Book Review on “Cicero, The life and times of Rome’s greatest politician”
Anthony Everitt’s biography “Cicero, The life and times of Rome’s greatest politician” gives a vivid account of the life of Cicero and the political struggles he participated in during the last decades of the Roman Republic. It is well structured, easy to follow and quite entertaining. The most benefit I got out of this book is some insights into the Roman Republic’s political system --- how it worked and why it failed --- as well as the political maneuvers conducted by the politicians some two thousand years ago and yet not completely different from today’s political tricks.
Political Structure in the Late Roman Republic
The top of the political pyramid is the Consulship. Two Consuls hold the highest executive power at the same year and alternate the seniority month by month. One Consul could veto any of his colleague’s proposals and those of junior officeholders Consuls can only hold office for one year. Traditionally there had to be ten years interval between the two Consulships held by the same person.
The typical career path to the Consulship is like this:
First step: the twelve Quaestors. Quaestors are responsible for collecting taxes and payments for the Republic. Quaestors are guaranteed memberships in the Senate.
Second step: The four Aediles. Aediles handle various civic matters (especially the public spectacular shows such as gladiator shows) at their own expense. It is a chance for the unknown wanna-bes to gain visibility and public support. This step is optional.
Third step: The eight Praetors. Praetors act as judges in the courts or administered law in the provinces. Only after he had been a Praetor might a man stand for the Consulship.
Former Consuls and Praetors (called Proconsuls or Propraetors) typically are appointed governors of provinces.
After this the Consul joins the Senate to become a Senator which is almost a permanent position. Senate was the Republic’s ruling instrument, it couldn’t pass laws as today’s Senate does but it usually considered legislation before it was brought to and approved by the General Assembly. The member of the Senators range from 300 to 900. Every five years two former Consuls were appointed Censors, whose job was to review the membership of the Senate and remove the unqualified ones.
Other Political entities include:
Military Assembly: In charge of voting and electing Consuls and praetors The membership was weighted according to citizens’ wealth. You can say the “president” of Rome was elected by a group of wealthy men. It doesn’t seem to have much to do with Military to me!
General Assembly:
Voted by tribes which were territorial in composition rather than socioeconomic. It had the exclusive power to declare peace or war and to approve or reject bills, usually after consideration by the Senate (During his Consulship, Caesar bypassed Senate and presented bills directly to the General Assembly, which was in favor of him). The General Assembly was not a parliament: those who lived more than a few hours travel from the city would find themselves very difficult to travel all the way to Rome to vote.
Tributes: Tributes sole purpose was to protect the interests of the plebs (the mass of the People). There were ten Tributes in Cicero’s day. They could propose legislation and convene meetings of the Senate but had no executive authority. Tribunes can veto the proposals from Senate or other Tributes.
College of Pontiffs: this is a religious council that was responsible for the organization of the state religion. It was in charge of the calendar and decided the dates of the festivals and public holidays
College of Augurs: Augurs observe and interpret signs given by the gods. It sounds like a fortune-teller’s job today but in ancient Rome understanding gods’ will was considered critical to the survival of the Republic. Augurs also marked the “lucky days” and “unlucky days” on the annual calendar, something similar to the practice of Chinese.
The vulnerabilities of the Roman republic’s government
Lack of Representations from Different Classes in the Government
Cicero imagined the ideal state should be “a fair and reasonable blending of the upper, middle and lower classes” harmonious as musical tones, yet in reality the Senate was pretty much a “gentlemen’s club” with Roman aristocrats in majority and occasionally some “new comers” such as Cicero from provinces. Senator’s job were permanent, giving them few incentives to seek changes in the system.
Consuls were elected by Military Assembly, which membership was based on affluence. Although General Assembly includes the mass public, the voting ballots were in Rome, giving little chances for people living outside of the city to vote. Tributes represent the interest of the plebs, but since they can veto each other’s proposal, it only took one or two Tributes to spoil all the rest of the majority’s interests. The result is that the demands from soldiers (land-reform), businessmen (lower the overbid tax) and the allies (citizenship) were not resolved for a long time.
The Inefficiency of the Senate
Senate had fundamental task: to prevent any individual gain absolute power. Honorable the task was, the Senate was rather reactive and obstructive than proactive and constructive achieving it. Sometimes the Senate made pact with the wolves in order to block the lions. It first used cunning and brutal Clodius to go against Pompey, then used Pompey to go against Caesar. In many cases the Senate’s major interest was to maintain the traditional status quo than providing solutions to the emerging changes of the State, and blocking other’s solutions along the way.
