Download 1. The Founding of Rome, 753 BC

The History of Rome, as Told in
Plutarch's Lives.
Preface. Plutarch, Our Guide
1. The Founding of Rome, 753 B.C.
(a) Social and Political Organization
ROMULUS, 8th cen. B.C.
(1) Rome's origin as a martial nation.
(2) Honor, sometimes observed in the breach, for family.
(3) The establishment of a political order of patricians, with a senate, and the people.
(4) Rome incorporates the Sabines, the first such expansion of Roman influence in Italy.
(5) The Romans, even under their kings, are jealous of their freedom.
(b) Roman Religion
NUMA POMPILIUS, c.715-673 B.C.
(1) As Romulus established the social and political order, so Numa does the religious.
(2) A war-like people are turned to the arts of peace.
(3) Religion as transactional (do ut des), not transformational or ethical.
(4) Numa's just social order will be the idea that Romans will always look back to as a
model.
2. The Republic Founded, 509 B.C.
(a) Founding Father
POPLICOLA, d. 503 B.C.
(1) Valerius has a zeal for freedom and self-government
(2) He is a model for the American founders
(3) Valerius enriches Rome by inviting in the best of the Sabines.
(4) The early republic balances rights of nobles and commons
(b) The threat from within
CORIOLANUS, fl. 493 B.C.
(1) Threat of return of monarch ended
(2) Class struggle
(i) The succession of the plebs, c. 495 B.C.
(ii) Creation of the office of tribune of the people.
(3) Ambitious intemperate men
(4) Twelve Tables of Laws, 451 B.C.
3. The Republican Empire, 5th through 2nd Century
(a) The Second Founder of Rome
CAMILLUS, fl. 396-367 B.C.
(1) Roman dominance of Italy
(2) Further efforts to defuse class struggle
(i) Of the two consuls, one is to be a plebeian.
(ii) Temple of Concord, 367 B.C.
(3) Sack of Rome by the Gauls, 390 B.C.
(b) First Punic War, 264-241 B.C.
(c) Second Punic War, 218-202 B.C.
SCIPIO AFRICANUS, 236–183 B.C.
MARCELLUS, d. 208 B.C.
FABIUS MAXIMUS, c. 275-203 B.C.
(d) First Macedonian War, 215-205 B.C.
(e) Third Punic War, 149-146 B.C.
SCIPIO AFRICANUS MINOR, c.185–129 B.C.
(f) Second Macedonian War, 200-197 B.C.
FLAMININUS, d. 174 B.C.
(g) Third Macedonian War, 171-168 B.C.
AEMILIUS PAULUS, c. 230-160 B.C.
(h) The Republican Virtues
MARCUS CATO, 234-149 B.C.
(1) Justice
(2) Prudence
(3) Temperance
(4) Fortitude
4. The Beginning of the Fall, 133-121 B.C.
(a) The "Haves" and "Have nots"
TIBERIUS GRACCHUS, 164-133 B.C.
(1) Concentration of wealth
(2) The increase in the servile population and the displacement of poor but free Romans.
(3) The struggles between the optimates and populares
(b) Themes of Reform
CAIUS GRACCHUS, 155-121 B.C.
(1) Land reform
(2) Professional military
(3) Expansion of the franchise and other rights
(4) Bread and circuses
(5) Shifts of pwer from senate to people
5. Reversion to Earier Martial State, 120-73 B.C.
(a) Military Dictatorship
MARIUS, 157-86 B.C.
(1) Tribune 120 B.C.
(2) Marius' Reign of Terror, 88-87 B.C.
SYLLA, 138-78 B.C.
(1) The senate's man also turns bloody dictator
(2) Sylla retires to private life and his new constitution stands
(b) The Military Unleashed from the Civil Authority
LUCULLUS, c. 114-57 B.C.
(1) Old models no longer work in far-flung empire
SERTORIUS, fl. 87-73 B.C.
(2) Now Roman fights Roman
6 .Appeals to Tradition and Reason, 64-43 B.C.
(a) Looking Back to the Good Old Days
CATO THE YOUNGER, 95-46 B.C.
(1) Unable to compromise
(b) A Reasonable Path Forward
CICERO, 106-43 B.C.
(1) The man with the plan that the March 15th conspirators lacked
7 .The Center Cannot Hold, 60 B.C.-March 15, 44 B.C.
(a) The Wealth of Crassus Creates Pompey and Caesar.
CRASSUS, c. 115-53 B.C.
(1) Ophaned when the populares murder his father, 87 B.C.
(2) Grew rich on the misfortunes of others.
(3) The rebellion of Spartacus, 73-71 B.C.
(4) Consul with Pompey, 70 B.C.
(5) The First Triumvirate, 60-54 B.C.
(b) The Rise and Fall of Pompey
POMPEY, 106-48 B.C.
(1) Rises as Sylla's lieutenant
(2) Clears the seas of pirates, 67 B.C.
(3) Third Mithridatic War, 75-63 B.C.
(4) Like Alexander, Pompey subdues Africa, Europe, and Asia; He celebrates his third triumph
in 61 B.C.
(5) The First Triumvirate, 60-54 B.C.
(6) The Rise of Caesar
(7) Pharsalia, 48 B.C.
(c) The Rise and Fall of Caesar
JULIUS CAESAR, 100-44 B.C.
(1) Youth, influences, and character
(i) Ambition
(ii) Use of Money
(iii) Use of Rhetoric
(2) The first triumvirate, 60-54 B.C.
(i) His Fellow Trimvirs
(ii) Wars in Gaul
(3) Dictator, 46-44 B.C.
(i) For the first time since 100 B.C. there is no blood-letting
(4) The assassination plot
(i) The conspirators
(ii) Brutus
(iii) Porcia.
(5) The Ides of March, 44 B.C.
8. Anarchy is Loosed, March 15, 44 B.C.-30 B.C.
(a) A conspiracy that is all Hands and no Head.
BRUTUS, 85-42 B.C.
MARC ANTONY, 83-30 B.C.
9. The New Order 30 B.C.-A.D.120
GALBA, 3 B.C.-A.D. 69,
OTHO, A.D. 32-69.
Preface. Plutarch, Our Guide
Plutarch was a Greek living, teaching, and writing in the Roman Empire in the second century of our
era. He was one of the most well-read men of his age. His extent writings range through such topics as
history, biography, philosophy, poetry, astronomy, diet, and etiquette. But he is best known for his Lives
of the Noble Greeks and Romans. For each of the great men of the ancient Greece and Rome Plutarch
wrote a Life; 50 of them survive. They are not exactly history; not exactly biography. His principle
interest is the moral character of his subjects. He tells us in beginning his Life of Alexander:
It must be borne in mind that my design is not to write histories, but lives. And the most
glorious exploits do not always furnish us with the clearest discoveries of virtue or vice in
men; sometimes a matter of less moment, an expression or a jest, informs us better of
their characters and inclinations, than the most famous sieges, the greatest armaments,
or the bloodiest battles whatsoever.
These Lives of the famous figures of the past must necessarily cover a great deal of what even in
Plutarch's time was ancient history. Take, for example the cycle of Lives built around Julius Caesar:
when he writes of the rise of ambitious Caesar prepared to save Rome by any means, even by destroying
her freedom, of the role of Marc Antony as excellent second-in-command after Caesar but a failure as
leader, of Brutus struggling with his close bond of friendship with the tyrant Caesar and his hatred of
tyranny, Plutarch speaks with such immediacy that we easily understand why a dramatist like
Shakespeare would take whole great parts of those Lives as material for his Julius Caesar and his
Antony and Cleopatra. We forget that Plutarch was not there; was in fact not born until 90 years after
the assassination of Caesar. Plutarch brings republican Rome alive for us, yet wrote, in the late first
century of our era when not a person was yet alive who lived under the republic.
When Plutarch writes of the early history of Rome he, as typical of the Roman writers, projects back the
familiar institutions of later times --a senate, the two annually elected consuls, tribunes of the people,
etc. Development over time is not, for Plutarch, the major theme it is in history writing from the 19th
century forward. Nor did he consider himself bound by our standards for historical method. When he
lacks facts he substitutes the most widely received fable. Does he really believe that Romulus was born
of a virgin, was taken up in whirlwind into heaven, and returned with a promise of Rome's future
greatness? It doesn't matter. The fame and grandeur of Rome demand a miraculous founding and he is
content to accept the traditional one. To the charge that he is writing centuries after the fact and with no
use of primary documents we must say nolo contendere; however noting that his sources, the earlier
Roman historians of one, two, or three centuries earlier, had access to earlier source we do not possess.
Plutarch's chronological calculations sometimes are less than accurate. When he relates the tale of the
meeting and conversation between the Athenian Solon (c. 639–c. 559 B.C.) and the Lydian Croesus (fl.
560–546 B.C.), Plutarch comments
That Solon should discourse with Croesus, some think not agreeable with chronology;
but I cannot reject so famous and well-attested a narrative, and, what is more, so
agreeable to Solon's temper, and so worthy his wisdom and greatness of mind, because,
forsooth, it does not agree with some chronological canons, which thousands have
endeavored to regulate, and yet, to this day, could never bring their differing opinions to
any agreement. --Life of Solon, 27
It's not that Plutarch isn't concerned about getting the chronology right: it's that given the tools available
--different calendars used by different peoples in different ages, sometimes varying wildly as one moved
from one Greek city-state to another neighboring one nearby, no fixed point from which to count, not
even agreement on the length of a year-- he knew that even the most accurate calculations were suspect.
The regulation, and standardization of time were, in Plutarch's mind, among the most important of
human endeavors. He marks out for particular attention and approval those men --Solon, Numa, and
Caesar-- who reformed the calendar.
1. The Founding of Rome, 753 B.C.
The Roman calendar kept track of the days in the month by looking forward rather that backward as we
do. The day we call the thirtieth, or last, day in September, the Romans called pridie kalendas octobres,
the day before the beginning of October, and the twenty-sixth of September was ante diem sextum
kalendas octobres, the sixth day before the beginning of October. Unlike so many ancient civilizations,
Rome habitually oriented herself toward her future, not her past. In fact, the Romans were largely
ignorant of their origins and supplied fables when facts were wanting.
From whom, and for what reason, the city of Rome, a name so great in glory, and famous
in the mouths of all men, was so first called, authors do not agree.
--Life of Romulus, 1.
(a) Social and Political Organization
ROMULUS, 8th cen. B.C.
(1) Rome's origin as a martial nation.
Fanciful tales of Rome's origins abound; Plutarch in the Life of Romulus, 1-2 retells a few of them,
including the familiar story, adapted by Virgil for the Aeneid, which traces Rome's founders back to the
refugees from burning Troy. In another version they are descendants of the Greek hero Odysseus.
Whatever the particulars, the Romans are persuaded of two things in general regarding their origins:
1. They are not an indigenous people, but, rather, result from a few persons leaving an existing
civilization and founding a new settlement on the banks of the Tiber.
Their arrival brings them into immediate conflict with the indigenous population, which they subdue in
the first of many conquests. These ancestors, known as Latins, establish themselves in several villages,
the chief one being Alba, the hometown of Romulus, the founder of Rome.
2. This migration is divinely inspired, which accounts for the success of the settlement and the
eventual rise of Rome as mistress of the known world.
According to Plutarch
The kings of Alba reigned in lineal descent from Aeneas and the succession devolved at
length upon two brothers, Numitor and Amulius. Amulius proposed to divide things into
two equal shares, and set as equivalent to the kingdom the treasure and gold that were
brought from Troy. Numitor chose the kingdom; but Amulius, having the money, and
being able to do more with that than Numitor, took his kingdom from him with great
ease--Life of Romulus, 3.
Amulius seeks to assure that no heir of his brother Numitor arise to challenge him for the kingdom, and,
therefore, enrolls Numitor's daughter as a Vestal virgin, strictly kept away from contact with the male
sex. But it is the will of the gods or fate that Roman should be founded by Numitor's grandson, and the
virgin bore not one, but two sons, the twins Romulus and Remus. Amulius learning of the birth of his
rivals, orders their destruction, but the babes are preserved by Faustulus, the swineherd of Amulius, who
rather than drowning the babes as commanded, preserves them in a basket he places in the river. Later
he will draw them from the water and raise them as his own children.
