By the second century CE the Roman Empire, now encompassing the Mediterranean basin and beyond, was in its glory days. With conquest largely completed, the pax Romana (Roman peace) generally prevailed and commerce flourished, as did the arts and literature. The empire enjoyed a century (96-180 CE) of autocratic but generally benevolent rule. In 155 CE a well-known scholar and orator form the city of Smyrna on the west coast of Anatolia (present-day Turkey) arrived for a visit to the imperial capital of Rome. He was Aelius Aristides (ca. 117-181 CE), a widely traveled Greek-speaking member of a wealthy landowning family whose members had been granted Roman citizenship several decades earlier. While in Rome, Aristides delivered to the imperial court and in front of the emperor, Antonius, a formal speech of praise and gratitude, known as a panegyric, celebrating the virtues and achievements of the Roman Empire.
Read the following excerpt The Roman Oration by Aelius Aristides in 155 CE.
Answer the following questions, in paragraph form, following the guidelines on the Forum Instructions and Grading handout (shared with you in Google). You do not have to address each question in order, but you must address all five questions within your answer. Your answer should be multiple paragraphs. Include citations from the article, The Roman Oration (Doc 1) and from textbook Ways of the World chapter three (Strayer 149).
1. What does Aristides identify as the unique features of the Roman Empire? Which of these features in particular may have given the empire a measure of legitimacy in the eyes of its many subject peoples? What other factors, unmentioned by Aristides, may have contributed to the maintenance of Roman authority?
2. What does Aristides mean by referring to the empire as a "common democracy of the world"?
3. Why might Aristides, a Greek-speaking resident of a land well outside the Roman heartland, be so enamored of the empire?
4. To what extent does Aristides' oration provide evidence for the development of a composite Greco-Roman culture and sensibility within the Roman Empire.
5. How does this speech compare, in both style and content, with that of Pericles' Funeral Oration?
Aristides has an oration about Rome in which was extremely exaggerated. Both Pericles and Aristides orations greatly over exaggerated the greatness of Rome and Greece, respectively. Aristides says, “You do not reign within fixed boundaries, and another state does not dictate the limits of the land you control” (doc 1, c), which makes Rome seem bigger than what it is. While Pericles did something similar when he discussed the benefits of Athenian democracy. Both orations try to praise and laud the governments, but Aristides said the Roman government is better than any other in the world, because it gives citizenship to any conquered people within its borders without taking their identity, and the method of governing that was used was quite different (Doc 1, j, L). What Aristides meant by "common democracy" is democracy was a very common type of government used in many other empires and civilizations around the world during the time period (Doc 1, g). The two speeches compare in style and content because they both talk about their views and beliefs on the two different empires. They both had to do with a government in some way, shape or form. I think they were both philosophers who had a big impact on the empires. The unique features Aristides saw in the Roman Empire were said to be vast and comprehensive in size. "Your empire is much greater for its perfection, than the area its borders encircles" He seems to be in love with this place, admiring even the little things in which creates the empire. (Doc 1 e,i). The Roman Empire had been split up into two groups, The Hellene, or a non-Hellene. "Non-Helene, was someone from outside the empire or some of the empire's uneducated mass, to travel(Doc k, l)". The empire was proud to be who they were "The Romans".
ReplyDeleteI do not fully agree with what you said about him exaggerating because he thinks that this empire is the best one. To me its his own idea and thoughts. I do agree with everything else you said. Both speeches were different and you explained them great. I would suggest that you describe why they were a little different to explain more about one another.
DeleteI don't feel he was exaggerating, just extremely proud. One of my assumptions, based on Aristides pride of this empire, was that maybe he was directly affected by the widely accepted idea that people shouldn't be discriminated against. This could be reason for his describing Rome in such a high manor.
DeleteSome of the unique features of the Roman empire were, first the size of the empire, second was the amount of trade the Romans did, third was the fact that they gave citizenship to some people and almost treated the non-romans equally, and finally the thing that set them apart was their firm, but not unkind rule (Doc 1 B, E, F, H, J, K). Some things that could have given the empire a sense of legitimacy was the size, which meant that they were serious about expansion, and their strong government, which was very generous to the subjects of the empire and did not establish any resentment to the minds of the people. These factors could also work the same with the maintenance of Roman authority, the people had no reason to disobey Roman authority, so it was easy to keep the people of the empire in order.
