Caesar's character; or, In defense of the standard of mankind

Dedication

' ' The public will expect, in choosing a patron for this work, the writer should address himself to some person of illustrious rank, and bearing a principal share in the great affairs of the nation. ' '^

Will it, then, be too bold to have dedicated this poor volume to the right honorable Governor Folk, of Missouri, for the uprightness of purpose displayed in his position, by his ''most passionate admirer and most devoted, humble servant" T

^Middleton. ^Steele.

Preface

This work has a single purpose. It was not written to display any merits (and if the latter exist it is the author's wish that they be made subordinate to his cause), but was called forth by the good in humanity.

The following incident will be of interest to those who may desire to know the circumstance that proved the immediate spur to the writing of this work.

One day at high school, the instructor in Latin, speaking of Caesar, said: ^'Caesar's character has never been satisfactorily explained, but undoubtedly he was one of the greatest monsters that ever lived." The writer, who was well acquainted with history, had previously thought along this same line, and had held similar ideas, and having his own thought, as it were, repeated to him, it doubly impressed him. He determined, therefore, to write on this man's character and clear up some facts that were not clear, at that time, in his own mind, nor in the minds of others. He then began to collect the original sources, but his work did not begin in earnest until two years later, and has progressed from that time to the present.

8 Preface,

In short, he then set out to establish what Steele so well states, ^^ There is no greater monster in being than a very ill man of great parts/ '^ That is, a man morally very sick, but possessing great abilities, is harmful to the world.

The original authorities were all consulted before going to the modern writers. The main original sources drawn from have been Plutarch, Suetonius, Appian, Dion Cassius, Cicero 's Letters, and Lucan. Suetonius was always considered a reliable authority by Mommsen, and is commended in the following terms by Trollope: ^'For the character of Cassar generally I would refer readers to Suetonius, whose life of the great man is, to my thinking, more graphic than any that has been written since. * * * There was enough of history, of biography, and of tradition to enable him to form a true idea of the man. He himself as a narrator was neither specially friendly nor specially hostile. He has told us what was believed at the time, and he has drawn a character that agrees perfectly with all that we have learned since. "^ Lucan, although a poet, made history the subject of his poem, and should be taken as authority, for, as Merivale says, ^'he sat at the feet of statesmen and philosophers, and knew much of history."^

Appian and Dion Cassius are usually taken as reliable authorities on this period of history.

'Steele— "De Coverly Papers," chap. III. ^'Trollope— "Cicero," Vol. I, p. 267. "Merivale — "Roman Triumvirs," p. 123.

Preface, 9

Plutarch needs no reference, and Cicero^s Letters on this period of Roman history are an inexhaustible fountain of information.

We liave used the same sources that the worshipers of Caesar have used, but *^our opinions, '' in the language of Cato, ''are extremely different. ' ^ We have probably shown what different results can be obtained from the same material. Let us say, with Fronde: "Suetonius shows, nevertheless, an effort at veracity, an antiquarian curiosity and diligence, and a serious anxiety to tell his story impartially. Suetonius, in the absence of evidence direct or presumptive to the contrary, I have felt myself able to follow."^ So have we.

The worshipers of Caesar, are dealt with in the work, but mention should here be made of one of them. The writer considers Fronde's volume to be probably the worst work on Caesar that has ever been written, and it was his original intention to deal with that work separately, but the final plan of his work prevented it. However, Froude 's work is dealt with under the subjects with which it treats.

In his notes the author has used an arrangement that he thought would be to the convenience of the reader, as it does not compel him to break off in the reading. The notes ^, ^, etc., are authorities only, or brief notes; (1), (2), etc., are the notes proper, or a comment on the subject.

In concluding his preface the writer wishes

iFroude— "Caesar," Preface, VIII.

10 Preface

to say that if those who perceive the purpose of this work feel it is not satisfactory, it will not be surprising, for it has not always come up to the expectations of its author. A man may have a grand thought, but to find one who can express it just as he means it, is a rare thing. However, as the work stands, he feels himself capable of saying with another, ^'So long as misery and ignorance remain on earth, books like this cannot be useless."^

Book I

"Will the world stop long enough in its terrific pace to listen to our mild speech?"