As a young man Remus, during a dispute between the cowherds of Amulius and Numitor, discovers to
Numitor the truth of his origins. Soon he is joined by Romulus, and the twins, aided by others who had
flocked to their grandfather Numitor, lead the rebellion which puts out the usurper Amulius and restores
Numitor to his throne in Alba.
(2) Honor, sometimes observed in the breach, for family.
Plutarch tells us (Life of Romulus, 9) that "the two brothers would neither dwell in Alba without
governing there, nor take the government into their own hands during the life of their grandfather." So
they go out and found a new settlement. The twins get off to an excellent start. Under a generous
sanctuary law the infant settlement grows quickly. Brothers, especially twins, had great significance for
the Romans. Tradition asserts that Castor and Pollux, the offspring of the mortal Leda and the great god
Jupiter, in the disguise of a Swan, come to the aid of Roman armies in critical battles. Most commonly
called the "Dioscuri" (sons of god) Castor and Pollux are united by the warmest affection. Romulus and
Remus, however, quarrel over the building of this new city, and Romulus kills his brother Remus. Thus
Rome's very foundation, traced to Romulus and Remus and before them to Amulius and Numitor rests
on discord between brothers. This must have disturbed Plutarch, who set so high a value on brotherly
love that it is the topic of one of his longest pieces of moral writings.
Nature has contrived to make most of the necessary parts double and brothers and twins:
hands, feet, eyes, ears, nostrils; and she has thus taught us that she had divided them in
this fashion for mutual preservation and assistance, not for variance and strife. Nature
from one seed and one source has created two brothers, or three, or more, not for
difference and opposition to each other, but that by being separate they might the more
readily co-operate with one another. –Of Brotherly Love, 2.
Else where in that essay he says that brothers are, or ought to be, as closely united as the body
and soul of man.
(3) The establishment of a political order of patricians, with a senate, and the people.
Following the murder of Remus, Romulus, on April 21, 753 B.C., ceremonially founds the new city of
Rome by yoking together a bull and a cow, and with a bronze plough cutting a circular furrow that will
mark the location of the wall of Rome. Because the wall will be sacred, he carefully lifts the plough
from the ground wherever a gate is to be let into the wall, so that dead bodies, excrement, and whatever
else is unclean may be conveyed out the gates without impiety toward the sacred wall.
According to Plutarch Romulus establishes the Roman army, by enlisting all that were of age to bear
arms into military companies called legions. He likewise establishes a political order that looks rather
like the later republican arrangement, naming the 100 most eminent men patricians and organizing their
council of elders as the senate,
He distinguished the senate from the populace; and in other ways also separated the
nobles and the commons,--calling them patrons, and these their clients,--by which means
he created wonderful love and amity between them, productive of great justice in their
dealings. --Life of Romulus, 13.
Later, in the republican era, this political order will be known as Senatus Populusque Romanus, "The
Senate and the Roman People," acting together with sovereignty.
(4) Rome incorporates the Sabines, the first such expansion of Roman influence in Italy.
Having thus established the city and provided for its defense and governance, Romulus turns to the
pressing matter of wives for the men who had flocked to her from divers territories to take advantage of
the generous sanctuary law. In the nearby people called the Sabines, Romulus sees a likely, even if
unwilling, source for wives and allies.
In the fourth month, after the city was built, as Fabius writes, the adventure of stealing
the women was attempted; and some say Romulus himself, being naturally a martial man,
and predisposed too, perhaps, by certain oracles, to believe the fates had ordained the
future growth and greatness of Rome should depend upon the benefit of war, upon these
accounts first offered violence to the Sabines, since he took away only thirty virgins, more
to give an occasion of war than out of any want of women. But this is not very probable;
it would seem rather that, observing his city to be filled by a confluence of foreigners, few
of whom had wives... Romulus, by proclamation, appointed a day for a splendid sacrifice,
and for public games and shows, to entertain all sorts of people; many flocked thither,
and he himself sat in front, amidst his nobles, clad in purple. Now the signal for their
falling on was to be whenever he rose and gathered up his robe and threw it over his
body; his men stood all ready armed, with their eyes intent upon him, and when the sign
was given, drawing their swords and falling on with a great shout, they ravished away
the daughters of the Sabines, --Life of Romulus, 14.
The Sabines, naturally, do not take kindly to woman-stealing and war ensues. Finally it is the Sabine
women, who have come to love their Roman husbands as much as their Sabine fathers and brothers,
who reconcile Sabine and Roman, saying:
"Wherein have we injured or offended you, as to deserve such sufferings, past and
present? We were ravished away unjustly and violently by those whose now we are; that
being done, we were so long neglected by our fathers, our brothers, and countrymen, that
time, having now by the strictest bonds united us to those we once mortally hated, has
made it impossible for us not to tremble at the danger and weep at the death of the very
men who once used violence to us. You did not come to vindicate our honor, while we
were virgins, against our assailants; but do come now to force away wives from their
husbands and mothers from their children, a succor more grievous to its wretched objects
than the former betrayal and neglect of them. Which shall we call the worst, their lovemaking or your compassion? If you were making war upon any other occasion, for our
sakes you ought to withhold your hands from those to whom we have made you fathersin-law and grandsires. If it be for our own cause, then take us, and with us your sons-inlaw and grandchildren. Restore to us our parents and kindred, but do not rob us of our
children and husbands. Make us not, we entreat you, twice captives." --Life of Romulus,
19.
Peace thus established between the Romans and Sabines, the Sabines are joined with Romans to double
the population of the city. Roman and Sabine customs are intertwined. Plutarch notes, with his
customary interest in calendars, that the Sabines adopt the Roman months. While preserving a separate
identity as Sabines, they are largely integrated into Roman society. In future years many men of Sabine
origins will serve in the highest offices in Rome.
(5) The Romans, even under their kings, are jealous of their freedom.
Romulus continues for some time governing in consultation with his patricians and senate, but upon the
death of his grandfather, king Numitor of Alba, Romulus begins to take on sole government of Rome,
becoming her first king. The senators resent his tyrannical actions and there is some sort of altercation.
All that is known for certain is that on the Nones of July (July 7th on our calendar), 37 years after the
founding of Rome, Romulus disappears, whether taken up in a whirlwind, or murdered and disposed of
by the senators is unclear (Life of Romulus, 27). Romulus, after departing this life, appears to Proculus,
one of the patricians, and foretells the future greatness of Rome.
"It pleased the gods, O Proculus, that we, who came from them, should remain so long a
time amongst men as we did; and, having built a city to be the greatest in the world for
empire and glory, should again return to heaven. But farewell; and tell the Romans, that,
by the exercise of temperance and fortitude, they shall attain the height of human power;
we will be to you the propitious god Quirinus." --Life of Romulus, 28.
And so the Romans came to revere Romulus as a god under the name Quirinus.
(b) Roman Religion
NUMA POMPILIUS, c.715-673 B.C.
Following the death, resurrection, and ascension of Romulus, Rome divides into factions of original
Romans and the Sabine newcomers. After a controversial interregnum Pompilius Numa, a Sabine, is
elected the second king of Rome. Offered the throne, Numa refuses, choosing rather to enjoy a life of
retirement and contemplation of God. Numa's father, however, prevails on him to accept his god-given
destiny, and take on the office of king as a instrument to use in instructing the people in piety, saying:
(1) As Romulus established the social and political order, so Numa does the religious.
"Though you neither desire riches, being content with what you have, nor court the fame
of authority, as having already the more valuable fame of virtue, yet you will consider
that government itself is a service of God, who now calls out into action your qualities of
justice and wisdom, which were not meant to be left useless and unemployed. Cease,
therefore, to avoid and turn your back upon an office which, to a wise man, is a field for
great and honorable actions, for the magnificent worship of the gods, and for the
introduction of habits of piety, which authority alone can effect amongst a people. --Life
of Numa, 6.
Numa accepts his calling to lead, but requires first that all the proper religious rites be observed before
he will put on the kingly garb (Life of Numa, 7).
(2) A war-like people are turned to the arts of peace.
He employs religion to turn a war-like people to the arts of peace and establishes a religion without
images and without bloody sacrifice. Although later Romans revive animal sacrifice, they forever
eschew human sacrifice, which is associated not with propitiating the gods for the welfare of the state
but with those who would attack Rome and the public good such as the conspirators in the time of
Poplicola who sought to restore to power king Tarquin (Life of Poplicola, 4) and those wicked followers
of Catiline who tried to overthrow the Republic (Life of Cicero, 10 and Life of Numa, 8) Peace --the long
continuous of peace for 43 years-- is the most remarkable things about Numa's reign. The doors of the
Temple of Janus at Rome, which are open in time of war, are closed for the reign of Numa. They will be
closed again, briefly, in 235 B.C. after the First Punic War, and again by Caesar Augustus after the
defeat of Antony (Life of Numa, 20).
(3) Religion as transactional (do ut des), not transformational or ethical.
Numa leaves a great body of religious prescriptions regarding how, when, and what to sacrifice, the
significance of which has been lost in time. Plutarch notes that "some of Numa's traditions have no
obvious meaning" (Life of Numa, 14). Roman religion was a formal and formulaic business. Throughout
Plutarch we read of rites being repeated because of a mispronounced word, a sneeze, or some other ill
omen that threatened to hinder the effectiveness of the charm. From the personal standpoint, the role of
sacrifice in Roman religion was summed up in the phrase, do ut des "I give, that you may give." It was a
practical religion based on transaction. Ethics, which became increasingly important as Romans
imported Greek philosophy, had a place in Roman life, but not as part of their religion.
The oldest Roman gods are Jupiter and Mars, along with the deified Romulus, known as Quirinus. Later
Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva come to dominate. The Romans also believe that every person, place, or
thing had its own genius (sort of a "guardian angel")
(4) Numa's just social order will be the idea that Romans will always look back to as a
model.
Numa divides the land among the people: the stable society of subjects under their king, as established
by Numa will last for a century and a half. He also abolishes the divisive distinction between Roman and
Sabine (Life of Numa, 16-17).
The Roman calendar, as reformed by Numa, serves, with adjustments from time to time, until reformed
again by Julius Caesar, over six hundred years later (Life of Numa, 18)
2. The Republic Founded, 509 B.C.
(a) Founding Father
POPLICOLA, d. 503 B.C.
The next great chapter of Roman history as recorded in Plutarch's Lives, opens over a hundred and fifty
years later. Successors to Numa have not used kingly power to benefit the people. And the last king,
Tarquinius Superbus, does nothing to control the intemperate lusts of his son Sextus who outraged all
Rome when he raped Roman matron Lucretia. She takes her own life, and her family and friends avenge
her by driving from Rome Tarquin, thus ending the period of monarchy (Life of Poplicola, 1).
(1) Valerius has a zeal for freedom and self-government
Kingly power is divided and given to two annually elected consuls. The first consuls elected are Lucius
Junius Brutus and Tarquinius Collatinus. Brutus was known as one of the fiercest foes of tyranny, even
watching unflinchingly as his sons are put to death for their role in a treasonous plot to restore to power
the exiled king. His descendant Marcus Junius Brutus will be famous --or infamous-- as one of Julius
Caesar's assassins. Tarquinius Collatinus was the husband of Lucretia which should have assured his
enmity toward the tyrant, but he is also a Tarquin, and, in light of his divided loyalty, is invited to resign
the consulship. Publius Valerius Poplicola, who along with Brutus had expelled Tarquin, replaces him in
509 B.C. (Life of Poplicola, 2-7).
(2) He is a model for the American founders
Publius Valerius is traditionally credited as the founder of the Roman Republic; America advocates of
adoption of the constitution for our republic published their Federalist Papers under the pen-name
Publius.
(3) Valerius enriches Rome by inviting in the best of the Sabines.
