Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Julius Ceasar :)

Good or bad? That is the question.

Ellie Sustaita

on 19 April 2010

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Julius Ceasar :)

We all know about Julius Ceasar, but the
question most frequently asked is, Was he
in fact, good or bad? Some say he was a good leader, cause he
was an incredible fighter and created
legendary 10th legion and never lost a battle. Julius doubled the size of the Roman empire.
Some observers would say that made him a good leader.
Then he triggered a civil war that raged for twenty-odd years.
Some observers would say that made him a bad leader Many say he was a good leader, but a bad politician. There are many different sides to the delema. It's all about personality differences. He led well and gained glory and wealth for the Empire.
But he could not keep the senators to toe the line
and got killed for his trouble. There is no absolute answer to the frequently question
asked, "Was Julius ceasar good or bad" Its's all a matter of opinion. Random Facts :)
Julius Caesar has a great importance in Rome's history because he was the one who started the transition of Rome from a Republic in which the Senate had the true power to an Empire where the dominant political figure was the Emperor.
He realized that the old Republic was unable to rule an Empire so great, which was extended from iberic peninsula to Germany and from France to Egypt and Middle East.
Of course he wanted the power for himself but was killed by some senators who feared the Republic's fall.
When he was killed, he had too much enemies in and outside Rome: the Senate, composed by the members of the oldest and richest families of Rome, who didn't want to lose power, the Aegyptian aristocracy, who feared to see their country conquered by the Romans, the friends of Pompey, which was defeated by Caesar in a bloody civil war...
But ordinary Roman citizens and his legionaries loved him because he distributed to them all the prize from Gaul campaign: it's right to say that they were the real foundation of Caesar's power in Rome.
So, in conclusion, if you look to the importance and influence of Caesar's life for Rome, we have to agree that he was a great leader; otherwise, if you look to the reforms he wanted for Rome, the birth of an absolute monarchy in which one man had power of life and death on millions, we could say that he wasn't a great leader, but in this case we must consider that those were different times, and our idea of democracy wasn't a strong value for the ancient people.
For more info about the life of Caesar and his importance in the history of Rome, check the voice "Julius Caesar" on wikipedia.
For a subjective point of view about Caesar, read the "Commentarii de bello gallico" and "Commentarii de bello civili", two masterworks of the latin literature, both wrote by Caesar himself in which he describes his decisions and opinions about the greatest events of his life, the Gaul's campaign and the civil war versus Pompey.
Full transcript