To make things worse, the Senate’s stubbornness was not backed by any military or police protection other than the law that forbids soldiers stepping in the city of Rome. When Sulla and later Caesar ignored this law, the Senate could do nothing but run.
When a system is inflexible to moderate changes and at the same time vulnerable to radical ones, the revolution is just something waiting to happen.
Conflict of Interests
The Republic almost had no public system, so everything had to be done through personal connection. It is important to be the “client” of some powerful people, and to return the favor, the “clients” were obliged to give their votes to their patrons. (kind of like the “Godfather”)
The state paid no salaries to the Governors of provinces. The powers are often abused by the governors who are more interested in gaining personal wealth at the expense of the locals.
An executive officer had “law immunity”, but once his year was up he was often sued by his political enemies for the decisions he made in the office, sometimes with serious accusations that can lead to severe punishments such as exile or death penalty. This kind of retrospective legislation was very counter-productive. Politicians (such as Caesar) timed their elections to avoid lapse between their government positions, so they wouldn’t be tried in court. Lawyers in the Forum were often aspiring politicians who would eventually end up in Senate, so they had to be careful not to step on the toes of someone who would very possibly became their colleagues.
Delay Tactic
Like today’s politics, filibustering was usual. Senators tried to talk proposals out until sunset, when Senate meetings automatically closed. The holidays or the “unlucky” days on the calendar can be added or altered so the General Assembly couldn’t be held. (This doesn’t work for officers who dare to ignore the bad omens.)
Today’s politicians still use the same tactics such as approving the ambassador of the UN when the congress is in recession, or slipping irrelevant laws into the bills late at night when the law makers were too tired to read them through.
Dirty and Bloody Campaigns
In the time of war, political casualties were inevitable. Nine thousand victims were killed in Sulla’s proscription. But even in the peaceful times the Republic’s political scene, civilized as it was, were sometimes like a strange mixture of the riots in mainland China’s cultural revolution and the parliament brawl in Taiwan. Gladiators and street gangs were used to either intimidate the voters or simply disrupt the election. Clodius kept well-organized street gangs just for this purpose. Even Pompey and Cicero were attacked by his men. When Caesar’s co-consul Bibulus tried to veto his bill, he was thrown down the steps and showered with filth by the veterans Caesar staged there. Since the Republic didn’t have police station, the only way to stop the violence was with violence.
When politicians were not literally fighting, negative campaigns were common. Attacks on characters, unfounded accusations and sexual scandals were frequently used as political tools. Even Cicero was not immune to the negative campaign, which he used when running for his Consulship.
Mixing Money and Power
Bribing was common in Roman politics. Buying off a Tribute means you can turn the proposition around. Also, like today’s politics, campaigns like gladiatorial shows and building new temples all needed large amount money. Caesar almost borrowed himself into bankruptcy. Cicero borrowed such a large loans from Caesar that he had his hands tied (or in his case, tongue-tied) if he wanted to oppose Caesar.
Proscriptions were used under both Sulla and Octavian’s rule to gain money. People were marked off simply because they were rich. Crassus, “the man who own most of Rome”, made his fortune buying up the cheap properties of those who had been killed in Sulla’s Proscription. During the Second Triumvirate, “the point was reached where a person was proscribed because he had a fine town house or country estate”.
Final words
The political systems of the late Roman republic no longer suits the change of time and were eventually transformed into a different kind of government: the Roman Empire. However, the fundamental ideas of democracy --- the respect of constitutions and the belief that a state should not be ruled by one single man --- had such influence on Western civilization that modern democracy were much easier to thrive 1800 years later. They really had a good heads-start.
- Re: Book Review on 鈥淐icero, The life and times of Rome鈥檚 greatest politician鈥�posted on 12/11/2005
Interesting to know there is one "greatest" in the political world. Sounds better than Mr Bush and his bastards anyway. - Re: Book Review on 鈥淐icero, The life and times of Rome鈥檚 greatest politician鈥�posted on 12/13/2005
Oh come on LingHu, you can't brush me off like this! Here is your chance to act like a political science professor as you've always wanted. What do you say?
