The text represents emperor Claudius of Rome as a fair, wise, innovative

ruler. On the contrary to that in the lecture, the professor denies the good
claims made about the king with evident facts. The emporer was not widely
praised in the history but he was a true leader as per the passage. While,
the professor suggests that the literature available about him stating that
he was very notorious ruler. Firstly, the text states that he was fair,
innovative and wise. He had good sense of judgement. But the professor claims
that he conquered britain and killed many innocent people. Not just this, he
used to kill hundreds of people just for the sake of the amusement for the
public of Rome. Moreover, he used to give judgements of conflicts even
without listening to the both sides. The text gives credit to the emporer's
quality of giving importance to slaves and bringing betterment in their
lives. Whereas, the professor says that his trustworthy slaves in higher
positions were actually culprits and used to take bribe from the general
public in order to gain more wealth. Also, the wives of the king were not of
a high moral values and good character. For instance, his last wife tried to
kill the king with poison. The text suggests that he was one of the best
ruler in the history of the rome. But as per professor, the king paid off the
army after the assassination of the former king. And he spreaded the roman
citizenship for his own interests.