The young republic faces several trials. The Romans fight yet another war with their neighbors the
Sabines. Among the Sabines, Appius Clausus alone urges reconciliation with Rome. Petty envy of
Clausus leads the Sabines to ignore his wise counsel. Valerius Publius Poplicola invites Clausus to come
over to Rome. It is an action that echoes the generous sanctuary law of Romulus, which populated the
settlement upon its first founding. Clausus immigrates to Rome, to the great enrichment of Rome's pool
of talent. The Claudian family tree had both patrician and plebian branches (including a patrician branch
that turned plebian for political expediency and adopted the more plebian-sounding spelling Clodian.)
For centuries the Claudians produced consuls and other high officials for the republic. The next four
emperors after Augustus (who was a Julian) were all Claudians: Tiberius (A.D.14–37), Caligula (A.D.
37–41), Claudius (A.D. 41–54), and Nero (A.D. 54–68). Claudians continued, on-and-off, to hold the
office of consul or emperor through the fifth century, or a thousand years from the date that the Sabine
Appius Clausus was grafted onto the Roman stock. (Life of Poplicola, 21-22).
Meanwhile, Rome must again fend off Tarquin who is yet trying to regain his throne, first with the aid
of the Etruscans, whom Popicola defeats. Later Tarquin is aided by Lars Porsenna of Clusium in his
quest for the throne of Rome. (Life of Poplicola, 9 and 16-17). Valerius Publius Poplicola stands firm
against Porsenna, but is forced to retreat to the city. It is at this time that Horatius Cocles famously holds
Lars Porsenna back at the wooden bridge as retold in Macauley's poem:
LAYS OF ANCIENT ROME
By Thomas Babbington Macaulay
1800-1859
Horatius
A Lay Made About the Year Of The City CCCLX
XXXII
Then none was for a party;
Then all were for the state;
Then the great man helped the poor,
And the poor man loved the great:
Then lands were fairly portioned;
Then spoils were fairly sold:
The Romans were like brothers
In the brave days of old.
XXXIII
Now Roman is to Roman
More hateful than a foe,
And the Tribunes beard the high,
And the Fathers grind the low.
As we wax hot in faction,
In battle we wax cold:
Wherefore men fight not as they fought
In the brave days of old.
(4) The early republic balances rights of nobles and commons
Valerius Publius earns the nickname "Poplicola" or people-lover, for the reforms, modeled after those of
Solon in Athens, which he instituted to give more power to the common folk. (Life of Poplicola, 10-12).
Latter generations of Romans will lift up this period of the Republic as the Rome's noblest time, when
there was harmony between the classes, suffrages for consul and other officers were given to the best
men, not the most popular, a volunteer army of citizen farmer-soldiers kept Rome free, and wealth had
not yet brought with it luxury and effeminacy.
(b) The threat from within
CORIOLANUS, fl. 493 B.C.
(1) Threat of return of monarch ended
Central to Plutarch's theory of the history of Rome is his belief that Rome's most dangerous threat are
from within, not without. The threat is two-fold: from class struggle between patrician and plebeian and
from ambitious men who place their own distorted sense of their personal glory above the interests of
Rome. Less than twenty years after Poplicola's institution of the idea republic, danger comes from both
sources of internal discord, laying Rome exposed to the threat of a foreign enemy.
Coriolanus leads the Romans in the final defeat of exiled king Tarquin at the battle of Lake Regillus
around 495 B.C. The Romans are aided in the struggle by the Dioscuri, Castor and Pollux (Life of
Coriolanus, 3). The young republic, now in its second decade, is finally, and permanently free of the
threat of a return of the old monarchy. However, a new internal threat arises.
(2) Class struggle
(i) The succession of the plebs, c. 495 B.C.
(ii) Creation of the office of tribune of the people.
Rome is riven by intestine strife as the poor cry out that they are misused by the patricians. The senate
fails to respond. Coriolanus makes things worse with his intemperate speeches against the people.
Finally, the common folk flee Rome, in perhaps the first recorded labor "walk out," seize a high ground
without the city and refuse to come back to work or bear arms until they get better treatment. (Life of
Coriolanus, 5-6). Through Rome's history, when conditions for the commons become unbearable, they
will know that, as a last resort, they can bring the nobles to the bargaining table but such a massive
walk-out. Indeed, four centuries later, in the time of the Gracchi and again in the time of Pompey the
Great they threaten to so do (Life of Tiberius Gracchus, 9; Life of Pompey, 30).
Harmony between the classes is restored by changing the (unwritten) Roman constitution by the
introduction of the office tribune of the people (Life of Coriolanus, 7). The political order of two
annually elected consuls (initially limited to patricians) as the chief executives, with a senate as
deliberative body that framed the questions to be put before the people for vote, and the tribunes of the
people (by law, plebeians) as the protectors of the rights and privileges of the people was stable until the
time of Sylla.
(3) Ambitious intemperate men
Coriolanus begins his career by saving Rome from external enemies, the exiled king Tarquin and
Rome's enemy of the week, the Voscians. But his ambition, pride, and headstrong attitude prove more a
threat to Rome than her external enemies. After harmony between patricians and plebeians is restored
with the creation of the office of tribune of the people, Coriolanus again returns to making intemperate
speeches attacking the plebeians for usurping the governing offices of their betters and the senate for
giving in to the plebs. His speech seems to incite violence against the tribunes, who persons, as
guardians of the rights of the people, are sacrosanct. The people, finally thoroughly disgusted with his
bullying arrogate ways, banish him from Rome. Coriolanus then goes to Rome's enemy, the Voscians,
and offers his services to lead the battle against Rome. The Voscians with Coriolanus' assistance very
nearly conquer Rome. Coriolanus relents only when his mother Volumnia intercedes.
Over the next three centuries as Rome grows from city to empire, the struggle between plebeians and
patricians will continue, and ambitious men will again risk the future of Rome in their intemperate quest
for personal glory. But the presence always of an external enemy to rally against (those doors of the
Temple of Janus will close for just a short time in the middle of the third century B.C.) will divert
energies toward the preservation of the city rather than the simmering problems that will, eventually,
destroy the republic.
(4) Twelve Tables of Laws, 451 B.C.
The fifth century B.C. is also the time of codification of Roman law. The famous Twelve Tables of 451450 B.C. survive only in fragments, however, they continue to impress us as an example of the
republican impulse to place limits on arbitrary authority and set forth certain unalienable rights of the
people.
Though all the world exclaim against me, I will say what I think: that single little book
of the Twelve Tables, if anyone look to the fountains and sources of laws, seems to me,
assuredly, to surpass the libraries of all the philosophers, both in weight of authority,
and in plenitude of utility. -- M.T. Cicero, De Oratore, I. 44
3. The Republican Empire, 5th through 2nd
Century
(a) The Second Founder of Rome
CAMILLUS, fl. 396-367 B.C.
(1) Roman dominance of Italy
From the founding of the republic in 509 B.C. to the first Punic War (war against Carthage) in the midthird century, Rome will grow by absorbing by alliance or conquest her near and distant neighbors in the
Italian peninsula.
(2) Further efforts to defuse class struggle
(i) Of the two consuls, one is to be a plebeian.
(ii) Temple of Concord, 367 B.C.
Camillus leads the Romans in many of their victories, but at home in Rome all is not well, as strife
between patrician and plebeians arises again. This time it is settled by enacting a law that of the two
consuls elected annually, one must be a plebian. This new settlement restoring the balance between
patrician and plebeian is commemorated by the erection, in 367 B.C., of the Temple of Concord.
(3) Sack of Rome by the Gauls, 390 B.C.
The Battle of the Allia was a battle of the first Gallic invasion of Italy. The battle was fought near the
Allia river: the defeat of the Roman army opened the route for the Gauls to sack Rome in 390 B.C.
Camillus saves the city and is styled the Second Founder of Rome.
(b) First Punic War, 264-241 B.C.
235 B.C., doors of the Temple of Janus closed.
(c) Second Punic War, 218-202 B.C.
SCIPIO AFRICANUS, 236–183 B.C.
MARCELLUS, d. 208 B.C.
FABIUS MAXIMUS, c. 275-203 B.C.
Hannibal, 247-183/2 B.C.; Carthaginian general; enemy of Rome.
Battle of Cannae major battle, August 2, 216 B.C. in Apulia in southeast Italy, where Hannibal
destroyed a numerically superior Roman army.
Marcus Claudius Marcellus, d. 208 B.C., Roman general.
Archimedes, c. 287-212 B.C.; Syracusan (Greek) mathematician and inventor; killed during the
occupation of Syracuse by Marcellus.
Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus, 275-203 B.C.; Roman general; opponent of Hannibal; from his
delaying tactics we get the term Fabian, referring to a policy of prudently biding one's time.
Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus, 236–183 B.C. Roman general, the conqueror of Hannibal.
(d) First Macedonian War, 215-205 B.C.
(e) Third Punic War, 149-146 B.C.
SCIPIO AFRICANUS MINOR, c.185–129 B.C.
Carthago delenda est Thus Cato, they say, stirred up the third and last war against the Carthaginians.
Scipio Aemilianus Africanus Minor, c.185–129 B.C., Roman general, destroyer of Carthage; son of
Aemilus Paulus; by adoption the grandson of Scipio Africanus Major. Plutarch's Life of Scipio
Africanus Minor has, sadly, not survived.
(f) Second Macedonian War, 200-197 B.C.
FLAMININUS, d. 174 B.C.
(g) Third Macedonian War, 171-168 B.C.
AEMILIUS PAULUS, c. 230-160 B.C.
168 B.C. Aemilius Paulus defeats Perseus the Macedonian at the Battle of Pydna, thus ending the
Macedonia line from Alexander. The spoils Aemilius brings home to Rome at so great that the Romans
do not need to pay taxes for over 100 years (Plutarch, Life of Aemilius Paulus, 38).
In his early manhood, which fell at a time when Rome was flourishing with illustrious
characters, he was distinguished for not attaching himself to the studies usual with the young
men of mark of that age, nor treading the same paths to fame. For he did not practice oratory
with a view to pleading causes, nor would he stoop to salute, embrace, and entertain the vulgar,
which were the usual insinuating arts by which many grew popular. Not that he was incapable
of either, but he chose to purchase a much more lasting glory by his valor, justice, and integrity,
and in these virtues he soon outstripped all his equals. --Life of Aemilius Paulus, 2
(h) The Republican Virtues
MARCUS CATO, 234-149 B.C.
(1) Justice
He handled public finances with probity. --Plutarch
"Yet, though he seemed thus easy and sparing to all who were under his power, he, on the other hand,
showed most inflexible severity and strictness, in what related to public justice, and was rigorous, and
precise in what concerned the ordinances of the commonwealth; so that the Roman government, never
seemed more terrible, nor yet more mild, than under his administration."--Plutarch
(2) Prudence
He managed his personal estate with prudence. --Plutarch
"There is a difference between a man's prizing valor at a great rate, and valuing life at little" --Cato
(3) Temperance
For his general temperance, however, and self-control, he really deserves the highest admiration. -Plutarch
However, his famed frugality extended, at times, to a mean-spirited niggardliness --Plutarch
(4) Fortitude
"He gained, in early life, [and continued in] a good habit of body by working with his own hands, and
living temperately, and serving in war." --Plutarch
4. The Beginning of the Fall, 133-121 B.C.
(a) The "Haves" and "Have nots"
TIBERIUS GRACCHUS, 164-133 B.C.
(1) Concentration of wealth
(2) The increase in the servile population and the displacement of poor but free Romans.
(3) The struggles between the optimates and populares
(b) Themes of Reform
CAIUS GRACCHUS, 155-121 B.C.
Caius' reforms of 123 B.C., while not major changes to the constitution, mark the beginning of a major
restructuring of Roman society that will take place over the next 80 years:
(1) Land reform
This will continue to be volatile, with Caesar beginning his rise to political prominence in 60 B.C. as a
spokesman for the landless poor (Life of Caesar, 14).
(2) Professional military
The Change from a citizen-farmer militia defending their homes to a professional paid army loyal more
to their general than to the idea of the city accelerates during the first consulship of Marius in 107 B.C.
(Life of Marius, 9) and Caesar.
