In 44BC, Julius Caesar (100-44BC) was assassinated on the Ides of March (15 March). More than two thousand years later, his life and legacy is still being debated. Is Caesar a man worthy of admiration or contempt? Was he a skillful politician of the people or an unprincipled opportunist? Anyone in the process of acquiring or broadening their worldview must answer these questions when reckoning with one of the greatest and most controversial figures in world history..
Indeed, political rivals Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton, the Secretary of State and Secretary of Treasury respectively during the administration of George Washington, held diametrically opposite views of Caesar. While Jefferson believed Caesar to have been akin to an unscrupulous tyrant, Hamilton envied his versatility, patriotism and military prowess. In forming an opinion on the remarkable life and person of Julius Caesar, one must assess not only his abilities but attempt to gauge his ultimate intentions as well.
.
Education and Ascent
.
Similar to the curriculum offered by Aristotle to Alexander The Great three centuries earlier, Julius Caesar received top-notch training in rhetoric under the tutelage of Apollonius Molon. From Molon, who had developed Cicero into one of the finest orators in the Republic, Caesar learned to how to reach an audience with an engaging delivery. From 75BC to his death thirty-one years later, Caesar would use his skills as a public speaker to win over his countrymen politically and inspire his soldiers to defend the honor of Rome.
.
Caesar, however, was not a man of mere words. He was also courageous to the point of recklessness. When taken hostage by a band of pirates in the Aegean Sea, he was insulted by the ransom demand of a mere 20 talents and asked his captors to raise the amount to 50 talents. Perhaps no person of self-respect, especially Caesar, would have settled for less. Prior to escaping, he mused that he would one day have the pirates crucified. His hosts chortled at far-fetched idea, but Caesar had the last laugh. When the regional governor decided to have Caesar's captors sold into slavery rather than given a death sentence, Caesar was outraged, and his self-fulfilled prophecy was realized as the pirates were crucified under his own authority. Long before his famous political and military exploits, both admirers and detractors of Caesar can already point to his 'greatness' or character flaws with regard to his handling of the piratical menace. While his physical strength and determination in eluding the marauders is undeniably impressive, Caesar's extra-legal vigilante crusade for justice can be variously interpreted as justifiable to a degree (executed pirates could not reconstitute as a threat) or as wholly unjustifiable in circumventing reigning authority.
.
Power and Glory
.
Shortly afterward, Caesar, now famous from his tale of treachery and redemption on the high seas, went back to Rome a hero and received the title military tribune upon election. As the years progressed, his reputation and political skills yielded additional power and titles in the Republic. By 53BC, he had attained the ranks of being a tribune, a consul and a member of the First Triumvirate (a 'rule of three') with Pompey and Crassus. Although impressive on paper, the Triumvirs did not wield powers beyond that of the Senate. Nevertheless, Caesar had earned the esteem of a significant bloc of people and the respect of his political peers.
.
Whether out of genuine concern for the downtrodden or out of political expediency (or both), Caesar introduced legislation to accord landless citizens, often impoverished, with small tillable tracts by dividing-up territory held by the state. Significantly, his measure called the use of force if necessary to implement the act. The other Triumvirs, Pompey and Crassus, had no other choice but to go along in order to avoid being eclipsed by the burgeoning popularity of Caesar.
.
Caesar then received the incredible fortune of being appointed to command an army in Gaul (modern Northern Italy and Southern France). As Caesar proceeded to eliminate all military threats in Gaul to the Republic with a string of impressive military campaigns, Crassus died in a futile attempt to subdue the Parthian kingdom, and Pompey, the only remaining Triumvir in Rome, was elected Sole Consul. Clearly, Pompey's backers in the Senate feared for the Republic. Did Caesar indeed intend to end the Roman Republic and rule autocratically or was Pompey smearing his political opponent in an attempt to amass more power for himself?
.
Alea Tacta Est
.
After defeating all enemies of the state in Gaul, Caesar wished to have his army march to Rome in a victorious celebration. Suspicious of his motives, Pompey and the Senate ordered him to step down as Gaul commander and return home as a private citizen. When he refused, Caesar himself was branded as an enemy of the state. What were his options? If he relented and gave up his army, Caesar would appear craven and submissive. It would have been the end of his political career. As the case throughout his life, Caesar neither bowed nor subordinated himself to anyone. Besides, why would Rome's greatest defender be asked to leave his command? For those partial to Caesar, Pompey was the cunning source of the political crisis. Critics of Caesar side with Pompey and the Senate. In their view, Caesar was an existential threat and ready to destroy the Republic for the sake of taking power with his minions.
.
In the winter of 49 BC (10 January), Caesar made the epochal decision to cross the Rubicon River toward Rome and uttered the famous Latin phrase 'alea tacta est' ('The die is cast'). Rome was plunged into a Civil War for years, and Caesar would once again emerge victorious. The Republic ended, and Caesar became 'dictator' (sole leader), but did he intend for both occurrences to happen or was it an inevitable consequence of a political struggle? If Pompey had defeated Caesar, would he have saved the Republic or would he have become 'dictator'? In judging Caesar, one must consider Roman politics in context with alternative hypotheticals.
.
Caesar was never able to wholly consolidate his power. On the Ides of March (15 March), 44BC, a few incorrigible members of the Senate dubbed 'The Liberators', assassinated him in the chamber.
.
The question for every generation since has been: Who was murdered on that day? Was it a political and military genius dedicated to the Roman citizens and their Republic? Or was it an arrogant opportunist and dark usurper of the state?
.
At some point or other, we must all reckon with Caesar.
.
Recommended Reading
.
1) Goldsworthy, Adrian. Caesar: Life of a Colossus. Yale University Press, 2008.
2) Meier, Christian. Caesar: A Biography. Basic Books, 1997.
.
J Roquen