part 8

The Romanesque period started in during the 9^th century and ended in the 10^th. While the  gothic period started in the 12^th century and ended in the 14^th.The Romanesque architecture was trying to keep their religion close to their chest while gothic architecture was like they were trying to reach towards god. I think that the idea behind the two kinds of buildings is totally different, one trying to reach out and the other trying to stay safely on the ground.

The Romanesque buildings had very thick walls like they are trying to keep something out. (picture one) Instead of being an open and accepting place it is keeping god out. Gothic buildings have thinner walls and smaller columns. Which leads one to believe that they want more of a connection with god. (picture 2) Also gothic buildings were much more open. The gothic buildings may have been built during a happier and peaceful time. The Romanesque buildings were tough and rigid ready for battle.

The Romanesque buildings had small windows, which let in little light. (picture 3) While the opposite was true for Gothic buildings. They had large windows to let in the light of god. This was a large theological difference between the two types of architecture. (picture 4)  The Gothics lived in a better and more peaceful time. Which is one reason why the windows were larger. The buildings had no need for defense from invaders.

The Romanesque buildings had towers that were high but not pointed. They were sort of like castle turrets. They were built like this because it was during a time of war. (picture 5) The gothic buildings had points and spires reaching towards the sky. These spires were believed to be reaching towards the heavens. It was an attempt to become closer to god in search of access to heaven. (picture 6)

There were three main differences between the gothic and Romanesque buildings, the size of the walls, the size of the windows, and the design of the towers. These differences meant something, the walls were to keep things out, the larger windows to let the light of god in, and the towers had spires which reached towards god.

appendix

Picture one:  San Romolo and its bell   http://lh4.ggpht.com/_SkG4Mh1b9lI/SjazbkErEXI/AAAAAAAARIs/-rRPHRLDXls/s128/IMG_1832.JPG

Picture two: http://smarthistory.org/assets/images/images/Gothic-nave-Salisbury.jpg

Picture three: The façade of the cathedral of Lisbon.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Se_de_Lisboa_Frente.JPG

Picture four: Saint-Chapelle church in Paris. http://static.guim.co.uk/sysmages/Arts/Arts_/Pictures/2009/3/11/1236774883032/Saint-Chapelle-church-in--001.jpgPicture five: http://tinyurl.com/3l5ax4v

Picture six:  http://tinyurl.com/43x7epl

part 10

 I actually learned a lot i thought i wouldn't, i learned about using the technology that i have and finding good sources also i learned a lot about the middle ages and about writing a good paper and religion. I had a great time this year , thank you

part 9

A renaissance man or polymath is a person who is skilled in multiple fields or multiple disciplines, and who has a broad base of knowledge. The term renaissance man is largely based on the various artists and scholars of the European Renaissance, (starting in about 1450 CE), who pursued multiple fields of studies. Perhaps the quintessential renaissance man of this period was Leonardo Da Vinci, who was a master of art, an engineer, an anatomy expert, and also pursued many other disciplines with great success and aplomb.


Michaelangelo was a renaissance man because he was a expert at sculpture, painting, architecture and poetry. His best works include the painting of the ceiling of the Sistine chapel, his statue of David, the pieta(a sculpture of Mary holding jesus' body) and the dome of st. peters basilica.

part 7

The black death spread form china by way of fleas riding on rats. Inside the fleas were bacterium that cause the black death.The black death killed between 30 and 60% of Europeans. The black death did not only affect Europeans , it also affected Russians.

i am a doctor and the most common symptom i see is is the appearance of buboes in the groin, the neck and armpits, which oozed pus and bled when opened. some treatments are; lancing the buboes, diet, sanitation and witchcraft.


if a plague like the black plague started now it would cause businesses to close and basically everything would shut down. People would be scared to leave their houses and some would quarantine themselves. I think people are thinking that something like this will happen and they are preparing with canned food bottled water, batteries and hazmat suits.

part 6

http://samwiki1.wikispaces.com/

I think that Richards crusade is completely ridiculous.He should not think that he will be able to take the holy land from me i am so powerful and have a better army than his. He should just give up now because i'm awsome and theres no way he can beat me. I am so smart i could a outwit him with my eyes closed.

Plus the holy land is where our prophet muhamed miraculously ascended into heaven. Also we built the dome of the rock there to signify his ascension. We already occupy the city so it would be hard for him to force us out.

part 5

America can be compared to a modern day Roman Empire in many ways. The good government, the bad governments, we can compare almost anything. America could not be called a modern day roman Empire if you are comparing it by government powers.

