Weekly #8 Final Draft

Question: How do Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals express different understandings about religious theology?

            The Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals both originated in Europe during the medieval period. The Romanesque period lasted from the ninth to eleventh centuries soon after that followed the Gothic period from the twelfth to fourteenth centuries. The Gothic and Romanesque architecture were somewhat similar, but completely different in the meaning due to the change in culture. The Romanesque architecture focused on judgment day and protection during violence; however, the Gothic architecture was peaceful and tried to le the light of God in. The Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals were based on two completely different theologies, but eventually led into what Christianity is today. 

            The Romanesque Cathedrals were made with thick, heavy walls; however, on the other hand, Gothic Cathedrals were made with thin, elegant walls.  In Figure 1, one can see thick walls of the Romanesque Cathedral. (Figure 1) The thick walls were also used for protection, which took a lot of time; instead of spending so much time on the thick walls for protection, they could have spent more time with God. The thick walls also showed how the people they tried to hide from God and didn’t accept many people. This shows that they weren’t really focused on accepting people; they were more focused on protection and judgment day.  On the other hand, the Gothic Cathedral in Figure 2 had much less thick walls with design and elegance. (Figure 2) The less thick walls showed how accepting they were to other people coming into the Church to praise God. The design showed how elegant the Gothic Cathedrals and tried to draw even more people in.  The walls weren’t the only part of the differences of the Gothic and Romanesque architecture in theology.

            Not only did the Romanesque Cathedrals have thick walls, but also had thick pillars to hold those walls for protection. The Gothic Cathedrals used thin, designed pillars, which were used to attract people in its elegance. The pillars on this Romanesque Cathedral show how thick and solid they could be. (Figure 3) The thick and solid pillars demonstrate how the people believed in protection and tried to keep safe. The thick pillars provided the people protection will they worshiped God and focused on judgment day. The thin, elegant pillars in this Gothic Cathedral display the Gothic’s theology in its architecture. (Figure 4)  The thin pillars show that the people believed in making peace instead of protection like the Romanesque architecture. The elegant designs on the pillar also showed how they tried to draw people into the Church to make it grow.  The Gothic theology was for peace and bringing people to see God; while the Romanesque theology was protection and judgment day and one could clearly see that through the pillars of the architecture.

            Another difference between the Romanesque and Gothic architecture about the theology were the windows.  The Romanesque windows were very small and skinny and were based on protection. (Figure 5)  The small windows show how protective the people wanted to be and showed how they people believed in Judgment day because the small windows let in very little light. The Romanesque windows clearly display how the people believed times were dark because of judgment day; however, the Gothic windows are quite the opposite. The Gothic windows were huge and were used to let in lots of light. (Figure 6) The huge windows were used to let in the light, metaphorically meaning, to let the light of God inside. The big windows show how accepting and open the Gothic theology was compared to Romanesque. As you can see the huge windows of the Gothic Cathedrals were used to let the light of God in, but the small windows of the Romanesque Cathedrals were used for protection, which showed some insecurity in their faith.

            In conclusion, the Romanesque and Gothic architecture both had its own particular way of showing its unique theology. Through the walls, pillars, and windows, one can see each detail that depicts its own theology. Through the thick walls, solid pillars, and small windows, one can see that the Romanesque theology was about protection and judgment due to the lack of light from the windows and the thick walls and pillars. Through the thin walls, elegant pillars, and huge windows, the Gothic’s theology was about letting the light of God in and building up the Church. Just the architecture of the Romanesque and Gothic show their differences in theology that eventually led up to Christianity.  

           

Figure 1

Tournai, Belgium

The five towers of the Notre-Dame Cathedral, exterior, 12th century,  http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tournai_JPG001.jpg,photograph taken in 2005

Figure 2

Brussels, Belgium

Bruxelles Notre-Dame du Sablon, exterior, (n.d),    http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bruxelles_Notre-Dame_du_Sablon.jpg ,          photograph taken in 2009.

Figure 3

Nivelles, Belgium

St. Gertrude Collegiate Church, interior,11^th/12^th centuries,            http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nivelles_JPG00_(13).jpg,

            photograph taken in 2005.

Figure 4

Manche, France

Coutances' cathedral, interior,(n.d),            http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cathedrale_de_Coutances_bordercropped.jpg,

            photograph taken in 2005.