THE AEGUMENT

Pakt I. — All humanity is divided into two classes. Why the author took up this work. How it came to be written. Caesar's character has never been definitely settled. The writers who have condemned Caesar are innumerable. A noteworthy fact of the great moralists and philosophers of this world. Good often arises out of evil. The age in which Caesar lived. Caesar could never have flourished in a virtuous age. A difference between history and biography. Men's opinions concerning Caesar at various times. In Dante 's time ; in Shakespere 's time.

Part II. — A few reflections. The ignorance and simplicity of mankind. Men who are naturally passionate and men who are only occasionally so. A point in the characters of Alexander and Caesar. How many men are as Johnson describes? The lot of the pioneer of truth, as shown by past history. Typical way of the world in receiving the truth. The principle by which men live. One characteristic of the world's great literary works. The power of evil men over literature. A fault of the ancients and the deterioration of nations. Force and condemnation are the best weapons in handling evil ; some examples. A tale of a young man and a sceptical audience.

Part I

The whole of humanity is divided into two classes : the good and the evil ; no more, no less. This has often been stated before, but no man knows what it means. If in this work mankind obtains some conception of this great truth, we have done a thing of inestimable service to mankind.

Of all wars and conflicts, the war of the good and the bad is the greatest, and includes all others.

There was a bandit who, with his followers, had for many years terrorized the country in which they roamed, and who during a large part of these years had been pursued by a band of men, sent out by a governor who was known throughout this country as a man of strong moral purpose. After some twelve years of this wild and evil life, the leader of these bandits was caught. Upon being taken to prison he was lodged in a cell with one of his followers who had been captured some time previously. Their talk, naturally, was about their capture and the governor who had effected it. Upon his companion making some remarks about the traits of this governor, the leader of the bandits said, dejectedly, '^I don^t know what this thing morals is, but I do know it's something powerful."

If he had been impressed as well by his observation as by his experience, he would have seen that men give up their lives, countries become engaged in war, and that there is a continual conflict going on in the world about this '' something powerful."

Our subject, then, being above all others, embraces the human race, and is intended to be of world importance, for it assuredly deals with the most vital matter that concerns mankind.

The world will probably demand to know, then, why we arise from the depths of nowhere to speak of important and embracing matters. Firstly, the author sets forth clearly his belief that as a man lives but once in this world, be he rich or poor, high or low, of noble or mean birth, he should give his life to the betterment of the world. Secondly, the author has not taken up this task backed by a knowledge of his abilities, but has been irresistibly spurred on by a deep-seeing conscience. So that if a certain class of men learn nothing else from the work, they may observe and learn what a powerful thing a conscience is.

If there are traces of a certain forwardness in this work, the author wishes to say that he is naturally neither bold nor forcible, but when he saw in the first place that the world possesses little real merit, and in the second place that men in general are either wholly deceived by certain men, or are of the same nature themselves, or at least have much in common with them which causes them to have a degree of sympathy for these men, which fact is detrimental to the sympathizer, the sympathized, and the world in general — when the writer's mind was opened to these facts, although he perceived great obstacles to be overcome, and realized the immensity of his task, he determined to step forth and give his opinions on the matter. When a bashful nature like Demosthenes can be aroused, when a timid man like Cicero is spurred on to arise before men, when a naturally quiet nature like Luther is compelled to arise before the world and wield the weapon of righteousness, men may form some conception of the depths and far-reaching effects of evil.

We admit we have been given the offer to undertake this work, and have accepted it, but we have no intention of arousing men from their natural torpor by exciting their grosser appetites ; our tune will spring from a higher string, such as is found in the Great Work and in the teachings of Christ, in whose service we write. If mankind cannot hear this tune, does not descry its meaning, does not recognize its air, and does not accept it, then mankind will hurl upon itself one of the most terrible condemnations that humanity has ever received; our purpose being not to war with the world, but to teach it,

CaBsar's character has never been settled definitely, and various opinions have been given of it. Three things have entered into the question which influenced men in deciding the point. Firstly, the matter throws itself upon the moral nature of the historians and readers, for it has been noted that bad and immoral men always decide in favor of Caesar, whereas good and honest men invariably decide against him. Secondly, according to the government under which they themselves lived. Thirdly, according to the beliefs then prevailing.

Caesar has followers for two reasons, namely : there are many immoral people, and such resemble him more or less in their character, and follow him, just as there are people who choose Satan instead of Christ for their leader ; men in general are very easily deceived, and admire without comprehending, for men do not stop to analyze before they admire. It is true that men, like paintings, look better at a distance; but if one be composed of the right metal he will bear the analysis.

