The Assassination of Julius Caesar: A People's History of Ancient Rome

by Michael Parenti

Book Overview

"A provocative history" of intrigue and class struggle in Ancient Rome--"an important alternative to the usual views of Caesar and the Roman Empire" (Publishers Weekly).

Most historians, both ancient and modern, have viewed the Late Republic of Rome through the eyes of its rich nobility--the 1 percent of the population who controlled 99 percent of the empire's wealth. In The Assassination of Julius Caesar, Michael Parenti...

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 1565849426
• ISBN13: 9781565849426
• Release Date: August 2004
• Publisher: New Press
• Length: 276 Pages
• Weight: 0.78 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.8" x 5.5" x 8.2"

Customer Reviews

New Insights on Caesar & the Historians

This book is excellent. I started reading about Julius Caesar 50 years ago. I have been constantly amazed at the praise that major historians have given to Cicero (who lies to everyone but Atticus), Brutus (whose exhorbitant interest rates were talked about by even HIS peers), for Cato (whose hyprocrisy allowed him to denounce Caesar at all points while manipulating Roman laws to defeat Caesar at every turn) and others in the oligarchy as "noble" protectors of the constitution. These "protectors" of the Roman constitution allowed Pompey to become consul before he was legally of age, appointted him sole consul (a unique position) at one point, allowed him to govern Spain and maintain an army without going to Spain, and gave him control of the Roman state BEFORE Caesar crossed the Rubicon. Mr. Parenti was able to take these inherent contradictions of the wealthy Senators AND many hisotrians and recognize their class blindness. Almost by instinct many historians seemingly identified themselves with the oligarchy ("the best") and condemned Caesar for excessive arrogance and ambition in a Rome where all of the Senatorial class were equally ambitious and desirous of getting & keeping private wealth. His book is readable and well reasoned. Thanks to Mr. Parenti!

Sincere and Heartbreaking Historical Document

Critics who fail to see through the very blindnesses Parenti challenges throughout this book are just proving his point. It is not, as "L.C" Robinson asserts above, that Parenti thinks everybody is wrong. Parenti's interest is not in some puerile (and typically American) debate over who is right and who is wrong, but rather a very fair and disinterested discussion about the consequences of crippling class stratification in ancient Rome and, as it turns out, throughout much of the history that followed. People like Mr. Robinson speak from precisely the privileged perspective Parenti works so tirelessly to challenge here. It is unfathomable to people such as himself that there are those for whom education is a pipe dream, an unattainable aspiration prohibited by the financial situations into which they were born. From the days of Sallust, Seutonius and Polybius on down to Edward Gibbon, education was a privilege reserved for the wealthy. Literacy rates in ancient Rome were horrific; the vast majority of the population could neither read nor write. This insurmountable disadvantage persisted over thousands of years and continues even today, when there are only two ways by which an American kid gets a good education: rich parents, or a willingness to plunge oneself into tens of thousands of dollars into debt (I myself owe $57,000 in student loans, which will not be paid off for 30 years). In less developed nations, literacy rates remain as bad as they were in Caligula's day. Still, though, America's own literacy rate ranks just 48th in the world (see Morris Berman's "Twilight of American Culture"). Of course, some of us are lucky enough to land a scholarship or grant, but that is too often like winning the lottery. People like Seutonius and Edward Gibbon were able to write history because they could afford to; they grew up in the upper classes where education was not only affordable but often taken for granted. Parenti's thesis is absolutely correct: history is written by the winners, the privileged and the fortunate. Thus, the condemnation of the ancient Roman populace as an unwashed and filthy rabble persists not because it is fact, but because it is the only history that circumstances have allowed. It is one of history's most glaring ironies that the privileged classes of ancient Rome considered themselves morally superior to plebs and slaves, when it was THEY who orchestrated spectacles such as this one, described so poignantly by Parenti: "The ceremonies to dedicate Pompey's theater included a battle between a score of elephants and men armed with javelins . . . the slaughter of the elephants proved more than the crowd could countenance. One giant creature, brought to its knees by missiles, crawled about, ripping shields from its attackers and throwing them into the air. Another, pierced deeply through the eyes with a javelin, fell dead with a horrifying crash. The elephants shrieked bitterly as their tormentors closed in. Some of them refu

As Goes Rome...

