Livy's First History of Rome recounts the rise of the Roman Empire, from its founding (traditionally dated 753 BC) to the reign of Augustus Caesar in his time. Its catalog details the achievements and failures of major Roman figures and offers a model of greatness for all of Rome to follow. For Livy, “History is… a record of the infinite variety of human experience clearly displayed for all to see; and in this file you can find for yourself and for your country both examples and warnings; beautiful things to take as models, base things, rotten through and through, to be avoided. (30) His goal was to dictate history without bias. Livy, however, fails to achieve this goal. By presenting biased depictions of Romulus and Tarquinius Superbus, two of the seven legendary kings of Rome, he denies the general public the opportunity to draw the same kinds of conclusions he drew when constructing his stories. Instead, Livy presents a preconstructed model of the ideal Roman citizen and leader, basing his judgments primarily on military prowess and strength. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why violent video games should not be banned"? Get the original essay Livy begins his story with the founding of Rome and the clash between Romulus, arguably the most notable Roman in the story, and his brother Remus. Livy wastes no time praising the two men, commenting on their Robin Hood traits as they both "set about attacking the thieves and sharing their stolen goods with their friends." (35) In describing the colonization of what would become Rome, Livy touches on the fight between Romulus and Remus, which resulted in Remus's death. Although Livy initially describes the quarrel without much detail, he recounts it in another, more "ordinary" way, saying that "Romulus killed [Remus] in a fit of rage, adding the threat: “So perish whoever crosses my walls.” .' » (37) By adding this alien narrative to history, Livy established the brutal tradition of war and aggression that came to define the Roman Empire over time. Rome itself came into existence through an extreme display of strength and power, and Romulus strengthened his rule by the same means. In detailing the conquest of Veii, an Etruscan city neighboring Rome, Livy notes: “In the fight that followed, Romulus used no strategy; the sheer might of his veteran troops was enough for victory” (48) and mentions how Romulus’s soldiers wasted the surrounding cultivated lands of Veii simply for revenge. Overwhelming force and vicious strategies became the foundation of the modern Roman army, and the Roman people expected it. Livy describes Romulus as a great citizen because he was a man of exemplary strength and military prowess, with complete disregard for his moral character. By allowing such a narrow scope of Romulus' abilities to measure his worth as a citizen, Livy imposes on his audience a strict definition of what makes a Roman citizen great, thus prohibiting his readers from thinking freely . Livy's representation of Romulus obviously goes further than that of an objective historian, who praises the founder of Rome. Although Livy inserts minute examples of Romulus's weak moments, such as when he fled the Sabines, he does so only to humanize the great hero. After a short retreat, Livy brilliantly recreates a speech given by Romulus, clearly adding a slight artistic touch to emphasize the greatness of the leader. Livy writes: WhileAs [Romulus] rode, he waved his sword above his head and shouted: “…Father of gods and men, let them not set foot in the place where we now stand. Banish fear from Roman hearts and stop their shameful retreat. »… It was almost as if he felt that his prayer was answered: a moment later, “Light them, Romans,” he cried, “and fight again. Jupiter himself commands it. The Romans obeyed what they believed to be the voice of heaven. They rallied and Romulus made his way to the van. (45) Livy misses no opportunity to praise Romulus' actions and does not hesitate to compare his actions and characteristics to those of the gods. Livy even goes so far as to affirm that the birth and entire existence of Romulus were divine, and that his death (or disappearance) was majestic: “One day… a storm broke out, with violent thunder. A cloud enveloped [Romulus] so thickly that it hid him from the eyes of all present; and from that moment on, he was never seen again on earth. (48-49) Livy echoes this feeling of divinity and praise for Romulus throughout his work. He conferred a royal title on Romulus and considered him a paradigm of greatness to be followed by all future Roman leaders. The attributes relating to Tarquin's effectiveness as a leader hardly deviate from the path set by Romulus. Although Livy discusses Tarquin's failures as a political leader, at no point does he question his leadership in battle. Livy states: “As lawless and tyrannical as Tarquin may have been as a monarch in his own country, as a warlord he did a good job. In fact, his fame as a soldier could have matched that of his predecessors. (94) Once again, Livy emphasizes the importance of military skill and the importance of expanding the empire through conquest. Moreover, Tarquin's overwhelming ambition manifested itself in brutal military advance and aggression, once again conveying Livy's idea of ​​how the Roman Empire should be defined. Tarquin came to power in a similar way to Romulus: through brute force. Just as Romulus took power from his brother Remus, Tarquin also took the throne from Servius through battle. His characteristics as described by Livy mimic those of Romulus and other kings of Rome, and his personality, although corrupt, fits Livy's model of the ideal Roman ruler. Again, Livy does not hesitate to include his own opinions. Livy's representation of Tarquin's reign apart from his military talent is very different from that of Romulus and other Roman kings. Its harsh, negatively biased narrative effectively deprives the reader of the ability to pass uninfluenced judgment on Tarquin's merits as a leader. Livy even goes so far as to say that after the death of Servius, “never again could a Roman king reign in accordance with humanity and justice”. (90) Given Tarquin's position as Servius' successor, one is immediately led to believe that he is unjust, according to Livy's general statement. Readers who knew nothing about Tarquin only begin to understand him through the way Livy presents him. Such subtleties make it difficult to overlook certain biases in the writing in order to truly understand Tarquin's merit. Livy's early History of Rome is no longer an accurate historical account but a biased description of Rome's ancient rulers. Livy's contradiction with himself does not lie in his analysis, but in the simple fact that he presents one. He could very well be right to call Tarquin an unjust ruler and., 2002.