history that we've been studying, so keep that in mind that Rome didn't come after Greek. Rome was instead developing around the same time as Greece. Now, before we start talking about Rome, I want to bring to your attention an interesting story from both Roman history and Jewish history. If any of you have ever seen this place before, Greece, maybe you're a little bit familiar with it. This is a place called Masada. M-A-S-A-D-A. It was initially a palace built by King Herod the Great. And he built this palace on top of a rocky cliff above the Dead Sea. It's a very hostile area. And so, you know, part of your assignment for this week is to go to the UNESCO website for Masada and just kind of explore around it. But I wanted to just kind of tell you the story about Masada before we move on because I think it tells us several really interesting things about Romans and the things they valued and their ideals. We know about Masada because of a man named Josephus. He was actually a Jew and he came from a prominent family, prominent Jerusalem family. He actually fought against the Romans in the initial years of the Jewish revolt against the Romans beginning around 67 AD. So he initially fought against the Romans. He was actually captured by the Roman Emperor Vespasian. And Vespasian found some use for him as an interpreter and so on and so forth. And by 69 AD, he had given him his freedom at which time Flavius or Josephus adopted Vespasian's family named Flavius and completely defected from from his Jewish homeland and was granted Roman citizenship. Now Josephus then took the time to write down Jewish history. One of the incidents that he tells us about is the siege of Masada and he is the only source that we have for what occurred at Masada. Now Masada became, during the Jewish revolt, Masada became kind of a last stand for Jewish rebels against Romans. And they basically just kind of went up on top of this this hill or this rocky cliff. It kind of looks like a mesa and just held up there for a while with with quite a number of people. And if you will see in the picture, in the center of the picture, there's a kind of a what looks like a hill that builds up to the side. This is not completely natural. Romans were incredibly ingenious about their siege works and Masada actually has the largest set of siege works that have ever been found. I believe up to this date. But in order to get at the Jewish rebels that were on top of this this very high rocky cliff, they had to do something a little bit different. So they built this ramp and it took them months, but they they did it and they built this hill up to the top and were able to storm the fortress and get at the rebels. And there are, Josephus tells the story about a mass suicide. Scholars now doubt the truth of that story. But what I want to tell you about with this story is that Romans really were fairly determined and and they tended to think in the long term. And now a lot of a lot of other peoples might have sat at the bottom of this rocky cliff and just tried to wait them out and hope that maybe eventually they would come down. But that wasn't enough for the Romans. It wasn't enough for them to just wait out to the Jews and to see if they would come down on their own because of a lack of supplies or water. The Romans the Romans were pretty determined to get at them and built this hill. Now another important feature of Romans is is embodied in the story of Josephus who of course was a Jew who became a Roman citizen. And this is pretty characteristic of Romans. Unlike the Greeks in which you know with Athens we see that to be an Athenian you had to have parents who were born in Athens or even later on to have a mother born in Athens. Your mother had to be born in Athens. Both parents. Roman citizenship could be granted to individuals who were not Roman born. And so Josephus is a good example of how that could how that could happen that that somebody could become a Roman citizen. Okay, so we're going to talk about the values of the moral values of Rome. Roman lives were guided by principles laid down by their ancestors, which they called Mos Maiorem. This is this is Latin for way of the elders. These traditional values were time-honored and Romans were suspicious of new ideas. They they looked on them as as fairly subversive. Roman values and morals were the foundation of their social and religious institutions. We're going to see a lot of that. They defined the relationships between people and the gods. They emphasized their values and defined these relationships. Their values also emphasized family loyalty. This is really important. They emphasized selfless political and military service. They also emphasized individual honor and status. So not quite individualism, but individual honor and status in terms of how a person does their duty and how successful they are at it. It also emphasized the rule of law and shared decision-making. Virtus or manly virtue was a primarily masculine quality that emphasized courage, especially in battle strength and loyalty, as well as wisdom and moral purity, which the social elite were expected to display in their public and private lives. In the broader sense, it could apply to women as well as men. So not necessarily exclusive. Fides or faithfulness meant keeping one's obligations no matter what. Failing to meet an obligation failed the community and had the potential to offend the gods. Women were expected to maintain sexual fidelity while men were expected to keep their word. They're expected to pay their debts and treat all with justice and in a way appropriate to