In modern time people are imprisoned every single day, manhunts happen on a daily bases. This is one way for our government to demonstrate their power.http://www.newseum.org/todaysfrontpages/hr.asp?fpVname=AL_GT&ref_pge=gal&b_pge=1 This man was caught after only 24 hours of committing his crime. In ancient roman times thieves and murderers could get away from town and never be seen again. They could easily not get caught for what they did. All they had to do was leave town and separate themselves entirely from their previous life. Now criminals have to basically give up normal living, no internet , no phone, no credit cards. They have to give up all these things so they cant be tracked by the u.s. government. therefor the government now is more powerful and more advanced.

The government now and in ancient times were both corrupt, although it happens in different ways. Recently two governors have been accused of sexting and cheating on their wives. http://www.newseum.org/todaysfrontpages/hr.asp?fpVname=AL_TD&ref_pge=gal&b_pge=1 Acts such as cheating on a spouse with a prostotute happened in ancient times too. These politicians were punished not by the court of law, but by the media. They had a bad story to tell about sex and immorality which cause the politicians to either resign or finish their term and get out of there. But word spreads much more quickly now, Internet and social media aid in that.

In Arizona there are huge wildfires that have started because of lack of rain and extreme heat. http://www.newseum.org/todaysfrontpages/hr.asp?fpVname=AL_TN&ref_pge=gal&b_pge=1 In ancient times they would not be able to fight these kind of fires. This may because of technology but its also because we are more organized in that we can send firefighters more quickly to the fire. The fires can be put out and people can be rescued. Back in the day many fires had to just burn themselves out and the only survivors were the ones who got themselves out. Now one can see some differences between the modern American and the Ancient roman Empire.

in conclusion the technology has changed but so have policies , expectations and organization. These are major changes and differences between america today and the ancient roman empire.

Grayson w. (June 8, 2011) survivor thanks rescuers

Noveck j. (June 8,2011) is sexting cheating?

Rogers l. (June 8,2011) manhunt ends with one in custody 

part 4

Thucydides
 http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/s/sept_11_2001/attacks/index.html

This is an artical with just facts and a lot of very important information. It has a "fact box" full of only things the writer of the article believed.

Herodotus
http://www.nytimes.com/indexes/2001/09/11/

this artical is like an artical that Herodotus would write because it has very vague and broad information. Compared to Thucydides who put in very specific information.

part 3

The Egyptians believed they needed their worldly possessions in the after life. They buried themselves with money,pets and food. Also they went to great lengths to reach the after life, from spells and rituals, to embalming and constructing magnificent tombs, the more money they had, the more they spent on their preparations for death. The ancient Egyptians had beliefs about the separation of the physical and spiritual beings. so they mummified their bodies to keep them together.

the Greeks had elaborate rituals where the body was washed and anointed with oils. the body was then placed on the high bed of the house. Mourners then came to visit. The body was buried with very few possessions.

part 2

It Made it easier to farm and settle down in one place because we were able to domesticate animals and set up farms. since we set up farms we had to stay in one place. This meant building houses which eventually grew into cities. Once these cities were established they grew and became major trade stations.

I think if the agricultural system crashed we would have almost no hope of becoming the nation we are today. If it collapsed we would have very little food, also things like corn oil are used in plastics and rubber.  Plants aren't just used for eating they are also used in medicine and other important items.

Also we would have machines and factories used for agriculture just sitting around with nothing to do. With factories shut down many people would have no jobs and would find it hard to survive. Especially now when it is hard to find a job we need the assurance that we can keep the ones we have.

View agricultural in a larger map

chat

http://todaysmeet.com/brainhumangeo

Worst job ever

I think the last job in the video, a fuller. Their job was to walk on cloth to eliminate oils, dirt, and other impurities, and making it thicker. Yeah that doesn't sound that bad right? Well heres the bad part, the cloth would need to be soaked in urine to help clean the cloth. I think it would be nasty to walk in the urine. It would smell horrible and probably gag a maggot. Another thing is that you have to work long shifts, up to eight hours. This job would be horrible and very tiering job.

Brian Matejevich's story

Brian came to school as a athlete on the jv soccer team. His favorite teammate was Ryan Noone. He liked Noone because he was really funny. Mid way through the season Sam Werneke joined the soccer team. He did this because he quit the football team, so he was kind of an outcast at first. But Brian mad friends with Sam. During the beginning of the year Brian had lots of parties for occasions like homecoming, Halloween and birthdays. This made him quikly make friends and have a successful freshman year. After the soccer season, and all the parties Brian did not play a winter sport. His life kind of slowed down. He started to gain weight and get out of shape which was okay because this kid is scrawny. He had achieved second honors for the first thee quarters and was on his way to a fourth. Then came the golf team, He had many favorites on the golf team, like Ethan Slusher, Adam lazlof and John Leishman. They had many entertaining bus rides to matches, one of the "wise guys" on the team held a stop abortion sign out the window when we came to a stop. Also there was one girls on the golf team, Claire Zurkowski was on the team however she missed a lot of the season for her French exchange program were she traveled to France. The season was not to successful in Brian's eyes they had only won one match while losing three. Brian believes that next year the team will be much better because we have no seniors who are leaving. also there are some very talented freshman joining the team next year. The season ended with the winter-spring sports banquet. He thought i was very long but still entertaining. Near the end there were the golf awards. For varsity golf they awarded the "triple threat award" to Brian Matejevich a freshman who had played the number one spot in near half of the matches. He went up against seniors who had much more experience and strength. He fought valiantly to attempt to win points against these player but the were just far more experienced. Still he fought on through the season because he knew that soon later in the years the golf team at John Carroll could be good and could have a bright future.

