In what ways has Michael Parenti contributed to the Historiography of the assassination of Julius Caesar
For
nearly 2000 years the belief of why Caesar was assassinated had come
from Ancient Scholars writing in the recent years after the
assassination itself, Plutarch and Suetonius. These Historians
writing with a bias towards the rich and powerful men, tell of how
Caesar was a tyrannical leader who was only intent on becoming the
king of Rome, and was assassinated by the Optimates of the Senate of
Rome as a last effort to save the Republic. However, the modern
Historian Michael Parenti presents us with a different explanation.
He attempts to disprove the earlier reasons for the assassination and
gives us his own theory, he believes that Caesar was assassinated
because he was but one of a group of men in the Senate known as the
'Populares' that were threatening the privileged lives of the wealthy
of Rome.
Julius
Caesar the great Roman General and Censor for Life, was assassinated
in a meeting hall adjacent to Pompeys theatre on the 15th
of March 44BC. The Assassination itself is not disputed in History
and we have numerous records of the event.
As
soon as Caesar took his seat the conspirators crowded around him as
if to pay their respects. Tillius Cimber, who had taken the lead,
came up close, pretending to ask a question. Caesar made a gesture of
postponement, but Cimber caught hold of his shoulders. 'This is
violence!' Caesar cried, and at that moment one of the Casca brothers
slipped behind him and with a sweep of his dagger stabbed him just
below the throat...Twenty-three dagger thrusts went home as he stood
there1
This
single act of violence, led to a series of civil wars between Marcus
Antony and Gaius Octavius which eventually led to the fall of the
Roman Republic.
The
Pre believed reasons as stated by ancient and modern scholars alike,
including Ancient Scholars Plutarch and Suetonius was that the
conspirators and assassins were idealists that still truly believed
in the power of the Roman republic. “this was a political
Statement, the restoration of power to the senate and people of
Rome”2
The
Optimates of the senate had a strong dedication to the ancient Roman
tradition of shared power. “These men could never see their
beloved Rome ruled by a single man, it was something that they could
not bear”3.
Many of the Assassins were men who's Ancestors had fought and died
for the Republic and to preserve their constitutional freedom. But
now, they were serving the unofficial 'King' of Rome. So these men,
many friends of Caesar took action in their own hands.
We
have two main sources on Caesars Assassination; Suetonius and
Plutarch.
Gaius
Suetonius Tranquillus is an ancient Roman Historian, was born in the
Roman province of Africa at around 70 AD . He was of the Equestrian
order in the early Roman Imperial era. Being of Equestrian rank
Suetonius was one of Aristocratic class in Rome. Pliny the younger
described him as “quiet
and studious, a man dedicated to writing”4.
Suetonius
was well educated, dedicated to writing and was a part of the higher
society of Rome.
His
view on Julius Caesars Assassination comes from his book The
Twelve Caesars,
that Caesar was becoming increasingly unpopular.
Even
with the common people of Rome, but does not specify why.
Even
the commons has come to disapprove of how things were going, and no
longer hid their disgust at Caesars Tyrannical rule but openly
demanded champions to protect their ancient liberties5
Suetonius
believed that he was assassinated so that the Ancient liberties of
Rome could be Protected.
Suetonius
also states other deeds of Caesar, justified his Assassination.
Not
only did he accept unconstitutional honours, such as
life-consulship,a life dictatorship, a perpetual censorship, the
title 'emperor' put before his name, and the title 'father of his
country' appended to it, also statue standing among those of ancient
kings6
He
goes on to say that there was “few, in fact, were the honours
which he was not pleased to accept or assume”7.
Suetonius
holds the belief that Caesar even though there were still two Consuls
yearly, was Dictator of Rome, that Caesar was Assassinated because he
posed a huge risk to ending the Republic by crowning himself the king
of Rome.
Our
other major source on the assassination of Caesar is Plutarch of
Chaeronea. Plutarch is believed to be born between 45-47 AD. He came
from what we believe to from a family which “was
wealthy enough to support his studies and travels”8.
His
description and view on Caesars assassination is found in his book
Fall
of the Roman Republic.
His account is similar to that of Suetonius, stating that the
assassination was again because he believed that Caesar was wanting
to end the republic and crown himself king.