their status. Fides also involved proper religious conduct and respect for one's family. Romans were also expected to maintain self-control and limit displays of emotion to demonstrate that they respected themselves and their status in society. They were expected to persevere in doing their duty and were rewarded with the respect of others if they did so. Men and women were expected to maintain their reputations and be treated with honor. Romans also believed that some people were superior to others and that a just society had to be hierarchical. They defined status in relation to family history and wealth and believed that aristocrats or those of high birth automatically deserve status and authority. Over time, money became increasingly important to the Roman elite as a source of social status. Roman laws and traditions built their society around the patron-client system, which defined the obligations of relationships between people of different status. Patrons were men of superior status who could provide benefits to lower status men or clients who would in turn owe duties to their patrons. This was a mutual relationship. It was reciprocal. Patrons were often themselves clients of higher status men. We've got a lot of layers here. Benefits and duties involved mutual exchanges of financial and political help. Patrons often jump-started clients' political careers and supported them if a client's family fell into legal trouble. Clients might support a patron's bid for political office by gathering votes for them or lend a patron money to support public works or dowries because these became important in gaining status and position. Patron-client obligations endured for generations, so they went beyond the lifetime of one person. And they were also seen to promote social stability. While men and women shared responsibility for raising children, fathers were the sole owners of their dependents' property and children lacked independent legal standing. Fathers had legal power of life and death over the members of their household and the role of the father was was called patria potestas. Most women remained under their father's power even after marriage. Roman women without living families were relatively independent, although they needed a male guardian to conduct some business. Roman women were responsible for teaching values to their children and maintaining and managing their households. Wealthy women managed household slaves and kept account books to track personal and family finances. The foundation of female virtue lay in the primary responsibility of teaching her children Roman values. Women had no official political role, but often expressed political opinions and influenced politics indirectly. Women could own property through inheritance and entrepreneurship. Poor women worked in the fields or sold small goods. Now Roman education sought to inculcate traditional values and make men and women effective speakers. Because just like the Greeks, it was important to be very well spoken. Most children were educated at home, but some families purchased slaves, often Greek, to educate their children. In upper-class families, both daughters and sons were taught to read. Girls were taught literature and music and were prepared to teach traditional social and moral values to their children. Boys received military training and training in rhetoric to prepare them for political careers. So we can see that education supported Roman values. Romans followed Greek models in religion. Jupiter corresponded to Zeus and Juno to Hera as powerful father figures. Minerva, the Roman equivalent of Athena, was along with Jupiter and Hera the most important of the gods. The gods were seen as responsible for Roman safety and prosperity, as well as success in agriculture. Romans sometimes turned to foreign goods in times of crisis. Foreign gods, I'm sorry, foreign gods in times of crisis, not foreign goods. Many cults thrived in the Empire, especially that of Vesta. The cult of Vesta was very important. And Vesta was the goddess of the hearth and family. The flame of Vesta's shrine in Rome was tended by six unmarried women who were sworn to be chaste, and they were known as the Vestal Virgins. They could be, they were put to death if the flame went out. If the flame went out, that was interpreted as one of the Vestal Virgins having having been unchaste. Religion was an important dimension of family life, and many household households maintained small shrines to house the spirits of their ancestors. Divine spirits were believed to participate in major events in life, and rituals were a part of public and everyday life meant to promote the health and stability of the community. So we can see from this that that religion didn't necessarily have the role of enforcing a moral code. Like the Greeks, the Romans believed that the gods cared very little about humor and morality, and were more interested and involved in security and prosperity than in personal behavior. So religion was not necessarily regulatory of personal behavior. The gods were consulted through divination before major events, pietas or piety. Demanded devotion to family, friends, the state, and the gods. Roman officials were charged with keeping good relations with the gods, and socially prominent men served as priests, conducting public rituals, sacrifices, and prayers. The chief priest was the head of state religion and the ultimate authority on public religious matters, and disrespect for religion brought public punishment. This was very bad because it had the potential to impact the entire community. And so if the