Figure 5

Schwarzach, Germany

Schwarzach Germany Roman-Monastery-Church, exterior,(n.d),            http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Schwarzach_Germany_Roman-Monastery         Church.jpg,

            photograph taken in 2006.

Figure 6

Reims, France

Reims Cathedrale Notre Dame, interior,(n.d),            http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Reims_Cathedrale_Notre_Dame_interior_002.  PG,

            photograph taken in 2008.

Weekly #8 Rough Draft

Josh Mannion

April 27, 2011

Western Civ.

Weekly 8

Question: How do Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals express different understandings about religious theology?

            The Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals both originated in Europe during the medieval period. The Romanesque period lasted from the ninth to eleventh centuries soon after that followed the Gothic period from the twelfth to fourteenth centuries. The Gothic and Romanesque architecture were somewhat similar, but completely different in the meaning due to the change in culture. The Romanesque architecture focused on judgment day and protection during violence; however, the Gothic architecture was peaceful and tried to le the light of God in. The Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals were based on two completely different theologies, but eventually led into what Christianity is today.  The Gothic and Romanesque architecture had nothing to do with theology and are exactly the same.

            The Romanesque Cathedrals were made with thick, heavy walls; however, on the other, Gothic Cathedrals were made with thin, elegant walls.  In Figure 1, one can see thick walls of the Romanesque Cathedral. (Figure 1) The thick walls were also used for protection, which took a lot of time; instead of spending so much time on the thick walls for protection, they could have spent more time with God. The thick walls also showed how the people they tried to hide from God and didn’t accept many people. This shows that they weren’t really focused on accepting people; they were more focused on protection and judgment day.  On the other hand, the Gothic Cathedral in Figure 2 had much less thick walls with design and elegance. (Figure 2) The less thick walls showed how accepting they were to other people coming into the Church to praise God. The design showed how elegant the Gothic Cathedrals and tried to draw even more people in.  The walls weren’t the only part of the differences of the Gothic and Romanesque architecture in theology.

            Not only did the Romanesque Cathedrals have thick walls, but also had thick pillars to hold those walls for protection. The Gothic Cathedrals used thin, designed pillars, which were used to attract people in its elegance. The pillars on this Romanesque Cathedral show how thick and solid they could be. (Figure 3) The thick and solid pillars demonstrate how the people believed in protection and tried to keep safe. The thick pillars provided the people protection will they worshiped God and focused on judgment day. The thin, elegant pillars in this Gothic Cathedral display the Gothic’s theology in its architecture. (Figure 4)  The thin pillars show that the people believed in making peace instead of protection like the Romanesque architecture. The elegant designs on the pillar also showed how they tried to draw people into the Church to make it grow.  The Gothic theology was for peace and bringing people to see God; while the Romanesque theology was protection and judgment day and one could clearly see that through the pillars of the architecture.

            Another difference between the Romanesque and Gothic architecture about the theology were the windows.  The Romanesque windows were very small and skinny and were based on protection. (Figure 5)  The small windows show how protective the people wanted to be and showed how they people believed in Judgment day because the small windows let in very little light. The Romanesque windows clearly display how the people believed times were dark because of judgment day; however, the Gothic windows are quite the opposite. The Gothic windows were huge and were used to let in lots of light. (Figure 6) The huge windows were used to let in the light, metaphorically meaning, to let the light of God inside. The big windows show how accepting and open the Gothic theology was compared to Romanesque. As you can see the huge windows of the Gothic Cathedrals were used to let the light of God in, but the small windows of the Romanesque Cathedrals were used for protection, which showed some insecurity in their faith.

            In conclusion, the Romanesque and Gothic architecture both had its own particular way of showing it’s unique theology. Through the walls, pillars, and windows, one can see each detail that depicts its own theology. Through the thick walls, solid pillars, and small windows, one can see that the Romanesque theology was about protection and judgment due to the lack of light from the windows and the thick walls and pillars. Through the thin walls, elegant pillars, and huge windows, the Gothic’s theology was about letting the light of God in and building up the Church. Just the architecture of the Romanesque and Gothic show their differences in theology that eventually led up to Christianity.  

