The emperor Claudius of Rome ruled an empire spanning three continents between 41 and 54 CE. His reign was of massive importance to the history of ancient European civilization. In fact, the emperor was among the most innovative, fair, and wise in all Roman history. However, because Claudius suffered from physical handicaps and spoke with a stutter, ancient authors were biased against him. Consequently, their descriptions of his time in power are almost uniformly hostile, and many ancient historians ignore all of the good that he did.
Claudius’s reign was important for its major innovations. He conquered the island of Britain and incorporated it into the Roman Empire. He also built a new harbor for Rome and oversaw the construction of several new aqueducts, which brought clean water into the city. He even created laws to protect the rights of slaves and expand Roman citizenship to new people. All of these facts suggest that he was a gifted ruler with strong judgment, despite what may be found in histories written by his detractors.
Another reason for the hostility of ancient authors toward the reign of Claudius has to do with the fact that the writers were usually of senatorial class. Claudius was not elected to power by the Senate and severely limited its traditional powers during his reign. However, illustrating his wisdom, instead of entrusting high bureaucratic positions to senators, he preferred to give them to trustworthy slaves and former slaves (freedmen), whom he felt were more loyal to him. They worked efficiently, creating a bureaucratic framework for all future emperors. Claudius should be praised for giving political opportunities to new groups of people such as former slaves and even the women of the imperial household, including his wives.
The passage glowrifies the emperor Claudius of Rome and defends his rule against all the negetive claims or ignorance attributed to him in many ancient historical texts. But the professor during his lecture refutes the optimistic claims asserted by the literature and provides various arguments to support his perespective.
According to the text the emperor Claudius of Rome was presented as the great emporer, innovator, good-judge, kind-hearted, wise and compassionate ruler. But there had been various instances in the history which states otherwise.
To being with, Claudius was far from a good ruler. He had to pay a huge sum for the assisination of the Roman Empire, which is definately not a quality of a good ruler. Moreover, some other ruler succeding him followed the same path which eventually led to the Civil War.
Another aspect which glorifies him, claiming that he was a just and fair ruler. But the professor disagrees with the notion by giving various examples. He clarifies that Claudius was known for giving baised judgement. There were instances when he did not even hear both the parties in the conflict and took a decision. Another example to prove his injustice nature is that, since he had a soft-corner for slave- he took decisions in their favor even when they were corrupt.
There had been stories about this ruler that he loved violent games for the amusement of his people and himself, distroyed indigeneous people. Clearly, these can be some qualities which are good attributes of a bad ruler.
Therefore, all the facts stated by the professor are not only in contradiction with the text provided by the literature, but also, gives clear reasons why Claudius is considered as bad ruler of the Rome.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 4, Rule ID: BEING_BEGIN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'begin'?
Suggestion: begin
...e history which states otherwise. To being with, Claudius was far from a good rule...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, moreover, so, therefore
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1459.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 287.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08362369338 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11595363751 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73188952674 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 145.348785872 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.571428571429 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 455.4 419.366225166 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.23620309051 12% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.0521912685 49.2860985944 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.2666666667 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.1333333333 21.698381199 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.53333333333 7.06452816374 36% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.09492273731 147% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 4.33554083885 208% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.151913138672 0.272083759551 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0545733088626 0.0996497079465 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0592991744952 0.0662205650399 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0848939167652 0.162205337803 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0539966857052 0.0443174109184 122% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.04 8.42419426049 107% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 63.6247240618 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.