entire community tolerated it, that could bring down bring on the disfavor of gods. But if the community punished such behavior, then then things would be okay. Hopefully. The first seven kings of Rome ruled from 753 to 509 BCE, and and they were legendary. Legendary in the sense that we don't have any historic documentation concerning their existence. So what we know of them comes to us from legends. They created the Senate and began Roman expansion by assimilating conquered outsiders during the first 250 years of monarchy. Rome underwent tremendous expansion of both population and territory. They gained control of some 300 square miles of surrounding land that could support a population of 30 to 40 thousand people. Rome was well situated for trade and expansion. Geography, war, and trade influenced Roman cultural development. Romans spoke Latin and were skilled iron workers, which was really important in gaining the the ground that they did. Cultural contact with Greeks had great effect on Roman development as Romans adopted many elements from Greek culture and scholars kind of debate how extensive this was. Whether many of the things that they adopted that seemed Greek were just part of an overall Mediterranean culture, such as the Greek gods or, you know, other features of Mediterranean life. Or if Greek really did truly influence Rome to that extent. The Etruscans were a wealthy northern wealthy northern trading people. They also influenced Roman culture. Although again, historians debate about the extent of that. Romans adopted ceremonial features of Etruscan culture and also some diving techniques. The Roman alphabet, militia, and military organization, urban planning, and foreign trade may also have been influenced by the Etruscans and other Mediterranean peoples. So when we see this image, how would you argue that the Etruscans represent a mix of Greek and Roman influences? So what we can see in Greek influence, we can see Greek influence in the posture of the musician and in the instrument. This is very very similar to Greek art at the time. Roman influence can also be seen in the hairstyle and the olive tree in the background. Many parts of the image are actually reflective of more general Mediterranean culture. So how would you describe the role of music in ancient Etruscan culture? Now like many cultures of the time, music was certainly important if it was worth depicting in this detail. It was also a place where cultures meet. The instrument originated in Greece actually, but Romans later borrowed musical traditions from the Etruscans. Here we can see a map of what we know today as Italy. We can we can see where Greeks actually populated a lot of southern Italy. And then we have the Etruscans up in the northern part of Italy. And Rome is in the center of the western coast of Italy. It's barely a dot by this time, so not very large at all. And this of course is going to change. The Roman social elite's hatred of monarchy and belief that power would inevitably corrupt a sole ruler motivated the creation of the Republic. And in your primary sources, you're going to read an interesting story of the birth of the Republic. So pay attention to the pay attention to the elements of that story and try to see if you can discern how that hatred of monarchy and the belief that sole power was corrupting. Take a look at that story and see how that comes into play. The Roman social order was split into patricians who were a small group of 130 aristocratic families who actually monopolized political office. And it was also divided into plebeians, which basically was everyone else. Bitter power struggles between the groups were known as the struggle of the orders. By 449 BCE, these struggles produced the Roman law code known as the 12 tables, which limited patrician rights. And again, you're going to read some some of the 12 tables in your primary primary sources. So pay attention to just what is what that tells us about what Romans thought was important. The conflict between the orders ended in 287 BCE when the plebeians, who withheld military service to gain advantage, won the right to make their own laws in an assembly. Elected officials ran the Republic and they operated in committees. The highest political offices were still available primarily to the patricians and were attained by holding a series of administrative positions that ended with the consulship, which was Rome's highest public office. The two consuls were charged with commanding the army. By 367, plebeians had enforced a requirement that one consul be a plebeian. Ex-consuls became censors who selected the Senate. Elected plebeian officials called tribunes, protected plebeians and their property by vetoing government action they felt to be unjust. If any of this confuses you, there are quite a few details in the book, so you can take a look at that. Men competed for public office to win respect and glory, often spending their own money to win popular support. The Senate gave advice rather than legislated, so not the same as the US Senate in terms of their role in government. But the Senate also had strong moral standing, so if they gave advice, leaders found it important to listen to them. Three assemblies of male citizens decided legislation. The centurion was dominated by patricians and wealthy plebeians and elected praetors and consuls. The plebeian assembly elected tribunes and after 287 BCE passed binding resolutions known as plebiscites. The tribal assembly mixed patricians and plebeians and was the most important lawmaking assembly and venue for holding trials. Voting was done by