final

The Middle Ages was a time of change. Whether it be in invention, religion or architecture.  The feelings about religion were changing drastically, Europeans wanted to take back the holy land.  The crusades were mainly for religious purposes like checking the spread of Islam. 

One non-religious reason for these crusades was to conquer pagan areas. “The Crusaders set up a new society” (The crusades). These lands weren’t only in the way of the crusaders as they marched their way to the holy land. They were land to add to the empire. Some crusaders stopped and settled down in the newly conquered areas. These lands consisted of areas from around Constantinople to around Jerusalem.  On the journey there was a spread of culture through food and tradition. Also these religious travelers brought back many types of things that weren’t available in Europe such as textiles from Jerusalem.

A second reason for the crusades was to check the spread of Islam. (Picture 1 and picture 2) Which was probably a motive of the pope. This is a religious reason because the Europeans just wanted to keep the Islamic religion out and away from the holy land. One reason the Europeans hated Islam so much was because its belief that god was one single person instead of the trinity. Also it was believed by Islamics that Jesus did not die, but he just ascended into heaven. For these reasons the Christian/Catholic Europeans had to suppress the Islamic religion.

Probably the most important reason for the crusades was for the retaking of the holy land. (Picture 3) This was important because this is where the Catholics believed Jesus was born. That was a very important thing and the Catholics wanted to have control over that land. It was simply an area of land that the Christians needed to have. The Christians were irritated because the Muslims and Jews had control over the holy land. They felt the land had to be theirs. And for that reason they fought for the land.

There were many reasons for the crusades such as adding land to the empire, to control the spread of Islam and to gain control of the holy land.  Most of these reasons were for religious purposes but there were other non-religious reasons to.  The Christians had to keep the Muslims under control or their religion would spread to Europe.  Their fear was that it would catch on, which was bad because Christianity was just starting to boom. That’s why they used religion as a motivator for the crusades.

Bibliography

The crusades: step by step through a spectacular mess. (2010, November, 17). Retrieved from http://gratefultothedead.wordpress.com/2010/11/17/the-crusades-step-by-step-through-a-spectacular-mess/

Appendix

1.        Islamic expansion before crusades http://www.usu.edu/markdamen/1320Hist&Civ/slides/14islam/mapspreadofislam.jpg

2.       Slightly edited picture of medieval world http://www.jesuschristsavior.net/Medieval.jpeg

3.       Holy land captured during the crusades: http://www.hist.umn.edu/courses/hist3613/calendar/states/images/Crusader%20States%20Map.jpg

rough draft

The Middle Ages was a time of change. Whether it be in invention, religion or architecture.  The feelings about religion were changing drastically, Europeans wanted to take back the holy land.  The crusades were mainly for religious purposes like checking the spread of Islam. The crusades were not for religious purposes.

One non-religious reason for these crusades was to conquer pagan areas. These lands were only in the way of the crusaders as they marched their way to the holy land.  Some crusaders, however, stopped and settled down in the newly conquered areas. These lands consisted of areas from around Constantinople to around Jerusalem.  On the journey there was a spread of culture through food and tradition. Also these religious travelers brought back many types of things that weren’t available in Europe such as textiles from Jerusalem.

A second reason for the crusades was to check the spread of Islam. Which was probably a motive of the pope. This is a religious reason because the Europeans just wanted to keep the Islamic religion out and away from the holy land. One reason the Europeans hated Islam so much was because its belief that god was one single person instead of the trinity. Also it was believed by Islamics that Jesus did not die, but he just ascended into heaven. For these reasons the Christian/Catholic Europeans had to suppress the Islamic religion.

Probably the most important reason for the crusades was for the retaking of the holy land.  This was important because this is where the Catholics believed Jesus was born. That was a very important thing and the Catholics wanted to have control over that land. It was simply an area of land that the Christians needed to have. The Christians were irritated because the Muslims and Jews had control over the holy land. They felt the land had to be theirs. And for that reason they fought for the land.