“what
made Caesar most openly and mortally hated was his passion to be
king”9
His
desire to be King, Plutarch believes is one of the reasons that the
men of the Senate killed Caesar, his desire to be king angered them.
“He
was approached by the consuls and the praetors with the whole senate
following behind... he behaved to them as though they were only
merely private individuals... This conduct of his offended not only
the senate but the
people as well... the treatment of the senate was an insult to the
whole state”10
Caesars
attitude towards the Senate and his apparent feelings of his own
greatness above the senate caused many men of the Republic to turn to
men like Brutus to end his self entitled Dictatorship.
Suetonius
and Plutarch's records of the reasons of Caesars assassination are
very similar with the major reason for the Assassination being that
Caesar wanted to become king, he wanted to abolish the Republic, an
almost five hundred year old governing system that had been hugely
successful and very popular. The Optimates or 'best men' of the
Senate did not want to live under a King. They saw Caesar as nothing
but a tyrant whose only intent was to abolish the Senate and replace
it with himself as the single leader of Rome.
These
reasons for Caesars Assassination are not believed by the Modern day
Historian Michael Parenti who attempts to explain why the Ancient
Scholars such as Plutarch and Suetonius present the Assassination in
the way that they do and also offers his own alternate explanation
for the Assassination.
Micheal
Parenti is a modern day political writer from the united states, he
has many works but is not well known for his historical works.
Parenti has written only two historical works The
Assassination of Julius Caesar
and History is
mystery.
In his works of History Parenti has the belief that History in
written by winners, by great men for great men about great men. He
refers to the Historians who write in this way as 'Gentlemen
Historians'.
“gentlemen
,was one who sported an uncommonly polished manner and affluent
lifestyle , and who presented himself as prosperous, politically
conservative, and properly classed in the art of ethno-class
supremacism”11
Parenti's
Gentlemen's history theory attempts to explain the trend in how
history has been written throughout the ages. He believes that
History was written by well off men, who could afford to write
instead of work. “Gentlemens
History, a genre heavily indebted to an upper class ideological
perspective”12
This
theory can be applied to the ancient Historians Plutarch and
Suetonius to discern whether these men were Gentlemen Historian and
pro-aristocratic views, promote a bias against Caesar.
Parenti
uses his gentlemen's historian theory to discredit the pre conceived
theories for why Caesar was Assassinated. This theory is one invented
by Parenti in which he notes that most History is biased towards
powerful people and interests. This being because no working man had
the time or money to be able to write history. Only very well off men
had the free time to engage in the researching or writing of
History.13
So he believes that when only the wealthy men of society are writing
or funding men to write history, the issues being written about are
the concerns of the elite in Society and no one else.
The
Roman senate and the Roman Republic was very much controlled by
around 20 of the richest most influential men of Rome. Of these men
there was two sides, the majority were the Optimates or 'best men' ,
these men were all for expanding the power of the rich, they despised
the Proletariat society of Rome, one of the greatest Optimates at the
time of Caesars Assassination, Cicero referred to them as”masses
and worst elements... many of them simply out for revolution”. A
great number of the men who Assassinated Caesar were Optimates. The
lesser, were the Populares, were the reforming group of the Senate,
with democratic tendencies. This group of men occasionally sided with
the lesser people, and used the Plebian Assembly to their advantage
to pass decisions in the Roman senate.
“Contemporary
American and British ancient Historians are divided between
Cicerorians (95 percent) and Caesarians (a mere handful), and the
division reflects there current political attitudes”14
So
according to Parenti many of the men who have written about Caesar
and his Assassination have written about him with a Gentlemens
Perspective of the events, they believed him to be a tyrant that was
rightly slain by men defending the beloved republic.
But
were Plutarch and Suetonius Gentlemen Historians and did they write
from a Gentlemens perspective?
Plutarch
was a man who was educated in Athens, lived there long enough to
attain a Citizenship, and had a family that was wealthy enough to
support his travels.15
This shows that Plutarch was indeed a Gentlemen Historian by way of
living, but what about his works? Did he write about the elite?
Plutarch
is famous for his works known as the 'lives' which are Biographies
of distinguished Greek and Roman men examined in pairs. Plutarch did
write about great men, his view on Caesars assassination is written
from a Gentlemens Perspective.
Suetonius.