groups instead of as individuals. The judicial system evolved over time and developed overlapping institutions. Early on, praetors and the assemblies decided cases, but over the second century BCE, a jury system developed. Accusers and defendants spoke for themselves or they had friends do so. And here we can kind of see a map that lays out Rome. Some of the important places to notice is you can see the Senate House in the center where the Forum is, as well as the Temple of Vesta. As we're studying Rome, it's important to note that wars of conquest, as well as the military, were central to Roman life. And Roman imperialism was driven both by fear of outside attack and by a desire for wealth and plunder. So Romans really worried quite a bit about attacks from outsiders. Often they would call them barbarians. Anybody who wasn't Roman was often a barbarian. You will often see in literature, in Roman literature and in Roman histories, that this was a big fear of theirs. They were really worried about barbarians attacking. And as we'll see, this was a fear that would bear out. Now conquest and war transformed Roman life. From the 490s BCE, the Romans really struggled against the Etruscans, eventually doubling their territory by conquering Veii in 396 BCE. Roman legions were were very effective fighters and by 220 BCE Rome controlled all of Italy south of the Po River. So we believe that the Etruscans ruled Rome initially and Romans eventually cast off Etruscan rule and took control of the areas that the Etruscans had formally controlled. And from there, Rome is going to experience a lot of expansion. So diplomacy and brutal threats of slavery and land confiscation secured the Empire and Romans co-opted many potential enemies. Conquered peoples might be enslaved. In fact, Rome had a large slave population in large part due to its conquests and numerous colonies of Romans were planted in the Italian Peninsula to better control their territory. So this was a an effective strategy of the Romans when they conquered an area or if they wanted to to get into an area they colonized. Roads were built by the Romans and these roads connected diverse peoples. So you've heard that expression all roads lead to Rome. This is where this comes comes from. Romans built roads everywhere and and there were such prolific road builders that really you could you could do a lot of trade along these roads. It was a really effective road system. So colonies spread Roman culture and social structures. Between the roads and the colonies a lot of Roman ideas, a lot of Roman culture, religion, philosophy, art is is being spread throughout the Western world. Latin became a common language. Although Greek continued to endure in the south as well, but Latin was becoming increasingly important. Wealth from conquests led to the construction of new aqueducts and massive building programs. So Rome would conquer a territory and then almost immediately start public works projects. It was one of the ways that they were able to get support from local populations, you know with with mixed results. Much conquered territory became open land and was freely grazed by Romans. Plebeians and Patricians cooperated in expanding territory. This was seen as a very Roman activity and so so people from all walks of life could get behind it. But in doing so they helped to weaken Roman social divisions, so that's an important development. So just to give you an idea of the territories that we're talking about when we're talking about Etruscan territory and what was initially Roman territory and how that that kind of changed. You can see in the pink the Roman territory. It was just initially a very small island. These were this was a group of Latins that a group of Latin people who had this very small piece of territory. The Etruscans were much more influential initially and you can see Laetium to the south as well as Campania. And that should give you a pretty good idea of what those areas looked like. This is sort of the middle part of the the Italian boot. And if we look at this map we can see that we can see the the just a taste of what the Roman road system looked like. You can see from the road system that you could pretty much get anywhere you needed to go. From from the Adriatic Sea to the Turanian Sea. There there were you had access from port to port. Rome radiated outward with all of these roads. And so these were important connections. They were important to trade. They were important to moving armies and to moving supplies. And so this was a really important component of Rome being able to build its empire. And as I've already discussed, one of the things that Romans often did when they came into these areas, when they conquered new areas, is they started they started public works projects. And one of the most prolific public works projects that we see are aqueducts. And this is a famous aqueduct at Nimes in France. And you can see it's very well preserved. One thing that Romans were good at was building for the long term. And so you'll often see throughout Europe, as well as the Middle East, there are parts of the Middle East where there are still some really well preserved aqueducts. I'm thinking of Caesarea and Israel in particular is an excellent example of an aqueduct in in the Middle East. And so these aqueducts really crossed the continents and crossed Europe and into Africa and parts of Asia. So it's really quite impressive. And this was quite common for them to do. One of the things, one of the reasons why this is so effective is the Romans helped to provide good drinking water, good potable