Abstract
This paper compares and contrasts Augustus' writings about himself in the "Res Gestae" with those of Tacitus and Dio Cassius.

From the Paper
"Augustus's writing about himself in the "Res Gestae" can be compared with the writing of two other ancients, Tacitus and Dio Cassius. While Augustus's writing was essentially an epitaph that he wrote for himself in advance of his death, Tacitus and Dio Cassius were historical writers who provided alternate views on the historical time in which they lived and on Augustus himself. In the "Res Gestae", Augustus does not allow modesty to prevent him from presenting his deeds in their best light as..."

Tags:Augustus, Roman Empire, Res Gestae, Tacitus, Dio Cassius

Abstract
This paper examines William Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar" and in particular looks at how the characters of Cassius and Brutus change from Act one Scene two and Act two Scene one. It discusses how throughout the whole play there are lots of power struggles and betrayal and how the characters of both Cassius and Brutus both develop greatly. It show how the relationship between them changes in many ways and how Brutus always seems to like to be in control of whatever is going on.

From the Paper
"Cassius is being so obsequious and sycophantic here that he almost seems insincere. This is suggesting that the plebeians of Rome would rather have Brutus as a dictator than Caesar. An actor would emphasize the stinging "except immortal Caesar". Brutus gets very agitated by this as he feels if anyone is above him then he is denigrated and base. Brutus does not want to be inferior to Caesar in any way. It goes against all of Brutus's personality traits to take the submissive role to anyone or to let anyone seem above him. The way Cassius says "immortal Caesar" presents him in almost a god like position. This is again reiterating the point that Caesar is above Brutus. This represents the manipulative and duplicitous side of Cassius' character."

Tags:power, rome, king, rivalry

Abstract
In "The Tragedy of Julius Caesar" by William Shakespeare, we see the characters of Brutus and Cassius as having the same goals to rid Rome of Caesar, but each for a different reason. The paper shows that Brutus wants Caesar dead for the good of Rome; the audience can see this when Brutus carefully and thoughtfully weighs his decision to join the conspiracy. It shows, on the other hand, that Cassius is jealous of Julius Caesar and his power and therefore wants to kill him.

From the Paper
"Throughout the conspiracy, Brutus and Cassius make many more important decisions besides murdering Caesar. Between the two, Cassius, unlike Brutus, has a more realistic outlook on the world. In the decision to allow Mark Antony to speak at Caesar's funeral, Cassius realizes that this is not a good idea and Cassius says to Brutus, "You know not what you do. Do not consent / That Antony speak in his funeral / Know you how much the people may be moved / by that which he will utter"? (III. i. 234 - 237). In contrast to Cassius? quick, decisive nature, the audience sees that Brutus carefully weighs and agonizes over his decisions before he makes them. Although Brutus? decisions might not be the wisest, they are definitely the most carefully considered. Brutus? weighing of his decisions is apparent when he is debating whether he should join the conspiracy (II. i. ll 10 - 30)."

Tags:Mark, Antony

Abstract
This paper analyzes the play "Julius Caesar" by Shakespeare, exploring two variant conceptions of manhood. The paper provides a textual analysis of Cassius, who exemplifies a manhood based in physical prowess and achievement, while Brutus exemplifies a manhood characterized by a deep stoicism. A contrast of these two types of manhood (and indeed, the two characters) is a theme that runs as the play's backbone. Their ideas on manhood direct their decisions; it causes Brutus to rush into the assassination without practical planning, thus manliness (and male conceptions of manhood) is the indirect source of much of the conflict in the play.

From the Paper
"It would be an incomplete discussion to address the issue of manhood in the text, especially within the context of ancient Rome, if one does not look to the concepts of honor and virtue. The Oxford English Dictionary defines honor in the context of Elizabethan idiom in several ways, the most applicable to our exploration of Julius Caesar being "[g]lory, renown, fame; credit, reputation, good name," and "[e]xalted rank or position; dignity, distinction." Virtue means "[c]onformity of life and conduct with the principles of morality; voluntary observance of the recognized moral laws or standards of right conduct[..,]" or "the possession or display of manly qualities; manly excellence, manliness, courage, valour." In Julius Caesar, we see the working out of these concepts through the characters of Brutus and Cassius. Brutus, who longs to have the reputation of a man of morals and of internal dignity, tries to operate with a moral compass. He attends mostly to the principle behind an action and not its outward show. He believes this will be sufficient. His implicit trust in the Romans to recognize a worthy man doing a worthy action when they see it is not politically astute and naive. Because of his naivety in things political (and his belief that the people of Rome are a judicious body as opposed to a fickle mob), we see him making disastrous mistakes such as trying to reason with the crowd even as the body of Caesar lies warm and bloody on the ground."

Tags:brutus, cassius, conspiracy, manhood, manliness, stoicism, virtue, rome, elizabethan

Abstract
The paper discusses various interpretations and images of Cleopatra based on Plutarch, Cassius Dio, and Lucy Hughes-Hallett.