ReplyDeleteRome was a huge empire and democracy was the government of that empire. So the statement that Aristides said about Rome’s common democracy means that it was, literally, the democracy of the world. It was the most practiced democracy, in Rome, and it was probably the best democracy, at the time.
I think that Aristides is so enamored in Rome, because it was such a great empire, that it was hard not to become sucked into the greatness of it (I’m saying this as if I was a person in the empire). He was also giving this oration in front of the Emperor, which it would have been a bad idea to talk badly about the empire in front of the emperor himself.
Aristides talks a lot about the Hellenes and their significance. He talked about the rights they had, and this gives proof of the composite Greco-Roman culture (Doc 1 H, L). These people, compared to non-Hellenes had citizenship and a lot more rights. His oration gives proof of this, that other people haven’t given.
Both of these speeches glorify their nations. They are both very serious, but in different ways. The style of both of the orations are different, because Aristides is really only glorifying the Roman empire, Pericles was glorifying the soldiers who had died. They both had given the orations with good intentions, so they weren’t very different from each other.
So, I think that the thing that made the Roman empire so successful was its government, its democracy made it not establish resentment to citizens, thus keeping them in check, and the leaders kept a strong, but not harsh way of spreading the government.
I agree with what you said about Rome being a big empire, and the citizenship they gave to the non-Romans. I also liked how you said that they treated non-Romans equal to the Romans themselves. The democracy was one of the biggest points of the article and you are absolutely right about the government being a democracy.
DeleteI agree with you on common democracy, I liked how you said that it was the government of the empire. It was the only one they knew.
DeleteI agree with you especially on how different Pericles and Aristides glorified their empire. They both had different ways that Pericles glorified the military and Aristides focused more on the people and governing what they all ready had. They were both successful but with good intentions.
DeleteI had totally forgotten the fact that Pericles was glorifying the fallen. And I see what you mean about them both having similar intentions. I also disagree, though, because I got the impression that Pericles wasn't as good-intentioned as Aristides.
DeleteI also see what your saying about the Hellenes being valued over the non-Hellenes but I'm a little confused because Aristides spent a lot of time talking about all the equality of the empire and how none are valued over others.
I fully agree with the unique features of the Roman empire that you listed, especially the part about trade, because it was extremely emphasized in Aristide’s oration about how the city of
DeleteRome was the center of the Mediterranean and how trade came from a variety of far-away places. I liked the point you made about how he was giving the speech in front of the emperor so it would have been a bad idea to say anything bad at all. I wonder what would happen if he did say anything bad. Some of the things you said about the comparison between the two orations I didn’t think about but I really liked it.
You said that the letters were different from each other, but then you also said they weren't different from each other. I think you meant that the reason for which they were writing their letters were different, but their intentions were the same. They were both only focusing on the good qualities, they did not mention the bad ones, and if they did, they did not put any emphasis on it. If that is what you meant by them being the same and different, I agree with you.
DeleteI agree with what you said about Rome's greatest asset being its government. The Roman empire had a very powerful democratic government that, in its citizens eyes, dominated all others.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSome unique features about about the Roman Empire is that the Romans were remarkably tolerant of cultural and religious differences, and did not force conquered people to adopt Roman religion or even language. They only required that they make no alliances with foreign powers and furnish troops to the Roman Army. They were not even required to pay Roman taxes. When Aristides refers to the empire as a "common democracy of the world" he means that is that democracy is a very common type if government in other empires and civilization. I think that Aristides would be a enamored of the empire because he is still admired by many and he still says what is what. But he is also respected and people admire him and when they are in his presence they have love and are fascinated by him. Aristides' oration provide evidence for the development of a composite Greco-Roman culture and sensibility within the Roman Empire by putting citizens in two categories "Hellene and non-Hellene". Where Hellene did not refer simply to an ethnic Greek and Non-Hellene, or barbarian, was either someone from the empire or one of the empire's uneducated masses. Then furthermore, last but not least the speeches in both were very hard to understand and to comprehend.
ReplyDeleteI agree, but it seems to me that Aristides exaggerated his account in order to show Rome as the greatest empire (which was his objective in the first place) and thus had a deliberate bias, which I guess is okay in this instance(though it could be the opposite).