           

Figure 1

Tournai, Belgium

The five towers of the Notre-Dame Cathedral, exterior, 12th century,  http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tournai_JPG001.jpg,photograph taken in 2005

Figure 2

Brussels, Belgium

Bruxelles Notre-Dame du Sablon, exterior, (n.d),    http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bruxelles_Notre-Dame_du_Sablon.jpg ,          photograph taken in 2009.

Figure 3

Nivelles, Belgium

St. Gertrude Collegiate Church, interior,11^th/12^th centuries,            http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nivelles_JPG00_(13).jpg,

            photograph taken in 2005.

Figure 4

Manche, France

Coutances' cathedral, interior,(n.d),            http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cathedrale_de_Coutances_bordercropped.jpg,

            photograph taken in 2005.

Figure 5

Schwarzach, Germany

Schwarzach Germany Roman-Monastery-Church, exterior,(n.d),            http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Schwarzach_Germany_Roman-Monastery         Church.jpg,

            photograph taken in 2006.

Figure 6

Reims, France

Reims Cathedrale Notre Dame, interior,(n.d),            http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Reims_Cathedrale_Notre_Dame_interior_002.  PG,

            photograph taken in 2008.

Weekly #7 Final Draft "Did the Roman Empire 'decline and fall' or did it evolve into something new?"

Josh Mannion

April 12, 2011

Western Civ.

            The Roman Empire ended in 476 due to constant changing and new uprisings. The Roman Empire basically had its own people turn on them like the Crusaders and Christians. The people of Rome disagreed on almost everything the government did or issued. Whenever the Emperor would try to fix something, it did the opposite most of the time. The Roman Empire 'declined and fell' gradually over a long period of time due to constant changing, attacks on the empire, and somewhat Christianity.

            Christianity in the Roman Empire was gaining popularity and pretty much taking over. Gibson stated: “the active virtues of society were discouraged; and the last remains of the military spirit were buried in the cloister; a large portion of public and private wealth was consecrated to the specious demands of charity and devotion” (Gibson, n.d).  This shows that as Christianity was becoming more powerful, the religion was actually taking over the Roman culture. Christianity basically distracted the Roman people from everything else, and everyone concentrated on Christianity. When the people of Rome where distracted, it left them vulnerable because they didn’t pay attention to the issues surrounding them. Because they didn’t pay attention to the issues, the issues overtook the people, and basically lead to the downfall. Christianity took over the people of Rome and the things that used to be important to the people of Rome weren’t so important when Christianity came into play. Christianity drew the intention of the people from major issues to the religion and culture, and in addition to that there was constant changing.       

The constant changing in the empire also lead to the decline and fall of the Roman Empire. The History Channel also states: “The stability of this system suffered greatly after Diocletian and Maximian retired from office. Constantine (the son of Constantius) emerged from the ensuing power struggles as sole emperor of a reunified Rome in 324” (History Channel, 2011). This quote from the history channel describes how change can often lead to suffering. When Emperors kept changing, dying, and retiring; the people could not get used to one good emperor. The people of Rome eventually got tired of getting a new emperor almost every year. Each new emperor would be different and try new things to try fix the struggles already, and when the people realized the new emperors didn’t really work they rebelled. The constant change of the emperors made people angry, and the people started to turn against its own government, which eventually lead to the fall of the great Roman Empire.

Because of the constant changing and the distraction of Christianity, the Roman Empire was left vulnerable to the surrounding forces that wanted to seize the Roman Empire included Germans, Parthians, and Goths. The History Channel states: “Meanwhile, threats from outside plagued the empire and depleted its riches, including continuing aggression from Germans and Parthians and raids by the Goths over the Aegean Sea” (History Channel, 2011).This quote reveals how when the ‘outside threats’ attacked, they deprived the Romans of everything. This quote also shows how the Roman Empire decreasingly lost its power overtime. As everything else was going on this quote demonstrates that the surrounding forces that were attacking the Roman Empire were aggressive, brutal, and took everything for the Romans. As the Germans, Goths, Parthians attacked like a ‘plague’, the Roman Empire was declining and fading from the map slowly.

                        Through these quotes, one must realize that the Roman Empire collapsed and declined because of constant changes, attacks from surrounding forces, and religions powerful influence on culture. If the Roman Empire just changed then why didn’t they just still keep the name as the Roman Empire? If the empire just evolved then, why was it destroyed by the surrounding forces and then rebuilt their way? Christianity distracted the people of Rome from the big issues around them, which lead them vulnerable of attacks from surrounding sources. As the Germans, Goths, and Parthians attacked Rome, the Romans kept changing its government and emperor just seeing if they could make something work. Obviously, Rome collapsed because it was just destroyed by its attackers while it was left vulnerable by issues inside Rome.