History is long dead, so who really cares what happened in ancient Rome? Surely there is some reason that it remains a staple of our educational curriculum. Perhaps it is because the more one learns about Rome, the more one understands about our own society and government. The lens of history permits us to take a less biased view of events. We gain an understanding of patterns and processes that, we suddenly realize, are applicable to our own situation in the present. This value of history, of course, depends on the impartiality of the history itself. Otherwise, history can be a powerful tool in warping our perceptions--both of the past and the present. Michael Parenti addresses these issues with a fine mix of political science and history in "The Assassination of Julius Ceasar". The subtitle is perhaps more descriptive of the book itself--"A People's History of Ancient Rome". Parenti does a brilliant job providing the background to the assassination itself. He paints Rome as a world much different than that normally portrayed in history textbooks. He takes us beyond a mere alternative interpretation of the events, however, into a historiological diatribe against the aristocratic historians who have, until now, portrayed Rome in a very warm light. From the primary sources--Cicero, Cato and Virgil--to the more recent giants of history such as Gibbon, Robinson and Tillemont, the accepted history of Rome has been passed down to us through an unbroken chain of wealthy aristocrats. Parenti points out their clear bias in interpreting issues of enlightened aristocracy, land reform and the plight of the commoner. He provides compelling evidence that this accepted, "gentleman's" history is strongly biased. He illustrates that this bias goes well beyond a few unkind words about "the ignorant masses" to outright reversal of the facts. Ultimately returning to the title, he demonstrates this egregious misrepresentation of history in the interpretations of the assassination of Julius Ceasar himself. Ask most any student of history about ancient Rome and you will hear about the strong democratic institution of the Senate, and about how Julius Ceasar made himself the first emperor of Rome by destroying the power of this institution, leading to the downfall of the Republic and the rise of Empire. Brutus and his fellow patriots killed Ceasar in an act of tyranicide, a last-ditch attempt to rescue the republic for the people of Rome. Or so the story goes... Never mind, for the moment, that Ceasar wasn't the first emperor (it was either Sulla or Octavian, depending on how you define Emperor). Never mind that the senate was never a democratic institution (but the tribal assembly of Rome was). Those commonly held beliefs are surely just simplifications to help us understand the big picture. At least we can remain confident in what we were taught about Ceasar himself? As Parenti points out, Gaius Julius Ceasar was actually the last in a long line of populares, men

Pulitzer Prize Nominated Masterpiece

The Assassination of Julius Caesar blows away the so called truth proffered to us by the gentlemen historians who peddle a genre biased towards an upper-class ideological perspective. Parenti is an eloquent Caesarian historian who displays an astonishing amount of research finely organized and presented in this Pulitzer Prize nominated work; which will no doubt have the Ciceronians scrambling to put together a rebuttal. The Assassination of Julius Caesar points out how numerous popularis fell victim to the optimates death squads, Tiberius Gracchus, Gaius Gracchus, Drusus, Clodius and Rufus all sealed their fates by taking up the populist cause. Along with Caesar each of them lobbied and passed such policies as land reform, debt forgiveness, expansion of the franchise, giving the craft guilds more power, and greater food allotments. Parenti makes for especially fascinating reading when he documents the reign of Sulla; the fascist autocrat whose policies weren't rolled back until Caesar's First Triumvirate was able to abolish some his more regressive laws. Also Dr. Parenti's sections on Cicero, the Machiavellian statesman who served autocratic interests, are sensational. He exposes Cicero's fomenting of the witch-hunt like Cataline Conspiracy. Egalitarian reforms and attempts to democratize decision making were treated as outright subversion by the optimates. Cicero upheld these values by constantly propagandizing against Cataline and his tepid reforms. We discover that Cicero was an odious creature who sold-out to power at every opportunity by often being quite an effective mouthpiece for the priveleged of ancient Rome. The Assassination of Julius Caesar shows how Caesar was not a revolutionary but rather a reformer who worked to break the stranglehold of the senatorial autocrats. While not being perfect, Caesar dedicated himself to the popular cause and was well liked by the masses. Unlike Cicero, Sulla, Brutus, Cassius and Cato of whom none have flowers left at their graves like Caesar's tomb does to the present day. Parenti documents how Caesar was committed to rolling back the worst class abuses perpetrated by the wealthy and was fondly remembered for it. One prevarication Parenti studiously attacks is Caesar's supposed burning of the Serapeum library in Alexandria. It was the Christ worshippers in the fourth century who carried out the deed, Caesar and his forces burned not a single page. The assassination itself is portrayed in vivid detail, including a surprising and accurate quote from Major General Fuller's biography that sums up the entire affair: "the plotters were well aware that under Caesar their opportunities for financial gain and political power would vanish." Perhaps not vanish but greatly diminish would have been totally accurate. A consistent theme runs throughout the book and that is Parenti's analysis and evidence of the bias many latter day gentlemen historians have against the "mob" or "rabb

People's History for real

Parenti's discussion of the assassination of Gaius Julius Caesar is radically enlightening. His presentation, like a fork of lightning, illumines the history of Rome. It's real and revelatory. I understand the history as I never before did. I can relate it to my life experiences and give it heft and dimensions because Parenti writes of and documents very well the crucial forces that were at work. He makes clear what the "gentlemen historians" with their upper class biases have so muddled.The words flow clear, the concepts easily grasped. He has a sweet way with words.He adds a very useful appendix that enables one on their own to penetrate into the scholarly resources available.An excellent book.