By Paul Carrier
We all know the bare bones of the story. On the Ides of March (March 15) in 44 B.C., Marcus Junius Brutus, Gaius Cassius Longinus and their fellow conspirators assassinated Julius Caesar as the Roman Senate was convening.
But who were these men? What motivated them? And who was the third leader of the plot, the man who is so often overlooked that William Shakespeare downplayed his role and misspelled his name?
Those are some of the questions that Barry Strauss, a professor of history and classics at Cornell University, tackles in The Death of Caesar, a lively, eminently readable account of the events before, during and after the death of a man whose rise to power provided a bridge between the demise of the Roman Republic and the birth of the Roman Empire.
Strauss’ account reads like a thriller, as he introduces readers to all of the key players; explains their sometimes evolving relationships to Caesar; and explores the planning, execution and consequences of the most famous assassination in history.
By 44 B.C., Caesar had long been a man on the rise, partly as a result of his political and literary skills but especially because of his brilliant military record, which included the conquest of Gaul and his defeat of Pompey the Great in the civil war that ended in 48 B.C. The Senate eventually declared him dictator for life, intensifying critics' fears that his autocratic tendencies would spell the end of the Republic.
Strauss makes it clear that the conspirators — there were 60 or more, although fewer than 25 of them stabbed Caesar — had various motives for their actions. Some, such as Brutus, seem to have had a sincere desire to safeguard the Republic and protect its liberties from what they viewed as the tyranny of Caesar. Others nursed personal grudges against Caesar, and saw the plot as a self-serving opportunity to settle scores.
The Death of Caesar rounds out the cast of characters with mini-profiles of everyone from Calpurnia (Caesar’s third wife) and Cicero (who was not a conspirator but supported the assassins) to Trebonius (one of Caesar’s generals, who played a major role in the plot) and Servilia (mother of Brutus, mother-in-law of Cassius, mistress of Caesar).
And let’s not forget the third leader of the plot, along with Brutus and Cassius: Decimus Junius Brutus Albinus, a brilliant young general under Caesar whose betrayal was especially shocking because he was a close friend. According to one of the ancient accounts, it was Decimus who persuaded Caesar to ignore his misgivings about attending the Senate on the Ides of March. Decimus is said to have led Caesar from his home by the hand that morning, taking him to his rendezvous with death.
Strauss devotes considerable attention to the aftermath of the assassination as well, including the eventual defeat of the armies of Brutus and Cassius at Philippi by the combined forces of Mark Antony and Caesar’s adopted son, Octavian. That was followed, almost inevitably, by a power struggle between Antony and Octavian, setting the stage for Octavian’s emergence as Rome’s first emperor, Augustus.
In the process, Strauss provides a wealth of detail, while discarding popular myths.
No one told Caesar to beware the Ides of March, although a soothsayer warned him to be cautious during the month leading up to that date. The conspirators did not assassinate Caesar with swords because it would have been difficult to conceal them in the Senate and daggers are more practical weapons at close quarters. The claim that Caesar berated Brutus during the attack by exclaiming "Et tu, Brute?" is not found in the ancient sources. In delivering his eulogy for Caesar, Antony did not address the crowd as "Friends, Romans, Countrymen," as Shakespeare would have us believe.
To his credit, Strauss acknowledges that there’s a certain amount of educated guesswork in separating fact from fiction regarding Caesar’s demise. The best of the ancient sources — Nicolaus of Damascus, Plutarch, Suetonius, Cassius Dio and Appian — do not always agree on who did what when, or why. Some discuss key aspects of the assassination, while others omit them. And the credibility of some claims is suspect, either because the ancient writers may have rehashed unverifiable information, or because the writers themselves had an ax to grind.
Still, Strauss sorts through all of this with finesse, differentiating among "facts" that are indisputable, conceivable but unproven, or likely unreliable. What emerges is a breezy and compelling account that has a spirited plot, if that term can be applied to a work of nonfiction. Even though we know the outcome, Strauss combines careful analysis and skillful writing to keep the reader fully engaged.
Caesar was "a master commander, a deft politician, an elegant orator" and a skilled literary stylist, Strauss writes. "His victories in the field, his championship of the common man and the provinces, his wit, his verve, his charm, and his vision of reform all continue to excite admiration." But he also was a cold-blooded killer in Gaul, a man whose egotism "seemingly knew no bounds," and a dictator whose power grab sounded the death knell for the Republic, despite the efforts of Brutus and others to restore Rome's democracy after the Ides of March.
