Civilization #32: Rome's Rise, Fall, and Legacy

Okay, good morning, um, class. So, we are today doing, um, the rise and fall of the Roman Empire. And this topic is extremely relevant today because there's a country in the world that purposefully modeled itself, um, out of Rome, and this country is the United States of America. The similarities between Rome and the United States are very striking. Um, both of these societies were, of their time, the most powerful nations. Rome dominated the Western World for centuries, and today America is the world's most powerful nation. In fact, America is so powerful that if the entire world were to get together, decide for whatever reason to invade and attack America and not stop until America was defeated, well, if that would have happened, America would win. America is really invincible. It's protected by two oceans, and it has infinite resources, and it has an extremely aggressive population and the world's most sophisticated military. Um, so by studying Rome, we gather insight into America, where America is right now in its history, and where America is headed. And the central argument I will make to you today is that both of these societies, Rome and America, are really war machines. They're extremely aggressive, and if they cannot turn their aggression outwards, they turn their aggression inwards. Um, Rome, throughout its history, was either fighting wars against its enemies, and then when it ran out of enemies, it fought wars, um, within itself, which ultimately led to its decline and collapse. America is in a very similar situation. Um, after the fall of the Soviet Union, um, in 1991, America became, um, a hyperpower. It had no competitors. It has no peers in the world. Um, even though it tries very hard to look for enemies, for example, for the past 10 years, America has been trying to paint China as a new threat. America really has no adversaries, and as a result, it can't really, um, be aggressive abroad. So, this will lead to, if the history of Rome is an indicator, it will lead to a massive civil war in America in the next 10 years. Okay, so that's what the history of Rome tells us.

Okay, so today I want to look at three questions. The first question is, why did Rome rise? What allowed Rome to become an empire, a superpower of its time? The second question is, what did Rome ultimately decline and fall? The third question is, what is the legacy of Rome? What is the impact and influence of Rome in today's world?

Okay, let's look at the first question. So, Rome, the tradition, we don't actually know this true or not, but the tradition is that Rome was founded in 753 BCE. And from, for that early history, Rome was a monarchy. It had a king. Then in 509 BCE, it became a republic, not a democracy, a republic. And then, and at that point, Rome was very much a poor, backward, and isolated city along the Tiber. And at that point in its history, no one, okay, not even the Romans, could have predicted that in 300 years' time, Rome would become the master of its world, the Mediterranean.

Okay, so, um, to understand why Rome was able to succeed, let me very quickly draw for you a map of the world, the Mediterranean, um, in about 500 BC when the Roman Republic was founded. So, um, at the center of this world was really the Persian Empire. The Persian Empire was in control of the, of the world's three most, most prosperous regions: Egypt, Anatolia, which is modern-day Turkey, and Mesopotamia, which is modern-day Iraq. And these are the three most fertile regions of the Western World. Um, it was extremely prosperous, very heavily populated, and the Persian Empire was in control of all three regions.

Okay, so the Persian Empire, um, is like this. Across the Aegean and the Mediterranean from the Persian Empire are the Greeks. You had Athens and you had Sparta. Okay, and these were the two dominant, uh, city-states, or we call *polis*, um, on the Greek mainland. Across the Adriatic is, of course, Italy, and the dominant power actually in Italy at this time are not the Romans, but, but, but a culture, civilization we call the Etruscans. And the Etruscans, for the longest time, were dominant over the Romans. In fact, some people believe that Rome was originally a colony of the Etruscans, and the first kings of Rome were actually Etruscan princes. Okay, um, and then over here is a place called Carthage, which is an emerging power. And over here, above the Greeks, are the Macedonians. So, these are the major cultures and powers of that time.

Now, one of these powers will eventually dominate and then provide the cultural framework for all Western civilization. And if we were to go back in time and we were to analyze this situation, then we could make some predictions. Okay, our first prediction would be that Persia would eventually conquer all of Europe, right? Because Persia had infinite wealth, it had infinite, um, resources, it was a superpower that was intent on on aggression. Okay, and in fact, as we know, eventually it will launch an invasion of the Greek mainland. Okay, so if we were to predict or guess who would dominate the world, we would think it would be Persia. That's our first guess. Okay, but let's just say, then who's who would be second? Well, we would think that either Athens or Sparta would be second. Why? Because Athens has a navy, and it, it is a really powerful navy, and at this time, Greek civilization, it's really growing. Okay, so we would guess Athens or Sparta. And remember, Athens has a navy, but Sparta is really, um, a military *hegemon*. It is focused on being a military powerhouse, and it has really the best military in Greece at this time. So, our third guess might be Sparta. Then we could guess, um, Carthage, why? Because Carthage is strategically located in Northern Africa, which gives it access to all trade routes in Africa, um, over here, into all of Europe, and then back to the Mediterranean. Okay, so Carthage would also be a good guess. We would not guess Macedonia, okay? Why? Because Macedonia is a poor, backward kingdom north of Greece that's being controlled right now by the Persians. We would never guess the Macedonians. But then there's one, one city that we would never, ever believe could dominate the world, and that's Rome. Okay, Rome would not be on a list. Macedonia might be on on the list because it still has a strategic location, it has a very militant population, but we would never, ever guess Rome.