                                                                                                  

Works Cited

Gibbon, E. (n.d.). Medieval Sourcebook: Gibbon: The Fall of the 
      Roman Empire .FORDHAM.EDU.

      Retrieved April 12, 2011, from  
      http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/gibbon-fall.html

History Channel, (2011). In Decline and Disintegration. 
      HistoryChannel.com. Retrieved Apr. 12,         

      2011, from 
      http://www.history.com/topics/ancient-rome/page2#a7

Weekly #7 "Did the Roman Empire 'decline and fall' or did it evolve into something new?"

Josh Mannion

April 12, 2011

Western Civ.          

           The Roman Empire ended in 476 due to constant changing and new uprisings. The Roman Empire basically had its own people turn on them like the Crusaders and Christians. The people of Rome disagreed on almost everything the government did or issued. Whenever the Emperor would try to fix something, it did the opposite most of the time. The Roman Empire 'declined and fell' gradually over a long period of time due to constant changing, attacks on the empire, and somewhat Christianity. The Roman Empire did not fall by constant changes, religion influences, and attacks; it evolved and changed into something new.

            Christianity in the Roman Empire was gaining popularity and pretty much taking over. Gibson stated: “the active virtues of society were discouraged; and the last remains of the military spirit were buried in the cloister; a large portion of public and private wealth was consecrated to the specious demands of charity and devotion” (Gibson, n.d).  This shows that as Christianity was becoming more powerful, the religion was actually taking over the Roman culture. Christianity basically distracted the Roman people from everything else, and everyone concentrated on Christianity. When the people of Rome where distracted, it left them vulnerable because they didn’t pay attention to the issues surrounding them. Christianity took over the people of Rome and the things that used to be important to the people of Rome weren’t so important when Christianity came into play. Christianity drew the intention of the people from the issues to the religion, which left them vulnerable to surrounding forces.

            The surrounding forces that wanted to seize the Roman Empire included Germans, Parthians, and Goths. The History Channel states: “Meanwhile, threats from outside plagued the empire and depleted its riches, including continuing aggression from Germans and Parthians and raids by the Goths over the Aegean Sea” (History Channel, 2011).This quote reveals how when the ‘outside threats’ attacked, they deprived the Romans of everything. This quote also shows how the Roman Empire decreasingly lost its power overtime. As everything else was going on this quote demonstrates that the surrounding forces that were attacking the Roman Empire were aggressive, brutal, and took everything for the Romans. As the Germans, Goths, Parthians attacked like a ‘plague’, the Roman Empire was declining and fading from the map slowly.

            The major reason for the decline and fall of the Roman Empire was the constant changing. The History Channel also states: “The stability of this system suffered greatly after Diocletian and Maximian retired from office. Constantine (the son of Constantius) emerged from the ensuing power struggles as sole emperor of a reunified Rome in 324” (History Channel, 2011). This quote from the history channel describes how change can often lead to suffering. When Emperors kept changing, dying, and retiring; the people could not get used to one good emperor. The people of Rome eventually got tired of getting a new emperor almost every year. Each new emperor would be different and try new things to try fix the struggles already, and when the people realized the new emperors didn’t really work they rebelled. The constant change of the emperors made people angry, and the people started to turn against its own government, which eventually lead to the fall of the great Roman Empire.

            Through these quotes, one must realize that the Roman Empire collapsed and declined because of constant changes, attacks from surrounding forces, and religions powerful influence on culture. If the Roman Empire just changed then why didn’t they just still keep the name as the Roman Empire? If the empire just evolved then, why was it destroyed by the surrounding forces and then rebuilt their way? Christianity distracted the people of Rome from the big issues around them, which lead them vulnerable of attacks from surrounding sources. As the Germans, Goths, and Parthians attacked Rome, the Romans kept changing its government and emperor just seeing if they could make something work. Obviously, Rome collapsed because it was just destroyed by its attackers while it was left vulnerable by issues inside Rome.