Writers have condemned Caesar in every form of literature known. In every form of prose, history, biography, satire and invective, besides poetry, has Caesar been denounced by writers of both ancient and modern times.

The writers, we repeat, that have condemned Caesar at various times and pointed out his glaring errors, are beyond number. It is possible that this work could have been made up entirely of quotations from historians and biographers, with remarks to explain the passages/ When it is possible to make such a statement one may realize the amount of material we have to back us up.

The works of these writers have not had the effect that it was intended they should have. As we make quotations from the most weighty authorities, it is sufficient here to say that the writers most depreciated are Lucan in ancient times and Middleton in modern times. Among others who have noticed and complained of this matter is Channing, who in his life of Napoleon says: '^ These reproaches are as little more than sounds and unmeaning commonplaces. They are repeated for form's sake. Wlien we read or hear them we feel that they ivant depth and strength/''^ This faulty however, lies not in the writers, but in the world, for it did not wish to bring to the surface the points brought out by those writers. There may be readers who will be inclined to consider this as humorous, but we wish to assure them this is no book of humor, and have only to ask them if this world is perfect! A negative answer being received, we will ask the nature of the world's imperfection. Aside from the example of Christ, almost all the great moralists and champions of truth have either been killed or exiled from their country. Agis and Socrates, of Greece ; the Gracchi, Cato, Cicero, and Seneca, all died for their opinions. Can creatures tvho kill such men

^A large part of the work is made up of quotations. ^Channing— "Works," p. 523.

read the weaker statements^ of the same hind of men and voluntarily give them credit? We are aware that the annals of history are corrupt from end to end, that the great deeds of this world have been largely derived from bad motives, that a great part of the good that has come into this world has been derived from the bad (1). Yet we are not dismayed. It does not prevent us from condemning it, from pointing out its faults, from showing the proper course and encouraging men to follow the latter.

The stories of the immorality of the age with which we deal, as told by the writers who lived during that time, are not a bit overdrawn. It is always the tendency of people to hide and lessen matters of this kind because they are unpleasant, but that is a very strange way of giving the truth of things. ' ' Truth is stranger than fiction,'^ and it should be added, there is nothing more terrible. A passage or two, however, will suffice for our purpose.

Of this period Middleton says: ^'In the declining state of the Republic, the elections were carried on not only by the most shameful and

'^Weaker because the former mentioned tried to force their ideas upon the world, whereas the latter confined themselves merely to the pen and were easier to meet.

(1) The good part of history is made up in this manner, but a few instances will suffice. Was not the Reformation, started by Luther, caused by the indulgences and licentiousness of the people? Was not Christ's coming upon earth with the object of reforming its corrupt, depraved inhabitants? And so "The Divine Comedy," "Pilgrim's Progress," and "Paradise Lost" were written to uplift the world from its awful depth of wickedness.

avowed bribery, but by the several mobs of the respective candidates. These, it may well be imagined, were both disposed and prepared to commit every outrage that the cause of their leaders should require."^ Mommsen, after railing against this ^'unnatural world, in which the sexes seemed as though they wished to change parts," says of this period: *'To be poor was not merely the sorest disgrace and the worst crime, but the only disgrace and the only crime ; for money the statesman sold the state and the burgher sold his freedom; the post of the oJSicer and the vote of the juryman were to be had for money; for money the lady of quality surrendered her person, as well as the common courtesan ; falsifying of documents, and perjuries had become so common that in a popular poem of this age an oath is called 'the plaster for debts.' Men had forgotten what honesty was ; a person who refused a bribe was regarded not as an upright man, but as a personal foe."^ We can well apply to this age what another had occasion to apply to a later period, "A time when dishonor and shame may arrive at high honors ; all evil repute and disgrace is knighted and ennobled ; when a marriage is suffered that is in a forbidden degree, or has some other defect. There is a buying and a selling, a changing, blustering and bargaining, cheating, lying, robbing and stealing, debauchery and villainy, and all kinds of contempt of right. "^

^Middleton — "Cicero," p. 386 (one-volume edition). ^Mommsen — "Rome," B. V, chap. XI. 'Luther.