Now, what's funny about these predictions, of course, is that eventually Rome does conquer the entire Mediterranean world, and it becomes, uh, the superpower of its time, and then it develops the cultural framework for all Western civilization. Okay, but not only that, but close to Rome is Macedonia, because remember, Macedonia is where Philip II builds the world's most powerful military, and where Alexander the Great comes from to conquer all the Persian Empire. Okay, so it's very strange that the nations that either are not on the list or at the bottom of the list will eventually conquer the world. All right, and this goes back to our first class where we talk about the oceanic currents of history, how empires are destined to fall, to decline, but in the process, they energize these borderlands and empower these borderlands to rise and eventually, over time, to overwhelm the empire. Okay, so this is true for Macedonia, and this was certainly true for Rome. Okay, so this fits into our pattern of the oceanic currents of history.

What I want to, so there are many different reasons why Rome would eventually win out over its competitors in the, in the Mediterranean. What I want to focus on today are the cultural reasons. So, my argument today is that Rome, in opposition to its enemies, developed a cultural system that allowed it to triumph over its enemies. This cultural system made it ideal for military competition against, um, its major enemies. Okay, so let's talk about this cultural system. And to understand this cultural system, I will compare and contrast it with the Greeks, who are also, um, who are basically the most culturally dominant, uh, people in this area at this time. Okay, so what do the Greeks believe in? Well, the Greeks believe in three things. Okay, the Greek system, or when I mean Greeks, I basically mean Athenians, okay, um, because the Athenians were the culturally dominant, um, uh, nation in the Greek world. All right, so what, what did the Greeks believe in, and, and how were the Romans different? Well, first, we understand is that Greeks were culturally dominant, and, and so what happened was that Romans developed a lot of their cultural systems in opposition to the Greeks, or they learned lessons from the Greeks. Okay, so think about as an analogy, the relationship between China and Japan. A lot of Japanese cultural systems and values were developed in opposition to China and because of the lessons that the Japanese learned from Chinese history. Okay, so, um, what, let's, let's talk about the Greek values and then what, what values the Romans developed in opposition to the Greeks.

Okay, so the first value the Greeks developed was the idea of freedom. What is freedom? Freedom represents an aristocratic society in which everyone has the right to speak his mind, his not hers, okay, his mind. So, every citizen was considered, um, equal, and that was the basis for Greek democracy. Everyone who has the right, everyone has the right to speak if you're a citizen. Okay, now, what is the Roman counterpart? The Roman counterpart is what we call Liberty. And they sound similar, but they're actually very different concepts. Freedom is the right to speak your mind, the right to live your life. Liberty is the respect for the laws, history, and tradition of your culture, because that's what enables you to be free. If we do not respect the laws, it'll be anarchy. Also, Liberty means basically no king. Okay, we will never allow a king to rule us because he takes away our Liberty. What's interesting for us is the modern Western concept is more aligned with, uh, the Romans than the Greeks. When we think of freedom and liberty, we think of the Roman idea, not the Greek idea. Okay, so Liberty, the, the Roman word for this is, of course, *libertas*.

All right, the second idea, value, um, of the Greeks is the idea of *eudaimonia*. *Eudaimonia* is the pursuit of human flourishing, to be the best that you can be, to be better than your peers, and to win respect for your peers, to seek glory, to seek honor. So, let's go back to last semester and think about Achilles in the, in the epic, the *Iliad*. Achilles was in Troy not to win glory for the Greek people, but to win glory for himself. He was extremely selfish, he was extremely competitive, and he was so competitive that when he, uh, abandoned the battlefield, he basically asked his mother, Thetis, the goddess, to get Zeus, the high god, to favor the Trojans. This is treason, this is sedition, and for the Greeks, this is good because what's important is to win *eudaimonia*. You, in order to achieve *eudaimonia*, can do anything because that's what matters. Okay, and the idea of *eudaimonia*, if you think about it, it's what led to Greek creativity because everyone saw society as a competition, and they wanted to be the best. But if you think about it, it also leads to corruption, um, um, and selfishness. Okay, so the Romans didn't like *eudaimonia*, but instead, their highest virtue was the idea of *virtus*. And this is where we get the word Republic from. Republic means for the greater good, for the public virtue. So, what's important is not that you win glory for yourself, but to sacrifice yourself for the greater good, for the good of Rome. That's what made you a good person, or the best person, to fight and die for Rome.

