WE ARE OPEN - CAESAR - WEEK ONE - February 26th - March 4th - Introduction and Chapter One: Caesar's World - (pages 1 - 29) ~ No Spoilers, Please

[Boris]

Vicki wrote: "Hello, Boris, welcome to the discussion. You bring up some interesting topics. First of all about slavery - you may be right about the constant need for conquest. I was thinking that wouldn't be necessary, as the slaves did procreate. But that was probably only in households. The slaves working in mines and on farms wouldn't have been raising babies.."

Hi Vicki, thanks for your reply. You are right that slaves procreate but I did read somewhere, not sure if it was this book, that it was not enough to keep their population stable. Romans were certainly not the worst slave-owners in history but conditions were harsh and mothers were not even allowed to keep the babies. On the other hand, slaves could be purchased from outside the Empire. This seems to become more important later in Roman history. In any case, I have the impression that the oligarchic latifundium economy needed military expansion to keep it running well, while the need for a better army to sustain these victories undermined the civilian power structure.

About Rome's exalted position in the West, I agree that this is not new, it has influenced a lot of our culture and that continues to this day. My 9-year-old son loves the Romans and is convinced they are invincible and would easily defeat the Vikings or Napoleon :-) There are no toys of the Achaemenid Persian immortals or Mongolian mounted archers, so the next generation will be as obsessed with the Romans as this one.

[Vincent]

Vicki wrote: "Boris wrote: "Hi all. I am Boris and I live in Belgium. I like reading about history, especially ancient and early Middle Ages and also like to think about world-history.

I want to give you my per..."


I agree with Vicki but don't deny Boris' assessment - we in the west tend to view world history from a "Western Civilization" perspective and not from a "World Civilization" perspective

I would have to think and look into the various statements of Boris but do not refute them but this is a biography of Caesar - so I would suggest we read the book without tight comparison to the Chinese or other cultures for now. Maybe HBC wants to set up a side discussion in a different thread?

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Mark wrote: "Rome's republic did not have a written constitution, it evolved as the various factions struggled for power. You had the senate class, the knights, the merchants, the poor, the farmers. It was an i..."

Hi, Mark, glad you joined us. Rome's progression from a tiny monarchy to a beginning republic to an empire spread over much of Europe is really fascinating. Of course it's hard to know how much of the early "history" is just legend, but the Romans believed it and it's a good story.

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Erik wrote: "Hi all,

I am Erik and I am originally from the Netherlands but now I live in Jakarta. I do not have any degree in history and am actually a finance professional, however recently started to read m..."

Greetings, Erik. I'm glad you enjoy the book so far and hope you will also enjoy the discussion we have here.

[Chase]

Hi, everyone. My name is Chase and I live in Central-Southern California. I majored in History both in junior college and at university, and as such I have both an AA and a BA in the subject. I also took a Roman History class at university but unfortunately, I was a poor student at the time and barely read any of the assigned readings (somehow I still pulled of an A in the class haha). I don't particularly have a specific area or era of history that I prefer to read about, but I tried to focus the most on European history (post-French Revolution, usually) at university but I also enjoy American history and WWII history.

I really enjoyed the fact that this week's reading was aimed more for the general reader than the academic. There's so much to set up in the walk towards Caesar's time, with so many names, dates, and wars but Goldsworthy made it easy and even enjoyable to read through. I was very surprised by how Roman politics was literally violent when disagreements and rivalries arose (and here I thought modern American politics was brutal). I had known previously about the tribune and consul positions and their lengths of office, as well as the rivalry with Carthage so to be fully honest, there wasn't much new information that I found in the Introduction and Chapter 1. The next reading, I think, will be much more exciting for me to read about.

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Boris, I'm glad your son is into the Romans. There are lots of good books about Rome for his age group. Does he have any Roman Legos? I myself have a Lego Caesar.

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Chase wrote: "Hi, everyone. My name is Chase and I live in Central-Southern California. I majored in History both in junior college and at university, and as such I have both an AA and a BA in the subject. I als..."

Welcome, Chase. The political violence wasn't constant, thank goodness, but it certainly was shocking at times. I'm sorry to say there's going to be more of it coming soon.

[William]

Hi all, I'm William, and I currently live in San Francisco. While reading the introduction and chapter 1 I was also trying to think back to what I know about ancient Rome. I feel like its really been awhile since studied it or read about it at all - it was probably middle school the last time I did any sort of studying on Caesar, Augustus, and the Roman empire. I think the introduction did a good job of laying the ground work for what the book will cover and chapter 1 did a good job of painting the picture of the political situation in Rome at the time.

[Nate]

Hi everyone. My name is Nate and I am living in Bogota, Colombia. I have enjoyed history for most of my life, although I pursued other academic subjects in both my undergraduate and graduate studies. I also never focused my reading on Roman history, but I did pick up a bit of knowledge through three years of Latin in high school and university.

The introduction and first chapter provided a nice refresher of the time period, both politically and militarily, and provided helpful background on the simmering unrest within the empire (widening economic inequality, unprecedented time in office for certain officials). I appreciate Goldsworthy’s accessible, focused writing style and I look forward to delving further into this book.

[Boris]

I like your lego Caesar, my son would be ecstatic if he would see that. Unfortunately, they don't sell lego Roman anymore but we have lots of Playmobil Roman.

