Moreover, democracy was not, as the aristocracy, a party based on a unitary, over a communion of interests. What held them together was something negative, hostility toward the Senate (upper bureaucracy and large landowners). Only then can explain the alliance between the cavalry (capitalists) and the proletarian crowd, which drew alliance main and essential advantages in their struggle first competition with the aristocracy who was intimately closer. This bourgeois democracy, which certainly was more democratic bourgeoisie, the proletariat, if one day he must come to the decisive struggle had nothing to expect.
However, true democracy, the social, not dead. The proletarian movement had fermented enough time in the town but in the capital, where because of the squabbles and personal differences within the parties, the vote as an article of trade was priced rather high, which in the plains italics. Here were wandering thousands and thousands of peasants forced off their lands by Sulla, as bandits without bread and home are reinforced by veterans of the Sila, who had supplanted before the first and now had to succumb to the large estate that was spreading each again. While Pompey was still in the fight against Mithridates in Asia, the social crisis again erupted violently in Italy, belonging also this time the drivers of the movement of the high aristocracy.
I purposely attempts reformers and revolutionaries of Sulpicius and Lepidus we have seen how hateful cartoons historiography can do part of his political opponents. But none is so disfigured in exhibitions and performances of those times as the principal chief of the proletarian movement erupted in AD 63. His name still causes generally a feeling of almost criminal folly: it is Catiline, represented in the blackest colors both in ancient as in modern. Scion of one of the oldest noble families of Rome, had joined in the civil war Sulla as a young officer and certainly it will also pay a tribute to the blind fury of that time supporter. Many times he had to conduct punitive executions and can therefore accept that there may be exceeded in severity and cruelty the limits of what is indispensable, but the most serious of the accusations brought against them, killing his own brother, is tested too weakly to be repeated. The fact is that, when accused by such executions together with other officers, he alone was acquitted.
What we are concerned about from the subsequent private life Catiline would be really scary if true. But it is noted that the accusations against him are growing in severity over time and accuracy. Things to contemporaries, despite his fierce hostility to Catiline, do not mention or refer only never entirely vague assumptions, appear in later stories as incontrovertible facts. It was never taken to court for these crimes, he would have murdered his first wife and her stepson, while the other is trying, of course without ever succeeding, to discredit him before the judges continued allegations. But later historians, the perversity of Catiline becomes a mandatory topic of declamation and each claims the right to paint so honrrosamente as nobody did before. But the fame of Catherine should not have been before his revolutionary attempt so bad, even in the eyes of his bitterest enemy, Marcus Tullius Cicero. Catiline and Cicero presented its candidature for the consulate of the year 63. As there were other candidates, sought an agreement with Cicero Catiline to appear together in one list, but Catiline declined the offer because he was more sympathetic another candidate. Moreover, Cicero until shortly before had assumed the defense of Catiline, when his enemies had accused him of having fleeced the province of Africa, whose government took after the performance of the Pretura in Rome. The most reliable witness reports that Cicero actually said the cause of Catiline, with an address obtaining his acquittal.
Unfortunately, this speech is not preserved, for it would have a portrait of the man whom we know from existing sources, just as a monster "to Ravachol.
If we know the cause of this distortion of Catiline's personality in all of our sources, we must take as a starting point run for the consulate. The scion of an ancient patrician family in the way of a splendid career, succumbs in the election right in front of Cicero, a "parvenu" ambitious, scion of a gentleman very prominent. This strange fact is explained in the internal political problems that were pending in that election. He was preparing something big. The conviction that the situation of urban and rural proletariat urgently required a remedy, had led to the preparation of a project, which promoted the solution of the most radical and wider.
The bill was introduced by the tribune P. Servilius Rulo, a fanatical and utopian, but that was certainly very serious and honest intentions. Rulo proposed the election of a college of ten citizens, who must be in function for a minimum period of five years and undergo a radical revision of title and possession in Italy. Not only should distribute all state land among those who had nothing, this Commission should also have the unlimited provision of all financial resources of the state to create, through acquisitions within and outside Italy, a lot of land. Obviously it consisted of a return to graquianas ideas, but in a much broader, since the transfer of all financial administration to that Commission, by the use of all public resources for the needs of the proletariat, it is became de facto, not only in the abstract, in the sovereign people of Rome.