And the third value for the Greeks that mattered was the idea of *arete*. *Arete* just means excellence. So, even though Achilles was a jerk, the Greeks still admired him because he was a great soldier on the battlefield. He was fabulous, he was excellent, and therefore he should be admired. Okay, the Romans didn't like this. Okay, they didn't want people to outshine everyone else, so they preferred the concept of piety, obedience, loyalty to your fathers, to Rome, to the gods. Piety is what mattered. The highest virtue in Rome is not *arete*, it is piety. And again, a lot of Roman values was developed in response to the Greeks, especially to the Athenians, because remember, the Athenians in 480 defeated the Persians, and they, the Athenians became basically an empire. They were a dominant military force in the Mediterranean, in the Aegean, all, all that time, but 80 years later, 400, they had been decimated, they had been destroyed. They fought against Sparta in the Peloponnesian War and they lost. The Romans witnessed all this, right, because they were just across, across from the Adriatic, they knew all this, and so they were determined not to repeat the mistakes of the Athenians. And that's why they developed a system in opposition to the Greek, the Athenians. The Athenians had democracy, and it was common wisdom at that time that it was the democratic system that caused the collapse of the Athenian Empire. And in response, the Romans developed a system called The Republic.

Now, there's a huge difference between democracy and Republic. They sound the same, and in today's world, we use these two concepts interchangeably. Okay, we say American democracy, we say American Republic, it means the same thing. But back then, democracy and Republic were two opposing systems. So, let me give you an example to show you how different the systems are. Okay, so democracy is basically one man, one vote. It encourages competition, encourages debate, encourages free thought. Republic is, um, to be ruled by institutions, basically the Senate, okay, institutions, by laws and by history or tradition.

All right, so what's the difference? All right, let's pretend that we're all going to go out for, for lunch today, and each of us has a different opinion. I want to go to McDonald's, Evo wants to go and get dumplings, Eko wants to go to Pizza. Who knows? But we all have different, these different opinions. In a democracy, we resolve this issue by having debate. I make my argument for my idea, then you all make your argument for your ideas, okay, and then we vote, and the majority wins, simple, right? Okay, a republic is different. A republic, you make your decisions based on tradition. So, for example, today is Thursday, and for whatever reason, we don't know why, but every Thursday we go out to get dumplings. So, guess what? We just go and get dumplings. We don't ask why, we don't even know why. We, we may not even like dumplings. It doesn't matter. What matters is you respect and follow tradition set by your fathers. Okay, does that make sense?

Now, what's interesting is these two systems have benefits and consequences, and it's the idea of the Republic that allows Rome to eventually conquer the entire Mediterranean. And the reason why is the idea of a republic solves a problem that democracy cannot solve. It's the idea of citizenship and identity. The way you organize your society is basically citizenship. Who gets to be a citizen, who doesn't? Now, democracy, it's actually very hard to be a citizen because if we are having debate and competition, we don't want others coming into the system, right? There are four of us in the classroom, we debate, but let's just say we let in five other people, and these five other people all love noodles. Guess what? We're stuck going to noodles every day, right? So we don't want newcomers. And that's why the Athenian Empire failed. The empire had to fight these wars to protect its empire, but in each battle, it had to lose soldiers. Even if you win battles, you have to lose soldiers, and it could not replenish these soldiers because it did not want foreigners to become citizens. Does that make sense?

But in a republic, you do not have this problem, right? If we are a republic, we're all stuck going to noodles, uh, every Thursday. We let in 100 people, doesn't matter, we're all going to noodles, right? It doesn't affect us. So, the beauty of a republic is you can allow immigrants and foreigners to come into your system, which allows you to replenish your military, and they become citizens if they are willing to fight for you and if they're willing to follow your traditions, your customs, your history. It's very similar in America, right? In China, how are you a citizen? You're born here and both your parents are Chinese, and that's it. There's no other way to become a Chinese Chinese citizen. But in America, you can immigrate and just say, "I swear to obey the Constitution. I swear to protect the Constitution." If you say those, those words, you can become a US citizen. Okay, so that's the power of the Republic.

Okay, so let's, let's talk about some historical examples to illustrate the difference between a democracy and a republic. Well, in the democracy, people understand *polis*, or society, as a community of people. Okay, so the example is in 480, the Persians invaded the Greek mainland, and they were about to attack Athens, and there's no way that Athens could withstand the Persian onslaught. So, what do they do? Well, what they did was they got, uh, onto their ships and they sailed away. The entire Athenian people, the entire city of Athens, got onto the ships and sailed away. And the Persians were like, "Well, you can't do that." And the Athenians said, "Yes, we can, because as a community, we can be wherever we want. We don't have to be in Athens. As long as we're a community, we will be Athens. We can leave Athens and go sail to Africa, and we will still be Athens." Okay, that's the idea of community.