A man from the Equestrian order. Suetonius was well educated and was
close friends with a Praetor and Consul of Rome, Pliny the younger.
Being of Equestrian order he must have considerable wealth, as well
as the fact that he was educated in Rome to be an Orator.16
His
written works include 8 books on The lives of the 12 Caesars. A
biography of Caesar and the Emperors of the Julio-Claudian Dynasty.17
Similar to Plutarch Suetonius writes on important men, and being
close at hand to many great men of the Roman Empire, he also writes
with a suttle Gentlemens bias.
Parenti
believes because Plutarch and Suetonius are 'Gentlemen' their works
on Caesar are biased towards the Optimates or 'best men' of the late
Roman Republic, so they're writings are tended to make judgements and
statements that are of an upper class view. So with this is mind
Parenti attempts to give us an alternate theory to why Caesar was
Assassinated.
In
the second century B.C., the senatorial nobles began to divide into
two groups, the larger being the self-designated as the optimates
("best
men"), who were devoted to upholding the prerogatives of the
well-born. ... The smaller faction within the nobility, styled the
populares
or
"demagogues" by their opponents, were reformers who sided
with the common people on various issues. Julius Caesar is considered
the leading populares and the last in a line extending from 133
BC to
44
BC18
Many
past Historians make very little mention of the proletariat society
of the Roman Republic, and when they do Gentlemen Scholars almost
always have a very low opinion on the common people.
Many
historians, both ancient and modern, have portrayed the common people
of Rome as being little better than a noisome rabble and riotous mob.
In word and action, wealthy Romans made no secret of their fear and
hatred of the common people and of anyone else who infringed upon
their class prerogatives19
Many
of Caesars legal reforms were intended to help the common people of
Rome, the proletarians, these included.
Founding
new settlements for 80, 000 Proletarians, giving choice land to 20,
000 families with 3 or more children. Gave work to unemployed
Proletarians by sending them to repair and rebuild ancient cities, or
slated them to work on public places in Rome itself. In relief for
poor tenants Caesar cancelled a year of rent obligations for low to
moderate dwellings. He increased duties on luxury imports, to
encourage domestic trade.20
So
when Caesar ignored the desires of the Optimates in the senate of
Rome and instead benefited the Proletarians with his reforms, he was
understandably shunned and hated by the wealthier men of the Roman
republic who cared for nothing but the issues that concerned the rich
and powerful.
Parenti
believes this to be the reason why Caesar was Assassinated. The
Optimates could not stand for his power while he was supporting a
cause that they deemed worthless and unnecessary, that is helping the
common people of Rome.
The
reasons for the Assassination of Julius Caesar have been left vastly
unchallenged for the past 1900 years, only recently has somebody
presented us with an alternate explanation. Michael Parenti using his
'gentlemen historians' theory explains why the views of the ancient
historians Plutarch and Suetonius were biased against Caesar. Parenti
sheds new light on the forgotten past of the late Roman Republic,
answering the questions that were left unanswered previously. His new
explanation is not necessarily accurate, but what he has done has
given us a down to earth alternate reason, to something that has
never been questioned to such an extent.
1Suetonius,
'The Twelve Caesars' , Betty Radice (ed), Penguin Classics,
England, 1957. P. 45-46
2Freeman
Phillip Freeman, 'Julius Caesar' , JR Books London, 2010. P.
356
3Ibid
P. 354
4
Pliny cited in the Suetonius, op. cit P. 8
5Ibid
P. 43
6Ibid
P. 41
7Ibid
P. 41
8George
Karamanolis. 'Plutarch' .
gkaramanolis@fks.uoc. 2010
9Plutarch.
'The Fall of the Roman Republic' Penguin
Classics England, P. 299
10Ibid
P. 300
11Michael
Parenti, “The Assassination of Julius Caesar: A peoples History
of Rome”,The New Press. New
York. P. 14
12Ibid
P. 15
13Ibid
P. 22
14Ibid
P. 86
15Karamanolis
op. cit
16Jona
Lendering. 'C. Suetonius Tranquillus'
17Robert
Graves. 'Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus' 1957.
18Parenti.
op. cit P. 54-55
19Ibid.
P. 94
20
Michael Parenti. Rome Historical Perspective. Audio
presentation, 2010
No comments:
Post a Comment