DeleteI agree with you about how Rome was tolerant to culture and religious differences. We still see this in our world today in the United States, which means Rome had the best empire for their people to tolerate.
DeleteI agree with everything you said, except the Romans accepting other Religions and not forcing others to accept it. They actually did force people to accept it, like when in the textbook it talks about how the Romans persecuted the Christians, because it was not the actual religion. It was only later when they began to accept Christianity as an actual acceptable religion.
DeleteI really liked what you said about the Roman empire being very tolerant of others’ culture and beliefs, that was something that I totally forgot about when writing my answer. The foriegn religions that entered was a very important and a surprising thing that happened in the Roman empire and I don’t know how I forgot about it. You also made a good point about how Aristides was a very respected man and how people looked up to him and were fascinated by him.
DeleteAristide explains, how unique the roman empire is when he talks about the expansion of Rome and how advanced they became. The Romans excepted people even if they were not citizens of the empire itself. Rome was divided but they were still equal (D2 H, I , J ,K ).
ReplyDeleteRome seemed to have accepted many different people, and welcomed them in as their own people, this may have influenced other city-sates to accept Rome's laws and still feel like they never left there home land. So therefore; many people would feel the legitimacy of Rome. (D1 L,M).
Other factors, the Roman empire differed from the others because In the beginning Aristides mentions how Rome had five good emperors. They were liked or disliked this may have caught attention with the last emperor, because as Aristide states the most admired Emperor was "Antoninus Pius (r. 138-161 ) He had a long reign , made many friends and ended with few enemies. (D1 G,G3,G4).
Aristides, gives us the term "common democracy" , which is in meaning one government, because it was within every ones belief. It was common, and that was what the Roman empire knew (D2 N , O ).
I believe Aristides was so enamored by the Roman empire because, he explains it as a dream land, something everyone would want to join or come into. He loves and knows about this because the empire itself expanded and was well known and he admired it.
I believe Aristides provided a lot of evidence that was needed. He mentioned about the Farm lands and where Rome trades (D2 I,J). He does explain how Rome develops, he says how Rome geographers believed that there were three continents surrounded by a single great ocean ( D2, H) .
Both of the styles honor their empire, both of them are exaggerated in what they believe and how they did things but they are different because in The funeral oration of the Roman empire Aristides honors his land and laws and the accomplishments of the empire. The funeral oration of Pericles' He talks more about war.
I like the way you said that both of them "honor their empire", that was a good way to put it. Although, I liked that statement, I disagree when you said that they exaggerated. I think that they were just proud with their beliefs. Other than that, I agree with everything else you said.
DeleteAristides identifies the unique features of the size of rome, trade and trade routes ( Doc 1. A,B ). The space of Rome gave a measure of legitimacy because it allowed more people to travel to the city-state and do more trade there. He is describing that there can only be one great ruler at one time and they rule the same as everyone else does. Aristides is so enamored of the empire because he thinks the way its set up is a safe and suitable place to be at.The extent that Aristides went to was that anyone would be able to pass into a society with freedom and no problems. Its different because this speech was talking of how great this empire is and why he likes it, while the other speech was talking about the soldiers who had died in the war.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you when you say that Aristides is enamored by the idea of Rome being a safe place. He is very ignorant of the idea of Rome being attacked. He only talked about how great it is and nothing about what can be done to make it better.
DeleteI agree with your responses. I never really thought about the advantage in trade that you mentioned. You really gave me a different look on a couple things.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteUnique features of the Roman empire was Julius Caesar, the Pax Romana, the Five Good Emperors. Julius Caesar was absolute ruler of Rome, which means he possessed divine authority. He was Rome's first ruler and created the Pax Romana, the Roman peace. The Five Good Emperors helped Rome expand. The emperors displayed sensitivity to law, good government, they had to maintain internal stability and prosperity and combine public work projects in both Italy. (Doc 1 A,B,C)
ReplyDeleteAristides means by ”common democracy of the world” is that every civilization has the same concept of being under the rule one man, the best fit person to lead them (Doc 1 H). No matter what country you live in, you still have a ruler, like some have kings and queens, while we have a president.