But the Romans didn't believe that. Okay, remember in 26, Hannibal comes and attacks the Italian Peninsula. He destroys and wipes out all the Roman armies. Rome has no army. And at this point, Rome has has options. It can surrender or it can leave. It cannot leave because to leave Rome would be to abandon its identity as a Roman people. If you're a republic, you're the place. Does it matter? Once you leave the place, you abandon the values, the culture, the history that makes you distinctly Roman. So, the Romans said to Hannibal, "We will not surrender. We will fight to the last man if you come and attack us." And Hannibal never did. Okay, and what's really funny about this incident is it's really the proudest moment in Roman history. They were up against impossible odds. They had no army. Hannibal was the greatest general, Rome in human history. He had a huge army, but the Roman people were willing to make all the necessary sacrifices in order to protect their identity and their values and their history. They refused to let Rome fall. So, every person, whether it's woman, man, or child, would have taken arms and attacked and defended the city against Hannibal. And this was really the highlight of the Republican system. It refuses to surrender because to surrender would mean abandoning its identity. Okay, so that's why Rome was able to defeat all its enemies because the Roman idea of citizenship was flexible. If you're willing to fight for Rome, you could become a citizen. And as such, Rome was able to draw soldiers from all of the, of the Italian Peninsula.

From 280 to 272 BCE, there's something called the Pyrrhic Wars. Pyrrhus, who was a Greek king, came to the aid of the Greek colonies in Italy. These Greeks were complaining and saying, "The Romans are bullying us. Can someone please help us and build us a Greek Empire?" So, Pyrrhus comes and attacks the Romans, and he won every battle. The Romans were terrible soldiers. He had the best soldiers in the world, and he was winning every battle. And at one, at at a certain point, Pyrrhus said, "Okay, we're killing a lot of Romans, but if I win one more battle, if I just win one more battle, I'm going to run out of soldiers, so we have to retreat." Okay, and, and this is because of the idea of citizenship. The Greeks could not replenish their forces, whereas the Romans could. Okay, and this is what allowed for social mobility and innovation in Rome. The fact that Rome was constantly fighting these battles, these wars against everyone, and learning from their mistakes and growing as a military power, eventually Rome comes in conflict with Carthage. And Carthage is at this point, um, the greatest military, sorry, the greatest naval power of, of the Mediterranean. Rome did not have a navy. It doesn't know how to sail ships. Guess what it did? What did, guess what happened? They decided to build a navy, and they lost a lot of battles against Carthage, but again, because Rome was so persistent, because, because Rome was not afraid to lose soldiers, eventually it overwhelmed Carthage. Okay, so this is the reason why eventually Rome was able to conquer the entire Mediterranean world. No one could stop Rome. Okay, so by about 200 BCE, um, Rome was, eventually was the greatest military hegemon, all that time, and by 100 BC, 100 years later, it was an empire.

Are you guys clear? Any questions so far before I continue? Are you guys clear about about this? All right, but there's a problem. When Rome became an empire, um, a republic is not the same as an empire. An empire needed a bureaucracy, it needed an emperor. You need a top-down system, and that's in conflict with the idea of a republic where you have to obey the history and, and the institutions. If you're an empire, you have to absorb new people into your culture, but the Romans didn't want to do that because it meant giving up their own culture, right? So, this created a contradiction. It, this created a paradox, and this will eventually lead to a series of civil wars that really never stop until Rome collapses.

All right, so to understand this idea, think about America today. America, again, it is the, it is our humanity's greatest empire. It controls the entire world, basically. It has 800 military bases around the world. China has about two. Okay, um, it has no peer competitor. But there's one thing that you cannot say about America. If you go to Americans, say, "You guys are an empire," you'll be shut down. "How dare you? You say we're an empire? There's nothing imperial about us. We're a republic, we're democracy, we're not an empire." For whatever reason, Americans refuse to believe they're an empire. It's ridiculous. And you have some silly things. For example, when Americans talk about the Middle East, right? Clearly America wants to control the Middle East for its resources. But when you talk to American academics, American people, for whatever reason, they believe American Middle East policy is being controlled by Israel, a nation of 8 million people in a desert. Israel is able to control the American Empire. And you're like, "That makes no sense." Like, how is it possible for Israel to control America? But Americans really believe this. If you, you talk about the war in Ukraine, there are a lot of Americans who believe that it's the Europeans who are making America assist Ukraine. It's all European, uh, manipulation. Okay, and it's the silliest thing. It's like, it's like, "What are you talking about? The Europeans are a vassal state of America. Israel is a vassal state of America." And the reason why is Americans cannot understand that they're an empire because it goes against their idea of themselves as democracy, as a republic.

All right, this is what we call the word for this is called cognitive dissonance. Okay, you guys have should have studied this in psychology, okay? But it's, but it's impossible to have, for your mind to hold in place two contradictory ideas. America cannot both be a republic and an empire. Therefore, it's Republic, and don't ever mention the word empire. Okay, and guess what? The Romans had the same problem. They could not conceive of themselves as an empire and they refused to be an empire, even though they were an empire. And this led to lots of civil wars and conflicts between Rome and the people around Rome.