There were many reasons for the crusades such as adding land to the empire, to control the spread of Islam and to gain control of the holy land. Most of these reasons were for religious purposes but there were other non-religious reasons to.

final draft

Rome went from being a small town in Italy to being the center of a vast empire. This took hundreds of years and many wars. Eventually it was bound to fall; it’s a long fall from the top. This fall was extremely painful and hurtful for the Romans. The Roman Empire started to decline after the pax romana, which was a 200 year long time of peace. The Roman Empire fell from the top and this was tough for them.

“After Commudus was killed by one of his guards, then they sold power to the highest bidder. This led to chaos every time a leader died. All leaders became dictators, and almost all were eventually killed by their guards. The Roman Empire had 26 leaders in the next 50 years” (Mr. Sedivy). Leaders had to pay their army well to keep them happy so that they would fend off invasions. This led to high taxes and inflation. Borders were left open as Romans fought among themselves. Germanic tribes invaded, Persians took Roman lands, and Gaul tried to become independent. This was the start of the decline of the political and economic strength of the Roman Empire.

“After Commudus’ death the politics in Rome went into chaos” (Mr. Sedivy). Wealthy aristocrats paid for positions in the government; as a result they raised taxes on the poor and cut aid for those in poverty. These acts caused even more corruption. This corruption even broke up the armies of Rome; there was infighting between the armies which caused Rome to be easily infiltrated. Germans and Persians invaded Roman lands. Also Gaul’s tried to separate from the Roman Empire (Mr. Sedivy).The Huns also threatened Rome, and then were paid off and then they still attacked Rome. Vandals also attacked Rome and sacked it (N.S. Gill). Also the economy of Rome went to shambles because the new leaders heavily taxed the citizens.  This caused inflation which even furthered the debt that the citizens of Rome were in. This was a hard hole for Rome to dig itself out of but they tried.

Diocletian,( who was elected by the army) and Constantine were the main leaders in the reform of the politics and economy of Rome,( Mr. Sedivy). They did this in a number of ways. One of which was government workers had to keep the same job for life. Also their children had to have the same job. A political aid was moving the capital of the empire to Constantinople now known as Istanbul. Diocletian also separated the empire into two separate parts which spread power over more representatives. This made it easier on the leader. It helped educate leaders on the different cultures and necessities of different areas.

In conclusion many things led to the fall of Rome. But most of all was the end of the Pax Romana.  Remember that the Pax romana was a 200 year time of peace throughout the Roman Empire.  Other reasons for the fall like the corrupt politics and economy. Diocletian and Constantine were the two main benefactors for bringing the Roman Empire out of the hole that it dug for itself. In the end Rome had fallen and it took a long time to get back up to the greatness they had once achieved.

Works cited

Mr. Sedivy, Initials. (n.d.). World history rise and fall of the roman empire. Retrieved from http://mr_sedivy.tripod.com/r_decline.html

gill, ns. (n.d.). Fall of rome timeline.. Retrieved from http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/tablescharts/a/120610-Fall-Of-Rome-Timeline.htm

rough draft

Rome went from being a small town in Italy to being the center of a vast empire. This took hundreds of years and many wars. Eventually it was bound to fall; it’s a long fall from the top. This fall was extremely painful and hurtful for the Romans. The Roman Empire started to decline after the pax romana, which was a 200 year long time of peace. The Roman Empire started to decline right after the pax romana.

After Commudus was killed by one of his guards, then they sold power to the highest bidder. This led to chaos every time a leader died. All leaders became dictators, and almost all were eventually killed by their guards. The Roman Empire had 26 leaders in the next 50 years, (Mr. Sedivy). Leaders had to pay their army well to keep them happy so that they would fend off invasions. This led to high taxes and inflation. Borders were left open as Romans fought among themselves. Germanic tribes invaded, Persians took Roman lands, and Gaul tried to become independent. This was the start of the decline of the political and economic strength of the Roman Empire.

After Commudus’ death the politics in Rome went into chaos. Wealthy aristocrats paid for positions in the government; as a result they raised taxes on the poor and cut aid for those in poverty. These acts caused even more corruption. This corruption even broke up the armies of Rome; there was infighting between the armies which caused Rome to be easily infiltrated. Germans and Persians invaded Roman lands. Also Gaul’s tried to separate from the Roman Empire. (Mr. Sedivy) Also the economy of Rome went to shambles because the new leaders heavily taxed the citizens.  This caused inflation which even furthered the debt that the citizens of Rome were in. This was a hard hole for Rome to dig itself out of but they tried.

Diocletian,( who was elected by the army) and Constantine were the main leaders in the reform of the politics and economy of Rome,( Mr. Sedivy). They did this in a number of ways. One of which was government workers had to keep the same job for life. Also their children had to have the same job. A political aid was moving the capital of the empire to Constantinople now known as Istanbul. Diocletian also separated the empire into two separate parts which spread power over more representatives. This made it easier on the leader. It helped educate leaders on the different cultures and necessities of different areas.

