A Show of Liberty: Lessons from Tom Holland's "Dynasty"

There has been a recent spat of published works within the last few years about Ancient Rome, particularly the period between the fall of the Republic and the rise of the Empire.  There are some good reasons for that.  Aside from New Testament Judea, it is one of the best preserved periods in ancient history.  There are scores of contemporary documents from that time.  We even have the personal accounts of the conquest of Gaul (modern France) and the civil wars from the hand of the man who instigated both, Julius Caesar.  However, I think this recent popularity is due to how our own period in American history feels similar to their time.  The rise of populist leaders like Donald Trump make one wonder if, like the rise of the house of Caesar, are our freedoms truly being restored or are we being given the show of freedom while our essential liberties are being taken away from us?

That's  why this book, Dynasty: The Rise and Fall of the House of Caesar by Tom Holland, is such a welcome one.  Not only did Mr. Holland write an incredible book about the end of the Roman Republic, Rubicon: The Last Years of the Roman Republic, which was one of my favorite books from my senior year of high school, but because some of the things he touches upon feel so familiar to our current time.

Here are some things I learned from reading this book:

• The show of power vs. the reality of power- I have a confession to make: aside from a few odd episodes here and there, I have not seen the popular Netflix show House of Cards.  I know, it is a critically acclaimed show and it is definitely on my list.  However, a recent YouTube video from the group Wisecrack has bumped this up on my summer to-do list.  In it, the narrator Jared examines the philosophy behind the show.  One of the themes Jared touches upon in his examination of House of Cards is the show of power versus the reality of power.  Examined by such 20th century philosophers as Hannah Arendt, some argue that the show of politics keeps citizens from engaging fully in politics by putting on a show while the real decisions are made in the backrooms away from the cameras.  Others argue that the show and the reality are one and the same.  Seriously, take some time to watch the Youtube video and some of Wisecracks other works.  Thug Notes is especially good.  What does this have to do with a book about the beginning of the Imperial Roman era?  A lot as it turns out.  When both Augustus and Nero died, they compared themselves to actors or artists.  Augustus is reported to have said, "Have I played the part well? Then applaud as I exit"  Nero's last were recorded as "What an artist dies in me." Mr. Holland mentions the theatrics of the imperial regime throughout and it is easy to see how the theater of politics Augustus put on masked the reality of politics as the rights of the people and the Senate were slowly stripped away.  It's also interesting to note that as the emperor's began to use power more nakedly, their regimes became more shaky.  Caligula and Nero openly disdained the formalities of the Senate and elections for local magistrates.  Both emperors were hunted down and killed by their enemies.  It just goes to show that you can take away any nation's freedoms so long as you put on a good show.  In the wake of the James Comes testimony, can anyone really disagree?

• The normalization of tyranny- There was one particularly sad moment in this book.  During his reign, the emperor Tiberius stripped away some of the people's political rights, such as the right to elect local magistrates.  However, Mr. Holland notes what happened when the next emperor, Caligula, restored their rights:"The days when the plebs had agitated for political rights were gone, and no one in Rome's slums greatly missed them.  Why bother with elections, after all, when they never changed anything? This was why Caligula's restoration to the Roman people of their right to vote had been greeted with such yawns of indifference that it had soon discreetly been abandoned." (p. 324)  This is how democracies die.  Bad behavior becomes normalized.  Leftist opponents to Pres. Donald Trump have noted the many norms shattering actions of his election (refusing to reveal his tax returns; denigrating immigrants, Muslims, Mexicans,  and people with disabilities; open boasts of sexual assault) that would have disqualified any other candidate for the presidency.  They tell us not to let his behavior become normalized.  They warn us about this because that is pretty much what happened in Ancient Rome under the Caesars.  If democratic governments are seen as corrupt or incompetent (or both) and if nothing seems to change from one election to another, then it becomes easy for the people to give up their rights to a dictator.  We already known that an embarrassingly small number of Americans vote in presidential and congressional races.  Even local elections, which can have more of an immediate impact on ones life than a national election, are poorly attended.  If people continue to see American democracy as ineffective, how much longer until we no longer have elections in this country?

It is interesting to see how this story develops.  There seem to have been many times when the Empire could have reverted back to the Republic, but it never does.  The roots of the imperial regime had become so ingrained in the body politic of Roman life that it was impossible for the people to see a future without a Caesar at the helm.  The Founding Fathers tried to plant the lessons of this period into the Constitution to keep a Caesar from rise up in America.  Hopefully the Constitution and the institutions of American democracy are stronger than Rome's.

Once again, life got in the way of me posting this at the beginning of the week even though I finished this book then.  I hope you will forgive me for this and that you will join me again next week when I review The Islamic Enlightenment: The Struggle Between Faith and Reason, 1798 to Modern Times by Christopher De Bellaigue. Until then, keep on reading!