drinking water, for populations. And so this was, I guess you could call it almost a propaganda tool. for the Romans. Let's talk about Rome's first wars abroad. Rome saw the Republic of Carthage with its rich Mediterranean Empire as a rival. And the Romans saw the Carthaginian people as barbarians. And we shouldn't be surprised by this because really Romans thought most people who weren't Roman were barbarians. With with maybe a few exceptions. Rome and Carthage fought the three Punic Wars beginning with the first in 264 to 241 BCE, which began over control of Sicily. If you'll recall, Sicily is that island at the toe of the Italian boot. Rome's victory in the first Punic War made Sicily a Roman province and emboldened Rome to see Sardinia and Corsica. And so as a result of its its victory over Carthage, Rome began looking at other territories as well. Carthage counterattacked in the second Punic War. This war was fought between 218 and 201 BCE. The Carthaginian general Hannibal invaded Italy and won territories, but Rome's allies stood really firmly together. Eventually a Roman invasion of the Carthaginian homeland in Africa if you recall the Carthaginian homeland was along that northern coastline of the Mediterranean along the continent of Africa. And this this invasion of the Carthaginian homeland by the Romans led to victory in following this victory there was a punishing settlement for Carthage. Romans were not kind to the people that they that they conquered, particularly if it was a protracted battle or a protracted war with a lot of brutality. So it's really interesting to take a look at the various cases in which Rome conquered a people because they they made deliberate decisions about whether a group of people would be integrated into Rome or whether a group of people would be punished and then colonized by Rome. It's very interesting and you could probably take a whole course probably study it for a lifetime and still be beset by complexity. In the third Punic War which lasted from 149 to 146 BCE so a little bit shorter about three years Carthage attacked Numidia. Numidia was a Roman ally and in response to this attack on Romans and on Rome's ally Rome destroyed Carthage and turned it into a Roman province. So at this point from this point on the the that area along the the coast of the Mediterranean in the north of Africa was a Roman territory. Roman territory now extended throughout the Mediterranean into Spain, North Africa, Greece, Macedonia and Western Asia Minor. By the late first century BCE Rome governed and profited from two-thirds of the Mediterranean region and had conquered southern Gaul. This is an interesting map. It gives you an idea of sort of the progression of Roman imperialism and and how over over various time periods they were expanding outward from the from the Italian Peninsula, the Italian boot. So you can see how by around the turn of the millennium by the time of the death of Julius Caesar in 44 BCE that the Roman Empire is really quite extensive. You know, it's covering parts of Africa and parts of Asia and into into southern Europe not quite up into we don't see it yet up into Britain, but they're gonna go there as well. They're also gonna go into Germania and so they're gonna get even bigger. But this is a good map that gives you an idea of what those areas look like during the Roman Republic. Now as we've already seen in our section on Greece, especially, so now let's talk about social structure and stresses on on social structure and society as a result of Roman imperialism. For the poor, imperial wars of expansion actually weakened Rome's small farmers as lengthy campaigns abroad kept farmers away from their fields and families. So as Rome is expanding outward the demand for for soldiers is increasing and this has an immediate this is felt greatly by farmers as they're they're having to go and defend. Remember, this is a duty and obligation for Romans and it's an ideal to defend to defend Rome. And so as farmers are being diverted away from agriculture and into the army, this is creating some significant problems for Rome. What this meant is that rising population actually led to a land shortage by the 2nd century BCE. So as farmers are being taken out of the land, there's also greater population and so Rome is experiencing this problem with an actual land shortage. Many homeless wound up going to Rome thinking that was the place where maybe they could solve their problems. And so we saw we can see that there was an increase in the number of men who were begging for work and a lot of women became prostitutes. The city's poor were supported by free imported grain and this became a volatile element in politics. So the number of poor as those numbers began to increase and the demands for grain and and sustenance increased as well. This becomes a pressure on the political system in Rome and could at times even serve to destabilize it. Now for the rich, the rich reaped financial and political rewards from imperialism as you would expect. Successful generals enriched their families and elites financed public works and temples that gained them political reputation. So they're they're more visible in Roman society as well, and they're benefiting from that. Rich landlords were able to buy bankrupt estates. And so as we see farmers being kept away from their fields and their families and as farmers are losing their farms because of course if you can't farm you can't pay for your farm, what we see happening is that that the rich are buying up these farms and they're consolidating them into these big estates. They also