In conclusion many things led to the fall of Rome, but most of all was the end of the Pax Romana. Diocletian and Constantine were the two main benefactors of bringing the Roman Empire out of the hole that it dug for itself.

Mr. Sedivy, Initials. (n.d.). World history rise and fall of the roman empire. Retrieved from http://mr_sedivy.tripod.com/r_decline.html

daily

How did the Roman Empire change after the Era of the Soldier Emperors.

The roman government turns into a tetrarchy mean four leaders. They did this because they thought no single man could be as good as previous leaders had been.  This worked for a little while but then turned into fights over power within the four emperors . This is a problem because a government will never work if there is infighting.  The roman empire eventually broke into two pieces, Eastern roman empire and Western roman empire. Easter roman empire is also know as  the byzantine empire. That is one of the reasons the age of tetrarchy  lasted only for only a short time.

daily

1. Required Daily: How does Early Christian and Byzantine portraiture represent both a continuation of and a break from the past? Look up the Fayum Portraits and the Ravenna Portrait of Justinian as a starting point for your thinking.

The difference between the old art and new art is the improved use of the third dimension. The new art seems like It has been done by more professional artist who also incorporate shadow and human anatomy. The new art is in my opinion is the art is more realistic and better representing the human body. The art also carries on some of the old tradition like what the pictures were of, most pictures depict a single person or a scene of battle.

essay final

Seneca remained calm during the time while his death was impending. While other men would have been worried crazy.Stoicism is the ability to endure pain and hardship while retaining the ability to control ones emotions; Seneca at his death was a perfect example of a stoic. 

 "Seneca, quite unmoved, asked for tablets on which to inscribe his will, and, on the centurion's refusal, turned to his friends," (Tacitus)this shows that he was un moved by many tragedies and that he had friends who he could rely on and who cared about him. In his time of need his friends came to his help to take the will from their stoic friend. It is hard to imagine that someone's friends could realize the importance of taking his will since they probably couldn’t sense a tone in his voice.  That is one of the downfalls and greatest advantages of being a stoic, others can not sense the fear in you.

 He also seemed like he though others didn't endure pain or hard ship also. "preferring the interest of any private citizen to his own safety, and he had no natural aptitude for flattery. No one knew this better than Nero, who had oftener experienced Seneca's free spokenness than his servility.(Tacitus)  This shows that Seneca did not "watch his mouth" as you could say . He said whatever cam to mind. He also was not there to compliment anyone, just there to speak the truth. This is one reason he was a good friend, because he would always speak the truth to his close friend Nero and give him advice.  It also seems like he cant see the happiness that flattery can bring a person.

 "Having spoken these and like words, meant, so to say, for all, he embraced his wife"(Tacitus) Although Seneca was a very strong  stoic he still showed some emotion and feelings towards his wife. Although he felt emotions he did not show the feeling of sadness or emotional pain. This could be a good and a bad thing. The good part would be that when he and his wife are fighting he does not feel the emotional pain and suffering. But this is also bad because when he is hurt emotionally he will internalize it and will not know how to deal.

Seneca was a perfect example of a stoic, whether it be near death, with his wife or with his friends. He never showed that he felt any hardship or adversity Which happens to be one of the main characteristics of being stoic. Stoicism can be a good thing and a bad thing, it really depends on the situation.

tacitus, Initials. (65 ce). The death of seneca.

class essay

Stoicism is the ability ti endure pain and hardship while retaining the ability to control ones emotions; Seneca at his death was a perfect example of a stoic. He remained calm during the time while his death was impending. While other men would have been worried nuts.

 "Seneca, quite unmoved, asked for tablets on which to inscribe his will, and, on the centurion's refusal, turned to his friends," (Tacitus)this shows that he was un moved by many tragedies and that he had friends who he could rely on and who cared about him. In his time of need his friends came to his help to take the will from their stoic friend. It is hard to imagine that someone's friends could realize the importance of taking his will since they probably couldn’t sense a tone in his voice.  That is one of the downfalls and greatest advantages of being a stoic, others can not sense the fear in you.

 He also seemed like he though others didn't endure pain or hard ship also. "preferring the interest of any private citizen to his own safety, and he had no natural aptitude for flattery. No one knew this better than Nero, who had oftener experienced Seneca's free spokenness than his servility.(Tacitus)  This shows that Seneca did not "watch his mouth" as you could say . He said whatever cam to mind. He also was not there to compliment anyone, just there to speak the truth. This is one reason he was a good friend, because he would always speak the truth to his close friend Nero and give him advice.  It also seems like he cant see the happiness that flattery can bring a person.

