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 frequently mentions the vastness of the Roman empire, saying that its size is limitless, and that its continents surround the sea and produce everything for the empire, (Doc 1, A, B // Strayer 130). He also describes Rome as a “common market for the world”, a center of trade, and a “common channel” where all trade, agriculture, shipping and arts--everything--of the empire converges and exists, (Doc 1, C, D, E). All people, Hellene or not, have the freedom to travel the empire (Doc 1, N). Aristides said that the empire is treated like a city state, and everyone is governed with care, protection, and equality, (Doc 1, F, G, L). No one is a foreigner, and a distinction-free union of harmony is present, (Doc 1, I, M). Rich and poor are governed with safety, regardless of every citizen’s original home, (Doc 1, K, L, M // Strayer 130).
ReplyDeleteThe most important feature of the Roman empire--and most legitimate in the citizens’ eyes--praised by Aristides is the fairness of citizenship. Most person in the empire are granted citizenship, unless they are a slave. Those who are accomplished, noble, and powerful, but are not of native blood are still given citizenship, as well as almost any other common free person, (Doc 1, H). Being a Roman citizen did not, however, erase the blood connection to other cultures outside of the empire; therefore, assimilation was not total, (Strayer 137). In addition, the ones excluded from Roman citizenship were not discouraged or angry, according to Aristides, (Doc 1, J). Roman citizens took pride in their republican, freeing political system, (Strayer 130).
Another factor that helped Roman leaders gain imperial power was divine sanction. Emperors were regarded as gods, and living rulers were popularized with religious cults, (Strayer 136).
Aristides calls the Roman empire a “common world democracy”. This is in reference to the fact that the Roman empire was so immense and overarching, and the government was equal and fair. The empire was the heart of the Mediterranean world, and extended from Britain to North Africa to Southwest Asia, (Strayer 130, 131). Assimilation of citizens to the Hellene culture commenced, and people were generally happy and proud with the peaceful, free Roman land they lived in, (Strayer 130, 137). The government was benevolent and flexible, even during the periods of aristocracy. The democracy, however, was a new and wonderful concept that reigned across the Roman empire, (Strayer 130). It was “common” to the people because the empire was so huge, most had not travelled far enough to leave Roman territory.
Aristides, though being outside of Rome itself, could easily see how great the empire was during the pax Romana. The combined cultures of Rome and the rest of the Mediterranean were enticing to all, (Strayer 137).
In his oration, Aristides said “It is now possible for Hellene and non-Hellene travel with ease wherever he wishes, as though passing from homeland to homeland”. He himself lived in Anatolia (modern-day Turkey) near Greece, and, being a Roman citizen, he was assimilated to the combined Greco-Roman culture of the area in which he resided, (Doc 1, N).
Aristides’ oration was similar to Pericles’ in a few ways. Content-wise, they are both accounts of their empires’ democracies. They both describe the many positives of being a citizen in each empire, as well as mention the unity of their peoples under the democracies. Stylistically, both writers are formal and descriptive, and somewhat boasting.
You did really good citing all your information and going in to great detail also.
DeleteSierra, I wanted to compliment you, and your work. You are always have good answers and well, detailed answers at that. I will have to agree on pretty much every thing you have said so far. I can't really find anything to critique you on, I just feel that all in all you've done fantastic on answering the questions. I could tell you've taken your time on them unlike others, keep up the good work!
DeleteIn many ways, I agree with many of the things that you state within your response to the questions Sierra. I never took into account how the Romans could have used religion(since they had converted to Christianity) to uphold the Roman Authority by using divine sanction. The only I'm gonna nitpick you about, is that Rome did not have a democracy, Rome had a republic, which is fairly different compared to a democracy. Other then that, fine job Sierra.
DeleteJust like Ajani, I applaud you on the work you are presenting and how when I read it I grasp a better understand for what I read, so for that I also thank you. With the information you stated above I am able to read it and agree with the points you’ve made and like again, I really don’t have any critiques to give you. Like Jason said, you brought up a good point as to how the romans could have used religion to keep roman authority by using divine sanction.
Deletewhen i read your forums you help me better understand the questions, like the divine sanction would have completely slipped my mind if you wouldnt have brought it up. When you say that they were both boasting, you were right.They were flaunting how great their empire was and why shouldnt they boast both empires were pretty good
DeleteI agree with basically everything you've said. Reading this before I submitted my own helped me tweak a few things because it opened my eyes and made me look at some one the questions a bit differently.
DeleteFirst of all I have to say Great Job! You went into extreme detail, I applaud you for that, you cited all your work and did everything perfectly. I couldn't find a single thing wrong with it, the only thing though is that for question number 4 you had a different response and citing than I did, I mean I'm sure I got that one wrong but it just really confused me. But besides that point I think you did amazing, great job.
