I think what I was trying to say was that Sulla kind of set the pattern for the "strong-man rule" and then the question was just more or less when the right strong-man was going to come along and rule and eventually the 'dictator for life' was what they got. But was he just the worst of a series of people like him, just a bit more bloodthirsty and good at hanging on to power, or was he something (as I with my HUGELY spotty knowledge) quite different and new?
I think that with Sulla, the fact that he used Roman troops against the city itself -- and they obeyed him! -- was something quite different and new. But I think that he did everything he could to avoid setting a pattern, by trying to make it impossible for anyone to need to do what he did. And he also hoped that he was setting a positive example, by laying down his power and retiring to private life, once he'd re-established republican government. Of course that's not how it worked out, and Caesar is a great example, because he takes on the kind of extraordinary command which Sulla had hoped would never happen again, and he refuses to lay down his dictatorship once he gets his teeth into it.
But I ought to say that a lot of historians do see it your way, that once the pattern had been set by Sulla and Marius, the end of Republican government was inevitable. I'm just contrary!
I think one thing I am struggling with as well, in terms of the show, is that I find Caesar hugely charismatic so it's hard for me to think of his death as a good thing, necessarily
Yes, I can see this. He really was extraordinarily charismatic (in real life and on this show!) and I think that's why the story remains so powerful, because it really is tragic. He's such a great man, and yet he creates this situation in which the people who ought to have been closest to him feel that they have no option than to destroy him.
no subject
I think that with Sulla, the fact that he used Roman troops against the city itself -- and they obeyed him! -- was something quite different and new. But I think that he did everything he could to avoid setting a pattern, by trying to make it impossible for anyone to need to do what he did. And he also hoped that he was setting a positive example, by laying down his power and retiring to private life, once he'd re-established republican government. Of course that's not how it worked out, and Caesar is a great example, because he takes on the kind of extraordinary command which Sulla had hoped would never happen again, and he refuses to lay down his dictatorship once he gets his teeth into it.
But I ought to say that a lot of historians do see it your way, that once the pattern had been set by Sulla and Marius, the end of Republican government was inevitable. I'm just contrary!
I think one thing I am struggling with as well, in terms of the show, is that I find Caesar hugely charismatic so it's hard for me to think of his death as a good thing, necessarily
Yes, I can see this. He really was extraordinarily charismatic (in real life and on this show!) and I think that's why the story remains so powerful, because it really is tragic. He's such a great man, and yet he creates this situation in which the people who ought to have been closest to him feel that they have no option than to destroy him.