Ancient FAQ – Part III

Part III of our series of Ancient FAQ – where we look at some popular questions regarding history and ancient civilizations.

  1. Was Julius Caesar a good leader?
  2. Why was Julius Caesar assassinated?
  3. Was Augustus a good emperor?
  4. Why was Rome at a disadvantage in the first Punic War?
  5. How did Mark Antony die?
  6. Where is Constantinople located?
  7. When did Constantinople fall?
  8. What was an effect on the decline in trade after the fall of the Roman Empire?
  9. What 3 continents was the Roman Empire part of?
  10. Why did the Roman Empire produce more coins?

1. Was Julius Caesar a good leader?

Purely from a military perspective, yes, he was a good leader.

Julius Caesar was a great battlefield tactician who was unafraid to take risks. He conquered all of Gaul and built a 460-1300 ft (140-400m) bridge over the Rhine in ten days in a show of power towards the local Germanic tribes before taking it down. He was also the first Roman to set foot in Britannia.

In Gaul, he subjugated the border tribes before entering inland. Caesar would display his tactical genius at Alesia (modern-day Alise-Sainte-Reine, France).

He laid siege to the town of Alesia, where the Gallic chieftain, Vercingetorix, was stationed with a combined Gallic army. To stop them from gathering supplies or retreating, the Romans built a wooden wall around the entire city that measured approximately 10 miles (16 kilometers) in length.

As some soldiers built the wall and gathered supplies, Vercingetorix could send messages to the rest of Gaul that reinforcements were needed. Upon hearing this, Caesar built another wall around the city, almost 13 miles long (21 kilometers) and facing away from the town itself. This was to ensure that the Romans were not trapped between the armies in the town and the reinforcing army.

Caesar effectively had a wall on two fronts to fight both armies simultaneously. That is precisely what happened. After attacking a weak spot of the outer fortification, the Gauls found themselves at a disadvantage when the Romans sent out cavalry from another part of the fortification. The Roman cavalry appeared behind as the Gauls attacked the weak spot. The Gauls had two choices – run or get stuck between the bottleneck at the outer wall and the Roman cavalry. Most decided to run but were cut down by the Romans.

While Caesar led the Romans to many victories, some senators back in Rome were not happy that Caesar appeared to be amassing power and that the Roman state did not properly sanction his conquest of Gaul.

As such, they requested that he return to Rome without honors or a further consulship. Caesar saw this as a means to have him arrested by his political opponents. This view was reinforced by the fact that generals returning to Rome had to disband their armies before crossing the Rubicon River. Not disbanding the army at this point is seen as a march on Rome itself and, therefore, an act of war.

In Caesar’s mind, he would be defenseless and heading into Rome, where he knew he had many enemies.

So, Caesar decided to cross the Rubicon with his legions. A civil war ensued, in which Caesar won, making him the sole ruler of Rome. His role as dictator was temporary at first, requiring the Senate to vote for it.

He then made himself dictator for life (an emperor in almost every way). His enemies saw this as a bridge too far, and in March 44 BC, Julius Caesar was assassinated.

Civil wars are never good, but Caesar saw that the power at the time lay with corrupt senators. He needed to end the corruption. To his detractors, this was all just a power grab by Caesar. So, he could be seen by some as a good leader as he cleaned up corruption, which there no doubt was in the political class.

Whatever version is to be believed, it all ended in Rome becoming an Empire less than 20 years after his assassination, therefore confirming the trajectory that was set in motion by Julius Caesar and his enemies.

2. Why was Julius Caesar assassinated?

He was assassinated as it was believed that he was amassing too much power, and those who opposed him were trying to protect the Roman Republic.

Caesar returned from the civil war as the sole ruler of Rome. After some political maneuvering, the Senate appointed him dictator for the previous four years. However, in early February 44 BC, he assumed the role of dictator for life. This angered his enemies even more, as they saw a further erosion of their own powers in the Senate. He was assassinated approximately a month later.

3. Was Augustus a good emperor?

Augustus was a good emperor. From military victories, building projects, and the beginning of the Pax Romana (Roman Peace), Augustus set the Roman Empire up for years of prosperity.

He reformed the tax system and added modern-day Switzerland, Slovenia, Albania, Hungary, Austria, Bavaria, Croatia, and Serbia as Roman territories. He unified all of the lands on the peninsula, which became Italia (Roman Italy).

You can find out more about Augustus and why he was one of Rome’s greatest emperors here.

4. Why was Rome at a disadvantage in the first Punic War?

Rome was at a significant disadvantage in the first Punic War as the Romans did not have a naval fleet, making it impossible to take the fight to Carthage.

While the Romans did have ships to transport soldiers from mainland Italy to Sicily, they could not compete with Carthage in naval warfare.