LingHuChong wrote:
Interesting to know there is one "greatest" in the political world. Sounds better than Mr Bush and his bastards anyway. - posted on 12/14/2005
It looks great to be honest, though I haven't read it carefully. I can sense it anyway. :) Political professor may be useless; you never heard about a professor on politics ever played any role in any significant social events anywhere in the world. :) Politics belong to rude and straight people with no shame on claiming other people's interests for his own use. :)
Susan wrote:
Oh come on LingHu, you can't brush me off like this! Here is your chance to act like a political science professor as you've always wanted. What do you say?
- Re: Book Review on 鈥淐icero, The life and times of Rome鈥檚 greatest politician鈥�posted on 12/14/2005
有谁能说说：如何鉴别政治家的雄心和野心？ - Re: Book Review on 鈥淐icero, The life and times of Rome鈥檚 greatest politician鈥�posted on 12/14/2005
Hi, 为力, my answer would be not to 鉴别 at all. As long as the system effectively moniters/measures their performances and prevents the abuse of power, 雄心 or 野心 doesn't matter.
为力 wrote:
有谁能说说：如何鉴别政治家的雄心和野心？ - Re: Book Review on 鈥淐icero, The life and times of Rome鈥檚 greatest politician鈥�posted on 12/14/2005
Please remember, there is no perfect system in human history, never!
Susan wrote:
Hi, 为力, my answer would be not to 鉴别 at all. As long as the system effectively moniters/measures their performances and prevents the abuse of power, 雄心 or 野心 doesn't matter.
为力 wrote:
有谁能说说：如何鉴别政治家的雄心和野心？ - Re: Book Review on 鈥淐icero, The life and times of Rome鈥檚 greatest politician鈥�posted on 12/14/2005
I am not talking about perfect system or fool-proof system, I am talking about effective system, you can be as effective as you can possibly be, right?
为力 wrote:
Please remember, there is no perfect system in human history, never! - Re: Book Review on 鈥淐icero, The life and times of Rome鈥檚 greatest politician鈥�posted on 12/14/2005
制度的确是另一回事。
我是想挖掘一下政治家的人性、本性。要知道这些人在历史上有着太大的影响。而在中国文化中，人民从来不容许评头论足于政治家。
Susan wrote:
I am not talking about perfect system or fool-proof system, I am talking about effective system, you can be as effective as you can possibly be, right? - posted on 12/14/2005
政治家的人性、本性 is fallible, period. :-) 这些人在历史上有着太大的影响 is because the systems were not designed to keep this consideration in mind. In China's case, they still ain't. That is why Cicero's ideal government would never work: because it was based on the ideal virtue of the politicians.
为力 wrote:
制度的确是另一回事。
我是想挖掘一下政治家的人性、本性。要知道这些人在历史上有着太大的影响。而在中国文化中，人民从来不容许评头论足于政治家。 - Re: Book Review on 鈥淐icero, The life and times of Rome鈥檚 greatest politician鈥�posted on 12/14/2005
希腊的大民主也可以供历史借鉴啊。也许更根源的。
罗马共和国以前也是王政的，关于共和的来历，我上回有个贴子，戏
剧的，也许不够严肃。
http://www.mayacafe.com/forum/topic1.php3?tkey=1127511250
西塞罗这老匹夫是蛮勇敢的，是死得其所吧？ - posted on 12/15/2005
xw wrote:
希腊的大民主也可以供历史借鉴啊。也许更根源的。
Yes they are definitely 更根源.
The Rape of Lucretia is considered more of a legend than what really happened, just like the legend that the twin brother founded Rome.
