Could Rome have risen to power without slavery?

I. Intro Paragraph

a. Hook – lower class being left unnoticed

b. Thesis statement – Rome could not have risen to power without slavery.

Argument: the higher class of Rome could not have advanced because they would have been too worried sustaining themselves

II. Detail 1

a. Harsh conditions and how that led slaves to work harder because of severe punishments

b. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/slavery-romrep1.html

III. Detail 2

a. What the upper class did instead of doing the “dirty work”

b. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/3slaverevolttexts.htm

IV. Detail 3

a. Slaves helped the population grow, expand, build the city, and the working class

b. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/3slaverevolttexts.htm

V. Conclusion

The lower class has always been left unnoticed. They have been neglected, ignored, and treated unfairly. Who were the main factors in this lower class? Slaves. Slavery prevailed in many countries throughout the world. In Rome, slavery succeeded, and the Romans had more slaves and depended on them more than anyone else. (Madden) These slaves were trained to work in the house, work in the fields, and be the caretakers. These jobs were taken care of while the higher class was able to spend more time working towards improving the city. Rome could not have risen to power without slavery.

Pericles and Lincoln - Which is a stronger funeral oration?

Which of these is a stronger funeral oration?

1. Introduction Paragraph
1. Briefly explain both speeches and backgrounds
2. Define funeral oration - " formal speech delivered on the ceremonial occasion of a funeral."
3. Thesis on how has a stronger one

2. Appeal to patriotism
1. Lincoln - "that this nation under God shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth. "
2. Pericles - "or Athens alone of her contemporaries is found when tested to be greater than her reputation"

3. Compare
1. Appeal to remembering soldiers

4. Compare
1. Appeal to pride of the nation

5. Conclusion

Intro Paragraph (not completed):

What makes a great funeral oration that will best memorialize those who died fighting for what they believe in? Both Pericles and Lincoln developed strong funeral orations for those soldiers who died. A funeral oration is " formal speech delivered on the ceremonial occasion of a funeral." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funeral_oration_(ancient_Greece)) Both men developed their speeches to an audience who had lost loved ones, such as brothers, sisters, and parents. At the end of the first year of the war in Ancient Greece, as custom, Athenians held an elaborate funeral for all those who where killed in the war. This oration was delivered by Pericles, a politician and general. The funeral oration is the "classic statement of Athenian ideology." It contained the patriotic sentiment felt by most Athenians. (http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/GREECE/PERICLES.HTM) When Lincoln delivered his speech, four and a half months had passed since the Union armies defeated those of the Confederacy. Between 46,000 and 51,000 Americans were casualties in a three-day battle, and Lincoln was one of the people who was able to remember them and redefine the purpose of the war in his speech. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gettysburg)

Who’s a Good Guy? Who’s a Bad Guy?

Wherever you are, wherever you go, you will always encounter many different types of people. There are different extremes of being a ‘good guy’ or a ‘bad guy’, but we all experience both types of people in our lives. Points of view and opinions are what make someone feel that someone else is a good guy or a bad guy. A good person has a moral heart; they are someone who is looking out for himself/herself and others, but a bad person does not have the kind of motives that are encouraging them to make good choices, or they simply are out to be reckless and destructive.

In my opinion, ‘bad guys’ or bad people are few and far between. When looking around me as I sit in a classroom, walk along the sidewalk, or shop in a store, I may encounter others who appear to look as if they are up to bad things and are not doing what they should be. I would not consider these people bad guys, but rather people who have made bad choices in their lives and engage in bad behavior.

A much different view can also be looked at when talking about good guys and bad guys. Instead of thinking about a person who you have found to do a few wrong things, you can look at the main groups of people in history who have really been considered to be ‘bad guys’. I would equip the Vikings with the description of being bad guys because they were ones who raided areas of land and were referred to by monks as “devils from hell.” (http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?groupid=2039&HistoryID=ab86&gtrack=pthc)The Christians were the victims of the Vikings. Christians were just an innocent group of people who were attacked and brought down by the Vikings. “In 793 A.D., the Viking raiders attacked a monastery where they held monks in captivity.” I would not look at these facts as being good, therefore I would not look at the Vikings as good people. They were powerful and successful, yes, but their ways of gaining their power and success were not justified. They were very skilled and talented, but I think these good qualities are quickly diminished when hearing of their raids. The Vikings did leave a legacy in England, which turned out to be a very good thing, but the end just does not justify the means. (http://www.family-ancestry.co.uk/history/vikings/england/)

I would consider most people in my life to be categorized as good guys. We all make mistakes because we are human, but I do not believe that anyone I know is intentionally mean, deceitful, barbarous, or bad. If you look at things with a broader sense of view, I am sure that a few people or groups of people come to mind when thinking about good guys. You can think about all of the good people you know, and you can also think about the really great people in history that have made an impact on us today. Take, for example, Martin Luther King Jr. and the people who followed him. He was an average American who turned his dreams into reality, in the best way that he could. He led the American Civil Rights Movement, and led it with dignity and courage. He was fighting in a respectful and appropriate way to get his point across that we are all equal and all need to be treated with equality. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr.) Martin Luther King Jr. was truly a good person who believed strongly in the equality of humanity and conducted himself in a dignified way while fighting for a cause which changed our country.