(3) Expansion of the franchise and other rights
Roman citizenship will final be extended to all of Rome's Italian allies after the Social War of 91-88
B.C., between Rome and her allies (socii) who demanded rights of Roman citizenship
(4) Bread and circuses
How the peace of the city came to be preserved through "bread and circuses" is proverbial; and
(5) Shifts of power from senate to people
Transferring the power to judge in the courts away from the sole prerogative of the senate and to a wider
class will be taken up again by Marius (Life of Marius, 4)
5. Reversion to Earlier Martial State, 120-73
B.C.
(a) Military Dictatorship
It is sometimes said of Plutarch that his characters do not develop over time, but rather stand as static
types. Marius, early on is recognized for his military valor; that will stay with him until death. But
equally, he dies as ignorant of the arts of peace as he was when introduced to us as a young soldier in the
Spanish campaign of Scipio Africanus Minor. The Life of Sulla opens and closes with pictures of Sylla,
not as a mighty general, but as a decadent pleasure-seeker. So does Plutarch believe that persons can
change for the better? Assuredly, yes! He devoted an entire essay to the question: How a Man May
Become Aware of His Progress in Virtue. In that work Plutarch argues against the Stoic philosophers
who held that all men except the perfectly virtuous are equally vicious. According to Plutarch we know
we are making progress in virtue when we look at the lives of virtuous men and want to be like them in
their greatness of character, and not merely in the enjoyment of similar grand and successful lives. So
what do we make of these lives in which there is scant evident either of virtue or even progress toward
virtue?
Perhaps the answer lies in looking at the failures of Marius and Sylla in the context of all of Plutarch's
Roman Lives. As it is sometimes said that the true subject of Shakespeare's English history plays is
England, not the various good or bad kings whose names stand as titles to the individual plays, so is
Rome the subject of Plutarch's Roman Lives. And that subject certainly displays development over time.
In lecture one we looked at the lives of the men who established the social, political, and religious order
of Rome that would endure for centuries. But we also noted the tension between the rich and the poor
that was ever present. And we saw how intemperate ambitions of men, more set on personal
advancement that the common good, could enflame the orders against each other.
In the lives of the Gracchi we saw one approach to the problem. The Gracchi proposed land reform in
the senate. They tried to work within the system. It had worked before, as when, in the time of
Coriolanus the plebeians gained the right to be represented and protected by tribunes and aediles, and
again, in the time of Camillus, when it was settled that of the two consuls annually elected, one should
be a plebeian. But such compromise and peace by constitutional amendment was not achieved by the
Gracchi and the next eighty years will be marked by the struggle between the populares, who favored
expanded rights for the people, and the optimates who looked to the traditional ruling class of senators
and patricians as having the best interests of the commonwealth at heart.
It is easy, and perhaps largely justifiable, for us to look back and see that the problem was the
intransigence of the rich and powerful who were so willfully deaf to the people's cry for land reform,
proper pensions for soldiers who had spent the greater part of their adult life in foreign lands in the
defense of Rome, and for a larger role in the courts which seemed rigged in favor of the privileged. But
we must remember, that the old guard were trying to preserve, or perhaps more properly restore, a
balanced republican constitution which had, with adjustments, served Rome from the founding of the
republic in about 509 B.C. For four hundred years the republic gave ordinary Romans a safe and stable
political structure that gave every free-born Roman male adult a vote and for a select, but rather large
group, of aristocrats, the opportunity to actually run their own government. Take power out of the hands
of these few who generation after generation had been reared in traditions of public services and give
too much to the uneducated and unaccustomed rabble, and who knows what might happen.
For an example --indeed the only available one at the time-- of popular rather than aristocratic or
monarchical government, thoughtful Romans had only to look at the experience with direct democracy
in Athens. The Athenian democracy dated to about 508 B.C., the same time as the founding of the
Roman republic. It lasted just 90 years, falling in the midst of the Peloponnesian War, in 411 B.C. with
the coup by the oligarchic 400. There were subsequent revivals of democracy in Athens, with varying
degrees of success, until the Macedonian conquests of Greece in the mid fourth century. In the Athenian
experiment, Romans saw the tendency for democracy, putatively the most popular government to
devolve into effective monarchy. They knew Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War, so they
understood that the greatest leader in that democracy, Pericles, was, effectively, sole ruling in what was
only nominally a democracy (Thucydides, II, 65). They also knew that the democracy easily
degenerated into mob rule, with the mob being lead by demagogues of the worst sort, as Alcibiades,
whose intemperate lust for glory goaded him into the disastrous Sicilian expedition which contributed so
much to Athens' downfall and the extinction of her democratic experiment.
However, reform of some sort was clearly needed. The murder of the tribune Tiberius, and the attack on
his brother, the tribune Caius Gracchus, culminating in his destruction in the year 121 B.C., manifested
the profound problems in a four hundred year old system originally designed for a small village and now
stretched to the breaking point as the constitution of an empire.
MARIUS, 157-86 B.C.
(1) Tribune 120 B.C.
The following year, 120 B.C., Caius Marius is elected tribune of the people and with him we see the
next development in the struggle for a new political order for Rome and her allies.
Marius picks up the populares' cause from the Gracchi, but drops their attempt at reform within the
system. Marius will break the system to pieces. It never recovers. In his unprecedented seven terms as
consul --including illegal back-to-back terms-- he ignores or obstructs his fellow consul to act as sole
ruler. He reorganizes the army by enlisting slaves and poor people. It was a natural step following Caius
Gracchus' law to cloth the soldiers out of the state treasury rather than as formerly at their own charge.
These innovations changed the character of the army from a citizen to professional army more loyal
their commander than to the ideal of a free Rome.
(2) Marius' Reign of Terror, 88-87 B.C.
Marius turns that army against Rome herself, marching into the city and making the streets run with
Roman blood, especially the blood of the aristocrats
SYLLA, 138-78 B.C.
(1) The senate's man also turns bloody dictator
(2) Sylla retires to private life and his new constitution stands
The great rival of Marius was Sylla (also spelled Sulla). Sylla is the darling of the optimates. When he,
supported by his private army, installs himself as dictator, he abolishes the office of tribune of the
plebeians, and imposes new restrictions on access to offices such as consul so that no new Marius can so
quickly rise from relatively humble origins. He moves the power of judging in the courts back to the
senate. When Sylla steps down from being dictator --remarkably, a voluntary act-- he leaves, as part of
the new constitutional settlement, a senate expanded both in size and power.
Marius and Sylla achieved the height of power by exploiting the flaws in the Roman system. Neither
offered any correction of the flaws. They are men of their time, and it was a time, in the development of
Rome when men of vision were not wanted. In Rome of a century earlier an illustrious figures such as
Aemilius Paulus could flourish in a virtuous republic. A brutish and ignorant Marius rises to power in a
Rome that has not yet educated herself beyond it rough primitive state and yet has the wealth, from
conquests, such as those of Aemilius, to produce the vulgar luxuries that an undisciplined Sylla could
revel in.
(b) The Military Unleashed from the Civil Authority
Marius and Sylla are followed by Sertorius and Lucullus, who stand as cautionary tales of what happens
when the proper relation between the civil and the military powers are disordered.
LUCULLUS, c. 114-57 B.C.
(1) Old models no longer work in far-flung empire
Lucullus rose as one of Sylla most able lieutenants. His victories in far-off battle-fields would, in the
good old days of the republic, have earned him triumphs and consulships in Rome. But in the greatly
expanded late republican empire, where battles were no longer in Rome's backyard as it were, but were
in distant and hard to get to provinces, fought by professional soldiers who did not return annually to
their Italian homes to farm their lands and vote in Roman elections, Lucullus failed to understand that
the public relations campaign on the home front was as important as victories on the distant front.
Lucullus extended Rome's control over new territories and defeated kings at the height of their power.
According to Plutarch,
"Lucullus was the first Roman who carried an army over Taurus, passed the Tigris, took
and burnt the royal palaces of Asia in the sight of the kings, seizing and overwhelming
the northern parts as far as the Phasis, the east as far as Media, and making the South
and Red Sea his own through the kings of the Arabians. He shattered the power of the
kings, and narrowly missed their persons, while like wild beasts they fled away into
deserts and thick and impassable woods." --Comparison of Lucullus with Cimon, 3.
Lucullus was a master of varied tactics in battle. When he marches into Asia in preparation for engaging
the forces of Mithridates in 74 B.C., Lucullus, calculating that the large host of Mithridates will soon run
out of provisions, waits for his opportunity rather than rushing into battle. He cuts the supply-lines of
Mithridates and the troops of Mithridates, being famished, are defeated by Lucullus. (Life of Lucullus, 711). Later, when Lucullus faces both Mithridates and Tigranes at the battle of Tigranocerta in 69 B.C.,
Mithridates, smarting from his early defeat at the hands of Lucullus, urges Tigranes to cut Lucullus'
supply-lines rather than rashly engage the enemy, but Tigranes, not wishing to share the victory with his
father-in-law Mithridates, throws himself against the Romans and is repulsed. Then Lucullus, acting
exactly opposite to the way he did in the earlier battle where, greatly outnumbered, he forebear to attack,
waiting rather for his enemy's food stores to give out, now goes swiftly on the defensive. Lucullus
divides his forces, leaving his lieutenant Murena to press the siege of Tigranocerta, while Lucullus goes
against Tigranes. Mithridates and Tigranes, thinking Lucullus will employ his customary waiting tactic
are caught unawares and Lucullus, with a smaller and more lightly armed force, utterly routs the forces
of Tigranes. (Life of Lucullus, 26-28).
Plutarch also records that Lucullus freed the cities of the Middle East of their crippling debts and ousted
their oppressors (Life of Lucullus, 20). For his labors to pacify a troubled region and free oppressed
people Lucullus created rich and powerful enemies and is seen as spending Roman resources to liberate
barbarians. Back home in Rome he was criticized for pursuing a foreign wars for his own glory but not
to the advantage of the Roman people (Life of Lucullus, 24).
Lucullus was a brilliant military leader, but he failed to rally the political support that he needed
domestically to build a lasting and prosperous Roman state. Perhaps he failed to grasp how Roman
military and civic life were changing as Roman territory expanded. For centuries Roman leaders had
followed a similar career. Military success won the opportunity to return to Rome for a triumph, election
to an office of honor and responsibility, with consul being the highest office, then entrance into the
senate to take one's place among the respected and powerful governors of the republic. It was a pattern
that worked well as long as Rome's enemies were nearby, as in the early years when she was subjugating
the surrounding cities of Italy, and even when conquering the Gauls in northern Italy and nearer parts of
Europe. Citizen-soldiers would take up arms in the summer campaign season and return in time for the
harvest. Military commanders were never long away from the city and the military and civic functions
of government were never far apart. But this was changing. Rome's enemies were farther away and
campaigns could no longer be concluded in a season. A generation earlier Marius, in 107 B.C.
reorganized the army by enlisting slaves and poor people, thus changing the character of the army from
a citizen to professional army (Life of Marius, 9). The great military exploits of Lucullus were done
during his long absences from Rome, during which time other men, not necessarily as good as
commanders, but with the advantage of being in Rome where they could sway the crowd and argue in
the senate, held office and with envious eye regarded Lucullus' Asian exploits as a threat to their own
careers rather than a credit to Rome.
Lucullus, perhaps, just didn't understand the need to run a campaign of political rhetoric at home while
campaigning against Rome's enemies abroad. The next generation of leaders, Pompey the Great, Julius
Caesar, and finally, Octavian known as Augustus will demonstrate an ever increasing awareness of this
vital blending of the military and the civic virtues.
SERTORIUS, fl. 87-73 B.C.
(2) Now Roman fights Roman
Sertorius was one of Marius' lieutenants who, on the rise of Sylla in Rome, took his professional army
and used it, with considerable effect, to run a rebellion in Spain, his talents being employed in defeating,
not commanding, Roman armies.
Marius and Sylla showed that a military general could be ruler of Rome, provided he is willing to rule it
as conquered territory. Hardly models to emulate. Sertorius and Lucullus demonstrate that military valor
was not sufficient to gain political power in Rome. To restore order and domestic tranquility something
more was needed.