                                                                                                  

Works Cited

Gibbon, E. (n.d.). Medieval Sourcebook: Gibbon: The Fall of the Roman Empire .FORDHAM.EDU.

       Retrieved April 12, 2011, from  http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/gibbon-fall.html

History Channel, (2011). In Decline and Disintegration. HistoryChannel.com. Retrieved Apr. 12,         

       2011, from http://www.history.com/topics/ancient-rome/page2#a7

Week 6: Daily # 3

Josh Mannion

April 6, 2011

Western Civ.

Question: How does Early Christian and Byzantine portraiture represent both a continuation of and a break from the past?

            The early Christian and Byzantine portraiture represent a lot about religion and don’t look much different from what we have today. Today, we have many paintings and art that deal with religion, like stain glass windows in many churches. Many of these paintings also have to do with culture and what the people looked like and did. Right down in Baltimore, we have statues of people who were sports great, just how many Christian and Byzantine portraitures had pictures and statues of people in different events. The portraiture of Early Christian and Byzantine art also showed great people from the past like the Ravenna Portrait of Justinian because this shows emperor Justinian and the Bishop of Ravenna in a meeting of some sort while surrounded by soldiers. This closely relates to the national monument at Mount Rushmore, because Mount Rushmore shows the great presidents we once had. As you can see both Early Christian and Byzantine portraiture clearly represent a continuation from the past.

           

            As the early Christian and Byzantine portraiture represent a continuation of the past, they also represent a break from the past. The Christian and Byzantine portraitures are in a lot more detail than they are today, because most portraiture now are very simplistic and are more abstract.  As you can see not only did we change from the past, but will also learn and keep some of the past in the present, just like we saw in the early Christian and Byzantine portraitures.

Daily, Final Draft Stoicism Essay

    Josh Mannion

    4/5/11 

     Today, many people let their emotions take control of them and some can’t endure pain that comes with some tasks. One of the hardest tasks in life is to obtain stoicism. Stoicism is the ability to endure pain and hardship while retaining the ability to control one’s emotions; Seneca at his death was a perfect example of a stoic.
     At his death, “Seneca, quite unmoved, asked for tablets on which to inscribe his will” (Tacitus). As Seneca he showed no emotion what so ever, even though he knew he was already going to die. Seneca was able to control his emotions, even under extreme pressure. This shows his ability and will power to endure the pain while he knows that he is going to die. Stoics like Seneca, know not to let their emotions to get the best of them, and this quote from Seneca is a prime example. Seneca at his death was not only able to control his emotions while writing his will; he was also able to endure his hardship many other times.
     Seneca once said, “I received the impression that my character required improvement and discipline; and from him I learned not to be led astray to sophistic emulation, nor to writing on speculative matters, nor to delivering little hortatory orations, nor to showing myself off as a man who practices much discipline, or does benevolent acts in order to make a display; and to abstain from rhetoric, and poetry, and fine writing; and not to walk about in the house in my outdoor dress, nor to do other things of the kind; and to write my letters with simplicity” (Tacitus).Through this, one may realize that Seneca has the will power and heart to do what he knows is best for him. Seneca shows his determinedness to become a better person and to endure whatever pain that may come with that journey to correct his character. When Seneca said he will discipline himself, he knew that it wouldn’t be an easy task to endure the hardships it comes with, but Seneca completed that task showing no emotion just like any other stoic person would do. In this quote Seneca shows that he is able to complete a very difficult task with no emotion.
     This was written down about Seneca: “Upon this the tribune asserted that he saw no signs of fear, and perceived no sadness in his words or in his looks” (Tacitus).This quote about how Seneca controlled his emotions and endured the pain shows the true stoicism that he had. Even though Seneca knew his death was near, he showed no fear or sadness, where most ordinary people would just break out in tears of horror. Seneca controlled his emotions by showing no fear and not even looking sad in times of horror. This quote demonstrates how perfect of a stoic Seneca is because of him being able to take the pain and show no emotions. This also proves that Seneca and his stoicism cannot be broken apart; they are one and Seneca would never stop being stoic. This work demonstrates how a real stoic like Seneca should truly act.
     Through these quotes, one must realize that Seneca is a prime example of a stoic. Even at the hardest moments of life, during death, Seneca was able to control his emotions and endure the pain that comes with death. Seneca was by far, one of the greatest stoics who ever lived. He was able to discipline himself and even teach himself to be a better person. Even any one person wanted to be a stoic, the first person they should observe is Seneca.

