Hero vs. Tyrant
Many people ague weather Julius Caesar was a tyrant or hero. There is no question that he made a revolution for Rome. From the beginning Caesar was a natural born leader. In 72 BCE Caesar around thirty or son was awarded military tribune. Two years later Caesar obtained a seat in the senate. He kept making carful discussions to capture power, for instance he joined with two other senators to form the first Triumvirate. Time went on and Caesar left to conquer Gaul which he seceded but coming back nine years later. Later after that he led his armies across the Rubicon River and marched into Rome. Marching an army into to Rome was highly unpopular with the aristocrats and was illegal. But Caesar did it anyway and taking full power of Rome and announcing himself as dictator. This is how Caesar took power, by force. But Caesar suggested laws to the senate which the senate approved that did make Rome a better place. For example he enforced a police force to prevent the over whelming crime in Rome, this made him very popular with the lower class population but the aristocrats hated him. While Caesar made Rome a better place, that way he went about doing it made him a tyrant.
Caesar is said to be a hero for very good reasons with strong evidence that supports this. Some excerpts from the document packet, “When Caesar had finished his series of brilliant campaigns; he had changed the nature of the Roman empire from purely Meditrainian realm into western European empire. He had also driven the empires frontier up to the Rhine, a natural, easy defendable border, which should come to be the imperial border for centuries.” This excerpt states that he expanded the Roman Empire which is heroic for the roman people. He initially made Rome richer, bigger, and safer for Roman citizens. He was an honorable general with surprising will power to accomplish his goals. Another excerpt, document 1 paragraph seven page two, “he established order, begun measures to reduce congestion in Rome, draining large track tracts of marshy lands, gave full voting rights to the inhabitants of his formal province south of the Alps, revised the tax laws of Asia and Sicily, resettled many Romans in new homes in the Roman provinces and reformed the calendar, which one slightest adjustment we still use today.” This except proved that Caesar did a lot of good in Rome. He demoted crime; he housed the homeless and gave full voting rights to a lot of people. This is strong evidence that Julius Caesar was a hero to the Roman Empire. When Caesar was assassinated here is some evidence of how it affected Rome. On page nine, paragraph two it states, “By this act, the assailants believed they had saved the Roman Republic. In fact, they set a stage for its complete undoing.” This proves the once Caesar was assassinated the government went out of control. He was keeping Rome in order and when the aristocrats killed him they did more harm than good.
Julius Caesar did do good in Rome but the way he did it was very tyrannical. Page one, end of paragraph two in the document packet it says, “In 49 BC Caesar crossed the Rubicon River, the demarcation line between his provinces in Italy. He marched into Rome of his battle hardened army, where he met little resistance.” First in for most, this was illegal in Rome to march an army through Rome because the senate didn’t want Rome be turned into a Hellenistic empire but remain a republic. But Caesar announced himself a dictator of Rome. For this made he is a tyrant because no one deserves having power if it is taken by force. Soon afterward Caesar was assassinated. A senator named Cicero claims, “Our tyrant deserved to die. Here is a man who wanted to be king of the Roman people and master of the whole world. Those who agree with an ambition like this must also accept the destruction of existing laws and freedoms. It is not right or fair to want to be king in a state that used to be free and ought to be free.” People thought it was fair and just to keep Rome as it is, like what Cicero says. Caesar was hungry for power and how do we know the good things he did in Rome was only to gain power for himself.
To conclude, while Caesar made Rome a better place the way he went about doing it made him a tyrant. There is no doubt that Caesar did restore Rome like decreasing poverty and promoting voting rights. But how do we know that he did these things just to gain power, the only way we could do this is to ask him personally which obviously we can’t.