西塞罗这老匹夫是蛮勇敢的，是死得其所吧？
Cicero died for his belief, so I suppose that he is 死得其所. But he has no choice but to 勇敢. Right after the assassination of Caesar (which Cicero had nothing to do with), Brutus called up Cicero’s name and announced in front of everyone that the survival of the Republic would now be in Cicero’s hand. So he really got no choice. - Re: Book Review on 鈥淐icero, The life and times of Rome鈥檚 greatest politician鈥�posted on 12/15/2005
把Cicero称为politician，而不是statesman，这点我很同意。读过他的传记，读过他的著作，但不喜欢他。在同一时期的人物里，我最欣赏Cato：Give me liberty or give me death。 - Re: Book Review on 鈥淐icero, The life and times of Rome鈥檚 greatest politician鈥�posted on 12/15/2005
I find Cato's stubborned-to-the-bone attitute made him an extremely amusing character. :-)
chloe wrote:
把Cicero称为politician，而不是statesman，这点我很同意。读过他的传记，读过他的著作，但不喜欢他。在同一时期的人物里，我最欣赏Cato：Give me liberty or give me death。 - Re: Book Review on 鈥淐icero, The life and times of Rome鈥檚 greatest politician鈥�posted on 12/15/2005
chloe wrote:
同一时期的人物里，我最欣赏Cato：Give me liberty or give me death。
幸亏这个家伙没有当政客，要不他的国家和密米就倒了邪楣了。当然，也当不了政客。 - Re: Book Review on 鈥淐icero, The life and times of Rome鈥檚 greatest politician鈥�posted on 12/15/2005
一种我们这个后现代时代极度缺乏的stubbornness，以至于被你看成是amusing。
Susan wrote:
I find Cato's stubborned-to-the-bone attitute made him an extremely amusing character. :-)
chloe wrote:
把Cicero称为politician，而不是statesman，这点我很同意。读过他的传记，读过他的著作，但不喜欢他。在同一时期的人物里，我最欣赏Cato：Give me liberty or give me death。 - Re: Book Review on 鈥淐icero, The life and times of Rome鈥檚 greatest politician鈥�posted on 12/15/2005
No no, we don't 极度缺乏stubbornness at all, just look at Bush. ;-)
"Amusing" is a compliment. At least he was not "boring". :-)
chloe wrote:
一种我们这个后现代时代极度缺乏的stubbornness，以至于被你看成是amusing。 - Re: Book Review on 鈥淐icero, The life and times of Rome鈥檚 greatest politician鈥�posted on 12/15/2005
Cato is a man of principle. So is Bush.
Susan wrote:
No no, we don't 极度缺乏stubbornness at all, just look at Bush. ;-)
"Amusing" is a compliment. At least he was not "boring". :-)
chloe wrote:
一种我们这个后现代时代极度缺乏的stubbornness，以至于被你看成是amusing。 - Re: Book Review on 鈥淐icero, The life and times of Rome鈥檚 greatest politician鈥�posted on 12/16/2005
chloe wrote:
Cato is a man of principle. So is Bush.
Nobody cares he is a man of pinciple or not. People only cares whether he is able to get the right principle. So is Bush. - Re: Book Review on 鈥淐icero, The life and times of Rome鈥檚 greatest politician鈥�posted on 12/16/2005
How dare you insulting both Cato and Bush at the same time?! I am really offended! Cato had much more principle than Bush, and Bush wouldn’t be bothered to let trivial things such as principle to spoil his cause. :))))))
chloe wrote:
Cato is a man of principle. So is Bush. - Re: Book Review on 鈥淐icero, The life and times of Rome鈥檚 greatest politician鈥�posted on 12/16/2005
Principle here implies good principle.
LingHuChong wrote:
chloe wrote:Nobody cares he is a man of pinciple or not. People only cares whether he is able to get the right principle. So is Bush.
Cato is a man of principle. So is Bush.
- Re: Book Review on 鈥淐icero, The life and times of Rome鈥檚 greatest politician鈥�posted on 12/16/2005
It is you who first insulted both Cato and Bush by calling them stubborn and amusing.
Susan wrote:
How dare you insulting both Cato and Bush at the same time?! I am really offended! Cato had much more principle than Bush, and Bush wouldn’t be bothered to let trivial things such as principle to spoil his cause. :))))))
chloe wrote:
Cato is a man of principle. So is Bush. - Re: Book Review on 鈥淐icero, The life and times of Rome鈥檚 greatest politician鈥�posted on 12/16/2005
Are you saying you are the second?? :))))))
chloe wrote:
It is you who first insulted both Cato and Bush by calling them stubborn and amusing. - posted on 12/16/2005
chloe wrote:
Principle here implies good principle.
Dear Chloe, you know this kind of "implying" doesn't work on Mr Bush, or don't you? :)
Principle seldom auto-cast to good principle, for most of the politicians. Principle doesn't mean simplicity in politics either, though simplity is the beauty in Science. This kind of common sense is too complicated for a simple cowboy -- and it doesn't matter for him until he became the president of United States, a coutry that owns too many weapons of destruction.
If a stupid guy is not a man of principle, it's always good because he can't make things worse; the worst he can do is doing nothing. If this stupidity is a man of pinciple, and unfortunately, he is not able to tell the difference of "good" and "bad" principle, may his God know what's next for the human beings.
Hope next time his simple mind can developed a few sophisticated cells; or may he step back from his principles; just relax in his farm -- that would do the world a favor.
Please paste HTML code and press Enter.
(c) 2010 Maya Chilam Foundation