 "Having spoken these and like words, meant, so to say, for all, he embraced his wife"(Tacitus) Although Seneca was a very strong  stoic he still showed some emotion and feelings towards his wife. Although he felt emotions he did not show the feeling of sadness or emotional pain. This could be a good and a bad thing. The good part would be that when he and his wife are fighting he does not feel the emotional pain and suffering. But this is also bad because when he is hurt emotionally he will internalize it and will not know how to deal.

week six daily

Required Daily: Read Tacitus' description of the Death of Seneca and Book One of M. Aurelius' Meditations. Find quotes within those two texts that help explain what Stoicism is all about.

 "preferring the interest of any private citizen to his own safety, and he had no natural aptitude for flattery. No one knew this better than Nero, who had oftener experienced Seneca's free spokenness than his servility."  This shows that Seneca did not "watch his mouth" as you could say . He said whatever cam to mind. He also was not there to compliment anyone, just there to speak the truth. "Seneca, quite unmoved, asked for tablets on which to inscribe his will, and, on the centurion's refusal, turned to his friends," this shows that he was un moved by many tragedies and that he was not a good decision maker he just turned to his friends so he could please the people around him. "Having spoken these and like words, meant, so to say, for all, he embraced his wife" Although seneca was pretty dang stoic he still showed some emotion and feelings towards his wife.

daily

Rome was better off as an empire. One of the factors that affected my reasoning is the fact that Rome allowed it's people to live by their own rules and didn't force anything on them. They respected everyones rights, and let them believe in who they wanted to, they realized that not everyone was going to think the same way. As a republic, the government and the people had a lot of differences and disagreements. When Rome expanded and became an empire, all the issues of the republic seemed to no longer exist or matter. Their was more opportunities for the people, even the ones that had been added to the empire by the means of roman conquest. This allowed them to go on with their lives, and their really wasn't much changes. Rome was expanding and there fore was respected as a large empire. The Roman army protected the empire from intruding forces, so there wasn't much for the people to have to worry about. The Empire definently made Rome a lot better off.

daily

Julius Caesar’s killers were not at all justified in the killing of Caesar. Caesar was really the first person that had a lot of power that really wanted to please the people, not just the rich people that could pay others to vote for them. This was the beginning of a revolution in the way that it started how we vote for others. By just showing other rulers that people are able to take control of who they put in power revolutionized us to being a republic, and it was a slow but steady step in the dissolving of dictatorship. In this way, Caesar could have shown some other brilliant leadership skills that would have a positive, or maybe even negative, effect in the government views today. I can’t really say whether they had justification, because I never lived through his time, nor do I have the mindset of ancient Rome. But, it is my belief that taking someone’s life is only justified, not acceptable, if this person was a serious threat to those innocent people around him or her. So, unless Caesar had people at gun, or knife point in this case, I really don’t think he could have done much harm. The people who assassinated him saw their dictatorship coming to an end, and in their fear, they decided that it would be best to kill him, to show all those who believe in Caesar’s way, are really believing in a dead man’s way.Julius Caesar’s killers were not at all justified in the killing of Caesar. Caesar was really the first person that had a lot of power that really wanted to please the people, not just the rich people that could pay others to vote for them. This was the beginning of a revolution in the way that it started how we vote for others. By just showing other rulers that people are able to take control of who they put in power revolutionized us to being a republic, and it was a slow but steady step in the dissolving of dictatorship. In this way, Caesar could have shown some other brilliant leadership skills that would have a positive, or maybe even negative, effect in the government views today. I can’t really say whether they had justification, because I never lived through his time, nor do I have the mindset of ancient Rome. But, it is my belief that taking someone’s life is only justified, not acceptable, if this person was a serious threat to those innocent people around him or her. So, unless Caesar had people at gun, or knife point in this case, I really don’t think he could have done much harm. The people who assassinated him saw their dictatorship coming to an end, and in their fear, they decided that it would be best to kill him, to show all those who believe in Caesar’s way, are really believing in a dead man’s way.

daily

this is a house that has been influenced by roman architecture.

daily

Italian senate 

lupercal

the portico at the Flaminian circus,

temple of Appolo

Temple of Jupiter Liberator. http://www.greatdreams.com/lebanon/baalbe

Theater at Pompey 

temple of mars

daily

coliseum

roman forum

circus maximus

arch of constantine

daily

"Hannibal, son of Hamilcar Barca was a Carthaginian military commander and tactician who is popularly credited as one of the most talented commanders in history." He made a desperate attempt to fight back against Rome who had once fought as allies with Sardinia. The victory cause Rome to have control of trade across the whole western Mediterranean . Hannibal decided he wouldn't accept defeat fighting Rome many more times. One conquest lead him across northern Africa, through Spain and France and finally to Canine. Where he has his first important victory, it is important because it is very near to Rome , and he defeated a force much larger than his.
I think the Romans would think of Hannibal as a monster because at the battle of canine he took no prisoners and then he forged ahead farther into Italy.

