The Republic was already dead, or least on its last
breath, thanks in large part to Sulla, and by an even greater degree to the greed of the
Senators.
The assassins were not looking to restore
"freedom to the people" but rather to safeguard and enhance their own
wealth.
Caesar was pushing forward land reforms that would
restore the public lands (ager publicus) to the people. The Senators had taken these
lands for themselves, farming them with slaves. Caesar sought to grant this land to
Army veterans and Roman citizens as a way of re-leaving the crushing unemployment in
Rome. He offered to purchase the land from the Senators at market
prices even though the land did not belong to the Senators in the first
place. Additionally he required that a certain percentage of farm workers be freeborn
citizens and not solely slave labor. Both of these measure would cut deeply into the
Seantor's income.
There is also the question of jealousy.
Romans were fiercely competitive, and the system of honors and offices was designed to
prevent any one person from out shining his fellow senators by too much. However this
system was proving inadequate against the onslaught of talent that characterized the
Roman leaders of the 1st century BCE. Caesar's achievements simply blew the system out
of the water.
The real question is not "Did Caesar need to
die?" but rather "What did the assassins accomplish by murdering
Caesar?"
What they achieved was not what they hoped for.
Indeed, their act made possible the rise of Octavian (Caesar's grand nephew and adopted
son) who, although not as physically brave nor as militarily or artistically gifted as
Caesar was, never the less, a shrewd politician who was able to accomplish was Caesar
could not -- a system of government that reconciled the Romans and the world at large to
the reality of the Roman Empire.
See: The Assassination Of
Julius Caesar A People's History by Michael Parenti
c2003
Caesar Life Of A Colossus by Adrian Goldsworthy
c2006
No comments:
Post a Comment