A Greek-speaking resident of a land outside Rome is enamored to the empire beacause they think that people should have the freedom to travel as they wish. The proverb said “ with or without prosperity, to travel with ease whenever he wishes, as through passing from homeland to homeland.” (Doc 1 I)
“Anyone who shared in the Greco-Roman high culture of the empire. Thus, Aristides, a native of Asia Minor, was a Hellene.” (Doc 1, I) This shows that the development of of the empire spread through Greece and Rome, which Greco-Roman culture. They adopted each others traditions and were alike.
Both of the speeches were explaining their empire. Aristides focused more on the people and government. I also don’t think he exaggerated as much as Pericles. Pericles, thought that having the best army would make the most successful empire. They both had successful empires despite their way of governing.
I agree with the first part, but it would help if you elaborated more on who the Five Good Emperors were. Otherwise it is a perfectly good post.
DeleteI agree with you on your answers. I never thought about the fact that Aristides actually was a Hellene. It proves a good point of why he was so enamored in the empire, and the fact that a complex Greco-Roman culture had developed. I probably would have not picked it up if you didn't point it out in your answer.
ReplyDeleteAristides takes great pride in Rome. He puts emphasis on all its positive qualities and down plays all its negative qualities (the very few mentioned in his oration). Aristides may have developed such a love for Rome due to treatment he had received over his life time. He puts emphasis on the lack of discrimination Rome shows against foreign people: rich and poor(doc 1, m-r). This is one of Rome's unique qualities; it's ability to expand effortlessly through sympathy and consideration.
ReplyDeleteCompared to other empires of the time, Rome was very unique. Not only did Rome accept foreigners but it welcomed them adding to its vast size(doc 1, h). Rome was a democracy and republic, and according to Aristides, the best of the time(doc 1, n). The people got to choose their governors and didn't mind their rule. With no resentment against the ruling system, rebellion was low and crime scarce. In addition, though it wasn't mentioned in the oration, people being able to choose the governors they liked could have added to the trust put in the ruling system.
When Aristides refers to Rome as being a "common democracy" he probably just meant that a common way of ruling for the empires of that time was democracy. Though, not any democracy. Aristides was confident in claiming Rome to be the best democracy of the time(doc 1, n).
I don't believe Aristides to be exaggerating, just extremely proud like Pericles was. They both built up the good of their empires and played down the bad. Though, I feel Aristides claims and speech over all were more heartfelt. While reading Aristides oration, I got the feeling he wanted to advertise or even promote Rome because of his great pride of its power.
I agree with this completely. Aristides puts much emphasis on the positive, and it's hard to even find the negative qualities because he doesn't make a big deal about it. Also I agree with how you said you didn't believe Aristides was bragging, just proud like Pericles. I don't believe either one were bragging, I think they were just proud of their democracy as a whole. They both did not put any emphasis on the bad qualities of their empires.
DeleteI agree with this because they did put the emphasis on the good rather than the bad. I do also agree how he takes pride in Rome and how he feels about Rome. I think that Aristides was pretty confident in everything he said and was for sure of what he meant.
DeleteI agree immensely. Aristides does put a large emphasis on the good in Rome. I also agree that he was very proud in his discoveries within Rome,
DeleteSome of the things that Aristides identifies as unique features of the Roman empire are that they had a lengthy rule compared to past empires, they created peace, the Roman empire encompassed a very large area, the emperors’ and government’s firm control over the empire well and fairly, order was maintained, trade was extremely successful, citizens felt safe inside empire, and the Roman empire offered citizenship to many people. All these factors contribute to the legitimacy of the empire in the eyes of the people (doc 1 a b c d e f g h i j k l). Some of the other factors, or features, that Aristides did not mention that contributed to the maintenance of Roman authority were that people felt pride in their empire because the empire rose from nothing, they valued “rule of law, the rights of citizens, the absence of pretension, upright moral behavior, [and] keeping one’s word” (Strayer 130), and the impressive army (Strayer 129 130 131).
ReplyDeleteAristides refers to the empire as a “common democracy of the world” and this means that Rome controls the whole world fairly. It is referring to the whole world because of Rome’s size and power. He calls it a democracy because democracies are fair and are powered by the people, even though Rome is a republic, Aristides thinks the Roman empire is very fair like a democracy (doc 1 a c e i).