Okay, so the example is that from 91 to 89, Rome fought something called the Social War. Remember, this is after Rome became an empire. It now has no peer competitor, it has no adversary. So, now it starts to fight wars among its own people. The Social War was fought between Rome and its Italian allies or neighbors. For most of its history, Rome was drawing soldiers from its allies, and after Rome became an empire, its allies, Italian allies, rightfully said, "Listen, we fought for you for decades. We've lost many men. We demand to be given citizenship." And, and Rome said no, and so they fought a civil war. And Rome lost the civil war because, guess what? Its military was from the Italian Peninsula. Okay, so it could not defeat its allies, and, and so it had to make its allies into Roman citizens. And Rome will keep on doing this where it has all these subject people. The subject people rebel because they want citizenship. But again, for Rome, what matters is the protection of its cultural identity. And if you give citizenship to too many people, that dilutes your cultural identity. Okay, they were afraid that Rome will stop being Rome, and that led to conflicts throughout its history, and it never really ended.

Okay, so, um, you can't ever use the word empire, emperor in Rome. Then the question then is, wait, didn't, wasn't, um, Augustus Caesar, after the battle of Actium, the first Roman Emperor? Uh, no. Okay, the idea of an empire, the idea of an emperor, the idea that, uh, Augustus Caesar was the first emperor, is something that later historians, um, decided on. The Romans did not see themselves as an empire. Okay, and Augustus Caesar did not see himself as an emperor. The word he used, the word the Romans use, is the idea of *princeps*. Okay, *princeps* just means "first" in Latin, "first citizen." We are still equals, meaning senators, okay, but I'm just a bit better than you. I'm the first among equals. And this is where we get the English word "prince" from. And Augustus Caesar did not see him, see himself as building an empire. He saw himself as saving the Republic.

Now, now, what's important to understand is that Augustus Caesar was considered the greatest Roman leader because he ruled for 50-plus years. His was a very stable regime. And the reason why, if you recall from last semester, is he was the heir to Julius Caesar. And there's tremendous regret and guilt among the Roman people for having killed Julius Caesar. And so they allowed his heir, his son, um, to be king, king or emperor, without much opposition. That was not true for his, um, his heirs. Okay, so after Augustus Caesar died, all these civil wars and conflicts that were suppressed were now fermented again. And this now would now lead to a massive period of civil wars.

Now, our understanding of Roman history comes a lot from Roman historians themselves, specifically two individuals: Livy and, um, Tacitus. And we basically listen to what they wrote. For example, we, so what we mean by that is we take their word as gospel, we take the word as truth. But what we, we need to recognize is they were senators, okay, part of the nobility, who hated the emperors, who hated the *princeps*. So, they did whatever they could in order to make the emperors look bad. Okay, so there were four emperors, uh, sorry, there were three emperors after the death of Augustus: Tiberius, Caligula, and Nero. And they were all made to look, look very, very bad, especially, uh, Nero and Caligula.

Okay, so let me give you an example of this. So, um, after Augustus dies, Augustus names two people heir to his legacy. The first is Tiberius, who becomes the emperor. Tiberius is not his son, it is his adopted son. Okay, so that is a Roman tradition where, uh, you can adopt someone outside the family to be your heir. Okay, and that, um, and then after Tiberius died, Augustus anointed Germanicus to be his successor. And Germanicus was considered, um, an extremely talented and capable leader. The problem, though, is that Tiberius, who is now emperor, didn't like the fact that Germanicus was appointed his successor. He wanted to anoint his own successor. Okay, so Tiberius, what he did that was very sneaky was he got, he made a man named Sejanus the head of the Praetorian Guard. And the Praetorian Guard was basically the secret police of Rome. And so Sejanus, because he was very ambitious, he started to kill not just Germanicus, but everyone in Germanicus's family. Sejanus wanted to be the heir to Tiberius. And then after, um, Sejanus was done killing everyone basically in Germanicus's family, Tiberius had him killed. This is a very common, uh, pattern in imperial history. Okay, um, after Sejanus was killed, there's a purge of Sejanus's allies. His children were killed, and everyone who supported Sejanus was interrogated by the Senate and put to death. And most of these people claimed innocence. "I had nothing to do with Sejanus. I was forced into an alliance with Sejanus."

Now, there's one person, a Roman noble man named Marcus Terentius, who in 31 CE, he appeared before the, for his trial, and he decided on a different strategy. Everyone else before him claimed, "I had nothing to do with Sejanus," and the Senate didn't believe them, and they were all killed. Okay, so Marcus Terentius tries a different strategy, and this is recounted in the history book *Annals* by Tacitus, who was writing about 100 years later. Okay, and this is what Marcus Terentius argues. He argues, "Yes, I was his friend. In fact, I tried my best to be his friend. Why? Because Sejanus had the favor of the emperor. Because if I wanted to get anything done, if I, if I want to become wealthy, I had to become a friend of Sejanus. And why did I do this, and why was this right? Because it is not up to me to question or or think about why Sejanus is a friend of the emperor. All I need to know was the emperor favored Sejanus, and it is my duty to obey the emperor. And therefore, I became his friend." That was his logic.

