Julius Caesar
Hero vs. Tyrant
Ande Lloyd
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.