Caesar’s group would not survive Caesar’s death. Those who had been within Caesar’s inner circle were expected to return to politics as normal. There was no expectation that Caesarian domination would have a ‘legacy’. It seems clear that the assassins were of the view that the removal of Caesar would mean the restoration of Republican governance under the control of the magistrates and senate. It seems that they were listened to quietly (Plutarch, Life of Caesar 67). In the immediate aftermath of the murder, the assassins made their bid for public sympathy and to excuse their behaviour. But there was clearly a much larger group of sympathisers. We do not know precisely how many were involved in the assassination, perhaps forty. They marched away from the assassination to the Capitol. The conspirators did not see it this way. The supposed restoration of liberty could be seen as an act of tyranny by a small number of men in the senate. One of the marks of tyranny was the killing of a citizen without due process of law. Caesar was killed because he was a tyrant. It is evident that the policy failed, both because Caesar sought ways of elevating his status (presumably under political pressure) and because the assassins killed him. Forgiving his enemies also minimised the division in Roman political life: it was an offer to all that they could get along and resume politics in a normal fashion. They had attempted to kill their enemies. This was not what Sulla and Marius had done in a previous generation. many of those who had opposed him were forgiven and allowed back to the city. When Caesar had defeated Pompey, he had attempted to build consensus.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |