|
|
marcenmoni@cpu-net.net wrote:
> Cato wrote:
>
> You're probably more well-versed than I am on Roman history. I've been
> meaning to get a complete history or histories and read up on it, but
> haven't had the time. As for GWB, I doubt he can be mapped to any
> particular Roman leader/emperor, given the differences between the two
> 'empires'.
> But my observation is more of a cultural one; after all, the public
> must be willing to accept someone as an emperor, and I think that when
> that happens, generally speaking, the populace feels that they are
> invincible, that the emperor is (mostly) infallible, to be deified, and
> therefore begin to lose their sense of civic duty and vigilance that
> was at the heart of creating the 'res-publica' in the first place.
> Whatever objections some may have had the at reworkings of the
> representative bodies in the transition from 'res-publica' to empire
> wasn't enough to stop the transition from happening. Here's a brief
> tidbit from Wikipedia, for those interested:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_assemblies
>
> Marcello
I merely have read quite a few books on the period because it's so damn
interesting. I've read many of the chronicles from that era, Caesar's
Gallic war chronicles, and even some earlier Polybius stuff. Which can
be a bit dry at times. One series of historic fiction I found
throughly entertaining were by Collen McCollough which is a 6 book
series covering an 80 year period from just before Caesar's birth until
the destruction of the Assasins armies by the final triumvarite and the
end of the Republic. She did a massive amount of research on the
period, and the "fiction" part really comes from her representation of
the characters personalities, whereas the timline and events are all
historically accurate. She even does many detailed maps of old Rome
which are interesting to contrast with modern day Rome. They are a
good way to kill MANY hours on long airplane flights. ;-)
It's really interesting how during the era of the Republic, the Consuls
were always vying to be the First Man in Rome, or the First amoung
many. With their hatred of the ways of Kings, human nature still
seemed to win out and someone always wanted to be King in everyway,
except in name. I suppose Emperor is just another term for it.
The reason Sulla and Crassus came to my mind was that they both made
their own ventures into the Fertile Crescent region. Sulla did quite
well and eventually became Dictator, thus laying some groundwork for
Caesar's eventual ascension and demise as Dictator for life (and thus
opening the way for his adopted son Octavian/Augustus to become the
first Emperor). Crassus' story didn't turn out so well for his foray
into the Mesopotamian region ended with his demise. That region has
been the final stand for many a leader with grand visions. Sound
familar?
|
|