In short, this and the age following were probably the most corrupt that the world has ever seen, and it had to be so for Caesar to prosper, for in a more virtuous age he would have had too many Catos, Ciceros and Catulli to overcome, and not enough Catilines, Curios and Antonys to help him; for it must be remembered that his army was made up almost solely of this kind of men. Cicero, in his letters of this time, says repeatedly that Caesar had all the criminal and obnoxious of all Italy in his army. Caelius says the army was composed solely of dishonorable men, ' ' all of whom had causes for apprehension in the past and criminal hopes for the future. ' ' Furthermore, in a better age the government would not have been corrupt and weak, and could not have been overthrown.

In history, the life of a man is not sufficiently dwelt upon, because history must take only the broader lines of affairs and take what is on the surface, often skipping over all that is beneath, but which is of vital importance. This is not a fault of history; it is the nature of it. Biography, however, stops and goes into the nature of a man, and speaks of the different phases of his character. This is the reason that the biographies of Caesar are so damaging to his character ; while the histories state the performance of his deeds, but do not stop sufficiently long to explain the means by which those deeds were performed. And in this period, as Meyers says, "events gather about a few great names, and the annals of the Eepublic become biographical rather than historical."^ The author, perceiving this, has made his work not less historical than biographical, but more biographical than historical.

The purpose of the writer, let it be made clear, is not to war with the dead nor with the fame of a man, but it is to war with the evil effects of that fame, which is not confined to one man, but which concerns the whole of humanity. As has been said before, there are three facts which influence men in their judgment of Ca3sar: the internal force or the moral sense of men as individuals, and the two external forces, namely, the government under which they themselves live and in accordance with the beliefs prevailing at the time.

In Dante's time men's minds were concerned with things that were holy, and Caesar was considered to have founded the Holy Roman Empire.

Dante, with Milton, wrote one of the most helpful, uplifting works humanity has received, but he had no insight into the character of Julius Caesar. He believed that the latter was divinely appointed to rule over earthly affairs. Whether he was deceived by Caesar's bluff of being descended from the gods, we know not; but wherever he got the theory, as soon as common sense is applied to it, it goes up in the air. But Dante's misconception of Caesar made him send Brutus and Cassius to the depths and the

^Meyers — "Ancient History," p. 467.

lower regions, whereas they most assuredly belong to the upper world.

We then come to a period in which Shakespere was involved, and w^ho, in the opinion of the writer, was an anti-Csesar man. During and after the Renaissance, when the people were lifted out of their ignorance, a decided stand was made against Caesar and in favor of Cato, Brutus, Pompey, and the defenders of the Republic. The influence of this period prevailed at the time Shakespere lived, but to those who will not accept the statements of the critics Schlegel and Gildon that the play is pro-Brutus, and are not impressed by Oman's positive statement, ^ ' It needs but a glance through this tragedy to see that Brutus is the hero,"^ to those, we repeat, we will direct a few questions. Does not Shakespere make his readers sympathize with the conspirators % Does he not make Caesar out as a braggart, and does he not make his pride go directly t3efore a fall? Does he not praise Pompey, to Caesar's detriment; and does he not exalt Brutus'? There is but one answer. Then could they have been expressed by any other than an anti-Caesar manT

But the strongest argument in showing that this play was an anti-Caesar play is the fact that at this time of which we speak there lived two of the greatest m.en, not only of England, but of the world, both of whom wrote decidedly

^Oman — "Seven Roman Statesmen— Caesar." -An expression of Shakespere that has been distorted by the followers of Caesar will be dealt withi later.

24 Caesar's Character

against Julius Cassar. These men were Francis Bacon and Ben Jonson. The work of the former was ''A Civil Character of Julius Caesar/' and was well received. The work of Jonson was a drama named *' Catiline/' in which he gives Caesar a part in the conspiracy of Catiline. The play was well received by the people, and Jonson considered it one of his best works. Who is it, then, who will say that in this age in which the people were so averse to Caesar, Shakespere would not write so as to find an echo in the people?

And so the attitude toward Caesar has changed according to the times and inclinations of men. But the time when the principle of right and wrong is employed in judging Caesar — when it is asked, did he do lawful? were his actions proper? was his life honest and his means pure ? — that time has not yet come. The author, although taking into account those things that have influenced other men, will try to follow out this last principle so far as it is within the power of one man.

PAET II

In the great works of the world, the passions of men — weak men, evil men, imfortunate men and fallen man — are the themes that are most popular.

Life is a disappointment, in tliat its pleasures are not permanent.

Pleasure is a disappointment that is why so many pleasure-seekers are so sour.

