The world's leading conquerors : $b Alexander the Great, Cæsar, Charles the Great, the Ottoman sultans, the Spanish conquistadors, NapoleonBevan, Wilson Lloyd
History
The world's leading conquerors : $b Alexander the Great, Cæsar, Charles the Great, the Ottoman sultans, the Spanish conquistadors, Napoleon
Bevan, Wilson Lloyd
History; Kings and rulers
Before the time for the consular elections the extreme wing of the
popular party appeared to have got out of hand. They selected for
their candidate Catiline, a leading spirit among the criminal and
corrupt order of Roman society, who had contested the election before
and had been defeated. Cæsar had already energetically supported
Catiline, but in the latter’s second attempt to be elected Consul,
it seems clear that Cæsar’s support was at best half-hearted. Cæsar
had come to know the reckless nature of Catiline’s program, with its
appeal for a general canceling of debts and its general attack on all
capitalistic interests. The scheme, however, did win the approval of
the discontented classes, and the occasion for carrying it through
was favorable, because Pompeius, the only man with a military force
adequate to act forcibly on behalf of the senatorial oligarchy, was
absent still in the East. It was understood that Catiline, if he
obtained office, would use it to inaugurate a social revolution;
if he were defeated, it was planned that violent methods should be
used to force a change of government on the oligarchy. An army was
to be collected in Italy, the city was to be set on fire, and in the
confusion the reins of government would be taken by Catiline and his
followers.
The plot was shrewdly defeated by Cicero, who was given by the
Senate unlimited powers, after a state of siege had been proclaimed.
Catiline escaped from the city, taking refuge with his army, which had
been collected near Florence; but several of the other conspirators
were taken prisoners in Rome, and the question of their fate was
brought up before the Senate. Cæsar had by report been implicated in
the conspiracy, but Cicero refused to follow up these suspicions.
Accordingly, in the senatorial debate, Cæsar appeared rather in the
light of a cross bench statesman than as a firm supporter of the
revolutionary leader.
It must be remembered that the Senate had no right to condemn a man
to death or to banishment. A general in the field could inflict the
death sentence without appeal, but no magistrate within the precincts
of the city could do so; there was an appeal from his decision to the
people legally assembled. Cicero wished to get from the Senate an
authoritative opinion, as to whether under their previous decree of
martial law he could exercise in the city the summary rights allowed to
a general in the field. Cæsar spoke after the consular members of the
Senate, all of whom had declared for the administration of the extreme
penalty. He opposed it in a careful and statesmanlike speech, using
his opportunity for putting himself on record as the upholder of the
democratic view of the constitution.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account