Senators and knights were equally threatened by this law. Although they were guarded against the forced sale and forfeiture, the crowd had come by the law humble servant to such a degree of power in the state that it would not have been possible to control bait were as thin as cash subsidies to customers, distributions of grain or public games. But first of all aridity threatened her great sources. Gauging, tenths, war booty, contributions should, henceforth, be invested by that Commission for the benefit of the proletariat. Until the generals and governors of provinces, until now almost completely independent, should in future be subject to accurate financial control of the Commission. And it was clear that after five years, the role of this Committee had been extended so that, by force of routine, would have formed a permanent government collateral, against which the Senate stripped of financial management, I had not had a shadow of existence.
The demands of Rulo were based on a conception absolutely fair and sound. If you wanted to distribute material successes of the Roman imperialist policy as evenly as possible among all, there was no other way than prescribed by Rulo. Also in this plan, as in the colonization laws of Gracchus and Saturninus, was including the great political thought - the state of decentralization, then the least accessible and logically would have to emerge immediately from the emancipation of the Italians. However, decentralization was precisely the most appropriate point for the beginning and the intensification of the agitation on the part of opponents. Nobility and chivalry, again in league against the common danger in a block as solid as ever they were before, they knew very well that to determine "a priori" the fate of the project Rullianus was enough to present it in that way to the urban populace, the that ultimately did in the voting tilt the scales in either direction. Any consideration for non-Roman population was regarded with suspicion.
Catiline, as follows from its election manifesto, which was transmitted to us, indeed distorted, by Cicero and Sallust, fully shared the proletarian standpoint, ie from Rulo. Both developed privileged classes against the election of Catilina the most violent agitation. Its common candidate was just the "parvenu" Cicero, who was elected as representative of the "sign of order," as he called it, against the candidate of the revolutionary proletariat and rural. The second consul, Gaius Antonius, was a fellow of Rulo and Catiline, but incompetent, indecisive and not even sure, being rather inclined to move to the opponent, if they had personal interests required. Actually, Anthony did nothing for the draft Rulo Cicero once he had done in the eyes glow a promise of abundant provision for the following year. Both Cicero worked more strongly. In his inaugural speech to the Senate and the People's Assembly draft Rulo fought in the most resolute, which is explained by the serious danger that threatened the interests of cartel enforcement.
Humiliating for the great mass of the urban population is, however, that Cicero's appeal went to the basest instincts of the same.
"Do not go," said Cicero's admonition to the colonies of Rulo! You do not sacrifice to, of course, by the hard field work, the advantages that only here can you enjoy, your influence on the distinguished citizens, free life , your voting rights, your consideration, in view of the city and the forum, games, parties and all that is beautiful in Rome. " He should think that these words are a treacherous distortion or invention of a political adversary, but these are in the speech and published by Cicero against Rulo, and we here a true testament to the high politics of the "poster order ".
Cicero can not blame him either from his fundamental point of view, or from that of his tactics, much less be accused of inconsistency. By the way, had been emerging as a Democrat to assume the consulate is set to head the party in the Senate. But Cicero had been a Democrat only because he had joined the cavalry for a time the proletariat for the struggle against the domination of the Senate. The more unnatural alliance was the more natural was the coalition of the Senate and the cavalry, the "cartel of order" against the new social-revolutionary ideas. Cicero, the greatest parliamentarian of Rome, who with his magnificent speeches, full of temperament, spirit and humor, got drunk himself and others, was not, however, a great statesman. Like almost all his contemporaries, nor understood the new party, which, in turn, was barely conscious of their homogeneity. She was not well in the new grouping, the Democratic morbid considering it as an abnormality and criminal, as a few decades ago was used to treat the social and especially their leaders emerged from bourgeois circles. Moreover, Cicero was lucky with his speeches. The Rulo bill fell even before the vote and the italics proletariat was again at the grave of a hope.