Now, let's look at what Tacitus wrote. Okay, and it's really, uh, one of the most striking paragraphs in the history. Okay, but, but this is Marcus Terentius's defense of himself before the Senate and the emperor. "It is not ours to ask whom you, the emperor, exalt above his fellow, or why you, the gods, have made sovereign arbiter of things." It's not my place to ever question the emperor. If the emperor made Sejanus his right-hand man, I now must also obey Sejanus. "If the emperor wants me to to marry a dog, I will go marry a dog. To search to us has been left the glory of obedience. To search out the hidden thoughts of the emperor and the designs he may shape in secret is unlawful and dangerous, nor would the Searcher necessarily find." What does this mean? It means the emperor is God. He has a secret design, he has a secret logic that we could never know. And because we're too stupid, and if we try to figure it out, we will be breaking the laws of Rome and the universe, and we could only get into trouble. So, it's not up to me to question the emperor. It is only my duty to obey the emperor.

The firmness of the speech. Okay, so he's finished speaking, defending himself in front of the Senate. And this is how the emperor and Senate respond to this speech. "The firmness of the speech, he speaks with conviction, and the fact that a man had been discovered to utter what the world was thinking made so powerful an impression that his accusers were penalized by banishment or death." Rather than punish this man, the Senate punished his accusers, his enemies. Why? Because they had found a man to speak the truth about the world. The emperor was in command. We had to obey the emperor. And they wanted to make a role model out of him. And therefore, they killed all his enemies and let him go and rewarded him lavishly.

Now, this was written in contrast to Roman history. This marks a radical departure from Roman history. Remember, in 9, the Republic was founded because they threw out the king. In response, the king organized his allies, the Etruscans, and they marched on Rome, and Rome was surrounded by, um, a huge army, and there was nothing Rome could do about it. So, a young nobleman named Mucius went to the senators and proposed a daring plan to assassinate the king. He swims across the Tiber, he goes into the camp of, uh, the enemy, and he's captured. He's interrogated by the king, and Mucius says, "We Romans have sworn to kill all kings." And to show that he's serious, he puts his hand into a fire and he burns, he burns his hand in front of the king, and the king is scared, so he runs away. Okay, so this story shows us the nature of the Roman character. Romans hate kings. Romans will always disobey kings. Romans will always find a way to kill kings. And this speech shows us that the Roman character has fundamentally changed because of empire.

Okay, so Romans, throughout most of its history, the Roman people have been grappling with what it means to be Roman and how to protect this precious identity. Now, we know that even though Tacitus wrote this, the Roman identity didn't really change. How do we know this? How do we know that even though Tacitus says, "Okay, empire changed the Roman identity," it didn't really change? How do we know this? Because he's writing about this, right? He's writing about this. He's telling us that the Roman identity changed because of empire. Well, if the Roman identity really changed, people wouldn't know it changed. It's only because people are resisting the change in nature, the change in character, that people appreciate what Tacitus is writing. And Tacitus is really saying that, "Oh, that empire, it's gone now because the new emperor has restored the Republic." So, throughout its history, Rome was constantly in a battle between empire and Republic. And every new emperor believed that he was restoring the Republic, but then his, but then someone else would come along and say, "No, he was the dictator, he was the emperor, he was the emperor." So, this was a conflict throughout Roman history.

And so now the question, then we go on to the second question, which is, all right, um, how did the empire fall? Well, the standard explanation is that eventually Rome became too corrupt. And this is the explanation provided by most Roman historians, as well as the very, as as well as the famous British historian Edward Gibbon in his most famous work, *The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire*. Okay, it's corruption. It's because the, the Romans became more like the Greeks or like the Persians. They started to appreciate the luxury, decadence, and corruption of empire more. And the explanation is that over time, you got all these Germanic invaders from the steppes. Remember, the steppes is where the nomadic people come from. These nomadic people are being pushed up by the Huns. So, remember, the steppes, um, is really this massive competitive, uh, poor hurricane that makes people more, more aggressive. And more aggressive tribes will push out less aggressive tribes, and these people are forced to go into Europe. And over time, the Romans are trying to absorb them into their empire by making them soldiers or, uh, by, um, giving them land. But over time, this pure population, um, will force the empire to collapse. And that's the standard explanation.