DeleteI like the length of your forum. I also agree with the statement you used, "Those who are accomplished, noble, and powerful, but are not of native blood are still given citizenship, as well as almost any other common free person". I also agree that the size of the Roman empire was impressive because of the era and the success. I also agree that both of the articles were similar. Also that they were both about the government forms. Finally I agree that Aristides not being born a Roman could see the actual greatness of the Roman empire.
DeleteAristides identifies the how the sensitivity to law and good government, internal stability, prosperity, extensive public projects and impressive infrastructure were some unique features of the Roman Empire.(Doc1 B,C,D) The sensitivity to law and good government gave the empire legitimacy in its peoples eyes. Having a strong good government gives people the sense of confidence, power, and protection. The reliability of the empires government gave its people the motivation to be successful and be prosperous, and allowed them to follow their pursuit of well being. If the Roman Empire had a weak government none of the other unique features and prosperity of the empire would have been possible. One of the unmentioned factors that could have contributed to the maintenance of Roman authority is civil war. I would think many people would have been tired of the constant wars that went on withing the empire. With that being said people would have been more accepting and willing to listen to Roman authority.
ReplyDeleteI think his reference to the empire as a "common democracy of the world" is an exaggerated but metaphoric one. I saw his reference as his saying that there are so much diversity and different cultures and people living within the empire that it is a "world democracy". (Doc1 T,U,V)
Aristides might be so enamored of the empire because it has allowed him to prosper. Aristides is a wealthy land owner and when he came to the empire it allowed him to do things that couldn't be done anywhere else. He had just admired the quality of the empire and all the wealth, knowledge, and diversity it had to offer. No other empire was was as superior at the time(Doc1 O) The commerce was consistent anytime of the year.(Doc1 I) The government was strong and it was just known for the quality of the empire rather then the quantity of it despite it being extremely large.(Doc1 P, R, A1)
Aristides' oration provides the evidence that within the Roman Empire that there are no foreigners.(Doc1 U) He says that citizenship is given anywhere and that whether you live in on the other side of the sea or the farthest par t of the land you are still granted citizenship and in every city throughout the empire you are no less a citizen then you fellow natives. (Doc 1 T, W)
In my opinion both speeches have a style of exaggeration but contrast in the content that one speaks about how the government makes a good empire and another says a good person makes a good government. The contrast in the speeches is that Aristides brings up the point of that the a good government makes the people happy and therefor a better empire and Pericles claims that in order to have a good empire the people have to be able to create a good government and be held to a high standard, their points of views are complete opposites. Aristides explains how amazing the empire is is has been one of the greatest ones and its partly because of its extremely good government. He talks about how the government makes the people want to do better and ultimately you will have an amazing empire. Pericles says that with having the right people will you have a good government then a stable empire.(Doc2 A) He explains that is the people have to be obedient to authority and treat everyone the same under the law.(Doc2 E) Both of the speeches are exaggerating with Aristides saying that everyday is like a holiday and Pericles saying that the people must perfect and excellent.(Doc2 F)
I really like what you said here. The only thing is, you forgot to sight from the textbook, as did I. I wholeheartedly appreciate the fact that you went into great detail. I can clearly see that you learned much from the text. You did a great job here.
DeleteLike Dante said, you did a good job. You factoring in the civil war (I almost forgot about it XD) as a way for the citizens to look up to the authority rule was a good and valid point. Though for the part where you took the 'common democracy of the world", I can see that he was referring to Rome being a world of democracy. But, you forgot a key point, what does that world refer too? Did it mean specifically their world? Or the entire world? Other then that, this was a really good response to the questions on top.
DeleteI would have to agree with both Dante and Jason. I agree with Dante because you did not cite from the textbook, but neither did I. You really did go into great detail, and it is noticeable that you read and contextualized this. I feel that you learned something from this text. I also liked how you cited from the Oration each time you used information from it. I believe you did a great job and it is noticeable that you learned something.
DeleteI agree with your statements. I like when you said that a contribution to the empire's maintenance was civil war because it tired the people out and could have led them to be more compliant with authority. That's a good thought. Also, I like the way you analyzed the "common democracy of the world" part. Indeed the empire was a large collection of many different cultures. Good job.