In the next lecture we'll look at another approach to Rome's problems. Cato's moral appeal to a return to
republican virtues and Cicero's arguments for a just society with concord between the orders based on
profound study of the philosophy and history of governance. Stern Cato fails to account of a Julius
Caesar who cares little or nothing for the traditional republic which seems to have uttered failed anyway.
Caesar prefers a new world order of his own making. And after six decades of bloodshed, Caesar's
benevolent dictatorship looks pretty good to the people. And Cicero's appeal to reason falls before a
Mark Antony driven by irrational lusts for power and for the flesh. Nevertheless, Cato and Cicero come
down to us as two of the most virtuous and public-minded of the ancients.
6 .Appeals to Tradition and Reason, 64-43 B.C.
The Crisis. Stubborn ideologues block all reform. Even some of the best men of the time can't see the
need for reasonable reform and so contribute the fall of the republic. Political theory matched with
rhetoric shows a way out, but with few allies in the battle, even the noblest minds cannot save the
Republic.
(a) Looking Back to the Good Old Days
CATO THE YOUNGER,
95-46 B.C.
(1) Unable to compromise
The boughs that will not bend must break!
–Mary Eulalie Fee Shannon (1825-1855)
Plutarch tells us that even as a child Cato (95-46 B.C.) showed evidence of his resolute character. At age
14 Cato sets himself against the dictator Sylla. He also devotes himself to the study of philosophy and to
the practice of justice, which he seeks to advance through rhetoric. (Life of Cato the Younger, 2-4)
Following the customary course he enters the Roman army. In the war to put down the slave revolt of
Spartacus (73 B.C.), Cato, though given no opportunity to distinguish himself in arms, is commended
for his conduct. Back in civilian life Cato excels at canvassing for votes and he begins to attract the envy
of less accomplished politicians. (Life of Cato the Younger, 8)
Cato becomes renowned for his incorruptibility after routing out corruption. In fact, he distinguishes
himself as the sole true guardian of Rome's public treasury. Cato consistently places public service
above private gain. He also punishes the many collaborators with Sylla in his criminal reign. (Life of
Cato the Younger, 16-19)
In 63 B.C. a bankrupt nobleman, Lucius Sergius Catilina, conspired to destroy the Roman Republic, but
the plot is found out by Cicero and the conspirators are tried and found guilty. Several important men in
the city are potentially implicated and many urge that clemency is the best way forward if future unrest
is to be avoided. Cato alone holds out for the ultimate punishment for the Catilinian conspirators,
withstanding Caesar's bid for clemency, showing that obstinacy of character which will later undo him
and after first rendering him unable to save the republic. (Life of Cato the Younger, 22)
Cato fearing the rising power of Pompey and wishing to moderate his ambition allies with Lucullus
against Pompey only to find that in so doing he is assisting Caesar in his more far-reaching ambition.
(Life of Cato the Younger, 29-30)
By opposing Pompey's request for land for his veterans and Caesar's reasonable desire for honors such
as enjoyed by others, Cato drives Pompey and Caesar into that partnership which, later, will overthrow
the republic. Marcus Tullius Cicero begs Cato be more reasonable and save himself and the republic
through small compromises rather than sacrifice both to abstract principle. But Cato continues to
withstand Caesar's attempts at reforms. (Life of Cato the Younger, 31-33)
Cicero, the orator, who urged upon him that it was perhaps not even right in itself, that a
private man should oppose what the public had decreed; that the thing being already past
altering, it were folly and madness to throw himself into danger, without the chance of
doing his country any good; it would be the greatest of all evils, to embrace, as it were,
the opportunity to abandon the commonwealth, for whose sake he did everything, and to
let it fall into the hands of those who designed nothing but its ruin, as if he were glad to
be saved from the trouble of defending it. "For," said he, "though Cato have no need of
Rome, yet Rome has need of Cato, and so likewise have all his friends." –Life of Cato the
Younger, 31.
Seeing that the great men are intent on seizing power and that the people, far from fighting for the
republic are happy to see the advance of a Caesar or Pompey if only they will bring some order to the
city, Cato advises Cicero in Rome, Ptolemy in Cyprus, and the other Ptolemy in Egypt each to reconcile
himself to the present situation and so save self and country; none follows his advice. As for himself, he
refuses to even consider such a compromise with those who would alter the forms of the republic which
had come down from ancient times. (Life of Cato the Younger, 35)
When, Pompey, Crassus, and Caesar form the first triumvirate in 60 B.C. they bribe the people to keep
Cato out of office. (Life of Cato the Younger, 41-42) Pompey continues to assist in the rise of Caesar,
not heeding Cato's warning that Caesar, once secure, would turn on Pompey. And Cato warns the people
of the danger from such ambitious men.
But Cato, before the voting began, went up into the place of speaking, and desiring to be
heard, was with much difficulty allowed two hours to speak. Having spent that time in
informing them and reasoning with them, and in foretelling to them much that was to
come, he was not suffered to speak any longer; but as he was going on, a sergeant came
and pulled him down; yet when he was down, he still continued speaking in a loud voice,
and finding many to listen to him, and join in his indignation. Then the sergeant took him,
and forced him out of the forum; but as soon as he got loose, he returned again to the
place of speaking, crying out to the people to stand by him. –Life of Cato the Younger,
43.
But the people do not stand by him and finally Cato, seeing that city in disorder and Pompey the least
harmful of the contenders for sole rule, reconciles with Pompey. And with Caesar marching on Rome,
Cato advises the senate to put all into the hands of Pompey. (Life of Cato the Younger, 48-52)
Unfortunately, by the time Cato relents and backs Pompey it is too late. Caesar has the army and the
people on his side. As we know from Plutarch's lives of Pompey and of Caesar, Pompey is overthrown
by Caesar at Pharsalia in 48 B.C. Cato follows Pompey to Egypt where Pompey is destroyed through the
treachery of the Egyptians. There Cato takes command and fortifies Utica. There he assembles his
council of 300 Roman businessmen and some senators, urging them to stick together the better to stand
against Caesar and, failing of that, the better to treat for peace with Caesar as a body rather than singly.
The Romans in Utica have such confidence in Cato that they elect to follow him into combat against
Caesar and resolve to free their slaves that these might join in the battle. Cato, rather than following
through with freeing and arming the slaves immediately, while all are excited and ready to join him,
equivocates and quibbles about the technical legality of such a commandeering of private property for
the public defense and, so, loses the moment. (Life of Cato the Younger, 56-60)
One of the assembly proposed the making a decree, to set the slaves at liberty; and most
of the rest approved the motion. Cato said, that it ought not to be done, for it was neither
just nor lawful; but if any of their masters would willingly set them free, those that were
fit for service should be received. Many promised so to do; whose names he ordered to be
enrolled, and then withdrew. –Life of Cato the Younger, 60.
The senators undertake to do what is needed to fight for liberty but the merchants and money-lenders
accept the dictatorship of Caesar. The cavalry arrives but cannot agree on the best plan for withstanding
Caesar. During the fateful period of Cato's vacillation the businessmen resolve to oppose Cato and throw
their lot in with Caesar. Cato leaves the businessmen free to embrace Caesarism and he evacuates the
senators to safety. (Life of Cato the Younger, 61-64)
Seeing no way out, Cato chooses death over life under tyranny. He sups with friends and discusses
philosophy and then passes his last evening reading Plato the philosopher. (Life of Cato the Younger,
66-68)
When the company was broke up, he walked with his friends, as he used to do after supper, gave
the necessary orders to the officers of the watch, and going into his chamber, he embraced his
son and every one of his friends with more than usual warmth, which again renewed their
suspicion of his design. Then laying himself down, he took into his hand Plato's dialogue
concerning the soul –Life of Cato the Younger, 68.
In the early morning hours, Cato takes his own life.
Plutarch's digressions on Cato's odd behavior which cases him to be ill spoken of reveal much about the
flawed character of Cato.
For he would often come to the court without his shoes, and sit upon the bench without any
under garment, and in this attire would give judgment in capital causes, and upon persons of the
highest rank. It is said, also, he used to drink wine after his morning meal, and then transact the
business of his office; but this was wrongfully reported of him. –Life of Cato the Younger, 44.
Likewise, Plutarch comments on Cato's unconventional views regarding marriage.
Among many that loved and admired Cato, some were more remarkable and conspicuous than
others. Of these was Quintus Hortensius, a man of high repute and approved virtue, who desired
not only to live in friendship and familiarity with Cato, but also to unite his whole house and
family with him by some sort or other of alliance in marriage. Therefore he set himself to
persuade Cato, that his daughter Porcia, who was already married to Bibulus, and had borne
him two children, might nevertheless be given to him, as a fair plot of land, to bear fruit also for
him. "For," said he, "though this in the opinion of men may seem strange, yet in nature it is
honest, and profitable for the public, that a woman in the prime of her youth should not lie
useless, and lose the fruit of her womb, nor, on the other side, should burden and impoverish one
man, by bringing him too many children. Also by this communication of families among worthy
men, virtue would increase, and be diffused through their posterity; and the commonwealth
would be united and cemented by their alliances." Yet if Bibulus would not part with his wife
altogether, he would restore her as soon as she had brought him a child, whereby he might be
united to both their families. Cato answered, that he loved Hortensius very well, and much
approved of uniting their houses, but he thought it strange to speak of marrying his daughter,
when she was already given to another. Then Hortensius, turning the discourse, did not hesitate
to speak openly and ask for Cato's own wife, for she was young and fruitful, and he had already
children enough. Neither can it be thought that Hortensius did this, as imagining Cato did not
care for Marcia; for, it is said, she was then with child. Cato, perceiving his earnest desire, did
not deny his request, but said that Philippus, the father of Marcia, ought also to be consulted.
Philippus, therefore, being sent for, came; and finding they were well agreed, gave his daughter
Marcia to Hortensius in the presence of Cato, who himself also assisted at the marriage. –Life of
Cato the Younger, 25.
Showing up at the senate half-dressed and half-loaded and treating his wife and daughter as brood-mares
are queer behaviors in ours, or Cato's, or any time. Such actions mark a man whose affections are
seriously disordered through a lack of self-awareness about want is proper and improper conduct.
Perhaps Plutarch includes these observations so we can make the connection between character, as
manifest in personal conduct and success or failure of the leader. Just as he failed to properly order his
personal and family life, so Cato failed to heed his own sound advice to others to accept some of the
changes Caesar was introducing to the republic. The result was Cato's destruction at his own hand with
Caesar's rise to power not seriously inhibited by Cato's protestations.
(b) A Reasonable Path Forward
CICERO,
106-43 B.C.
Marcus Tullius Cicero (106–43 B.C.) presents as a warning on intemperate and untimely speech. Cicero
was known for his wit, but he often used it injudiciously. According to Plutarch, "he excited much ill
feeling by his readiness to attack anyone for the sake of a jest...[and] by this habit he made himself
odious with many people." (Life of Cicero, 27-28) In that regard Cicero deserves the over-, and often
wrongly-, used epithet, tragic for, it was indeed his powerful, clear, and prescient pronouncements
against tyranny that earned him the disfavor of tyrants and cost him his head.
However, we were amiss to dwell on Cicero's failure to preserve the Republic. The Republic was
already far gone in the 60s and 50s B.C. The Senate and rich men of Rome blocked every reasonable
attempt at reform so that even a Cicero advocating sound constitutionalism with the most persuasive
rhetoric could little avail in the face of massive self-willed ignorance on the part of the "best men." And
Cicero had the bad luck to lack capable partners in his quest for restoration of the ancient system of
checks and balances. Indeed, the most capable Roman of the period, Caius Julius Caesar, was, from a
Ciceronian perspective, the problem, not a fellow-worker in the solution.
Yes, Cicero saw the faults in the Roman Republic. Further, he developed a sophisticated theory of
constitutional government aimed at mending the faults and tirelessly, and at great personal peril,
advocated for reform. His monuments are the modern (eighteenth century to today) western
democracies. John Adams wrote that "all the ages of the world have not produced a greater statesman
and philosopher united in the same character." Our American constitution was created not for an
unmitigated democracy as Athens of the fifth century B.C., nor for the Caesarism of the Roman Empire,
but for a Ciceronian Republic.