This was until the Romans found a wrecked Carthaginian quinquereme (five rows of oarsmen). The Romans basically reverse-engineered the ship and built a fleet of their own, enabling them to finally compete with Carthage.

However, Carthage had been perfecting naval warfare for centuries, meaning Rome had to play catch-up. The lack of soldiers with naval experience also hindered the Roman Republic. The number of ships required to take on Carthage meant plenty of ships sailed with an inexperienced crew – dangerous during naval battles.

The only way the Romans could perfect their naval skills was through intense training and naval warfare. Many battles were fought at sea, with the Romans capturing many Carthaginian ships using a corvus (a ladder that could be dropped onto the decks of enemy ships, which had spikes attached, which in turn allowed for the corvus to be anchored to the ship’s deck).

Several battles ensued before the fight was taken to North Africa, the homeland of Carthage. A peace treaty was eventually agreed upon, with Carthage having to pay a considerable sum of money over the next ten years. This sowed the seeds for the Second Punic War.

5. How did Mark Antony die?

Mark Antony died by suicide – driving his sword into himself.

At the end of the war with Octavian (future Emperor Augustus), Cleopatra and Antony fled to Egypt after the Battle of Actium.

It is here that Antony stabbed himself, under the belief that Cleopatra had already taken her own life. It appears that Antony’s self-inflicted wound was not instantly fatal as he asked to be taken to where Cleopatra was hiding after finding out that the Egyptian queen had, in fact, not killed herself. It seems like Antony’s death was more slow and painful. He died in the arms of Cleopatra, with the Egyptian ruler taking her own life a short time later.

6. Where is Constantinople located?

Constantinople is located in modern-day Turkey. It is now modern-day Istanbul and straddles the Bosphorus Strait, which separates Europe from Asia. The city is located on the European side of the strait.

7. When did Constantinople fall?

Constantinople fell to the Ottoman Empire on 29th May 1453.

When Constantine the Great moved the capital of the Roman Empire to Constantinople in the early fourth century AD, it was a newly built city that was a part of the Greek classical city of Byzantium.

Constantinople remained the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire until the ‘fall’ of the Western Empire in AD 476. After this time, it became known as the capital of the Roman Empire.

It should be noted that modern scholars use the term Byzantine Empire to distinguish history before and after the ‘fall’ of the Western Roman Empire. The people within the Eastern Roman Empire always considered themselves Romans, all the way up to the fall of their capital in AD 1453.

The Romans faced attacks from the Ottoman Empire and an ever-shrinking territory. The final siege included the earliest use of gunpowder in a significant battle, with the Ottomans using cannons to break down the city walls. These proved to be somewhat ineffective, and repairs were made by the Romans.

Ottoman ships were repelled, and underground tunnels were discovered and destroyed. However, the Ottomans found a weak spot in the northwestern part of the city. The walls there were built much earlier than the rest of the city’s walls and, therefore, much weaker.

The Ottomans concentrated their attacks there, eventually overcoming the Roman resistance. By this time, the Ottomans had overrun other sections of the wall, and, as they say, the rest is history.

To find out why Constantine moved the capital of the Roman Empire to Constantinople, click here.

8. What was an effect on the decline in trade after the fall of the Roman Empire?

The decline in trade after the ‘fall’ of the Roman Empire ensured that Western European people were poorer as they could not trade their goods as easily as before.

With no one government in place, all following the same laws and speaking the same language, it became much more difficult to trade with others. As soldiers no longer guarded the vast lands of the former empire, it became much less safe for people to trade, with many roads now subject to banditry.

Less money means a poorer standard of living, which means that people regressed in the clothes they wore, the buildings they constructed, and the quality of their towns and cities.

9. What 3 continents was the Roman Empire part of?

The Roman Empire’s territory covered large swathes of Europe, parts of Africa, and parts of Asia. At the height of the Roman Empire under Emperor Trajan, its territories stretched from the north of England to Syria and from Romania to Morocco and Algeria.

10. Why did the Roman Empire produce more coins?

The Romans produced more coins for several reasons, chiefly because coins were used as a means of propaganda. They also minted more coins because coins had less silver, leading to inflation.

The production of coins was used as a means of propaganda as anyone who was minting them could depict themselves in any way they wanted. They could depict themselves as divine beings; they could show off the battles they had fought or even the monuments they had built.

Usurpers could even have coins minted depicting them as the new Emperor.

When the Roman Empire stopped adding new territory to its lands, it became harder and harder to maintain the military, along with all of the expenses that came with maintaining a vast state – and that is before we even look at all the corruption that took place.

This meant that the emperors started devaluing the currency by removing a percentage of silver content. This led to increased prices, which led to more coins being minted, albeit with less and less silver.

Scroll to Top