DeleteAristides identifies trade, great expansion, and democracy as some of the unique features of the great Roman Empire (Doc 1 A, C, E). I believe that the world democracy allowed them to gain respect from the subjects. The multi-branched government benefited the empire and helped create a stable structure that extended the reign. Aristides saw Rome as a "common world democracy" because of its unique governing style that was effective, resulting true Romans and Romans with partial citizenship all functioned among each other (Doc 1, F). Although Aristides was not a Roman, he had a passion for the roman empire was very strong because he was mesmerized by it. The Oration gave a look at some Greco-Roman culture, it expressed the flourish of resources and tradition. His speech compared to Pericles' stylistically and by the content in the sense of glorifying Rome culture.
ReplyDeleteDante, your answer to " common world democracy" made me look at the question differently then I had before. I like what you put for your answer "its unique governing style that was effective, resulting true Romans and Romans with partial citizenship all functioned among each other (Doc 1, F). " I would have never thought of that. I also feel that you could have added much more to your paragraph than what you have down. There is so much more to be said, I know you could have written more.
DeleteI too agree with what Ajani said about your view on “common world democracy" for I wouldn’t have seen your perspective on unless I read what you had to say about it and I agree with what you have to say. I also agree with the point Ajani brought up about how much you wrote. I think you should have went more into depth about why Aristides was so found over Rome by talking about its diversity and how diversity intrigues foreigners because they are accepted more by those who are from Rome.
DeleteI agree with you Dante he does identify trade, great expansion, and democracy as some of the unique feature,I don't agree with you in that i think they earned their respect from the subjects by power, and partially Democracy. i Think his love for the Roman empire was because it was so much like Greeks not that he was mesmerized.The oration very much gave a look at Greco-Roman culture in that it all connected to Rome. I agree though that they both glorify the countries by peaking of them so fondly.
DeleteI agree you Dante with what you said about Aristides because he did indeed identify trade, great expansion, and democracy as some of the features of the Roman empire. Dante I also agree with what you said, that Aelius Aristides was extremely passionate about the Roman empire. I think that the reason that he was passionate because he was granted Roman citizenship. Also I agree that democracy allowed them to gain respect from the citizens.
DeleteIn the passage Aristides identifies the unique features of the Roman Empire being its size, bountiful amounts of manufactured items, citizenship, and equality. size of the Roman empire by saying, “The clear implication is that the Roman Empire is vaster than that of ancient Persia). Now, however, it has become fact. The land you possess equals what the sun can pass over, and the sun does encompass your land....” (Doc 1, A). The textbook also mentions the vastness of the Roman empire, “Rome subsequently became the center of an enormous imperial state that encompassed the Mediterranean basin and included parts of continental Europe, Britain, North Africa, and the Middle East” (Strayer 130). Aristides also mentions the abundant amount of manufactured goods, “Whatever each culture grows and manufactures cannot fail to be here at all times and in great profusion” (Doc1, B). Aristides talks about the empire giving citizenship to anyone worthy, “everywhere giving citizenship to all those who are more accomplished, noble, and powerful, even as they retain their native-born identities” (Doc 1, C). He also alluded to the equality throughout the empire, “Thus, the present government serves rich and poor alike, and your constitution has developed a single, harmonious, all-embracing union” (Doc 1, E). The features that gave the empire a measure of legitimacy was the granting of citizenship, “everywhere giving citizenship to all those who are more accomplished, noble, and powerful, even as they retain their native-born identities” (Doc 1, C) and the equality, “Thus, the present government serves rich and poor alike, and your constitution has developed a single, harmonious, all-embracing union” (Doc 1, E). Another factor that contributed to the maintenance of the Roman authority was the establishment of a Republic.
ReplyDeleteWhen Aristides refers to the empire as the, "common democracy of the world" he meant that the democracy of Rome was spread throughout the world. He taught that because in ancient geographers had false theories about the Earth, “Ancient Greek and Roman geographers believed that the three continents were surrounded by a single great ocean” (Doc 1, H). Since Aristides believed that there were only three continents, and Rome was controlling most of the land at the time, he believed that the democracy of Rome was the one and only.
Aristides, a Greek-speaking resident of a land well outside the Roman heartland, was so enamored of the Roman empire because he was granted citizenship, “Aristides, for example, retained his citizenship in the Anatolian city of Smyrna while simultaneously possessing Roman citizenship” (Doc 1,C) although he did not live in Rome, but in the Roman empire. He was so enamoured of the Roman empire because he lived during a time of peace and prosperity, “In the year 155, Publius Aelius Aristides (117 or 118 - ca. 180)” (Doc 1,G).
Aristides provides evidence for the development of a composite Greco-Roman culture and sensibility within the Roman Empire. In The Roman Oration by Aelius Aristides in 155 CE he says, “It is now possible for 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”(Doc 1, F).