I want to make a different argument. My argument is this: it really has to do again with the idea of citizenship and identity. Throughout most of its history, Imperial Rome has been struggling with this identity issue. And then at some point, an emperor came along and said, "Screw this. We no longer want to be Republic. We want to be an empire." Okay, and the way he resolved this issue is in 212, the Emperor Caracalla issued the Edict of Caracalla, which made everyone in the Roman Empire a citizen. So, he basically destroyed the idea of citizenship. If everyone can be a citizen, citizenship means nothing. Before, you had to fight for Rome, you had to die for Rome in order to become a citizen. You had to believe in the customs, the history, the tradition of Rome to become a citizen. You had to fight for it. It was valuable. It was, in fact, it was the most valuable thing in the world for people. But now everyone got it, so it's absolutely worthless. And because everyone was not a Roman citizen, there was now no more Roman identity. It was now a clean slate. The emperors were now, were now no longer bounded by tradition or history, by institutions like the Senate. And so now they could build the imperial bureaucracy. And this imperial bureaucracy, uh, will replace the Republic. And the major change is in 330, the Emperor Constantine will move the capital from Rome to a place called Byzantium, which will become the Byzantine Empire, or the Eastern Roman Empire. We'll talk about this next class. But this is something that was unthinkable. How could you move the heart and center and soul of the empire from Rome to somewhere else? It was unthinkable. If, if to be Roman was meant to die for Rome, but now the capital was somewhere else. Okay, and so when, so this marks the basically the end of Rome as a cultural identity, as a cultural beacon. This marked really the death of the history of Rome. Okay, does that make sense to you guys? Okay, now historians argue about this, and historians argue when the Roman Empire fell. All right, but the consensus is 476, when a German warlord deposed the last emperor named Romulus Augustulus. Okay, but I disagree. I believe that it really happened in 212, when Rome announced everyone could be a, um, citizen. And we'll talk more about this next class when we get to the Byzantine Empire.

Okay, so any questions so far? I, I know this is a lot, but we'll try to clarify a lot of the issues over the next few classes. Okay, but you, any questions now, please ask. Any questions so far about this? Is this clear to you guys? Yeah, pass this. Okay, all right, let me clarify. Tacitus was a senator, okay? The senator was always in conflict with the emperor. The senator, the Senate, okay, uh, sorry, let me clarify about the Senate. The Senate was basically the Roman aristocracy. It was where the ruling families of Rome sat, and they were supposed to be in charge of the empire, and the emperor was basically the CEO, okay? He was basically in charge of managing the empire, but it was the Senate that was supposed to make the decisions. In reality, it was the emperor who was in charge because the emperor controlled the army and he controlled the Praetorian Guard, which is the secret police. So, he could kill senators who disobeyed him. Okay, and this was always a very complex relationship. So, when Tacitus, again, who is a senator, who who comes from one of the elite families of Rome, when he's writing about the history of the, uh, Roman Empire from the time of Augustus to Nero, he's trying to paint them in a very bad light, okay, because he's trying to tell us emperors are bad, what's good is a Senate. And, and that's why he's producing the speech, because if you're a Roman citizen and you read this speech by Marcus Terentius, you are appalled, you're disgusted. "We're Romans. We hate kings. We do not obey. We fight. We do not surrender." Okay, so this speech goes against the very heart and soul of what it means to be Roman. And that's, and, and that's why Tacitus is writing this and saying, "You see what empire does to the Roman character? It corrupts us. It destroys us. It weakens us. And therefore, we must resist the emperor and protect the Senate." Doesn't make sense, guys? Okay, so, so thanks for that. Okay, so, so I apologize because I'm running through a lot of history in a short amount of time, so I'm missing a lot of important details. What's really important for you to understand is in the Republic, the Senate is in charge, okay, meaning the ruling houses, the aristocracy, is in charge. But in an empire, the emperor is in charge. But Rome never resolved this issue: who's, who should be in charge, the Senate or the emperor? And it changes over time. Okay, sometimes the Senate is in charge, sometimes the emperor's in charge, but they all believe they're protecting the Republic. And this creates cognitive dissonance. Okay, and that it creates a lot of confusion. And then in 212, the emperor said, "Screw this. Let's this be an empire. I don't want the Senate anymore." Okay, and this, and this begins a process of creating the Byzantine Empire, which does not have the idea of a Roman character.

Did, did you have a question? Echo, basically, are the senators, exactly? Yeah, um, the Senate is filled by, again, members of the ruling houses. And what's interesting about about the system is it's almost like a federal system. I'm not sure you know what a federal system is, but the emperor is in charge of the army, he's in charge of the secret police in Rome, but the senators are actually in charge of the provinces. So, basically, each senator gets a certain province to, um, uh, control. Okay, um, so it's like the United States, where governors are in charge of a state, the president is in charge of the nation. Okay, now, what's important for you to understand is technically, each state is independent, each state has its own army, has its own basically legal system, and it agrees to be part of the federal system, which the president is part of. And this is very similar to the Roman system, okay, not exactly, but it's very similar. All right, okay. Any more questions before I conclude?