Cicero was not the richest, the most powerful, the most well-connected, or the most naturally endowed
man in Rome. In a militaristic culture, he was not a man of action on the field of honor. Wealthy Crassus
or financially inventive Caesar easily out-spent Cicero in throwing public entertainments. He was
morally incapable of sinking to the then nearly universal practice of bribing voters. Yet he rose to the
highest office, consul, and guided Rome safely through her gravest internal convulsion, the conspiracy
of Catiline, a bankrupt and reckless noble who plotted nothing short of complete destruction of the
established order.
This remarkable career was supported on two grand pillars: his unshakeable belief that a man's duty is to
search out what wants doing and do it, and his devotion to the right use of rhetoric to teach and lead the
people in the way they should go.
For as soon as he was of an age to begin to have lessons, he became so distinguished for his
talent, and got such a name and reputation amongst the boys, that their fathers would often visit
the school, that they might see young Cicero, and might be able to say that they themselves had
witnessed the quickness and readiness in learning for which he was renowned...And afterwards,
when he applied himself more curiously to these accomplishments, he had the name of being not
only the best orator, but also the best poet of Rome. And the glory of his rhetoric still remains. -Life of Cicero, 2.
He studied philosophy seriously and emerged as a synthesizer and popularizer of Greek learning. While
he was not the most original thinking of the ancient world, he was one of the most influential as he
summed up the accumulated centuries of philosophical and political thought and presented his
summations in a compelling manner. In Athens he sought out voice teachers and instructors in the arts of
rhetoric to train his voice and mind for public speaking. And as an advocate arguing cases in Rome he
perfected the arts of persuasion. (Life of Cicero, 3-4)
His brilliance as pleader at the bar and his justice while holding office of judge won Cicero the support
of the commons and the aristocracy alike. (Life of Cicero, 9-10) As a relatively young man, with little
prior experience, and little by way of money or connections to advance him, Cicero was elected to the
highest office in Rome. As consul, or chief magistrate, Cicero exposed and put down the Catilinian
conspiracy, saved Rome, and was proclaimed Father of his Country. (Life of Cicero, 11-23)
Well, as the opening quotation has it "If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man," and
Cicero, being human was imperfect. He was overly vainglorious and more than a bit of a braggart.
...he created himself much envy, and offended very many, not by any evil action, but because he
was always lauding and magnifying himself. For neither senate, nor assembly of the people, nor
court of judicature could meet, in which he was not heard to talk of [Cicero's vanquishing of]
Catiline and Lentulus. Indeed, he also filled his books and writings with his own praises, to such
an excess as to render a style, in itself most pleasant and delightful, nauseous and irksome to his
hearers; this ungrateful humor, like a disease, always cleaving to him. --Life of Cicero, 24.
His "ribbing" of others --sometime just criticism; sometimes (to borrow a phrase from Dorothy Parker1)
simply calisthenics with words, set powerful men against Cicero. Wealthy Crassus had been an
important ally in exposing and routing out the conspiracy in 63 B.C., but Crassus' wealth was not always
honorably gotten and Cicero censured him, thus creating, in the richest man in Rome, a formidable
enemy. Cicero, needing powerful friends, attached to Julius Caesar, but, flattered by the disreputable and
destructive Clodius, he deserted Caesar, who, feeling ill-used turned against Cicero and, in turn, turned
Pompey against Cicero as well. This left Cicero with the most powerful men in Rome all arrayed against
him. (Life of Cicero, 30)
He did manage to restore a friendship with Pompey the Great, at the time Rome's most successful
general. But by then Pompey's star was sinking as Caesar's rose and the alliance merely further separated
Cicero from the powerful Caesar. Pompey made not much use of Cicero in any event. And Cicero's old
habit of wise-cracking popped up again, hindering his advance in Pompey's service. (Life of Cicero, 38)
When, in 48 B.C., Caesar defeated Pompey at Battle of Pharsalia and entered Rome as sole ruler, Cicero
retired to teach philosophy. (Life of Cicero, 39-40) He soon answered once again the call of public life
in one of the most dramatic episodes in the history of Rome.
He had no concern in the design that was now forming against Caesar, although, in general, he
was Brutus's most principal confidant, and one who was as aggrieved at the present, and as
desirous of the former state of public affairs, as any other whatsoever. But they feared his
temper, as wanting courage, and his old age, in which the most daring dispositions are apt to be
timorous. --Life of Cicero, 42.
In the general confusion following the assassination, Cicero, in his favorite role of presiding in the
senate, restored order, saw to getting Brutus and Cassius sent off to administer far-flung provinces and
so averted, for the time, civil war. But when Antony presented himself as sole rule to replace Caesar,
and Octavian arrived presenting his claims as Caesar's heir, Cicero attached himself to Octavian,
believing him less a threat to Roman liberties than the passionate and unruly Anthony. Sadly, Cicero
miscalculated. Octavian did not believe himself strong enough to take on Antony at that time, nor weak
enough to need flee and abandon his claim. Rather, Octavian, with Antony and Lepidus formed the
Second Triumvirate and set out to carve up Rome amongst themselves. Antony wanted Cicero killed and
Octavian, while having offered token resistant, yielded and agreed to desert Cicero. (Life of Cicero, 4346)
1
The complete quotation is, "Wit has truth in it; wisecracking is simply calisthenics with words."
Perhaps it was just one-too-many "cracks" about his drinking that drove Antony to have the weak and
elderly Cicero hunted down and killed on December 17, 43 B.C. History records that after chopping off
Cicero's head, Antony's henchmen cut off the hand that wrote the Philippics against Antony. Antony's
wife drove a pen through the orator's eloquently piercing tongue. In death, the reputation of Cicero
quickly rose, as Plutarch obverses:
Some long time after, Caesar [Octavian], I have been told, visiting one of his daughter's
sons, found him with a book of Cicero's in his hand. The boy for fear endeavored to hide
it under his gown; which Caesar [Octavian] perceiving, took it from him, and turning
over a great part of the book standing, gave it him again, and said, "My child, this was a
learned man, and a lover of his country." --Life of Cicero, 49.
And across the centuries, that tongue has spoken clearly to those who would hear his admonition "You
see the situation. Now consider what ought to be done" (Cicero, In Defense of the Manilian Law). And
Cicero's writings have survived as guides for those who ask, and welcome the answer to, the question,
"how shall we live our lives?"
In the next lecture we'll look at the life of Julius Caesar. For supplemental reading you might look at the
lives of Pompey and Crassus, Caesar's colleagues in the first (unofficial) triumvirate which ruled Rome
from 60 to 54 B.C. With Crassus we see yet another unsuccessful approach to the question of how to
restore order to the dying republic. Crassus, the richest man in Rome, sought to buy influence, but found
that all he had purchased was the advancement of his rivals Caesar. In Pompey the Great, Caesar might
have found a formidable rival, but by ostensibly bringing Pompey into his enterprise as coruler, he
pacified Pompey while Caesar prepared for the coming battle that Pompey didn't anticipate. Caesar also
positioned himself much better for popular civil rule at home even while in far-off Gaul by sending
home his reports from the front -- his commentaries. Also for next week, read the Life of Brutus, up
through the March 15, 44 B.C., when Brutus assassinates Julius Caesar.
(1) The man with the plan that the March 15th conspirators lacked
7 .The Center Cannot Hold, 60 B.C.-March 15,
44 B.C.
(a) The Wealth of Crassus Creates Pompey and Caesar.
CRASSUS,
c. 115-53 B.C.
(1) Orphaned when the populares murder his father, 87 B.C.
When Marius and Cinna came to power in 87 B.C. the father of Crassus was among the many leading
citizen of Rome murdered. Crassus built his political career, such as it was, as a champion of the
optimates in opposition to the Marian party.
(2) Grew rich on the misfortunes of others.
Crassus came from an honorable family and enjoyed a reputation for a well-ordered life, but for one
flaw, his avarice which lead him to his fall and to calamity for the Roman republic.
People were wont to say that the many virtues of Crassus were darkened by the one vice of
avarice, and indeed he seemed to have no other but that; for it being the most predominant,
obscured others to which he was inclined.--Life of Crassus, 2.
Moreover, the way he became so rich --profiting from the misfortune of those proscribed by Sylla and of
those losing their homes to fire, and in traffic in slaves, showed a mean-spirited disposition in Crassus.
For when Sylla seized the city, and exposed to sale the goods of those that he had caused to be
slain, accounting them booty and spoils... and was desirous of making as many, and as eminent
men as he could, partakers in the crime, Crassus never was the man that refused to accept, or
give money for them. Moreover observing how extremely subject the city was to fire, and falling
down of houses, by reason of their height and their standing so near together, he bought slaves
that were builders and architects, and when he had collected these to the number of more than
five hundred, he made it his practice to buy houses that were on fire, and those in the
neighborhood, which, in the immediate danger and uncertainty, the proprietors were willing to
part with for little, or nothing; so that the greatest part of Rome, at one time or other, came into
his hands... And though he had many silver mines, and much valuable land, and laborers to work
in it, yet all this was nothing in Comparison of his slaves, such a number and variety did he
possess of excellent readers, amanuenses, silversmiths, stewards, and table-waiters...But it was
surely a mistaken judgment, when he said no man was to be accounted rich that could not
maintain an army at his own cost..." --Life of Crassus, 2.
Crassus, in his affection for money was very unlike the noble-minded Cato the Younger who used his
personal wealth to relieve his friends (Life of Cato the Younger, 6) and Tiberius and Caius Gracchus
whom Plutarch commended for "their superiority to money" (Comparison of the Gracchi with Agis and
Cleomenes, 1).
(3) The rebellion of Spartacus, 73-71 B.C.
The servile rebellion began when 78 gladiators made their escape with kitchen cutlery and seized a city.
But with the brilliant and inspiring Spartacus at the head of the rebellion, it quickly attracted followers
and Spartacus with his army defeated Romans in several battles and seemed to threaten Rome herself.
Plutarch records with great respect the estimable qualities of this man who was such a threat to Roman
order.
Spartacus was chief, a Thracian of one of the nomad tribes, and a man not only of high spirit
and valiant, but in understanding, also, and in gentleness, superior to his condition, and more of
a Grecian than the people of his country usually are. When he first came to be sold at Rome, they
say a snake coiled itself upon his face as he lay asleep, and his wife, who at this latter time also
accompanied him in his flight, his country-woman, a kind of prophetess, and one of those
possessed with the bacchanal frenzy, declared that it was a sign portending great and formidable
power to him with no happy event. --Life of Crassus, 8.
Crassus was put in charge of the war against Spartacus and defeated him in 71 B.C. But Pompey,
returning from putting down the rebellion of Sertorius in Spain, returns to Italy in time to join in
finishing off the slave rebellion and gets credit for ending the war. As military leader, his sole major
accomplishment, the suppression of the servile rebellion, he must share with Pompey. His Life, as
recorded by Plutarch, shows no important accomplishments as civic leader. All that is notable of Crassus
is his wealth, which will be used to promote other men ahead of him. Crassus will descend into
destructive envy as he sees Pompey and Caesar consistently honored about him.
(4) Consul with Pompey, 70 B.C.
In 70 B.C. the wealth of Crassus buys the election to the consulship of Crassus and Pompey. In this
consulship, as in his term as censor five years later, Crassus accomplished little. Furthermore, he finds
that Pompey, who had already taken credit for Crassus' victory over Spartacus, uses the offices that
Crassus buys for him to establish himself as the principle leader of the optimates in the government.
Perhaps it is the frustration over his being relegated to inaction that prompts Crassus to toy with joining
the Catilinian Conspiracy of 63 B.C. The extent of his involvement is unclear, and he emerges for the
affair unharmed.
(5) The First Triumvirate, 60-54 B.C.
Also implicated, but not formally indicted in the Conspiracy of Catiline, was Julius Caesar. Having
failed to learn his lesson from Pompey who first used Crassus to advance himself and quickly surpassed
Crassus, Crassus lends his wealth to Caesar, as well as Pompey. Together the three form the first
(unofficial) triumvirate. Pompey and Caesar will rule Rome from 60 to 54 B.C., while giving Crassus of
the honor of paying for their illegal combination that has supplanted the constitution of the republic.