daily

In 494 BC, only 15 years after the founding of the Republic, a secession of plebeians(struggle of orders) to the Sacred Mount outside Rome, ushered in a fundamental change to the Republican government. The Plebes formed a tribal assembly, and their own alternative government, until the patricians agreed to the establishment of an office that would have sacrosanctity. This was the right to be legally protected from any physical harm, and the right of help, meaning the legal ability to rescue any plebeian from the hands of a patrician magistrate. These magistrate positions were labelled as Tribunes or tribuni plebes. Later, the tribunes acquired a far more formidable, and often manipulated power, the right of intercession. This was the right to veto any act or proposal of any magistrate, including another tribune, for the good of the people. The tribune also had the power to exercise capital punishment against any person who interfered in the performance of his duties. The tribune's power to act was enforced by a pledge of the plebeians to kill any person who harmed a tribune during his term of office.

map

<iframe width="425" height="350" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" src="http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;msa=0&amp;msid=213896113858981935687.00049e71922e7d56d1058&amp;t=h&amp;ll=41.900758,12.475496&amp;spn=0.029099,0.040352&amp;output=embed"></iframe><br /><small>View <a href="http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;msa=0&amp;msid=213896113858981935687.00049e71922e7d56d1058&amp;t=h&amp;ll=41.900758,12.475496&amp;spn=0.029099,0.040352&amp;source=embed" style="color:#0000FF;text-align:left">the ancient roman world</a> in a larger map</small>

daily

The roman government is broken into four groups while the american government is broken into three. The roman government is divided as such;EXECUTIVE BRANCH, SENATE, LEGISLATIVE BRANCH and OTHER, which contained man sub sections made up of consuls of plebeians. Plebeians were ancient romans, most likely the lower class or the common people. Today the american government contains two of the four branches; executive, judicial, and legislative. The executive branch controls  the daily administration of the state bureaucracy. The judicial branch decides the constitutionality of case brought before them including laws and trials. The legislative branch writes the bills or laws. There are two groups of the Legislative Branch, The senate and the house of representatives. There are 100 senators and 435 representatives, a total of 535. When the bill is written they need a simple majority to make it a law. When the representatives and senators meet together they are called the congress. Senators serve six years in office. A representative serves 2 year terms. All bills and laws have to go through the Congress to get to the President who make the final decision.

essay

The life of Alexander the Great was a big long trip that took him across continents and earned him his reputation of "Alexander the great".  The son of a prominent King, Alexander would quickly surpass his father’s reputation and make his own as a brilliant military leader. Tutored by Aristotle and pushed by his ambitious mother, Alexander sought greatness and believed it was his destiny. Even as a prince, Alexander found success on the battlefield. Alexander’s conquests as the ruler of Macedonia would take him across the continents of Europe, Asia and Africa making his rule worthwhile and influential throughout the world.  

After King Phillip’s murder, Alexander easily took over rule of the Macedonian army and quickly sought to fulfill his father’s lifelong ambition of bringing down the Persian Empire. He mobilized his army and marched toward Egypt taking all cities with ease, except Tyre which he battled over for close to seven months. Ironically, the seizes of Tyre and Gaza brought about a letter from the King of Persia, Darius, who attempted to invoke a truce with Alexander, but it was refused as Alexander would not have any peace unless the entire Persian Empire was given to him. By the time Alexander reached the heart of Egypt, the Persian satrap welcomed Alexander and surrendered without a fight. Taking each city with brutal force, Alexander was known for slaughtering the men and leaving women and children for slavery. Alexander had successfully taken Egypt and promptly called a son of a god, for all his power and reign by the liberated Persians.

Having several victories behind him, Alexander continued to move toward his ultimate goal- the Persian Empire. Darius continued to flee Alexander, even leaving behind his wife and children in Tyre. Alexander was noted for treating them like royalty and not harming them. Alexander traveled to the center of Persia’s rule, Persepolis. Alexander attempted to beat Darius with a risky battle strategy which caused Darius to flee from battle yet again. Eventually Alexander caught up to Darius, but to find him already murdered by a fellow Persian, and close friend. Alexander claimed Persia, making him more powerful than ever. Conquering the Persian Empire was a smart and well-constructed move made by Alexander. He also took his first wife, Roxana, a known beauty among Persians and from Persepolis.