Aristides might have been so enamored of the empire because he’s a scholar and has learn about past empires and of the Roman empire and compared them and finding that he thinks Rome is the best.
Aristides’ oration provides evidence for the development of a composite Greco-Roman culture when he says and the editor added in “Hellene and non-Hellene [by this time the term Hellene did not refer simply to an ethnic Greek. It meant anyone who was a Roman citizen and who shared in the Greco-Roman high culture of the empire. Thus, Aristides, a native of Asia Minor, was a Hellene. A non-Hellene, or barbarian, was either someone from outside the empire or one of the empire's uneducated masses], with or without property, to travel with ease wherever he wishes, as though passing from homeland to homeland” (doc 1).
Aristides’ oration compares to Pericles’ funeral oration because both orations glorified Rome and Athens. Also, both never mentioned anything bad about either empire and only said, and over-exaggerated, the positive things.
I disagree with you when you said that both philosophers glorified their empires. I believe that Aristides did not really have a liking nor hatred for Rome while Pericles defended Greece and it's glory.Though, I do agree that both of them exaggerated their points on the empires immensely
DeleteAristides refers to the empire as a common democracy of the world. This was said to show that Rome was not just a democracy for the people of Rome but a democracy for everyone. This is what makes them a multiethnic empire. He uses common democracy of the world to show that there is one ruler that leads this widely multiethnic group. (Doc1 H) Aristides identifies Rome’s trade, ethnic citizenship, and the culture as the unique features of the Roman Empire. The size of the territories and number of people they conquered set the legitimacy for it’s peoples subjects. The people were conquered and each region was given a guard to protect Rome’s regions which helped set the legitimacy for it’s size. I believe the pax romana also helped Rome’s authority because it was a time of peace and no war which helped maintain the government. (doc1 e,f) Aristides was enamored by the empire because his family were wealthy landowners and were used to the life of aristocracy , yet now he is living in Rome and all these ethnic people are not set apart from other citizens(Doc1 d). Aristides' oration provides evidence for the development of a composite Greco-Roman culture and sensibility within the Roman Empire by saying that “it is better to be a roman citizen , or one of those people under your rule”. He even says before that a non-hellene is a is a barbarian without property that wanders from place to place. THis shows us that he believes the greco-roman culture is better than being a wandering non-hellene (Doc1 J,K,L). This speech contrasts with Pericles’ funeral oration in the way that Pericles defends Greece and loves everything about, where with Aristides, he doesn’t have a hatred nor liking for Rome.
ReplyDeleteI don't agree with what you said about Aristides not having a hatred nor a liking for Rome. He glorified the empire and said that every day there was like a holiday. He also said, "Cities glisten with radiance and charm, and the entire earth has been made beautiful like a garden.... Like a perpetual sacred flame, the celebration is unending..." If that doesn't sound like he's professing his love for Rome, then I don't know what does.
DeleteAristides identifies that there is no foreigners, and that trade, and the trade routes were unique. There was a single destination for trade, shipping, agriculture, and metallurgy. There was also a common channel where all waters of the ocean met up, so they were able to trade easily (doc 1 J, T)
ReplyDeleteWhen Aristides says a “common democracy of the world,” he is meaning that they have one ruler. Many democracy’s are placed under one ruler, not many, so he is just referring to the “common” democracies.
I think Aristides is so enamored of the empire because he was welcome, and not considered a foreigner (doc 1 o). He had rights to travel anywhere. He was also just treated like everyone else, not any different.
He showed the development for a composite Greco- Roman culture when talking about Hellene, and non-Hellene. Hellene referred to Roman and Greek citizens who shared the Greco-Roman culture (doc 1 t)
This speech compares to Pericles’ in many ways. They both were glad and supported what they were saying very much so. They didn’t focus on the negative things within their topics. Mostly they were soft spoken but at the same time put great emphasis in what they had to say.
Aristides identified unique features such as it being surrounded by an ocean, it having an equinox, its trade, and that the "sea extends like a belt". Out of these qualities, its trade is this most unique feature to the citizens because its only a one way trade route. It also worked through the ocean (doc 1 a-e).
ReplyDelete2. Aristides meant "common democracy of the world" because a lot of countries adopted it after the Greek empire made it famous, such as the Roman empire. It was a common way to rule a country.