In “The Roman Oration by Aelius Aristides in 155 CE” he speaks with delight, and in the Funeral Oration of Pericles is more solemn because it a funeral oration. A similarity in both passages is that both of them praise their empires. Also they both talk about their forms of government.
I really like how in to detail you went with all your answers.
DeleteI second in Kayla's comment. You went to extraordinary detail for each answer. You treated each answer as if it were its own forum, and gave great sources for each answer. Which reminds me of the fact that you did a great job siting all of your sources. You gave great answers for each question, and I feel like you truly did learn something new.
DeleteI love how you have so many good details in your answers. I also agree with your statements. Aristides talked a lot about equality and citizenship. I think that the main idea of the speech was about being equal, and also welcoming foreigners or travelers, having a more diverse empire. I really like your response.Good job!
DeleteAristides identifies power, own decisions, and governing in their own decision as a unique way of the Roman Empire (Doc 1,A,D,E). It was clear that there was a legitimacy to this empire just as soon as Aristides spoke of just how much of an expansion of Roman rule there had been across the Mediterranean. Despite a number of weaknesses within the Roman imperial system, the Roman Peace held up rather well for two centuries (Doc 1, O). Factors that contributed to the elongation of the Roman empire were things like trade, shipping, commerce and absolutely citizenship (Doc, F,I,J,M). When Aristides refers to the Empire as the "common democracy of the World" he is giving it a huge compliment, identifying that one ruler has been able to make Rome so profoundly promising that the only distinction between people is Roman and Non-Roman (Doc, I,J,N). Creating the biggest cause of the collapse of the empire, the overexpansion of Rome was a tool, which caused the gap between the rich and the poor to widen as the Roman empire grew (Strayer 139). With that said the organization of the social classes into two classes brought the people together, it also caused even tension between the higher and the lower classes and brought a massive internal problem within Roman territory, which caused the collapse of half the empire (Strayer 132, 133).
ReplyDeleteI like how your article is short and straight to the point. It has a lot of facts and citations. Not only that but you also number the citations. It has a lot of facts that are really just down to the point with so much info. I like how you mentioned the common democracy around the world, and the fact the Romans welcomed foreigners. It's great how you put so much info in such a short paragraph.
DeleteI like how you shortened your response to just one paragraph by combining the questions. I agree with your answers and I like the way you worded your answers so we knew exactly which questions you were addressing and answering. Your post helped me understand more about what Aristides was saying.
DeleteAristides believed that a unique feature of the Roman Empire was size, bountiful amounts of manufactured items, citizenship, and equality. He refers to the size of Rome by saying “the clear implication is that the Roman Empire is vaster than that of ancient Persia”. In ancient Rome, “there is (was) a common channel to Rome and all meet here: trade, shipping, agriculture, metallurgy-all the arts and crafts that are or ever were..” So obviously with this being said, they had quite a lot of manufactured goods. With citizenship and equality is was noticeable in his passage, frequently, that he wanted everyone to be nice to one another. When he says,”As on a holiday, the entire civilized world lays down the weapons that were its ancient burden and has turned to adornment and all glad thoughts-.” With this being said, all he wanted was the people of his civilization to have respect for eachother. I think the respect and equality were what made people see him as a legit empire. Some unmentioned qualities that may have contributed to the maintenance of the Roman empire may have been keeping the streets clean of filth and crime.
ReplyDeleteWhen Aristides says,”common democracy of the world,” he is saying that everyone is equal and ‘under the rule of one man, the best ruler and director….You have divided humanity.’ So long story, short, everyone has the same rights and privileges as a human and individual.
Aristides was probably enamored by the Roman empire because felt some type of connection to the empire rather than his Greek homeland.
The Roman Oration by Aelius Aristides in 155 CE he says, “It is now possible for 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.]”
Between “The Roman Oration” and “Pericles’ Funeral Oration” a similarity is that they both were speeches to praise the empire. A difference is that the Roman oration was a delightful speech, while the funeral oration was depressing and solemn; because obviously it was for a funeral. Also, I believe that both speeches were a bit exaggerated.
Aristides means when he refers to the empire as a “common democracy” of the world is that even though Rome was divided into Romans and non-Romans doesn’t mean one is higher than another. They are still equal because they are still citizens. “You have divided humanity into Romans and non-Romans,... and because you have divided people in this manner, in every city throughout the empire there are many who share citizenship with you, no less than the share citizenship with their fellow natives (Doc 1, H). Aristides being a Greek-speaking resident of a land well outside of the Roman heartland was so enamored of the empire because his family had received citizenship in 123 (Doc 1, E). Also because he “captured the spirit of prosperity, cosmopolitanism, and universal mission that characterized the attitude of so many of the Roman empires ruling elite during the second century (Doc 1, F).
