Party Politics in the Age of Cæsar (Sather Classical Lectures)

Sather Classical Lectures

by Lily Ross Taylor

The advice given to Cicero by his astute, campaign-conscious brother to prepare him for the consular elections of 64 B.C., has a curiously modern "Avoid taking a definite stand on great public issues either in the Senate or before the people. Bend your energies towards making friends of key-men in all classes of voters."

Party Politics in the Age of Caesar is a shrewd commentary on this text, designed to clarify the true meaning in Roman political life of such terms as "party" and "faction." Taylor brilliantly explains the mechanics of Roman politics as she discusses the relations of nobles and their clients, the manipulation of the state religion for political expedience, and the practical means of delivering the vote.

Genres: History, Classics, Nonfiction, Ancient History, Politics

268 pages, Paperback

First published July 2, 1961

About the author

American author and academic who in 1917 became the first female Fellow of the American Academy in Rome. (Lily Ross Taylor. In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia).

Reviews

[Justin Evans · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very informative, though rather outdated in approach and execrably written. And those two things are connected: Taylor's evidence is almost all textual, and I don't mean records and archival material, I mean Sallust and Cicero. And that has had an... interesting impact on her prose. Like a good Roman, Taylor is very keen to make sure a sentence's main verb comes as close to the end of the sentence as possible, which leads to huge amounts of this:

"Cicero, confident in the support of senate and knights, had the execution carried out."
"Although the good men, following Catulus, hailed Cicero as the father of his country, the real hero of the famous Nones of December was not Cicero but Cato."

Perhaps this worked when these pieces were delivered as lectures? Perhaps classicists in the forties and fifties just wrote like this? In any case, while reading this I happened to read a review of new classics books by the wonderful Peter Thonnemann. He cautioned us not to idealize the scholarship of the past, before it got all trendy. For example, one "cutting edge" volume of this time period featured nine chapters on individual poets, and one on Roman and Greek historians. Back then, classics was just the classic books. Taylor's book is okay, but very much a period piece.

[Sean Chick · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is what every history should strive to be: well written, clearly argued, and free of jargon. The personalities leap off the page and combined with the systems and mores of the time you see how the Republic died. The last paragraph is a perfect conclusion.

[Jerry Mrizek · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great description of the "battle" between the Boni and the Populares but what I found to be the real value was in the explanation of how following Octavian's consolidation of power Caesar himself was placed in the shadows while his enemy Cato was extolled.

[Drianne · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very interesting! Great explanation of the different ways voting worked (the different assemblies) and how they were employed. A classic.

[Anthony Emmel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Revisiting a friend I've not read since undergrad school over 20 years ago. So much that is clearer to me now at 50 than at 26!

[Jackson B · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this specifically because I was confused by Megalopolis. You can tell this was written in the late 40s as the author lays out very explicitly some similarities between the Nazis’ and Caesar’s rise to power. Still, this was a nice little introduction to the late republic’s factions and the interesting (if confusing) ways they manipulated the organs of government for their own ends. I understand Megalopolis a little better.

[James · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting and insightful perspective on the fall of the Roman Republic. Her stated thesis, that Rome essentially could end up only with either an oligarchy of the nobles or a tyranny of an emperor, does tend to take a back seat to her occasionally lurid thematic analyses of the abuses of the state apparatuses (and here Caesar comes across as probably the most remorseless abuser). It's probably best to read this non-narrative approach to the period after you've absorbed a narrative account, such as Rubicon.

[Irene · Rating 5 out of 5]

A classic!

[Daniel Pittman]

Slow to get going but engaging once you get into it.