3. Aristides was probably so enamored by the Roman empire because it was such a unique land according to him. I think he just wanted to learn more about it because it was a very popular place.
4. The extent he went to while talking about a composite Greco-Roman culture he was talking about Hellene and non-Hellene (doc 1).
5. This speech compares to Pericles' because they both wanted to get their message across. They were both persistent in what they wanted to tell the reader and weren't focused on the bad things, only good. They were strong speakers in the sense that they were determined to say what was on their mind.
Aristides first states that the Roman Empire was bigger than the Persian empire, and that an empire is not ruled by boundaries. Rome’s trade routes are also eloquently described here(doc. 1 a, b). The idea that Rome is a veritable world market can also add to Aristides’ credibility. When Aristides refers to a “common world democracy”, he also noted that there were Romans and non-Romans as well, possibly implying that the separation was simply a part of being a citizen. It is likely that the Roman empire had benefited him greatly at some point, so he would make it his obligation to appraise it as much as necessary(doc 1, d). Aristides also explains how Greco-Roman culture developed. This became the Hellenic culture and, along with Roman citizens, included anyone that lived in the empire, as they also got citizenship. anyone who lived outside of the empire were considered barbarians(doc 1, f). Comparing this to Pericles’ funeral oration, I find that they both speak highly of their culture, but while Pericles goes into detail about authority, Aristides talks more about the empire and its assets and citizens.
ReplyDeleteAristides identifies Roman's two century reign, territorial expansion and reached morals as unique features within its Empire (Doc 1, A-C). The particular feature of morals increased the legitimacy within the the eyes of the subjects. Having good government and sensitive law allowed the people to really grasp and see what exactly the goals were intended for the Empire. Roman authority also may have been contributed to the maintenance through the idea of a democracy; allowing the civilians in when it came to huge decisions or even just letting their voices being heard.
ReplyDeleteWhen Aristides refers the empire as "common democracy of the world" he's talking about the equality to the hard workers, non Romans, and to the foreigners (Doc 1, H-J). He tells us how in the empire, EVERYONE is equal. Those who do little are still lifted up, however, those who do a lot, are still lifted, however just a bit higher. There is no separation within the people.
Aristides may have been enamored of this empire, simply because he had such a large admiration for it. He's a scholar, who I'm guessing has done his research within these empires and he finds Rome the best.
Greco-Roman culture goes hand in hand with the Roman Empire because of the desire to become one. The Hellene and non-Hellene are to be seen without any difference (Doc 1, O and P)
The two Orations compare because both stress the good within the Roman Empire. Although the good is a little exaggerated, they both still glorify.
Aristides identifies democracy, power, equality and great expansion as some unique features of the great Roman empire. Equality, all in all, was one of the qualities that made Rome legit and that made citizens actually think that it was as good an empire as Aristides described. Another factor that may have contributed to Rome’s success as an empire, though Aristides didn’t directly mention, was the fact that the emperor’s were saw and treated like gods, and rulers socialized with the religious cults.
ReplyDeleteBy referring to the empire as a “common democracy of the world,” Aristides is pointing out how vast and powerful Rome was becoming. It also could be an exaggerated metaphor; his way of saying that the Roman empire was the greatest democracy in the world and other empire’s merely followed in their footsteps.
Aristides, though he was a Greek speaking man, was most likely enamored by the Roman empire because felt some type of connection to the empire rather than his Greek homeland. He was made a citizen in Rome and he prospered there. (“Aristides, for example, retained his citizenship in the Anatolian city of Smyrna while simultaneously possessing Roman citizenship (Doc 1, C).”)
Aristides includes insight in their governing, their beautiful cities, and the empire’s geographical location. Both the Greek and the Roman Empires had similar governments, both democratic and both surrounded by bodies of water.
Aristides’ and Pericles’ orations are similar in a few ways. For one, they both describe how great one’s empire is and how it was an honor to live there during that time. They mention all of the positivities of living in said empire (Rome for Aristides and Greece for Pericles). Both of the speeches, however, have an element of exaggeration to them. Aristides stated that every day in Rome is like a holiday and Pericles said that the Greek citizens must perfect and excellent.
Is the complete oration in praise of Rome available online anywhere?
ReplyDelete