ReplyDeleteIn Aristides oration he states how it is “ now possible for Hellene and non-Hellene could now travel with ease whenever he wishes as though passing from homeland to homeland” (Doc 1, T). In my opinion I think what Aristides was trying to say was that he wanted it to be possible so that the Roman empires could be a unity. Pericles’ and Aristides speeches compare in both style and content. Both speeches were passionate, and they meant what they were saying, although I felt like both speeches were a bit exaggerated. They also both believed in democracy, and had a formal writing style. Aristides identifies as the unique features of the Roman Empire is “ despite the number of weaknesses within the Roman imperial system, the Roman imperial system, the Roman peace held rather well for two centuries” ( Doc 1, B). Due to Rome’s number of weaknesses I assume because of this, this made Rome a very strong empire. Rome had a very powerful military, a structured government, and a successful empire (Doc 1, G).
When you say they were all equal, you're right because they were all considered equal if you had citizenship which almost every free man had.and the speeches were straight from the heart and it felt like they could remember those feelings even if they werent written on something else. Its formal but its weird because they were addressing a bunch of people but they were probably important people.
DeleteRome is a great empire, and is known as one of the biggest empires during its time. Aristides describes Rome as such, and much more. He praises their trade, how vast Rome is, and how Rome gives out citizenship to people within Rome’s borders (Doc 1 B, C). Aristides has shown that these are features that he believed are unique to the Roman Empire. In the eyes of the subjects, I think that the most outstanding feature to the citizens that appealed to the eyes of the subjects is most likely the how fairly the people in the empire are treated. Such as how many of the people who lived in Rome were given citizenship, except for the people who were in slavery at the time. Though, I also think that how vast Rome is, this could help in preventing many wars. Due to Rome’s immense size, I think this can contribute to the factor of seeing Rome as a legitimate empire due to the pride of being part of such a large empire. Also, a factor unmentioned by Aristides to help maintain rule in Rome, is how the Roman’s support for the empire to expand, in which the empire did expand, putting a sense in the citizens that they can trust their government to listen to their words (Strayer 132).
ReplyDeleteDue to the time frame of it being in the early Common Era, the people back then most likely didn’t know about the Americas in this period. What Aristides means when he says “common democracy of the world” is that Rome’s great way of governing has covered a good part of “their” world. In which Rome did encompass a majority of Europe (As far as the Britain and Germany), Northern Africa, and the Northern part of the Middle East (Strayer 131).
Aristides loved his country, as he loved the way it was governed and the way it ruled. In anyway, I would too, as living in the early ages, these are some advances for its time. Aristides also could have a great love for Rome, because it could be compared to Greece (Specifically Athens) way of governing. As being Greek born, he could compare it to how great Athens way of governing was. Also, it might just be that Rome was that great of an empire to live in, as the people were treated fairly and they were somewhat assimilated into Rome without any conflict.
Aristides said in his oration “It is now possible for Hellene and non-Hellene travel with ease wherever he wishes, as though passing from homeland to homeland” (Doc 1, E). This showed that wherever you traveled in Rome, you would always find the same culture (with maybe slightly different variations) in which shows that Rome was starting to be mainly composed of Greco-Roman culture.
The Roman Oration and Funeral Oration are similar in a way. Both praise their country (Rome and Athens). A difference is the tones of both, The Funeral Oration being a tad bit sadder due to being a Funeral Oration. Both also praise their countries ways of governing over their citizens. Anyways, these are the ways I seem to compare the two.
Aristides was able to identify and show Rome’s uniformity with its citizens and all he was able to keep together (doc1, d, e, and f). because Rome’s people had a great séance of freedom, it reassured them that what they had was real and when times of trouble between other people arouse, this keep the people levelheaded (doc 1,g, h, I, l). To contribute to the maintenance of the Roman Empire was the amount of rulers they had and not just one. Due to the fact of multiple rulers, this brought some awesome tools of maintenance. What was not mentioned that really brought the empire together is the engagement of politics of the citizens, which helped them to settle disputes through words rather than physical means? When referring to the empire as “common democracy of the world,” he meant the empire was a democratic empire which means it is ruled by all because no one is a true foreigner (doc1, m). I believe the reason why Aristides was so enthralled with Rome was due to its vast diversity due to its being a hub for common marketplace. By being a foreigner and seeing the diversity in an area would undoubtedly cause one to admire a place not of their homeland. Aristides provides insight on the governing, luxuries, and geography (doc 1, d, f, and h). Both of these empires were similar in the fact that they have similar government, but they were different in the fact of how their geography was. I believe the speeches shared many similarities. In both of them you see them speaking highly of their empire despite the defaults both empires have.