Certain qualities will be obtained if you are a good person or a bad person. To determine who is a bad guy and who is a good guy, conclusions can be drawn based on points of view, information known, and experiences with that person.

Works Cited

Family Ancestry. Web. 18 Mar. 2010. <http://www.family-ancestry.co.uk/history/vikings/england/>.

History World. Web. 18 Mar. 2010. <http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?groupid=2039&HistoryID=ab86&gtrack=pthc>.

Wikipedia. Web. 18 Mar. 2010. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr.>.

Picture Source:

Wikimedia Commons. Web. 18 Mar. 2010. <http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Leif_Ericson_on_the_shore_of_Vinland.gif>.

Gibbon and Toynbee Views

Edward Gibbon was and English historian and a member of Parliament. His most important work is the History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Gibbon) Arnold J. Toynbee was a British historian and also a member of Parliament. His analysis of history is called A Study of History.( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_J._Toynbee)

Gibbon looks highly upon Rome, by pointing out many of its good qualities. He referred to various places being, "successfully broken by the iron monarchy of Rome." He said that the decline of Rome was an inevitable effect of greatness. He believed that Rome yielded to the pressure of its own weight. Gibbon also says that inside of asking why it fell, we should instead be thinking about how Rome lasted so long. (http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/gibbon-fall.html)

Toynbee, on the other hand, had a different side of view. Toynbee believes that Christianity rose as the empire sank, and the rise of Christianity was the fall of civilizations. He says the life of the civilization had already destroyed itself by turning itself into an idol to which people worshiped. The rise of the philosophies was a consequence. Toynbee believed that, "Civilizations arose in response to some set of challenges of extreme difficulty, when 'creative minorities' devised solutions that reoriented their entire society. " (http://www.myriobiblos.gr/texts/english/toynbee.html) Both Toynbee and Gibbon had very interesting views.

Web. 17 Mar. 2010. <http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/gibbon-fall.html>.

Web. 17 Mar. 2010. <http://www.myriobiblos.gr/texts/english/toynbee.html>.

Wikipedia. Web. 17 Mar. 2010. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Gibbon>.

Wikipedia. Web. 17 Mar. 2010. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_J._Toynbee>.

Picture Sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Edward_Emily_Gibbon.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ArnoldToynbee1961.jpg

Eddas and Heimskringla

Viking Helmet With Horns?

The Vikings did wear helmets, but they were not the helmets that many people imagine they wore. The Vikings' helmets were fairly simple, a bowl with a nose guard. There is no evidence that the Viking helmets had horns. Before and after the time of the Vikings, the helmets were made from steel and hammered into shape. During the Viking era, however, helmets were usually made from several pieces of iron riveted together. This way of making a helmet required less labor. It is said by Dr. Wester that the oral tradition of the Viking culture is to blame for why we now believe the Vikings wore helmets with horns attached. The entire history of the Vikings was passed through stories because paper did not arrive in Scandinavia until after the Viking Age. To sum it up, the Vikings did wear helmets, but they did not have horns as we think of them today.

"Viking Age Arms and Armor Viking Helmets." Web. 16 Mar. 2010. <http://www.hurstwic.org/history/articles/manufacturing/text/viking_helmets.htm>.

Web. 16 Mar. 2010. <http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/viking.html>.

Picture Source:

Flickr. Web. 16 Mar. 2010. <http://www.flickr.com/photos/anytime_armour/3971015415/>.

Vikings as Mascots

The Viking is a very common mascots in sports, including professional teams, high schools, and so on. The word viking is derived from the word vikingr, a word for 'pirate'. Because of its origins, we know that this is a strong word. It describes the Norsemen who raided the coasts of Britain and northwest France. Vikings are thought to be scary, big, vicious, barbarous, and inferior to others, so having this meaning to your team mascot name would be intimidating but appropriate. Vikings are warriors, and if your team wanted to be known as fighting warriors, the Viking as a mascot would be a fitting choice.

"Overview: The Vikings, 800 to 1066." Web. 15 Mar. 2010. <http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ab86>.

Picture Source:

Flickr. Web. 15 Mar. 2010. <http://www.flickr.com/photos/daviderickson/2690700258/>.'