Okay, so my, the last question I want to look at today is, what's the legacy of the Roman Empire or the Republic? And the answer is, we still live in the Roman world. Even though we like to think that we are heavily influenced by the Greeks, it's institutions of Rome that we've inherited. Okay, so the idea of the political system, the legal system, the cultural system, it's something that the Americans basically copy and pasted. The Roman, the American system is very, very Roman. And right now, of course, America controls the world, and therefore, it's able to disseminate Roman values and culture. Okay, and throughout the semester, we will be examining how Rome came to control the cultural framework of Western Civilization, because even though Rome collapsed, and Rome, the character of Rome is now dead, the Roman legacy is still there. And all these people fighting these warlords, okay, these basically German warlords, they're now going to fight the civil war after the death of Rome. They're claiming to be to be carrying on the legacy of Rome. Okay, from their perspective, Rome has not died, but Rome has spread out. And these warlords will adopt a lot of Roman practices, and these warlords will build, uh, the culture that will give rise to new nations called France, Germany, Britain, basically the European world. Okay, so that's the legacy of Rome. That's why it's important to study Rome.

What lessons? Okay, what lessons can we draw from Rome? Well, one really important lesson that we have to learn here is the idea of citizenship and identity. You cannot be a strong and coherent nation if you do not have a strong cultural identity. That's why the Romans were so insistent on protecting their identity against the Greeks, against, um, foreigners. Okay, and this is important because if you look at the Western world today, immigration, identity, and citizenship are huge political issues. Um, I'm a Canadian citizen. I was, I, I grew up in Canada. And over the past 10 years, the population of Canada went from like 30 million to 40 million. These 10 new, this 10 million people are all foreigners. We have no sense of Canadian identity. They have no interest in being Canadian. They just want a better life for themselves. 40% of Canadians now were either foreign-born or have a parent who is foreign-born. So, there's no more identity. And this is a problem. Why? Because the United States, Trump wants to take over Canada and make Canada into the, the 51st state. Okay, and this is a problem because Canadians don't want to resist this. 10 years ago, all Canadians would say, "Nope." But now you have 10 million Canadians who are very happy to join the United States because it means more economic opportunities for them, right? They don't care about cultural identity. So, without controlling immigration, you, as a nation, can't be coherent, and you will cease to exist over time. And the same is true in, um, the same is true of what's happening in Britain. Throughout the Western world, basically, they're landing too many immigrants, and they're diluting their own cultural identity. So, over the next 10, 20 years, a lot, a lot of people are predicting massive civil wars in the Western world as these nations grapple with the consequences of unlimited immigration these past 10 years. Okay, so that's one thing to think about. One lesson that, that we can learn from the Roman Roman world: citizenship does matter. Make it hard to become a citizen, make it valuable, make it an honor to be a citizen, and your nation will be strong. If citizenship is cheap, if you can just buy it, then it's worthless, and you will cease to be culturally coherent, and eventually you will cease to exist as a nation. Okay, so that's the first major lesson.

Second major lesson about Rome is it went out because it was an aggressive nation. But once you went out against your enemies, this aggression has to go somewhere, and it usually turns inward. Okay, and that's why Rome kept on fighting these civil wars amongst itself. And the same is true for America. America is a nation that worships aggression. For example, um, think about the number of guns in America. There's like, I, I don't know the exact statistics, but there's about 400 million guns in America. America only has 300 million people. There are more guns than there are people in America. It worships violence. Also, think about this: the most popular sport in America is American football. There's only one nation in the world that plays American football, and that's America. No other nation plays it. Why? Because it is barbaric. You, you literally have people trying to kill each other for the entertainment and pleasure of spectators. It's barbaric. Um, I'm not sure if you know this, but after five years of playing football, these athletes' brains are mush, and they commit suicide at age 30 or 35. Okay, so, so it's no different from gladiator sport in Rome, which Romans loved. Okay, so what, so America is a violent society. If it cannot turn its violence outside, it will turn violence, it will direct its the violence and aggression inwards. So, I think within the next 10 years, America will most likely start a war, probably against Iran. Okay, so I'm predicting within the next five years, America will start a war against Iran, probably sooner, and then America will start a civil war as well. So, civil war does not mean, um, two sides fighting against each other. It just means that there'll be a lot of political killings, assassinations, a lot of violence in America, okay, based on religious, political differences.

All right, so that's a second lesson to learn from Rome: aggression and violence will allow you, will allow you to defeat your enemies. Once you do this, violence and aggression will turn inwards. Okay, and the third lesson that we can learn from Rome is again, no societies are stable. Everything changes over time. So, even though Rome was the dominant superpower of its time, it still collapsed. And the same is true for America today. So, the world will change, and it always changes.

Okay, so next class, we will look at the Roman Empire, which is basically the Byzantine Empire. Okay, any questions about today's class? Are you guys clear? Okay, great. So, I will see you, uh, next class.