Ancient Rome: The Rise And Fall Of An Empire(2006) ^HOT^

This dramatised documentary series tells the story of the rise and fall of Ancient Rome through the six key turning points. Factually accurate and based on extensive historical research, it reveals how the greed, lust and ambition of men like Caesar, Nero and Constantine shaped the Roman Empire. It describes how Rome destroyed Carthage, was conquered by Caesar, how it suppressed the Jewish revolt, and converted to Christianity. CGI is mixed with compelling drama and spectacular live-action battles to tell the definitive television story of how the Empire was formed, how it achieved maximum power, and why it eventually failed.

Ancient Rome: The Rise and Fall of an Empire(2006)

Download Zip: https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Furlcod.com%2F2ui6Bs&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AOvVaw3peF4e98s_LnXUmrwgUurF

Ancient Rome: The Rise and Fall of an Empire was a six-part Docudrama created for The BBC which aired in 2006. Set in Ancient Rome, the series looks at six important events in Rome's history - namely, the rise of Julius Caesar, the Fire of Rome in the reign of Nero, The Jewish Wars and the rise of the Flavians, the career of the notorious Tiberius Gracchus, the rise of Constantine, and the fall of Rome.

Mr. HARRIS: Well, of course, this is no accident. The founding fathers looked back at Rome and adopted many of the principles of the Roman Republic: a Senate, a separation of powers and a system of checks and balances. And it's no surprise that when one looks back to the Roman Republic, you go spooling back 2,000 years, and you suddenly confront situations, language, which is exactly the same as modern-day America. Even the word - our modern word ambition -comes from ambitiose, the Roman word for walking around, which is what a candidate did during election time. Everywhere one looks in ancient Rome, one sees a parallel with today.

Mr. HARRIS: I think that whenever a nation feels itself to be at is zenith, it starts to feel a creeping sense of anxiety. And from Gibbon onwards and through the 19th century, there was a great deal of interest in Great Britain - when it was the world's superpower - in ancient Rome, and in particular, the fall and collapse of Pompeii when it was destroyed. This was an object of great interest and fascination to the Victorians, I think because it's one of those perennial stories people go back to just to give themselves a (foreign language spoken) of terror that nature - however sophisticated your civilization, or you think you're well-protected against it - nature has a habit of biting back.

Spanning over three thousand years of human endeavor, this course investigates some of the major events, ideas, and crises which shaped societies from ancient Mesopotamia to early modern England. Interactive lectures will be supplemented by in-depth consideration of primary source materials: texts and artifacts produced by and for the people of this fascinating epoch. Students will learn to analyze and evaluate historical data, and to better understand the institutions, ideologies, and cultures of our own time by studying those of our shared past. They will be required to read carefully, to engage in class exercises and discussions, and to write several short papers. There will be midterm and final examinations.

However, the comparisons do not end there and some believe that the Roman Empire that replaced their Republic provides even more opportunities for comparisons with our own evolution. No longer do we look to Rome for only heroic stories of its rise and zenith but also for stories of its decline and eventual fall. In Cullen Murphy's book, Are We Rome?, he shares that depending on the perspective, Rome can serve as "either a grim cautionary tale or an inspirational call to action" (Murphy 2007). Though we can argue whether the United States is an empire or not, what we cannot deny is that Rome and the U.S. are the most powerful actors in each of their respective periods. During America's inception our founders were greatly hoping that our model would be Rome of the republic, though they greatly feared that one day we would become Rome of the Caesars for according to J. Rufus Fears, Ph.D. in his Heritage Lectures article, "the Lessons of the Roman Empire for America Today", "Rome of the Caesars and the United States today are the only two absolute superpowers that have ever existed in history" (Fears 2005). Fears goes on to define an absolute superpower as being "a nation that is dominant militarily, politically, economically, and culturally" (Fears 2005). According to his definition, the United States is absolutely a superpower. Though "we may never produce a Beethoven or a Bach, a Goethe or a Shakespeare [because] that is not how our culture dominates. [Instead], it is our music, our McDonald's, our popular culture that spreads all over the globe" (Fears 2005). In this way we understand that our superpower status has much to do with global consumption of American popular culture, enabling America to rule far beyond our borders. Murphy agrees with Fears that a civilization's power goes beyond just military strength by also including what he defines as "the 'soft power' of language, culture, commerce, technology, and ideas" (Murphy 2007). Both Rome and the U.S. are also made up of many different people, cultures and newcomers, whom they have absorbed into their societies through citizenship, guaranteeing the constant and continual change of identities of both long-term and recent citizens. Although we cannot ignore that the United States is only in its third century of existence, whereas the Western Roman Empire lasted for over a millennium, both also have in common their abilities to molt repeatedly from their previous selves.