How one handles money, and the proper ordering of affections with regard to riches are important
recurring themes in Plutarch. The Lives are full of cautionary tales of men who ruined themselves and
their countries through love of money. In fact, the final fall of Crassus, at the battle of Carrhae in 53
B.C., one of Rome's worst defeats, was, according to Plutarch, caused as much by the greedy and
envious nature of Crassus as it was by barbarian duplicity.
Besides, he spent his time in Syria more like an usurer than a general, not in taking an account
of the arms, and in improving the skill and discipline of his soldiers, but in computing the
revenue of the cities, wasting many days in weighing by scale and balance...issuing requisitions
for levies of soldiers upon particular towns...and then again withdrawing them on payment of
sums of money, by which he lost his credit and became despised. –Life of Crassus, 17.
And so ends Crassus.
(b) The Rise and Fall of Pompey
POMPEY,
106-48 B.C.
(1) Rises as Sylla's lieutenant
Pompey the Great (106-48 B.C.) was from a plebian family and his father was ill-regarded of the people.
However, Pompey quickly overcame his origins by matching his noble character to his good looks. As
was normal for a Roman youth, he entered military service. The dictator Sylla, pleased with Pompey's
conduct of the war in North African against followers of Marius who are attempting an assault on Sylla
and Rome, is the first who first honored Pompey with the attribution "The Great." He was honored with
a triumph in Rome and as Sylla's power was on the decline; that of Pompey was ascendant. (Life of
Pompey, 13-14).
Civil war yet again rent the Roman Empire as Sertorius battled on in Spain. Pompey went to Spain to
put down Sertorius' rebellion. Pompey pacified Spain; destroyed certain treasonous letters he found lest
they become the occasion of continued civil war. (Life of Pompey, 17-20).
In the meantime Sertorius died, being treacherously murdered by some of his own party; and
Perpenna, the chief among them, took the command, and attempted to carry on the same
enterprises with Sertorius... Pompey therefore marched directly against, Perpenna... Pompey
appeared suddenly with all his army and joining battle, gave him a total overthrow... Pompey
guided by a high minded policy and a deliberate counsel for the security of his country. For
Perpenna, having in his custody all Sertorius's papers, offered to produce several letters from
the greatest men in Rome, who, desirous of a change and subversion of the government, had
invited Sertorius into Italy. And Pompey, fearing that these might be the occasion of worse wars
than those which were now ended, thought it advisable to put Perpenna to death, and burnt the
letters without reading them. --Life of Pompey, 20.
Pompey returns to Italy to find the country convulsed by the slave rebellion of Spartacus. Pompey and
Crassus share in the victory over Spartacus in 71 B.C. He enjoys a second triumph. (Life of Pompey,
21).
(2) Clears the seas of pirates, 67 B.C.
While Rome wearied herself in civil war pirates seized control of the seas. Pompey is sent out to
suppress the pirates, under a proposal to grant him broad powers at sea and up to 50 miles inland.
Pompey receives command of the mission to put down the pirates in 67 B.C. He deftly deflects the envy
that this grand appointment was bound to engender.
The assembly broke up for that day; and when the day was come, on which the bill was to pass
by suffrage into a decree, Pompey went privately into the country; but hearing that it was passed
and confirmed, he resumed again into the city by night, to avoid the envy that might be
occasioned by the concourse of people that would meet and congratulate him. The next morning
he came abroad and sacrificed to the gods, and having audience at an open assembly, so
handled the matter that they enlarged his power, giving him many things besides what was
already granted, and almost doubling the preparation appointed in the former decree. --Life of
Pompey, 26.
He shrewdly gets some of the pirates to turn themselves in and betray their fellows, having received
from Pompey an offer of mercy. In the space of three months Pompey ends the threat from piracy. (Life
of Pompey, 24-28).
(3) Third Mithridatic War, 75-63 B.C.
The Third, and last, of Rome's wars against Mithridates in the East, was prosecuted more-or-less to
Completion by Lucius Licnius Lucullus, but Pompey, in a move similar to his eleventh hour appearance
at the slave rebellion in 71 B.C. , shows up to inflict the final blows and win the triumph.
(4) Like Alexander, Pompey subdues Africa, Europe, and Asia; He celebrates his third triumph in
61 B.C.
Pompey celebrates his third triumph in 61 B.C. having subdued to Rome Africa, Europe, and Asia. Like
Alexander, Pompey has conquered the world before he was forty years old.
(5) The First Triumvirate, 60-54 B.C.
However, Pompey's figure turns tragic, as his undoing arises from the very things that made him great.
Julius Caesar is beginning his ascent to great power and he needs Pompey as a prop. Caesar reconciles
Pompey and Crassus, who have regarded each other with mistrust ever since the expedition against
Spartacus. Having the united support of Pompey the most successful general and hero of the people, and
Crassus the richest man in Rome and champion of the aristocracy, Caesar is without effective
opposition.
For [Caesar] well knew that opposite parties or factions in a commonwealth, like passengers in
a boat, serve to trim and balance the unready motions of power there; whereas if they combine
and come all over to one side, they cause a shock which will be sure to overset the vessel and
carry down everything. And therefore Cato wisely told those who charged all the calamities of
Rome upon the disagreement betwixt Pompey and Caesar, that they were in error in charging all
the crime upon the last cause; for it was not their discord and enmity, but their unanimity and I
friendship, that gave the first and greatest blow to the commonwealth. --Life of Pompey, 47.
(6) The Rise of Caesar
As popular leader Caesar enjoys unquestioning support and the older leaders, Pompey and Lucullus,
begin to retire from public affairs. With the death of Julia, wife of Pompey and daughter of Caesar in 54
B.C., the pact between Pompey and Caesar unravels. Crassus goes to his death in the Parthian expedition
the following year. His way being now open, Caesar begins, publicly, to seek honors such as those
enjoyed by Pompey. And Pompey, lead on by flatterers, is seized with the desire to bring down Caesar
whose great power Pompey has heretofore done so much to promote.
For Pompey, yielding to a feeling of exultation...and abandoning that prudent temper which had
guided him hitherto to a safe use of all his good fortune and his successes, gave himself up to an
extravagant confidence in his own, and contempt of Caesar's power; insomuch that he thought
neither force of arms nor care necessary against him, but that he could pull him down much
easier than he had set him up... --Life of Pompey, 57.
And Pompey begins to listen to flatterers who lead him on:
...telling Pompey, that he was unacquainted with his own strength and reputation, if he made use
of any other forces against Caesar than Caesar's own; for such was the soldiers' hatred to
Caesar, and their love to Pompey so great, that they would all come over to him upon his first
appearance. By these flatteries Pompey was so puffed up, and led on into such a careless
security, that he could not choose but laugh at those who seemed to fear a war; and when some
were saying, that if Caesar should march against the city, they could not see what forces there
were to resist him, he replied with a smile, bidding them be in no concern, "for," said he,
"whenever I stamp with my foot in any part of Italy, there will rise up forces enough in an
instant, both horse and foot." --Life of Pompey, 57.
And so the great struggle between Caesar and Pompey begins. And when Caesar crosses the Rubicon,
and all Rome is confused, Pompey, the senate, and consuls flee the city. This allows Caesar to enter
Rome peacefully, allaying fears that he will be another bloody dictator on the model of Sylla. And when
Caesar pursues Pompey, Pompey flees Italy, abandoning the field to Caesar (while calling it a tactical
retreat). Thus, Caesar is, within 60 days and with no bloodshed, master of Italy.
(7) Pharsalia, 48 B.C.
Pompey raises a great and glorious army and many of the best citizens flock to him. But Pompey is
overly cautious of engaging Caesar's army. He pursues Caesar, aiming to harass and wear him down
rather than risking an assault. We may question whether Pompey is merely timid or is executing a
cunning stratagem, but as long as he pursued this course Caesar was denied the out right victory that he
needed to consolidate his power. However, Pompey, fatefully, abandons his well-considered plan to
follow the cries of flatterers and of the mob who urge him on to combat at Pharsalia in 48 B.C. Plutarch
observes that it was not fated that Pompey should fight and lose to Caesar at Pharsalia. Pompey had
more resources and could have delayed engaging until at a more favorable place, but he allowed himself
to be swayed by faulty counsel.
Heaven had not appointed the Pharsalian fields to be the stage and theater upon which they
should contend for the empire of Rome, neither was he summoned thither by any herald upon
challenge, with intimation that he must either undergo the combat, or surrender the prize to
another. There were many other fields, thousands of cities, and even the whole earth placed at
his command, by the advantage of his fleet, and his superiority at sea...Pompey, whose error had
been occasioned by others, found those his accusers whose advice had misled him. --Comparison
Pompey with Agesilaus, 4.
After the defeat at Pharsalia, Pompey flees to Egypt where one of his own men basely kills him on the
orders of the Egyptian king.
(c) The Rise and Fall of Caesar
JULIUS CAESAR,
100-44 B.C.
(1) Youth, influences, and character
(i) Ambition
According to Suetonius (The Twelve Caesars) Caius Julius Caesar lost his father at age 15. Plutarch's
narrative, which is thought to have lost its opening chapter, lacks an account of the dictator's early
boyhood, and opens with the teenager, the nephew of Marius the great rival of the tyrant Sylla, already
attracting attention as a threat to Sylla. Early on Caesar showed the passion for distinction that marked
his entire life. He remarked to friends that he would rather be the first man in an obscure village in Gaul
than second man in grand and glorious Rome. And when, in Spain in his mid thirties, Caesar read a
biography of Alexander the Great, he wept at the thought of how little he had accomplished compared to
the Macedonian. (Life of Caesar, 11-12).
Like Alexander, Caesar will be a conqueror and empire-builder. In battles, such as at Alesia where,
outnumbered five to one, he simultaneously defeated two Gallic armies, one in the town, besieged by
Caesar, the other behind him, besieging Caesar; he took as a trophy the Gallic king Vercingetorix; and
finally subdued Gaul as a Roman province, Caesar proved a military leader worthy of his uncle Marius
the great commander. But to his native talent for leadership and the organization he inherited from
Marius, Caesar added what Marius lacked, a liberal education in philosophy and rhetoric. Thus equipped
Caesar was ready to take his place as a leader of men not only on the battlefield but in the Roman forum
and senate house.
Sylla's power being now on the decline, Caesar's friends advised him to return to Rome,
but he went to Rhodes, and entered himself in the school of Apollonius, Molon's son, a
famous rhetorician, one who had the reputation of a worthy man, and had Cicero for one
of his scholars. Caesar is said to have been admirably fitted by nature to make a great
statesman and orator, and to have taken such pains to improve his genius this way, that
without dispute he might challenge the second place. --Life of Caesar, 3
(ii) Use of Money
Early in this life, Plutarch presents Caesar's advantageous use of money. After bribing his way to
freedom from Sylla's henchmen, the boy Caesar flees Sylla only to be captured by pirates. Again, in a
pattern that will recur in Caesar's life, he uses money to good advantage. When the pirates demand 20
talents ransom he jokes that they must not know who he is, else they would have asked for more.
Ransomed, released, and then returned with reinforcements, he makes good on another boast, one the
pirates also mistook for a joke, that he would see them all hanged (Life of Caesar, 1-2).
In the episode with the pirates, Caesar gives early evidence that, as Plutarch write:
Caesar was born to do great things, and had a passion after honor, and the many noble
exploits he had done did not now serve as an inducement to him to sit still and reap the
fruit of his past labors, but were incentives and encouragements to go on, and raised in
him ideas of still greater actions, and a desire of new glory, as if the present were all
spent. --Life of Caesar, 58
It was a passion unlimited by fear of death, of which Caesar famously said that it was "better to suffer
death once, than always to live in fear of it."
(iii) Use of Rhetoric
As public speaker and writer of persuasive prose, Caesar was second only to Cicero among the men of
his generation. But Cicero was no military leader, just as Marius was no deep thinker or civic leader. In
Caesar, military command and political strategy combine. His victories on the field were followed by
election to high office not merely chronologically, but as Caesar had planned, as an integration of the
martial and civic virtues in one compleat man. Indeed, we know in detail of Caesar's victory at Alesia,
and his other victories in Gaul, from Caesar's own Commentaries. And even while campaigning, Caesar
constantly was sending dispatches back to Rome in, perhaps, the first ever military public relations
campaign.