occupied land seized from defeated enemies. So in the case of Rome, it's true what they say that the rich just kept getting richer. Government posts in the provinces could also lead to greater opportunities for wealth and corruption. Corrupt officials were often protected by their friends in the Senate and this growing wealth helped the elites control most of Rome's offices. But it also strained the traditional Roman values of uprightness and moderation. And so this is going to be a weakening factor. This is going to help continue to weaken the Roman Republic because people are no longer acting in ways that are consistent with those Roman values that are so integral to the Roman Republic. Now I want to bring to your attention a couple of men. These two men were brothers. Their names were Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus and despite being born into an elite family, both men worked to pressure the social elite to institute popular reforms. Now Tiberius was elected as tribune in 133 BCE. He used the plebeian assembly to pass reforms in defiance of the Senate and some of these reforms included redistributing public land and establishing new farms for landless Romans. When he sought to run for a second term in defiance of the law, he was assassinated by a band of senators and their clients. Gaius was elected tribune ten years later, and he was re-elected contrary to tradition a second time. He instituted farming reforms, subsidized prices for grain. He created jobs funded by public works programs. All of this angered the rich. Gaius also offered citizenship to many Italians and suggested a process for trying senators for corruption in front of juries drawn from equitus or equestrian class of wealthy businessmen. To pass his reforms, Gaius used an armed group to threaten the Senate and when the Senate sent consuls to arrest him, he committed suicide by having a slave cut his throat. Hundreds of his supporters were killed following his death. So this is not a pleasant episode in Roman history. The conflict led to the creation of persistent factions among the elites. The Popularis, who supported popular reforms, and the Optimates, who resisted them. Another important Roman figure in the Roman Republic was Gaius Marius. He we're talking about between 157 to 86 BCE was about the time that he lived. He came from the equitus class. He achieved fame for his brilliant military career and won election as a consul in 107 BCE. His continued military success led to his unprecedented re-election six times. He was honored with the triumph, Rome's ultimate military honor, but the Optimates never accepted him because he was a new man. That is the first in his family's history to become a consul. Marius' support came from the common people, and he opened the ranks of military service to the proletarians, men who had no property and could not buy weapons of their own. Marius' reforms allowed poor men to better their lot by serving in the army and led to the creation of an army that was more loyal to its commanders than to the Republic. Soldiers became clients of military patrons, and although he lost political importance, Marius pioneered the system of client armies. This is going to be an incredible problem for the Roman Republic, and it's going to contribute significantly to the decline of the Republic. When Rome rejected its Italian allies demands for citizenship, non-citizens in many regions demanded benefits from conquests and formed a confederacy to fight Rome from 91 to 97 BCE. This became known as the Social War. Lucius Cornelius Sulla was a military commander who quelled uprisings in Italy and Asia Minor. Although the Roman army won the bloody war, this was a very bloody war, citizenship was extended to all freeborn peoples in Italy. So Rome recognized that there was a demand for this, and in order to sort of appease those people who are making these demands and causing problems, they went ahead and granted the citizenship. Sulla's successful generalship actually won him election as consul in 88 BCE. Sulla was chosen to put down the rebellion of King Mithridates in Asia Minor, but when his rival Marius tried to take his command, Sulla began a civil war by attacking and capturing Rome and then going on to crush the rebellion. When he returned in 83 BCE, he once again crushed his enemies at Rome and exterminated his opponents, prescribing his enemies and making them hunted men. The Senate appointed him dictator. As dictator, he favored the optimates and limited the power of tribunes. So here are the effects of Sulla. Sulla's short career revealed strengths and weaknesses in Roman values as well as the changes that were taking place in Roman society. Success in war was increasingly oriented towards plunder. This is why people got into the business of making war, because they felt it would be the means to enrich themselves. The patron-client system led soldiers to follow generals. So in the past, the patron-client system had functioned as sort of an informal education system. Maybe informal is not the right word, but this was a way of training younger men to become leaders. But now we see that patron-client system changing and soldiers are giving their allegiances to generals rather than to the Roman Republic. It also led to competition for status and individual prestige could actually overshadow concern for public service and become a force that pulled the Republic apart. And we're going to see that happen. And so here's a map of, as I as I just talked about, Sulla was sent to Mithridates kingdom to to quell that rebellion. And so you can see its