But who were these men? What motivated them? And who was the third leader of the plot, the man who is so often overlooked that William Shakespeare downplayed his role and misspelled his name?
Those are some of the questions that Barry Strauss, a professor of history and classics at Cornell University, tackles in The Death of Caesar, a lively, eminently readable account of the events before, during and after the death of a man whose rise to power provided a bridge between the demise of the Roman Republic and the birth of the Roman Empire.
Strauss’ account reads like a thriller, as he introduces readers to all of the key players; explains their sometimes evolving relationships to Caesar; and explores the planning, execution and consequences of the most famous assassination in history.
By 44 B.C., Caesar had long been a man on the rise, partly as a result of his political and literary skills but especially because of his brilliant military record, which included the conquest of Gaul and his defeat of Pompey the Great in the civil war that ended in 48 B.C. The Senate eventually declared him dictator for life, intensifying critics' fears that his autocratic tendencies would spell the end of the Republic.
Strauss makes it clear that the conspirators — there were 60 or more, although fewer than 25 of them stabbed Caesar — had various motives for their actions. Some, such as Brutus, seem to have had a sincere desire to safeguard the Republic and protect its liberties from what they viewed as the tyranny of Caesar. Others nursed personal grudges against Caesar, and saw the plot as a self-serving opportunity to settle scores.
The Death of Caesar rounds out the cast of characters with mini-profiles of everyone from Calpurnia (Caesar’s third wife) and Cicero (who was not a conspirator but supported the assassins) to Trebonius (one of Caesar’s generals, who played a major role in the plot) and Servilia (mother of Brutus, mother-in-law of Cassius, mistress of Caesar).
And let’s not forget the third leader of the plot, along with Brutus and Cassius: Decimus Junius Brutus Albinus, a brilliant young general under Caesar whose betrayal was especially shocking because he was a close friend. According to one of the ancient accounts, it was Decimus who persuaded Caesar to ignore his misgivings about attending the Senate on the Ides of March. Decimus is said to have led Caesar from his home by the hand that morning, taking him to his rendezvous with death.
Strauss devotes considerable attention to the aftermath of the assassination as well, including the eventual defeat of the armies of Brutus and Cassius at Philippi by the combined forces of Mark Antony and Caesar’s adopted son, Octavian. That was followed, almost inevitably, by a power struggle between Antony and Octavian, setting the stage for Octavian’s emergence as Rome’s first emperor, Augustus.
In the process, Strauss provides a wealth of detail, while discarding popular myths.
No one told Caesar to beware the Ides of March, although a soothsayer warned him to be cautious during the month leading up to that date. The conspirators did not assassinate Caesar with swords because it would have been difficult to conceal them in the Senate and daggers are more practical weapons at close quarters. The claim that Caesar berated Brutus during the attack by exclaiming "Et tu, Brute?" is not found in the ancient sources. In delivering his eulogy for Caesar, Antony did not address the crowd as "Friends, Romans, Countrymen," as Shakespeare would have us believe.
To his credit, Strauss acknowledges that there’s a certain amount of educated guesswork in separating fact from fiction regarding Caesar’s demise. The best of the ancient sources — Nicolaus of Damascus, Plutarch, Suetonius, Cassius Dio and Appian — do not always agree on who did what when, or why. Some discuss key aspects of the assassination, while others omit them. And the credibility of some claims is suspect, either because the ancient writers may have rehashed unverifiable information, or because the writers themselves had an ax to grind.
Still, Strauss sorts through all of this with finesse, differentiating among "facts" that are indisputable, conceivable but unproven, or likely unreliable. What emerges is a breezy and compelling account that has a spirited plot, if that term can be applied to a work of nonfiction. Even though we know the outcome, Strauss combines careful analysis and skillful writing to keep the reader fully engaged.
Caesar was "a master commander, a deft politician, an elegant orator" and a skilled literary stylist, Strauss writes. "His victories in the field, his championship of the common man and the provinces, his wit, his verve, his charm, and his vision of reform all continue to excite admiration." But he also was a cold-blooded killer in Gaul, a man whose egotism "seemingly knew no bounds," and a dictator whose power grab sounded the death knell for the Republic, despite the efforts of Brutus and others to restore Rome's democracy after the Ides of March.
No comments:
Post a Comment