(2) The first triumvirate, 60-54 B.C.
As, under Caesar, the government of Rome began to resolve first on a few and finally one man, the place
for orators and political theorists such as Cicero grew smaller. Indeed, as the Republic collapsed, Cicero
spent much of his public career lending his talents to one or another of the various strong men who
sought legitimacy through Cicero's skillful use of rhetoric. Caesar, having mastered that art himself,
passed over Cicero and, for his first triumvirate enlisted Pompey and Crassus. This trio of Caesar,
Pompey, and Crassus ruled Rome for from 60 to 54 B.C. Caesar's choice of co-rulers demonstrated his
foresight and resourcefulness.
Pompey, known as the The Great because of his early military and policing successes, was, as an ally,
less of a threat to Caesar than he would be as an open rival, at least in the early rise of Caesar. But
Caesar would be first, not one of three. And Caesar saw, from the beginning that a grand struggle
between these two for domination of Rome was inevitable. Therefore he planned for the conflict while
Pompey did not. Caesar's bonuses to his soldiers and promises of lands for them to retire to after the
wars cemented them to him. His mild and lenient treatment, even of opponents whose lives he spared,
and the reasonableness of his request for nothing more than the honors conferred on Pompey, were
shrewd propaganda. After the death of Crassus, as the struggle between Pompey and Caesar escalated,
Pompey was advanced to sole ruler of Rome, while Caesar was outlawed. But when Caesar marched on
Rome the unprepared and uncomprehending Pompey fled with most of the senate. Caesar, officially
enemy of Rome, illegally brought his armies into the city and then pursued, engaged, and defeated the
legally constituted government-in-exile and came off as the savior, not enemy, of Rome. In a moving
scene at the beginning of the 1960s Hollywood motion picture Cleopatra, Caesar surveys the many
Roman dead slain at the battle at Pharsalia in 48 B.C., and declares, convincingly, "'Twas Pompey
wanted it so; not I." And so history remembers it for in this case the victory literally wrote the history.
The third triumvir, Crassus, was never a political rival for Caesar. The low nasty money-grubbing
character of Crassus alienated him from the people's affection and from any serious chance at a
successful public course of honor. And his military judgment was faulty. In fact, later, after serving
Caesar's purpose as sometime ally, Crassus, goaded on by the wily Caesar, set forth on a disastrous
expedition to Parthia where he and a huge Roman force were annihilated in 53 B.C. What Caesar saw in
Crassus was money. Not money to enrich himself, as Crassus had done, but money for what it could do.
Caesar observed, as others had not, that in the corruption of the late Republic, the traditional course to
leadership --military success recognized in a triumph followed by stump speeches calculated to get the
conquering hero elected to a consulship, had to be augmented with bribes for votes. It was Crassus'
money that Caesar used to buy those votes. He also went deeply into debt buying today's honors with
tomorrow's money.
He was so profuse in his expenses, that before he had any public employment, he was in
debt thirteen hundred talents, and many thought that by incurring such expense to be
popular, he changed a solid good for what would prove but short and uncertain return;
but in truth he was purchasing what was of the greatest value at an inconsiderable rate. -Life of Caesar, 5
(i) His Fellow Triumvirs
(ii) Wars in Gaul
(3) Dictator, 46-44 B.C.
(i) For the first time since 100 B.C. there is no blood-letting
(4) The assassination plot
(i) The conspirators
Marcus Brutus thought to be descended from that earlier Junius Brutus who drove out the last of the
kings of Rome.
CASSIUS, d. 42 B.C.
Of the part Brutus played in the assassination people see only noble motives; of Cassius', the baser.
Caius Ligarius, from envy of Caesar also worked to enlist Brutus in the conspiracy.
"Vile" Casca, Decimus Brutus, Cinna.
Cicero, at about age 62, thought too timid to be included in the conspiracy.
(ii) Brutus
BRUTUS,
85-42 B.C.
Believed to be descended from the Brutus who drove out the last of the kings of Rome.
Cato [the Younger] the philosopher was brother to Servilia, the mother of Brutus, and he it was whom of
all the Romans his nephew most admired and studied to imitate, and he afterwards married his daughter
Porcia.
Plutarch reports Caesar's high regard for Brutus. In fact Caesar had had a notorious affair with Brutus'
mother and there was, at least in Plutarch's day, a rumor about that Brutus may have actually been
Caesar's son (unlikely as Caesar was just 15 years old when Brutus was born, and the affair with
Servilia, at least what we know of it, was years later.)
Although Pompey had killed Brutus' father, Brutus judged Pompey to be better for the commonwealth,
and, therefore, supported him against Caesar. After Pompey's defeat at the battle of Pharsalia in 48 B.C.,
Caesar forgave Brutus from battling against him, and, at the request of Brutus, forgives Cassius as well.
(iii) Porcia.
Porcia as was said before, was the daughter of Cato, and Brutus, her cousin-german, had
married her very young... This Porcia, being addicted to philosophy, a great lover of her
husband, and full of an understanding courage, resolved not to inquire into Brutus's secrets
before she had made this trial of herself. She turned all her attendants out of her chamber, and,
taking a little knife, such as they use to cut nails with, she gave herself a deep gash in the thigh;
upon which followed a great flow of blood, and, soon after, violent pains and a shivering fever,
occasioned by the wound. Now when Brutus was extremely anxious and afflicted for her, she, in
the height of all her pain, spoke thus to him: "I, Brutus, being the daughter of Cato, was given to
you in marriage, not like a concubine, to partake only in the common intercourse of bed and
board, but to bear a part in all your good and all your evil fortunes; and for your part, as
regards your care for me, I find no reason to complain; but from me, what evidence of my love,
what satisfaction can you receive, if I may not share with you in bearing your hidden griefs, nor
be admitted to any of your counsels that require secrecy and trust? I know very well that women
seem to be of too weak a nature to be trusted with secrets; but certainly, Brutus, a virtuous birth
and education, and the company of the good and honorable, are of some force to the forming our
manners; and I can boast that I am the daughter of Cato and the wife of Brutus, in which two
titles though before I put less confidence, yet now I have tried myself, and find that I can bid
defiance to pain." Which words having spoken, she showed him her wound, and related to him
the trial that she had made of her constancy; at which he being astonished, lifted up his hands to
heaven, and begged the assistance of the gods in his enterprise, that he might show himself a
husband worthy of such a wife as Porcia. So then he comforted his wife. --Life of Brutus, 13.
SHAKESPEARE --Julius Caesar, II:1
grant I am a woman; but withal
A woman that Lord Brutus took to wife:
I grant I am a woman; but withal
A woman well reputed, Cato's daughter.
Think you I am no stronger than my sex,
Being so father'd and so husbanded?
Tell me your counsels, I will not disclose 'em.
I have made strong proof of my constancy,
Giving myself a voluntary wound
Here in the thigh: can I bear that with patience
And not my husband's secrets?
In his tract, "The Virtues of Women," Plutarch discusses and gives examples of  (a word various
translated as "virtue" "excellence" or "bravery") of Women, setting forth 28 specific historical instances
of women founding cities, defeating enemies in battle, establishing justice and restoring domestic
tranquility.
(5) The Ides of March, 44 B.C.
Death came to Caesar, as we all know, at the hands of assassins on the Ides of March, 44 B.C. The first
blow was struck by Vile Casca; the final blow by Marcus Brutus who was as a son to Caesar and whose
life Caesar had spared after the battle of Pharsalia. The death of Caesar did not restore the ancient
Republic. Nor, indeed, did the conspirators evidence any forethought for the organization of Rome and
her empire after dispatching Caesar. Caesar's blood proved the seed of bloody civil war and Rome knew
no internal peace until another Caesar, Octavian Augustus, restored order and ended all hopes for revival
of the traditional liberty of Roman citizens to govern themselves through freely elected officers. But
thanks to the bold vision of Julius Caesar, Roman order spread to Gaul and Britain and created the
Western World.
"So the Empire might have remained, and so one would think it naturally would have
remained, a Mediterranean thing, but for that capital experiment which has determined
all future history--Julius Cæsar's conquest of Gaul...
It was this experiment--the Roman Conquest of Gaul--and its success which opened the
ancient and immemorial culture of the Mediterranean to the world."
–Hilaire Belloc, Europe and the Faith
8. Anarchy is Loosed, March 15, 44 B.C.-30 B.C.
(a) A conspiracy that is all Hands and no Head.
One wonders what would have happened had Cato survived another two years. What if he and Cicero
had added, to Cassius and Brutus' murder of Caesar, a plan for restoring the republic.
BRUTUS,
85-42 B.C.
(b) The Second Triumvirate (43-33 B.C.)
The Second Trivirate of Antony, Octavian, and Lepidus was legal impowered for fiver years to "restore
the republic." It was renewed for, apparently, another fiver years.
MARC ANTONY,
83-30 B.C.
The destructive power of unbridled sensuality. The dire prospect for a people left with no leader with
vision.
9. The New Order 30 B.C.-A.D.120
Caius' reforms of 123 B.C., while not major changes to the constitution, marked the beginning of a
major restructing of Roman society that took place over the next 80 years.
(a) Tiberius Gracchus' Lex Sempronia agraria was passed by the senate in 133 B.C., but land reform
continued be to volatile down to the end of the republic. Caesar began his rise to political
prominence in 60 B.C. as a spokesman for the landless poor (Life of Caesar, 14).
(b) The change from a citizen-farmer militia defending their homes to a professional paid army loyal
more to their general than to the idea of the city accelerates during the first consulship of Marius in
107 B.C. (Life of Marius, 9) and Caesar; Completed under Augustus. It is reported that Julius Caesar
doubled the soldiers pay. Augustus abolished the draft in favor of a professional army serving terms
of 15 to 25 years with a comfortable pension at retirement.
(c) Roman citizenship will final be extended to all of Rome's Italian allies after the Social War of 9188 B.C., between Rome and her allies (socii) who demanded rights of Roman citizenship.
(d) How the peace of the city came to be preserved through "bread and circuses" is proverbial.
(e) Transferring the power to judge in the courts away from the sole perogotive of the senate and to a
wider class will be taken up again by Marius (Life of Marius, 4) Augustus further reformed jury
service (Suetonius, Augustus, 32)
Julio-Claudian Dynasty (five emperors)
Octavian Caesar Augustus, b. 63 B.C.; ruled 31 B.C.-A.D. 14
"First Settlement", 27 B.C., the Republic restored with Octavian, now called Augustus, given ten-year
term of power and made consul.
In 23 B.C. the "Second Settlement" gave Augustus more power but fewer titles.
His colleague, Marcus Agrippa, consul in 27 B.C., built the Pantheon, which was destroyed in a fire in
A.D. 80; the current Pantheon was built under Hadrian in about 120-125.
Perhaps most notable thing is the peaceful transition to Tiberius.
Tiberius, 14-37
Caius (Caligula), 37-41
Claudius, 41-54
Nero, 54-68
The Year of the Four Emperors (A.D. 69)
GALBA, A.D. 69,
OTHO, A.D. 69.
Vitellus, A.D. 69
The Flavian Dynasty (three emperors)
Vespasian, 69-79
The Flavian Amphitheatre (Colosseum) begun (completed under Titus; with modifications under
Domitian.)
Titus, 79-81
Destruction of Jerusalem temple in 70
Vesuvius, 79
Domitian, 81-96
Nervian-Antonian Dynasty (six emperors)
Historian Edward Gibbon said of the period 96-180, "the period in the history of the world, during
which the condition of the human race was most happy and prosperous."
Nerva, 96-98
Trajan, 98-117
Hadrian, 117-138
Rebuilt the Pantheon. Hadrian's Wall. Temple of Olympian Zeus in Athens. Hadrian's Tomb (Castel
Sant-Angelo)
Antonius Pius, 138-161
Marcus Aurelius, 161-180
Commodus, 180-192