September 07, 2003

BOOKNOTES:

The Assassination of Julius Caesar: A People’s History of Ancient Rome by Michael Parenti (C-SPAN, September 7, 2003, 8 & 11 pm)

Most historians, both ancient and modern, have viewed the Late Republic of Rome through the eyes of its rich nobility. They have generally regarded Roman commoners as a parasitic mob interested only in bread and circuses, as Cicero’s “starving, contemptible rabble.” And they have cast Caesar, who took up the popular cause of the poor, as little better than an adventurer and a demagogue, presenting his murder as a personal feud or a constitutional struggle, devoid of social content. In The Assassination of Julius Caesar, the distinguished author Michael Parenti subjects these assertions of “gentlemen historians” to a bracing critique, and presents us with a story of popular resistance against entrenched power and wealth.

As he carefully weighs the evidence concerning the murder of Caesar, Parenti sketches in the background to the crime with fascinating detail about wider Roman society. In these pages we find reflections on the democratic struggle waged by Roman commoners, religious augury as an instrument of social control, the patriarchal oppression of women, and the political use of homophobic attacks. The Assassination of Julius Caesar offers a whole new perspective on an era we thought we knew well.


Mr. Parenti is apparently a Marxist, so it's hard to take his arguments too seriously--in fact, it's amusing to listen to an NPR host try to keep him in the realm of reality when he compares the current situation in America to a Rome with roving death squads--but here it is:
The history of the Late Republic has been distorted by those writers who regularly downplay the importance of material interests, those whose ideological taboos about class realities dim their perception of the past. This distortion is also manifested in the way many historians, both ancient and modern, have portrayed the common people of Rome as being little better than a noisome rabble and riotous mob. In word and action, wealthy Romans made no secret of their fear and hatred of the common people and of anyone else who infringed upon their class prerogatives. History is full of examples of politico-economic elites who equate any challenge to their privileged social order as a challenge to all social order, an invitation to chaos and perdition.

The oligarchs of Rome were no exception. Steeped in utter opulence and luxury, they remained forever inhospitable to Rome's democratic element. They valued the Republic only as long as it served their way of life. They dismissed as "demagogues" and usurpers the dedicated leaders who took up the popular cause. The historians of that day, often wealthy slaveholders themselves, usually agreed with this assessment. What is rather startling is the fact that the great majority of classical historians of the modern era adopt a viewpoint not too different from the one held by the Roman aristocracy. Whatever their differences in nationality, religion, language, and epoch, most of these historians share the same class-bound ideology, causing them to see the struggles of ancient Rome from the perspective of the elites rather than from that of the struggling proletarii and plebs.

Caesar's sin was not that he was subverting the Roman constitution---which was an unwritten one---but that he was loosening the oligarchy's overbearing grip on it. Worse still, he used state power to effect some limited benefits for small farmers, debtors, and urban proletariat, at the expense of the wealthy few. No matter how limited these reforms proved to be, the oligarchs never forgave him. And so Caesar met the same fate as numerous other reformers before him---and so many other reformers down through the centuries since his day.

MORE:
-AUTHOR SITE: Michael Parenti
-BOOK SITE: The Assassination of Julius Caesar: A People’s History of Ancient Rome by Michael Parenti (New Press)
-ESSAY: Why Caesar Was Really Killed (Michael Parenti, History News Network)
-ESSAY:To Kill Iraq (Michael Parenti. May 2003)
-ESSAY: Terrorism Meets Reactionism (Michael Parenti, October 2001)
-AUDIO INTERVIEW: The Death of Julius Caesar (The Connection, 7/21/2003)
-AUDIO INTERVIEW: People's History of Ancient Rome (Here and Now, 8/27/2003)
-AUDIO INTERVIEW: Michael Parenti (Todd Mundt Show, July 24, 2003)
-REVIEW: The Tragedy of Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare (Brothers Judd)
-REVIEW: of The Assassination of Julius Caesar Posted by Orrin Judd at September 7, 2003 12:05 PM

Comments

If you are going to compare the US to ancient Rome, forget the Late Republic or any part of the Principate--better to concentrate on the period just after the victory against Carthage, when Rome became the unchallenged power in the Mediterranean world for half a millenium. We can learn a lot from the mistakes they made, or at least come up with some new ones.

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at September 7, 2003 02:44 PM

Does Mr Parenti think he has an original idea?
I have a 1920 highschool history text (I collect old history books) that makes exactly the same argument. For that matter, Plutarch makes the same argument with regard to the Gracchi.

The real reason Caesar was killed is that the Roman nobility (Cassius in particular) didn't want to end up as a greasy spot on the plains of Parthia.

Posted by: carl at September 7, 2003 07:55 PM

Well there is that aspect about the nobilities self preservation instinct; however, this idea
of death squads, composed of Caesar's colleagues;
is kind of ludicrous; when the Senate Conspires
to murder a McCain, Clark, or Dean figure, maybe
it would have more resonance.

There is a more pressing parallel however, that
Mr. Parenti does not bring out. One of Rome's
more brutal campaigns did not occur abroad but
on Rome's doorsteps; The Social Wars, that involved the original occupants of the Italian
peninsula, and their cultural clash with the
Roman Authorities; California; anyone

Posted by: narciso at September 8, 2003 12:29 AM

Ooooh, yeah, is Parenti a Marxist! I first read him in People's World (or whatever the CPUSA rag was called at the time) circa '92-'93, right after the fall of the Soviet Union. Parenti had been at a Moscow book fair trying to sell Marxist books, and the Russians who passed tended to laugh at him or get angry. He just could NOT understand why they didn't want to know about his brand of Marxist thought!

Posted by: PapayaSF at September 8, 2003 02:09 AM

Parenti's positive spin could be applied
to Hitler in his view of himself in relation
to the 1920's German ruling class? What's his
point that Caesar was class conscious? Or simply
that Caesar had different interests than the
money people?

What's more is the left seems unsure about whether
our leaders are acting more like Caesar (crossing
the Rubicon) or the entrenched Roman Senatorial
class. Grand historical metaphors never really
hold up.

Posted by: at September 8, 2003 09:33 AM

The fact that Parenti considers a tyrant buying his power with token gifts to "the people" as unquestionably a good thing should worry all of us. Or at least make us laugh at him.

-Timothy

Posted by: Timothy at September 8, 2003 10:36 AM
« NOT DISNEY, BUT INTERESTING: | Main | MARGIN CALL: »