proximity to some of the Roman territories. Just an interesting interesting map. Now Sulla became a model for other powerful generals. He was pretty instrumental in changing the way the patron-client system worked. And later generals were going to follow in his footsteps. Pompey, for example, supported Sulla and he defeated a massive slave rebellion led by the gladiator Spartacus. You've probably heard of Spartacus. Pompey demanded and received a consulship in 70 BCE. Although he had not climbed the ladder of offices that you traditionally were supposed to climb in order to to qualify for a consulship. Pompey then exterminated pirates in the Mediterranean and became wildly popular. Romans loved him. He then from there led successful campaigns in the eastern Mediterranean against the Seleucid Kingdom in 64 BCE. As we saw in the last week, the Seleucid Kingdom was undone. By its contact with Rome, it didn't win that conflict. Pompey's enemies attempted to turn the growing numbers of Roman poor against him. So frustrated by the Senate's efforts to control the territories he conquered, Pompey agreed to share power with his rivals. And his rivals were Crassus and Caesar. In 60 BCE, this is about the time that this was occurring, and his goal was that he hoped that he could force his decisions through the Senate. So he entered into this agreement of allegiance, of shared power for the purposes of subverting the Senate. Caesar was elected as consul and actually built a client army through his invasion of Gaul. And Crassus profited politically and through his personal control of tax collection in Asia Minor. So Pompey, Crassus, and Caesar all benefited from this arrangement. Caesar's client army and popular support led him into conflict with Pompey, however. So this partnership didn't last for too long. After seizing Rome, Caesar fought Pompey in Spain and Greece. In 48 BCE, his troops defeated Pompey and his Senate allies. So, he went to fight Pompey. Pompey had allies in the Senate, but Caesar was able to beat them. He defeated them at the Battle of Pharsalus in central Greece. Pompey fled to Egypt as a result, where Caesar defeated him again and restored Pompey's lover who, sorry, not Pompey's lover. He restored, Caesar restored his lover, Cleopatra the seventh, to the Egyptian throne. Caesar had a relationship with Cleopatra. You probably have heard that story as well. And we're going to talk a little bit more about that. By 45 BCE, Caesar had won the Civil War and attempted to unite Rome as a dictator. Caesar manipulated elections and controlled the government. He was very effective at doing this. He was mild to his opponents, but enraged the optimates. Some senators, including his close friend Brutus, whose ancestors were supposed to have overthrown Rome's first king. You'll recall that story from the Rape of Lucretia. Brutus and some of his co-conspirators assassinated Caesar in the Senate on March 15th, 44 BCE. These so-called liberators who murdered Caesar had no plans for a successor government and vendettas and violence continued as a result. This was not a good time in the Roman Republic. It was a very dangerous and tenuous time. So I want you to take a look at this. This is a coin that was produced in the days of Julius Caesar. And I want you to take a look at it and think about what the message is that it's attempting to communicate to the people. So as we saw in an earlier lecture on Greece, we saw that Athenian coin that had the portrait of Athena on one side and the owl, the symbol of Athena, on the other. So in this one, we see something very different. And so this is reflecting Roman values. Something you might think about is that Caesar in distributing this coin is emphasizing the importance of faithfulness and fidelity to core values. And you can see that in the, it's, I don't know how well you can see it, but there's a statue of Athena in there. And so this is what this is symbolizing. He also emphasized fidelity to history. You can see the son carrying his father and the importance of a strong leader. And this would be the depiction of the famed Aeneas. The coin has Caesar in large letters on the side, suggesting that Caesar will bring these values and stability to Rome. So this is a propaganda piece for Caesar. Now, would you argue that this coin is an example of propaganda? Do you agree with me? Do you not agree with me? I would say that that this is a piece of propaganda because it appears that what Caesar is trying to do in minting this coin is he's trying, he's attempting to control and promote his image and send a message about himself through his use of this coin. He's winning the war of images as well as military victories. And it's important to remember that a coin like this would have probably been distributed throughout the Roman Empire and we've already seen, or the Roman Republic, and we've already seen that that empire is quite large. And so images like this were very important in terms of being able to carry a message across vast lands and diverse peoples and languages. And so one last map. This is just, this is a great map of where we wind up at towards the end of this chapter, the material that we're covering. And so in yellow, in a little bit of yellow, you can see Roman client states. And so these were a little bit different. These were client states that were dependent on Rome, owed them tribute. So there was a back-and-forth kind of relationship, but they still preserved somewhat of a level of independence. Whereas in the orange, this is Roman territory. This is the Roman Empire by the time of Caesar's death in 44 BCE.