Many often cite Rome's decline in morals and values as a major reason for the fall of the Roman Empire. Many historians note that the final years of the Empire were especially excessive in declining morals and values as witnessed through decreasing safety, promiscuity, lavish overindulgent parties, and violence. During this time the Empire's larger cities were very unsafe because violent crimes were rampant in their streets. Roman historians recount that "there were 32,000 prostitutes in Rome during the reign of Trajan. Emperors like Nero and Caligula became infamous for wasting money on lavish parties, where guests ate and drank until they became ill" (Bower et al 1993). Some believe that the most alarming trend during this time was the rise in Roman passion for cruelty. Gladiatorial combats, which brought together the rich, the poor, and often the emperor himself, became the most popular form of entertainment. The audience would shout out cries and curses as the gladiators fought and multiple contests took place on the same stage daily. "Should the ground of the arena become too soaked with blood, it was covered over with a fresh layer of sand, and the revolting performances went on" (Bower et al 1993). These are just a few of many examples that historians often cite when arguing that the overall decline in Roman morals and values was one of the major reasons why Rome eventually fell.

After the reign of emperor Marcus Aurelius, Romans conquest of new territory significantly decreased and their economy suffered greatly eventually causing inflation. By not conquering new lands, the amount of gold flowing into their economy also decreased. Meanwhile, remaining gold was still being used to pay for luxury items. Gold was also a key mineral used in their coins. With less gold circulating in their economy, the amount of gold used in their coins also decreased causing the value of the coins themselves to plummet as well. "To make up for this loss in value, merchants raised the prices on the goods they sold. Many people stopped using coins and began to barter to get what they needed" (Bower et al 1993). With this revival of a barter economy instead of paying salaries in money, employers paid in food and clothing and taxes were paid through fruits and vegetables. This significant decrease of circulating gold caused prices to rise. Through this imposition Rome's economy suffered greatly and many argue that they were never able to completely recover. For these reasons some historians believe that inflation played a major role in Rome's downfall.

Christianity rose and spread during the Roman Empire. However, Rome did not welcome this new religion with open arms right from the start. Some emperors, like Marcus Aurelius openly rejected Christianity numerous times, though some historians believe that he himself embodied Christian principles more than any other Roman ruler. It was not until the emperor Justinian welcomed this new religion into the empire that it grew in popularity. Once Christianity was welcomed and even encouraged, many people followed their emperor's lead and embraced this new religion. Some historians point to the dramatic cultural changes that Christianity produced, especially during a time when barbarian pressure was at a rise. These historians argue that "Christianity made its followers into pacifists, thus making it more difficult to defend Roman lands from barbarian attacks" (Bower et al 1993). They also suggest that "the Church attracted many qualified leaders whose talents were needed to deal with the problems of the Empire" (Bower et al 1993). With a growing increase in Christian pacifists who were opposed to and therefore avoided war, especially those of military strategists, Rome was at a loss in defense with rising barbarian threat. Lastly, these same historians believe that money that citizens generously contributed to the Church could have been more beneficial if given to support their empire. For these reasons combined, the rise in Christianity is often cited by some as a significant factor in the fall of Rome.

The principal occasions for dramatic spectacles in the Roman world were yearly religious festivals, or ludi, organized by elected magistrates and funded from the state treasury. Temple dedications, military triumphs, and aristocratic funerals also provided opportunities for scenic performances. Until 55 B.C., there was no permanent theater in the city of Rome, and plays were staged in temporary, wooden structures, intended to stand for a few weeks at most. The ancient sources concur that the delay in constructing a permanent theater was due to active senatorial opposition, although the possible reasons for this resistance (concern for Roman morality, fear of popular sedition, competition among the elite) remain a subject of debate. Literary accounts of temporary theaters indicate that they could be quite elaborate. The best documented is a theater erected by the magistrate M. Aemilius Scaurus in 58 B.C., which Pliny reports to have had a stage-building comprised of three stories of columns and ornamented with 3,000 bronze statues. 041b061a72