But Catiline not give up, and the following year he appeared again as candidate for the consulate on the basis of proletarian program. Mass reached Rome from all parts of Italy the proletariat for the election of consuls, but this time in vain, to be elected two ardent enemies of reform. The agitation was intense electoral and vote-buying was not only accomplished, but until approved. But just this wild turmoil of the enemies of reform served as a lesson to the followers of Catiline, who are also the propertied classes, and even senators and knights, led now a large contingent of "socially awake." Now it was clear that nothing could be achieved by constitutional means and that a change could be obtained only by the path of violence. For an armed uprising was no lack of strength. Bands roamed everywhere proletarians, threatening the lives and property of residents.
Catiline wanted to avoid, as long as possible, that way. Were the opponents who longed to the outbreak of the revolution, to be rid of this fraction of its opponents and before the return of Pompey from Asia. Cicero went so far as provocation and finally had success. Catiline, after he had organized in Rome the revolutionary party, left the capital and began, in Etruria (Tuscany), the head of the strongest in those bands. Tried to become a well-ordered army and agree with the rebels in the other regions for a general attack against Rome. Meanwhile in the capital was proclaimed a state of siege and armed several armies, who were quick to march to the threatened regions. At the same time be proceeded against the adherents of Catiline in Rome imprisonment and illegal executions altogether. War broke out before Catiline could make the necessary preparations. Once again the "cartel of order" managed to succeed. On the hills of Fiesole. near Florence, the army of the insurgents was destroyed (62 d C.) Catiline fell again and the proletarian movement was without drivers.
Catiline is true, had become revolutionary, driven by circumstances and by the provocations of their opponents, but violent revolution had already become an indispensable instrument in policy development. If you wanted to lead an army against Rome, did nothing but what they did before him, Sylla and Marius and what would shortly after Julius Caesar. For this you can not, of course, see a criminal Catiline. What he undertook was serving a good cause, which worried him more than his own political career. But his adversaries forged legends stupidest and most shocking to debunk, once and for all, the proletarian movement to burn in the proletarian party as the party of anarchy, to bring up their own fight against social reform as a fight against subversion. The currency you want to accept all that pure Cicero, his brother Quintus Cicero and Sallust, representing the "bourgeois" democracy, have collected and invented for that purpose, would logically have to be judged also according to Gaius Gracchus or demonstrations of Cicero Napoleon Volfango according to Menzel. However, if the political art of Catiline had been to murder and arson, his supporters were not met for years and years, on the anniversary of his death around his grave to honor the memory of the fallen godly glory, which both had expected. And very hard in the elections for the year 63 had voted at the same time many citizens by Catiline, the friend of reform, and by Cicero, the representative of the "sign of order."
The so-called "Conspiracy of Catiline", whose sole purpose was the election of party chief for consul, has occupied us long, because this constitutes the only real explosion of proletarian fermentation in the post-silane. That success is missing, is to be attributed only partly to the imperfection of the organization, in reality, the movement was not the right man who could take the reins of government with a firm hand with practicality and broad prospects, as opposed to the ruling powers. Neither Rulo and Catiline had those conditions. Moreover, denying the situation to the point of considering social reform to reconcile with a world empire Republican. Neither enjoyed the reputation among the crowd, to distinguish themselves with displays of monarchical aspirations. To a crowd in general and in particular Roman proletariat prevailed over after all only a man of war. If they had had in their ranks to Pompey, the success would have been possible. They had what was missing for Pompey owner erected in Rome: positive and sweeping political ideas, while one that had what they lacked: the means of power, familiarity with its use and fame of irresistible because of his military successes. Even when the aristocracy feared Pompey close union and the party of reform, the latter did not want any connection with it precisely because of its monarchical inclinations, seeking instead to convert the "College of the ten" in a power which should contain not only the aristocratic clique, but monarchical aspirations.
No comments:
Post a Comment