[Boris]

I did some very basic wikipedia research on political violence and found that only about 32 consuls died in office (including war, disease) while more than 30 Roman emperors were assasinated (excludes war and disease). Given that an emperor is appointed for life, and that the office did not exist under the republic, and is often not shared, this seems to confirm that the top job was a lot more dangerous in imperial times and that indeed, political violence was relatively rare in the republic.

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

William wrote: "Hi all, I'm William, and I currently live in San Francisco. While reading the introduction and chapter 1 I was also trying to think back to what I know about ancient Rome. I feel like its really be..."

Hi, William, welcome to the group. I'm glad you're enjoying the book so far.

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Nate wrote: "Hi everyone. My name is Nate and I am living in Bogota, Colombia. I have enjoyed history for most of my life, although I pursued other academic subjects in both my undergraduate and graduate studie..."

Greetings, Nate in Bogota. I'm guessing you read some Caesar in your Latin classes. I keep thinking I should study Latin.

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Interesting stats on consul vs. emperor deaths, Boris. Do you remember if any of the consuls were assassinated (besides Caesar, and he was dictator at the time)?

What was shocking about the murders of the Gracchi and of Marcus Livius Drusus before the Social War is that they were Tribunes of the Plebs, and as such were sacrosanct. "The whole body of the plebeians were pledged to protect the tribunes against any assault or interference with their persons during their terms of office. Anyone who violated the sacrosanctity of the tribunes might be killed without penalty." (From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribune)

[Mark]

Boris wrote: "I did some very basic wikipedia research on political violence and found that only about 32 consuls died in office (including war, disease) while more than 30 Roman emperors were assasinated (exclu..."

I think violence increased in the Republic and built to a rather high amount and indeed civil war at the end. The Republicans were constantly at war throughout the time they were subduing first Italy then the Mediterranean. Violence against each other seems to increase starting with the Gracchi brothers. The big problem with the emperors was the succession and the lack of nonviolent means to deal with an emperor gone bad.

[Boris]

Another striking aspect of the political violence we have seen so far in the book is that it comes across as very amateurish. I mean, killing with the leg of a chair or throwing roof tiles... while they had one of the most powerful armies the world had ever seen.

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Boris wrote: "Another striking aspect of the political violence we have seen so far in the book is that it comes across as very amateurish. I mean, killing with the leg of a chair or throwing roof tiles... while..."

But these murders happened before the army tended to be loyal to their commander rather than to the Republic and were spontaneous rather than planned. Also, the army was forbidden from entering the city.

[Boris]

Yes, exactly. But they do set a terrible precedent. So when strong men with a loyal army emerge later, it is harder for the Senate to appeal to their morality and order them to stop. It is striking to see how quickly the situation escalates.

[Mark]

Well it took over a 80 years. Only appear quick from our perspective. Tiberius gracchus was elected in 133 BC and Caesar was assassinated in 44 BC.

[Boris]

You are right, the build-up is quite gradual from a Roman point of view. Politicians took 1-2 generations to evolve from 'amateurs' to hardened military men. Here is a chronology of the main incidents of political violence mentioned in the book:

Chair leg: 132 BC (against Gracchus 1)
Cretan archers: 122BC (against Gracchus 2)
Projectiles from roof: 100BC (against Saturninus)
Stabbing: 91BC (against Drusus)
Large-scale proscriptions: 82BC (by Sulla)
Full-scale civil war: 49BC (by Caesar)

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Candace wrote: "Btw, what would consuls do after their term was up? I mean, how did they reintegrate? And would new ways to acquire wealth follow from their term? ..."

Sometimes they were sent off to be governor of a province, and that afforded opportunities to get rich. Once in a while, you might be elected censor, and get a chance to throw men out of the Senate, either for having lost the required level of wealth or for moral turpitude.

[Mark]

Moral turpitude: Which is why when a Roman male hankered for some same sex sex, they went to Greece where it had a long history. While in Rome, they were militant heterosexuals! Somewhat amusing.

[J.W.]

I got the book at last! I loved the introduction. I think it is very important to note how no historian can be truly unbiased when analyzing or writing about an historical figure. Good context for understanding Caesar here. I am also struck by a desire to read his accounts of his own campaigns. Has anyone done so?

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

I read his The Conquest of Gaul a few years ago, in English. Wish I could read Latin - Caesar was supposed to be a really good writer.

by Gaius Julius Caesar

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Mark wrote: "Moral turpitude: Which is why when a Roman male hankered for some same sex sex, they went to Greece where it had a long history. While in Rome, they were militant heterosexuals! Somewhat amusing."

Strangely, it seems to have been OK as long as you were "pitching" and not "catching". There were lots of pretty slave boys in upper class families.

[Pamela]

J.w. wrote: "I got the book at last! I loved the introduction. I think it is very important to note how no historian can be truly unbiased when analyzing or writing about an historical figure. Good context for ..."

I'm definitely dating myself here but when I was in high school his campaigns were required reading and yes, he was a good writer. As I dimly recall, most of the Romans were. Since those years, I've only read those things in translation and there are such good ones now that unless you really want to put in the effort to learn Latin, I'd stick with them :>)!

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

I'm sure everyone who had Latin in high school read Caesar's commentaries. I wonder how many high schools even teach Latin these days.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

There are quite a few Latin high schools on the East Coast and other high schools that teach Latin (Boston Latin, Cambridge Ridge, Malden High, etc) to just name a few. I think the classics, the western canon and Latin should be part of every college preparatory program. I remember taking 4 years of Latin and other languages too. The times have changed though in education and I am not sure for the better. Everyone else can be the judge. I agree with Pamela that in high school his campaigns were required reading.