ReplyDeleteAristides is often mentioning the fact that his empire is incredibly large (Doc 1, A,B,C). He mentions that his empire is large in three ways: area, farmlands, and trade routes. He mentions that they have a very large empire, by just the sheer fact that they ruled over a large amount of land. Aristides says "... he placed all of Africa and Europe outside of the area where the sun rises in the east and sets in the west (Doc 1, A)." This means that they are noticeably larger than that of any other empire at the time. Aristides also says that his farmlands are Egypt, Sicily and all of cultivated Africa (Doc 1, B). This is proof to us that Rome covered a lot of land, and used a lot of it for farming. They also said that there was a large channel that meet city-states together so that they could meet for trade, shipping, agriculture, metallurgy- the construction of objects made from metals. However, one thing that made Rome such a strong empire is that it had great leaders all over the empire (Doc 1, E)
ReplyDeleteAristides mentions something known as a "common world democracy." What this means is very simple. When he said "world" in "world democracy," he might of meant empire. This could be pointing out that Rome has the largest empire, yet again, or he could be saying world to mean empire, because this empire could be all the world these citizens have seen. Emperors were rulers, and Aristides was a ruler, but he supported freedom. He put down some basic rules you have to follow, but other than that, he gave the people freedom to live how they wanted to.
Aristides, despite being a Greek- speaking resident, and being from somewhere far from the Roman heartland, is definitely enamored, or in love with the empire. This could because he realizes all the positives that Roman's have, after his civilization was defeated in a battle to conquer the land.
Aristides also talked about being Hellene. At this time, Hellene didn't mean to be from Greek decent. At this point in the empire, it meant to be a citizen of the Roman empire. Aristides was born in Asia Minor, but this was a part of the Roman empire. All the pieces the Roman empire had all had to come together and become one empire, this is how Aristides became Hellene.
This speech is very similar to that of the Funeral Oration given by Pericles. These are both speeches directed to the citizens of their respected civilizations; the Roman empire for Aristides, and Greece for Pericles. Both of these rulers were very uplifting and were only positive. Another similarity between the two are that they are were bragging about how great there places of rule were.
Great article. I like how you mention the fact that Aristides was a huge supporter of freedom, despite being the ruler of the Roman world. But I don't see much evidence or citations on how the the Funeral of Pericles is similar to the Roman empire. I don't see many similarities between the two. And I don't see many citations about how Aristides was born in the Asia Minor. But I did like the interesting facts of how they loved the empire.
DeleteGood work on your analysis. Your facts are generally correct. However, you only cited four times. You have to remember to cite everything. There is evidence in the document and the textbook for almost everything you wrote, so you need make sure to back your information up with the actual source.
DeleteThe oration Pericles and Aristides were similar Both orations were very proud of being a democracy and of there citizens working with one another not against one another.they were both positive and didnt say bad things about there state like getting there good side when you take a picture thats going to be hanged up for everyone to see,The way that that he shows the Greco-Roman is blending is when he says "Hellene and non-Hellene with or without property, to travel with ease wherever he wishes, as though passing from homeland to homeland.. it shows that they are combining in cultures and cities(doc 1 w,x).Aristides was so enamored with the empire because even though he wasnt a Roman speaking townsmen he was still a Roman citizen(doc 1 n,p,w.x). When Aristides is referring to the empire as a "common wold democracy",because they were all equal to each other and a democracy was equal when it came to laws (doc 1 o,p,q). Some of the great attributes that Aristides mentioned was the the great land mass and they were constantly importing creating a common market(doc 1 j,k).A thing that Aristide didnt mention was the political power the republic had over the people. They made them trust there government which then created support for Rome(Strayer 132).
ReplyDeleteAs far as I could see you got the majority of the questions correct. Somethings that have to critique you on though is that format, it was very difficult understanding your forum at times I had to go back and read several times. I also saw some punctuation errors and capitalization errors as well, but other than that your forum was well done and made me questions things (in a good way). Good job Courtney nice work.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe many things Aristides as sees as the main part of the Roman empire is is culture and art as well as it's architecture. But the main thing he considers the main part of the Roman empire is his republic city state.( Doc 1. 15) One thing the roman kings had to do was appeal to the people. To do so they gave rights to the people that made them free men. ( Doc 1. 36). Other factors that contributed to Roman authority was how they accepted foreigners as if they were their own people. Which is why Aristides was so enamored by the Roman empire, despite being so outside it's heart land.(Doc 1. 54).