Bibliography

Tacitus,(1998). In Tacitus: The Death of Seneca, 65 CE.
      Fordham.edu. Retrieved April4,2011,from
      http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/tacitus-ann15a.html

Rough Draft, In Class Academic Essay

One of the hardest tasks in life is to endure pain and control your emotions. The will power and the capability to do this is called Stoicism. Stoicism is the ability to endure pain and hardship while retaining the ability to control one’s emotions; Seneca at his death was a perfect example of a stoic.
At his death, “Seneca, quite unmoved, asked for tablets on which to inscribe his will.” As Seneca he showed no emotion what so ever, even though he knew he was already going to die. Seneca was able to control his emotions, even under extreme pressure. This shows his ability and will power to endure the pain while he knows that he is going to die. Stoics like Seneca, know not to let their emotions to get the best of them, and this quote from Seneca is a prime example. Seneca at his death was not only able to control his emotions while writing his will; he was also able to endure his hardship many other times.
Seneca once said, “I received the impression that my character required improvement and discipline; and from him I learned not to be led astray to sophistic emulation, nor to writing on speculative matters, nor to delivering little hortatory orations, nor to showing myself off as a man who practices much discipline, or does benevolent acts in order to make a display; and to abstain from rhetoric, and poetry, and fine writing; and not to walk about in the house in my outdoor dress, nor to do other things of the kind; and to write my letters with simplicity.” Through this, one may realize that Seneca has the will power and heart to do what he knows is best for him. Seneca shows his determinedness to become a better person and to endure whatever pain that may come with that journey to correct his character. When Seneca said he will discipline himself; he knew that it wouldn’t be an easy task to endure the hardships it comes with, but Seneca completed that task showing no emotion just like any other stoic person would do.


Through these quotes, one must realize that Seneca is a prime example of a stoic. Even at the hardest moments of life, during death, Seneca was able to control his emotions and endure the pain that comes with death. Seneca was by far, one of the greatest stoics who ever lived. He was able to discipline himself and even teach himself to be a better person.

Daily Assignment, Read Tacitus' description of the Death of Seneca and Book One of M. Aurelius' Meditations. Find quotes within those two texts that help explain what Stoicism is all about.

1. “Seneca, quite unmoved, asked for tablets on which to inscribe his will.”
2. “It was brought to him and he drank it in vain, chilled as he was throughout his limbs, and his frame closed against the efficacy of the poison. At last he entered a pool of heated water, from which he sprinkled the nearest of his slaves, adding the exclamation, "I offer this liquid as a libation to Jupiter the Deliverer." He was then carried into a bath, with the steam of which he was suffocated, and he was burnt without any of the usual funeral rites. So he had directed in a codicil of his will, when even in the height of his wealth and power he was thinking of his life's close.”
3. “I received the impression that my character required improvement and discipline; and from him I learned not to be led astray to sophistic emulation, nor to writing on speculative matters, nor to delivering little hortatory orations, nor to showing myself off as a man who practices much discipline, or does benevolent acts in order to make a display; and to abstain from rhetoric, and poetry, and fine writing; and not to walk about in the house in my outdoor dress, nor to do other things of the kind; and to write my letters with simplicity.
4. “I learned freedom of will and undeviating steadiness of purpose; and to look to nothing else, not even for a moment, except to reason; and to be always the same, in sharp pains, on the occasion of the loss of a child, and in long illness; and to see clearly in a living example that the same man can be both most resolute and yielding, and not peevish in giving his instruction; and to have had before my eyes a man who clearly considered his experience and his skill in expounding philosophical principles as the smallest of his merits; and from him I learned how to receive from friends what are esteemed favours, without being either humbled by them or letting them pass unnoticed.”
5. “Upon this the tribune asserted that he saw no signs of fear, and perceived no sadness in his words or in his looks.”
1. Tacitus: The Death of Seneca, 65 CE
2. Tacitus: The Death of Seneca, 65 CE
3. Marcus Aurelius Antonius: Meditations, 167 CE (Book 1)
4. Marcus Aurelius Antonius: Meditations, 167 CE (Book 1)
5. Tacitus: The Death of Seneca, 65 CE