The situations of the Roman conspirators in Julius Caesar and the signers of the Declaration of Independence had many similarities. One of the main similarities is the personalities of Julius Caesar and King George III. There were many honorable men in Rome who knew that Julius Caesar was very ambitious and very lacking in morals. Julius Caesar was a coward and did everything he could to get ahead and push others down. King George III also had very little good morals and did everything to improve his personal situation and not that of the people: he too was too ambitious. The Declaration of Independence describes how the king imposed taxes on the colonists without their consent and summoned legislative bodies in “unusual, inconvenient, and distant places… for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.” King George III unfairly collected money from the people and made it extremely difficult for colonists to participate in politics. This shows that he wanted everything to be convenient for him, even at the expense of others, so that he could get ahead and be more prosperous than everyone else. Both Julius Caesar and King George III were too selfishly ambitious. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay The main difference between the circumstances of the authors of the Declaration of Independence and those of the Roman conspirators is that King George III was already a tyrant when the Declaration was written but Julius Caesar had not yet become king when he was assassinated. The Declaration of Independence was therefore written as a reactionary measure for the wrongs already committed, while the men who assassinated Julius Caesar killed him as a preventative measure against possible wrongs that might be committed if Caesar became king. Another similarity is that there was a discussion among the revolutionaries before the Declaration was written and before Julius Caesar was killed. Brutus and Cassius discussed the possible consequences if Caesar became king, then met with a large group of other conspirators. Before the Declaration of Independence was written, representatives of each colony met and discussed severing ties between America and England. Both the conspirators and the writers thought carefully and planned their decisions in large groups. The goals of the Roman conspirators and the American revolutionaries were also very similar and different. The main goal of the Roman conspirators was to prevent Caesar from becoming king and maintain the republic. The authors of the Declaration of Independence wanted to separate the 13 colonies from Great Britain and establish a new country. The difference between these two objectives is evident. The Romans intended to maintain a republic and the Americans wanted to build a new republic. The Romans wanted to keep the country as it was, the Americans wanted to create a new one. However, both the Roman conspirators and the writers of the Declaration of Independence wanted to save their country (or colonies) from the rule of an unfit king. . They saw that the people would not be able to prosper under the rule of such a king, so the Roman conspirators killed the would-be king, and the authors of the Declaration wrote a declaration to the king of England declaring their independence. Both groups of revolutionaries had noble intentions and wanted to save their countries. Another major difference between their goals was that the Roman conspirators wanted to kill the would-be king, and the writers of the Declaration of Independence only wanted to separate themselves from the then-current king's government. The Roman conspirators, however, did not want to start a war. They thought people wouldaccepted Caesar's death and would understand and accept that it was a good thing. The writers of the Declaration of Independence had at least some idea that war would be inevitable. This is demonstrated in the last paragraph of the Declaration of Independence where it is written “…as free and independent States, have full power to wage wars, make peace…” This shows that the writers knew that the States would have to go to war at a certain point. The actions of the Roman conspirators were very severe and were not expected to lead to any difficulty, while the actions of the writers were less immediate, but were expected to cause immense strife between England and the colonies. The means and methods used by the conspirators and the authors of the Declaration of Independence to instigate change are extremely different in one fundamental way: the conspirators killed the would-be king to bring about change, but the authors of the Declaration simply wrote a letter to the king. The writers committed treason; the conspirators committed murder. However, both provoked war, so it is not easy to determine which act was more violent. Both the conspirators and the writers nevertheless presented the reasons for their actions to the public. This was a necessary method to promote change because the support of the people was needed to affirm the decisions made and then fight the opposing side. One of the conspirators, Brutus, gave a speech telling the people why he had killed Caesar and why change was needed. The authors of the Declaration of Independence had the document published and read aloud throughout the colonies. Each group presented their opinions to the public as a means of gaining support and promoting change. Another difference between the two groups' means of bringing about change was that the Roman conspirators simply killed Caesar: they did not try to talk to him or reason with him. with him first, while the framers of the Declaration of Independence say, "In every phase of these oppressions we have petitioned for compensation in the most humble terms..." The action of the conspirators was immediate and drastic, while the actions of the writers were civilized and spread over a long span of time. There are several factors that may help explain the success of the American effort for change compared to the Roman failure. One such factor is that the speech given by Brutus was immediately followed by a speech by Caesar's right-hand man, Mark Antony. Marc Antony turned public opinion against the conspirators, which led to the people rising up against the conspirators. This nullified any support the conspirators had gained after Brutus' speech and transformed the conspirators' efforts from efforts for change to efforts for survival. The authors of the Declaration of Independence published the declaration and had it read far and wide. It listed all the wrongs committed by the king of England against the colonies, reminding the colonists (or convincing them) how angry they were at England. This gave immediate support to the authors of the Declaration, making it much easier for them to fight against England. The Declaration of Independence did not have a counterargument offered immediately afterwards, as Brutus' speech did, and therefore had a much more lasting impact on the people. Another reason the Roman conspirators failed was because they killed a man the people loved and who wanted to be their king. The Romans supported Caesar. When the conspirators killed a loved one of the people, outrage and chaos ensued, leading to the failure of the conspirators' cause. American writers, however, concentrated their anger in their own.