ReplyDeleteIt was a common and almost universal law due to their massive expansion at the time. They dominated more than half the continent. (Doc 1. 23) It was like a democracy because it had many similarities to democracy, because it was a government by the people and for the people.( Doc 1.36).This also gave a sense of a Greco- Roman culture.
It was much like the funeral of Pericles because of the fact that political life was open to both cultures. (Doc 2. 10) And this was the reason why people respected the empire. ( Doc 2. 13). And they were both to have every man equal by the law. ( Doc 2. 13).
Aristides identified the unique features of the Roman Empire as having a fair government and law. Aristides says that travelers should be welcomed into the city and become a citizen. "IT is an age-old tradition that travelers who journey forth on land or water offer a prayer whereby they pledge to fulfill some vow-something they have on their mind - on reaching their destination safely,"(Doc 1, E). He also believed in equality. Aristides says that the ruler must also retain their citizenship. He says the government should treat everyone equal, rich or poor. "You have divided into two parts allmen throughout your empire...everywhere giving citizenship to all those who are more accomplished, noble, and powerful, even as they retain their native-born identities,"(Doc 1, D). "Thus, the present government serves rich and poor alike, and your constitution has developed a single, harmonious, all embracing union,"(Doc 1, D).
DeleteAristides says that the world has been divided into two different people, Romans and non-Romans. All of the cities throughout the Roman empire must treat each other as citizens, no less. "You have divided humanity into Romans and non-Romans,... and because you have divided people in this manner, in every city throughout the empire there are many who share citizenship with you, no less than the share citizenship with their fellow natives."(Doc 1, D).
I think Aristides loves the Roman empire so much because the Greeks and the Romes have united. He believed that they all should be equal and civilized. "It is now possible for Hellene and non-Hellene, with or without property, to travel with ease wherever he wishes, as though passing from homeland to homeland,"(Doc 1, F).
Aristides talks a lot about foreigners and welcoming them. That has to do with expanding the empire, and making it more diverse. "Whatever each culture grows and manufactures cannot fail to be here at all times and in great possess,"(Doc 1, G).
Pericles speech and Aristides speech are very similar. They both talk about how they would want their empire to be like and all of the benefits. The general idea in both of the speeches were all about everyone having equal rights. Although, Pericles speech had more of a depressing mood to it, Aristides was more positive.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI agree with you. Aristides believed all citizens should be treated equal. Even the ruler possessed Roman citizenship. He wanted the empire to also welcome travelers or foreigners.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAristides identify s a lot of unique features of the Roman Empire, but ti think the one he talks about the most is how its connected to everything, how everything revolves around Rome "market of the world" (Doc1,J L). Universal, every one is equal (Citizens), and firm rule. These features in particular may have given the empire a measure of legitimacy in the eyes of its many subject(Doc1,X Aa Bb). Other factors, unmentioned by Aristides that may have contributed to the maintenance of Roman authority i believe was there great army (Strayer 131)
ReplyDeleteWhat i believe Aristides means by referring to the empire as a "common democracy of the world is that was that this was a new type of goverment and it was working while taking in everyone's ideas (Doc1, ).
Aristides, a Greek-speaking resident of a land well outside the Roman heartland, might be so enamored of the empire because he sees him self as a part of the Roman empire as he speaks that Roman Excepts those that came, and they have the same beliefs (Doc, w / Strayer 130).
Aristides' oration provides a lot of evidence for the development of a composite Greco-Roman culture and sensibility within the Roman Empire. he Talks about how all cultures wined up in Rome how the ship yards are filled with things like that (Doc1 H).
This speech compares, in both style and content, with that of Pericles' Funeral Oration in that they both glorify there nation. For Pericles it was Athens and for Aristides it was Rome.
Aristides identifies that the size of Rome is so unique, since no other empire has spanned that far yet. He also acknowledges Rome's ability to manufacture and distribute everything needed in the empire (Doc 1, A, D). He also talks about how well the empire rules all of its peoples (Doc 1, F). I think the most important feature would be the government. It gives the people inside or outside of Rome citizenship. It treats everyone as equal and let's almost anyone - except for slaves- be a Roman citizen (Doc 1, G). The reason it is probably the most legitimate feature is because it does not make you cut ties with your original country, it allows you to be a citizen of multiple countries (Doc 1, H)
ReplyDeleteWhen Aristides refers to the Roman Empire as a "common democracy" (Doc 1, H) I think he is saying that the empire is so vast with so many different cultures 'under one roof' if you will, that it's like the world's democracy. Everyone is equal as a citizen, whether you're Roman born or not.(Doc 1, J)
He has just become a citizen and he is going to Rome for the first time and he's very overwhelmed by it's greatness. I think he if he had lived in Rome his whole life he wouldn't be as enthusiastic about it. He is so enamored with Rome because of it's vastness and the amounts of different cultures.