From the Paper
"Historians and writers of fiction alike have long been fascinated with Egypt's Queen Cleopatra. The ways in which this apparently complex woman has been portrayed have varied over time and with respect to the nationality, culture and political views of the writer. This essay will consider the presentation of Cleopatra according to Dio Cassius and Plutarch, two Roman writers who, if not precisely contemporary with Cleopatra, lived at a time when her influence was still widespread. A contemporary writer, Lucy Hughes-Hallett, will also be discussed."

Tags:Cleopatra, ancient history

Abstract
This paper explores the relationship between Marcus Agrippa, Maecenas, and Octavius in Cassius Dio's text. The author analyzes how the interaction of these three characters provides insight into their characters. The author believes that the central theme is humane ambition.

Abstract
This paper discusses whether Julius Caesar was assassinated out of fear, idealism or jealousy. It argues that fear, idealism and jealousy were all present among the 'liberators' when they assassinated Caesar. It specifically looks at the idealism of Brutus, the fear of Cicero and the jealousy of Cassius in their responsibility for causing the final downfall of Caesar.

Table of Contents:
Introduction
Probable Causes Of Caesar's Assassination:
Historical Background/Political Situation
Idealism Of The 'Liberators' Or The Conspirators
The Opposing View And The Role Of Jealousy Or Fear
Fear Among Friends
Jealousy Amidst The Power Seekers
Understanding The Underlying Factors
Conclusion

From the Paper
"According to Taylor, though the struggle against Caesar was triggered by idealism, in course of time it became more influenced by 'personal interests' rather than any ideal of Free State. Storch suggests that 'relative depravity' possibly played a role in Caesar's assassination. He explains that those who were pardoned or favored by Caesar were not happy as they in many cases did not get as much as they wanted. Moreover even inside the inner circle of friends dissatisfaction remained because of advancing someone's career over others, like that of Anotony's. Though there were many eligible people in line to be chosen as consul, violating the tradition Caesar appointed Antony for the position, which enraged Labienus, one of the hopefuls for consulship and a member of Caesarian camp."

Tags:fear, jealousy, idealism, Rome

Abstract
This paper examines the life and career of Cassius Clay, later known as Muhammed Ali. By exploring several sources, including Jose Torres' "Sting Like a Bee", the paper shows how Ali influenced the sport of boxing and American society as a whole in the 1960s. The paper also touches on the racial element.

Paper Outline:
The Early Years
On the Road To Glory (1950s)
On the Road to Glory (1960s)
Works Cited

From the Paper
"In fact, if we look at Clay's image and impact upon the boxing world and American society during this period, it is highly likely that many people regarded him as a serious threat to the status quo, and the very fabric of the "American" way of life. Within this context, we can argue that Clay probably served as an inspirational and positive role model for other young men of color who wanted to believe that they could overcome any obstacle in life and achieve their dreams - what ever they may be."

Tags:Tony, Madigan, Olympics, heavyweight, Negro

Abstract
This paper explains that the primary use of rhetoric is to convince the reader to take the author's side of an opinion; but sometimes the author, as in Machiavelli's "The Prince", has hidden his opinion so deeply in the rhetoric that it is misunderstood. The author points out that Shakespeare used rhetoric in his plays, especially in his political tragedies, to demonstrate how easily men and women were corruptible by power. The paper relates that in "Julius Caesar" Cassius was totally corrupted by his quest for power and brought down ignominiously in battle; however, Brutus, whose flaw was poor judgment and needed to be "one of the gang", was permitted to honorably commit suicide rather than be tried and executed. Many long textual examples.

Table of Contents
Uses and Abuses of Rhetoric
Rhetoric in "Julius Caesar"
Machiavelli's "The Prince"
Rhetoric Unveiled

From the Paper
"If Johnny Cochrane were playing to both the jury and the country in this use of a crude rhetorical device, certainly a playwright like Shakespeare would be playing to both royalty and the average playgoer when he wrote "Julius Caesar". Advertisement was limited to a few playbills posted on walls and what the town crier could yell to the generally illiterate common rabble. In looking at any of Shakespeare's plays as Renaissance commercial theatrical adventures, memorable lines would have been good selling points for the literate as was word of mouth of the great fight and death scenes to the common man. Even today our far more sophisticated tastes run from high action adventure to the deeply philosophical in our entertainment."

Tags:convince, opinion, misunderstood, political, flaw

Abstract
This essay studies William Shakespeare's play, "Julius Caesar". It approaches the antagonism of both Caesar and the conspirators and the motivations of the conspirators. The themes of political achievement and popular responsibility are also discussed.

From the Paper
"Caesar was popular on the streets. His popularity was his source of power. Manipulation is a vice of politicians; on the converse side, influence is a political virtue. These are characteristics of Caesar. Because of his popularity, he can do anything he wants, as the Plebes rule Rome indirectly. This sets the stage for the political statement of the play. As there is an order set, this pure democracy of Rome is one of a kind. The people cast no votes as a whole, but only the elite. However, the approval of the Plebes is the primary concern of all politicians in Rome. This power of the people, however, is flexible in an uneducated society, as is most of Rome. Those who ran the politicians could easily be persuaded by those they ran (i.e. the politicians), who offered supremacy to Caesar."

Tags:Rome, Brutus, Cassius, Republic