In inequalities of the intellect and financial inequalities, the one that cannot be prevented nor averted is striven against, while the other, which can be prevented or averted, is allowed to exist to such an extent that while some men own palaces and mansions, and throw away money on clothes, cigars and beer, others have not enough bread.

Business is a good thing for tramps, bums and broken sports.

One of the worst evils of this world, in its effects, is the way evil and misfortune impresses most men. They exaggerate it, bewail their fate, become indifferent to their own fate or the welfare of others.

Men, in their present state, do not like to admit the facts of life ; for, as they must live, they want it to be as pleasant as possible. This attitude, however, induces them to become hypocrites, and say things when they know different.

The petite passions of men rule business, and it follows that it (business) is loaded with selfinterest.

Men were more of their own nature in ancient times than they are to-day. For civilization has brought much polish with it that makes hypocrisy easy and desirable. In ancient times, aside from man's original nature, hypocrisy was unknown; now, all are hypocrites. In earlier times, hypocrisy was natural to some individuals ; now, it is a system.

All men are evil ; the difference only being in the type and the depth, which, however, offers a great variety.

There is a degeneration going on in this country. First, its inhabitants fought for this country and posterity (1776). Then they fought between one another in the Civil War (1861). Now, through the spirit of money-making, they %ht one another, to get the money (1907). Money leads to luxury and pleasure, and the latter means the downfall of a countrj^, as it did for Persia, Greece and Eome. And neither the gold of the East nor the resources of the West can prevent this. (Rome was extended over the world when she went down.) This thing will not happen in a day, nor a week nor a month, but it will happen, and is happening to-day.

The world is a place where defects are howled about much louder than merits are appreciated.

It is very seldom that you find a man who is willing to agreeably surprise one.

The world is crooked from top to bottom, inside and out; and its inhabitants, with a little variety, are all crooked. Probably that's why the world is round.

Burglars;, grafters, thieves, murderers and whores get the bulk of attention and notoriety here.

The highest and purest motives have the less chance of succeeding.

In this world, pleasure is that feeling which we receive when pain leaves us.

The good, in this world, is derived in this way : Take the worst and compare it to the bad. The bad is better than the worst — this is the good.

Life is a game that is not played on the level ; and it is a desperate game, at the best.

What are the beliefs and practices of one age are the ridicule of another. Every age, like man, must believe that it is right, and the others wrong; otherwise it could not flourish. In the case of individual men, if this illusion did not exist, existence would be unendurable.

It is quite difficult to teach the present age of what things are good, for it is wrapped up in the present, and its case is analogous to that of man in passion, who sees its merits only, but no defects or consequences. The past, the only place where these lessons can be learned, they will not turn to long enough to take their eyes off what is before them. Are not men of the past made up of the same bone, blood and flesh as men of the present! However, they (men of the present) can easily be taught the different varieties of worldly pleasure and personal gain.

There is not a passion man is heir to that is not delusive. If it were as strong as it, in its height, appears to be, then he would have something, but, as it is, it is like a gas balloon, with nothing to it. Similarly, are man's hopes so much so in fact that frequently he is best off who has no hopes.

A man who exposes vice and crime is frequently called a scandal-monger, etc., pure as liis intention and purpose might be, while those who did the act get off scot-free. Such is the judgment of men. But the point is, has he no right to condemn this condition and ask men to better it?

If the principle brought out by the writer, in this work, is not satisfactory to the world, and does not coincide with that law of the world, ''The world is the all in all, the ruler of all things, superior to and above all else; what is satisfactory, alone, is accepted; what is not, is rejected. ' ' This is a law, dear reader, by which the world has unsuccessfully tried to rule itself. If the principle brought out by the writer does not coincide with this law, and is not satisfactory to the world, it is no fault of the writer. It is his work simply to proceed.

The ancient Greeks were the most heautifid race the world has produced, and mankind will probably never produce a race of people their equal. In the arts, science, literature, the Greeks were the first of heroes, painters, poets and philosophers. The ancients, until the end of time, will be admired by mankind for more things of depth than any other age. The reason is that they possessed a finer quality and a greater quantity of nervous force than men of to-day and, as a result, were the more gifted; but they misused their powers, and the human race deteriorated and left us the remnants of a once glorious race. The men of to-day misuse their powers by siiniliar means, and to-day the human race is deteriorating'.

People deny many of the dark things of this life, because they have to live here and want it to seem as pleasant as possible. But that is getting at neither truth nor facts ; it is simply adding another illusion to the many that already exist.