Despite having achieved his ultimate victory over the whole Persian Empire, Alexander would chose to continue his ambitious campaign seeking to rule the Far East. His army would divide due to disillusionment, and his most formidable opponent would be a former ally, Spitamenes. Alexander would not win a victory over Spitamenes for two years when he would finally gain control of the Sogdianian region, present-day Afghanistan. It is from this region that Alexander would take his first wife, Roxana, in an attempt to gain allegiance from the locals. A successful strategy that Alexander used when seeking governors for his conquered cities- he gained allegiance by chosing a person from the area. After this victory, Alexander led his troops to another hard battle with India, an area in present-day western Pakistan. Like all the battles before, Alexander proved a genius at battle strategy and won over the Indians. Yet with seven years of marching and fighting done, it is no wonder that Alexander’s troops wanted to turn around, and they talked of a mutiny after the Indian area was won. Although Alexander wanted to press forward toward China, he realized that without his men he could not and began to head homeward.  

          Alexander’s influences are seen today in the trades and sharing of cultures as well as in his brilliance as a military leader. Throughout his rule, Alexander sought to fulfill his destiny as a great leader. He used the wisdom gained through tutoring with Aristotle and the ambition shared by his mother to propel him through his campaigns. Fantastic strategies where shown at each battle while clever decisions were made when choosing who would govern newly won cities. Each step towards victory was a step closer to ultimate control for Alexander. His title of greatness is truly a reflection of his amazing life and its impact on the world as we know it today.

"Alexander the Great." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Web. 11 Mar. 2011. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_the_Great>.

daily

The relationship between Egypt and Persia was very complicated and violent. The Egyptians and Persians were at war for a very long time, since both were evenly matched in power and strength. The wars between them continued for centuries. Many times one would come into power over the other and then the other would make a huge comeback. Finally Persia took over Egypt, and the Egyptians were under Persian rule. The Persians were cruel and very unfair to the Eyptian people. Alexander the Great changed this when he came into power. He felt that someone needed to get revenge on the Persians. He eventually took over Persia and conquered the Persians regaining and giving power to the Egyptians.Before Alexander the Great Egypt was falling in part in need of a ruler.The Persians were harsh rulers who had no commpassion for the Egyptians. 

The King Philip chose the tutor for Alexander wisely. Aristotle was a logical thinker who followed mostly Christian views. He also was into the sciences, since his father of the King’s physician. In the time period that Aristotle lived he was often considered eccentric or odd. Aristotle taught Alexander many things, in Meiz, this was the place where Alexander was tutored. Aristotle had mostly a formal relationship with Alexander and taught him regular subjects. Alexander respected his tutor and mentor he took heed to what Aristotle said. Alexander took Aristotle’s word to shape himself into a strong man of honor. Even though Aristotle believed that conquers were barbarians that lacked sense. Alexander craved power and honor and he soon became what his father wanted him to be. Alexander did listen carefully to Aristotle because he studied and had a want to receive honor. The only thing that Alexander may have disagreed with his teacher is about conquers. Alexander took the knowledge he learned from Aristotle, like geometry and the sciences and used it in his life. It was even said he would give medicine he created to friends. 

weekly

Does Power Corrupt? How or How Not? Why or Why Not? Do you think Alexander was corrupted? And who influenced whom the most: Did Persia become more Greek or did Alexander becoming more Persian?

            Yes, I do believe that power does corrupt. Power is an interesting thing to have. It can be corrupting especially if you are a person who has never had power before. If you, all of the sudden, come into a large position of power you don’t know what to do with it. You could use your power in a good way, or in the case of corruption you could use your power in a poor way. If you don’t have the experience to handle power than you will corrupt, only for the reason that once you got the power you only wanted more. Power corrupts because it is like an addictive drug; once you have it you only want more and more until you go into a downward spiral into oblivion.

            How power corrupts can be a number of things. Edward Abbey once said,“Power is always dangerous. Power attracts the worst and corrupts the best.” According to Edward Abbey, power can make the best of us begin to corrupt into the worst. Along with that the thought of power attracts the worst. You could make the argument that the person was corrupt when they came into power. Corruption could occur because of a want for more power or because if you don’t have power before then, then you would not know how to control it. Power does not always corrupt though. If you have an all-around good person then they might not give in to corruption.

Alexander was not a cruel leader, he tried to be fair to his people, but often manipulated them. He was considered a "good leader" to many people because of the inspirational speeches he gave before battle. Alexander was also very selfish and wanted power badly. He risked many lives in doing this, he also earned a reckless reputation. He was allabout his ego risking his troops and his own life for power. He was dangerous in his ways and he caused many problems with other nations. Pericles was different he instead wanted to do the best for the people. He showed them this by caring and attempting to hear what the people had to say. Pericles was not as egotisticle and almost an odd ruler for that time period since he cared about his people so much. He was willing to listen and wanted to keep them safe. Without a doubt Pericles was a better ruler than Alexander, because of many reasons. Alexander might have been a good leader on the battle fields, with amazing strategies, but he was not ready to take care of his people