Unit 3 comp civ essay
Rome's history is riddled with honor, self-empowerment, republics and empires. Perhaps one of the most significant moments in Rome's history that encompasses all of these is the assassination of Gaius Julius Caesar, but with various opinions based on the time frame it is looked at from. Although the assassination of Caesar was honorable in Roman times, it isn't considered honorable now, and it certainly didn't save the republic of Rome, as some say it did.
At the time of Caesar's death, the assassination would have been considered honorable. The senate wanted to keep rome as a republic, and couldn't have predicted that it would return to being an empire anyway. The senate would have thought that to save rome and keep the civilization alive, they would need to keep a republic. Brutus was also the one who suggested the assassination to the senate, and he was considered an honorable man, so it was thought to be honorable to kill Caesar. Even Marc Antony, Caesar's biggest supporter, said in his oration of Caesar's death that Brutus was an honorable man. Killing Caesar also preserved the honor of the senate, as they had barely any power in the senate while Caesar was in charge. But this trait nowadays would not be considered honorable.
In modern times, the assassination of Caesar would be considered a extremely selfish thing to do by the senate. The senate killed Caesar in order to remain in a powerful position. The senate feared that Caesar would overthrow them after having been declared dictator perpetuo by the senate themselves. Murdering Caesar in order to remain in power is a very selfish reason, and not considered honorable. Another way in which it wasn't honorable, is that the entire senate (or at least the several senators who were conspiring against Caesar) didn't even give a chance for a fair fight. Gladiators at least it's one on one, or a group versus several people, but in Caesar's case, it was the whole senate against him. Giving Caesar no chance to fight isn't honorable, it's cold blooded murder, and if that is the way the republic does business, then it's no wonder that they didn't last long.
Although the assassination may have been an honorable attempt at saving the republic, it ended up being futile, as immediately after the death of Caesar, there was a power struggle between Marc Antony and Octavian, which lead to the second triumvirate consisting of Marc Antony, Octavian, and Lepidus. The triumvirate quickly faded though, as Marc Antony and Octavian went to war, and Marc Antony killed himself. This lead to the beginning of the Empire, lead by Octavian, and continued until the fall of rome. The senators murder of Caesar only delayed an Empire by twenty years, and robbed the roman empire of the potential of having a great ruler in the form of Julius Caesar. The republic never returned, and the empire stood until 410 AD. The senate's assassination of Caesar never saved the republic, it only delayed the inevitable.
With no way of knowing that Caesar's death would ultimately still lead to the destruction of the republic, the attempt at saving it is still considered honorable. While the true motivation to save the republic is still to ensure the power of the senate, there were some honorable intentions in the assassination of Caesar. Though it does not justify the actions, it does make it a little more bearable, especially for those who had conspired against Caesar in the first place. Honorable though it may have seemed at the time, it wasn't all done in the name of rome, and it certainly didn't help the situation. But at the time, the excuse of honor must have certainly helped the senators sleep at night.
Rome's history is riddled with honor, self-empowerment, republics and empires. Perhaps one of the most significant moments in Rome's history that encompasses all of these is the assassination of Gaius Julius Caesar, but with various opinions based on the time frame it is looked at from. Although the assassination of Caesar was honorable in Roman times, it isn't considered honorable now, and it certainly didn't save the republic of Rome, as some say it did.
At the time of Caesar's death, the assassination would have been considered honorable. The senate wanted to keep rome as a republic, and couldn't have predicted that it would return to being an empire anyway. The senate would have thought that to save rome and keep the civilization alive, they would need to keep a republic. Brutus was also the one who suggested the assassination to the senate, and he was considered an honorable man, so it was thought to be honorable to kill Caesar. Even Marc Antony, Caesar's biggest supporter, said in his oration of Caesar's death that Brutus was an honorable man. Killing Caesar also preserved the honor of the senate, as they had barely any power in the senate while Caesar was in charge. But this trait nowadays would not be considered honorable.
In modern times, the assassination of Caesar would be considered a extremely selfish thing to do by the senate. The senate killed Caesar in order to remain in a powerful position. The senate feared that Caesar would overthrow them after having been declared dictator perpetuo by the senate themselves. Murdering Caesar in order to remain in power is a very selfish reason, and not considered honorable. Another way in which it wasn't honorable, is that the entire senate (or at least the several senators who were conspiring against Caesar) didn't even give a chance for a fair fight. Gladiators at least it's one on one, or a group versus several people, but in Caesar's case, it was the whole senate against him. Giving Caesar no chance to fight isn't honorable, it's cold blooded murder, and if that is the way the republic does business, then it's no wonder that they didn't last long.
Although the assassination may have been an honorable attempt at saving the republic, it ended up being futile, as immediately after the death of Caesar, there was a power struggle between Marc Antony and Octavian, which lead to the second triumvirate consisting of Marc Antony, Octavian, and Lepidus. The triumvirate quickly faded though, as Marc Antony and Octavian went to war, and Marc Antony killed himself. This lead to the beginning of the Empire, lead by Octavian, and continued until the fall of rome. The senators murder of Caesar only delayed an Empire by twenty years, and robbed the roman empire of the potential of having a great ruler in the form of Julius Caesar. The republic never returned, and the empire stood until 410 AD. The senate's assassination of Caesar never saved the republic, it only delayed the inevitable.
With no way of knowing that Caesar's death would ultimately still lead to the destruction of the republic, the attempt at saving it is still considered honorable. While the true motivation to save the republic is still to ensure the power of the senate, there were some honorable intentions in the assassination of Caesar. Though it does not justify the actions, it does make it a little more bearable, especially for those who had conspired against Caesar in the first place. Honorable though it may have seemed at the time, it wasn't all done in the name of rome, and it certainly didn't help the situation. But at the time, the excuse of honor must have certainly helped the senators sleep at night.