Both Pericles' Funeral Oration and Aristides Roman Oration are similar in content in how they both talk highly of a country/empire. The content is a bit different because Pericles is talking about how the government makes it good, and Aristides talks about how one person (the emperor) is making a good empire.
Both are similar in style in how it feels like they both make exaggerations about the empire to get their point across.
Aristides states that the citizens equality, the vast amount of land, and that they were very accepting of foreign peoples were unique to Rome's attributes (Doc 1, A, C.) He speaks of how valued all of his citizens were despite cultural differences.
ReplyDeleteWhen he talked about a "common democracy" he might be referring to how large the Roman Empire was at the time. It was so big that many peoples shared the same democracy. (Doc 1, F)
Aristides was so enthralled by the Roman Empire because it was one of the most incredible empires of its time. If he didn't recognize its brilliance he would have been ignorant in a way.
Both of their orations were focused on governments and their successes. It seemed that Pericles wasn't as enthused as Aristides was. Aristides was absolutely amazed by Rome whereas it seemed the Pericles was only amused by his. They both convey how much they liked their forms of government very well.
Aristides had identified the unique features and ideas of the Roman Empire as having a fair government as well as a fair law. Aristides also states that the size of Rome is very unique because there is no other Empire that has expanded as much as Rome has.He has also described Rome as a "common market for the world", and a center of trade, as well as a "common channel" where all trade, agriculture, shipping and arts of the empire converges and exists, (Doc 1, c, d, e). Aristides says" he placed all of Africa and Europe outside of the area where the sun rises in the east and sets in the west (Doc 1, a). By being a foreigner and seeing the diversity of an entire area it would undoubtedly cause one to admire a place that's not at all of their of their homeland. Aristides provides an insight on the governing, luxuries, and geography (doc 1, d, f, and h). Aristides just wants everything to be fair for everyone.
ReplyDeleteWhen Aristides refers to the Roman Empire as a " common democracy of the world" he is referring to anyone under the rule of one man, the best ruler and the director and the dividing of humanity into Romans and non- Romans. And because of those who divided people in this manner in every other city throughout the empire there are many who share citizenship. The empire was the heart of the Mediterranean world, and extended from Britain to North Africa to Southwest Asia, (Strayer 130, 131). He is just pretty much saying how everything and everyone is equal.Both of the orations were both focused on governments and their successes. In Pericles oration he just didn't seem like he was very interested or enthused as much as Aristides was. Aristides was amazed by Rome but Pericles he just didn't care about anything except for his own oration it just seemed that Pericles was very selfish and didn't care or didn't seem very interested in Aristides oration. But other then Pericles being so selfish they both liked their forms of government and orations.
Aristides identifies many things as unique features of the Roman Empire for example Rome was bigger than the Persian Empire (the largest empire), Rome had anything that was out in the world, Rome was so magnificent that it’s farmlands were Egypt, Sicily, and cultivated Africa (Doc.1;F, G,H). Also Rome had “world democracy”, there was no need for troops to protect the high points of the city because the most powerful people among the area protected the area themselves(Doc. 1; L, M). Other features where that governors rightly ruled, they governed the poor and rich alike, and Rome governed firm but not unkind (Doc. 1; N,O,P).
ReplyDeleteWhen Aristides refers to “common democracy of the world” he said that no one is a foreigner. The text says “Neither the sea nor the great expanse of interviewing land keeps one from being a citizen, and there is no distinction between Europe and Asia…” they later called this world democracy (Doc. 1; L).
Aristides was enamored of the empire mostly because of his citizenship that was gave to him, even though he was just a wealthy landowner from Anatolia. Back in that era it was usually like if you weren’t a citizen of Rome you were below them, but Rome treated all equal and gave them citizenship (world democracy). There were other reasons why he was so in love with the Roman empire such as it’s enormous size, or amazing agriculture, but it was mainly because of the equality it had towards all people (Doc. 1; F,J,L)
”The mixing of elements of Greek, Hellenistic, and Roman culture produced a new culture, called Greco-Roman culture. This is also often called classical civilization.
Roman artists, philosophers, and writers did not merely copy their Greek and
Hellenistic models. They adapted them for their own purposes and created a style
of their own. Roman art and literature came to convey the Roman ideals of
strength, permanence, and solidity.”(Strayer 178).
Aristides speech in praising Rome and Pericles’ funeral oration were alike in a in many ways which are because in both the empires they were citizens in they both loved their democracy, They both many explained , and in a way bragged, on how amazing their democracies were and how they both loved being citizens in those empires.