Gaius Marius
Marius was in some ways a great Roman hero. However, he also contributed to bringing disaster on Rome. Please read Plutarch's Life of Marius, either in the abridged version here or the unabridged version here. Cite a passage that particularly illustrates one of Marius' strengths or weaknesses.
posted by Ancient Art at 12:35 PM
15 Comments:
His first act after his election was to propose a change in the system of voting, which lessened the authority of the Patricians. This made him popular with the Plebeians; but when, on the other hand, he opposed certain laws regarding the distribution of corn that favored the people, he lost their good will, but gained favor with the Patricians. So he was honored by both parties as a man who worked only for the public good, and not for the interest of any particular party.
This passge says to me that, in his early years, Gaius Marius was able to apply unpopular laws evenly across the board. He showed favor to neither party in which the laws he enacted and enforced.
The Beginning passages say that Marius was honored by both the plebians and the partricians as a man who favors no part but does what is good for Rome. This can be a good quality. Too many people in public office do things to gain favor from their party diregarding what is actually good for their country. And in trying to gain favotism, they become consumed by their greed for power. Unfortunately, this good quality in Marius does not last. He continues to seek the consulship of Rome to the point where that is all he cares about. "He did not care how low he stooped if only he could gain favor with the people." This is not a good quality. It shows that Marius may have begun his political career as an honest man, but over the years his lust for power and greatness consumed him. Such greed does not bring greatness, but breeds disaster for the nation he wished to serve because no longer did he care for the good of Rome, but for the good of Marius.
Marius was a great Roman hero. However, like many, he clinged to power too long and led Rome into ruin throughout his seven terms as consul.
Marius, since he was young, had a warlike nature that made him a better wartime general than a peacetime leader. Marius did many glorious things in battle. However, the violence of battles did not end at the trenches and instead extended into the streets and towns of the Roman Empire due to his ambition to be a powerful leader.
Marius's war accomplishment brought him power, but he was unable to use that power wisely. "He was not a true patriot, but he would make any sacrifice for position, and worked as hard for his sixth consulship as any man had ever done for his first one. He did not care how low he stooped if only he could gain favor with the people; that meant to him votes, for which he even resorted to bribery." The passage reveals that he would do anything for power. However, Marius, in his sixth consulship, would lose the support of everybody through his actions such as taking bribes and not honoring Metellus for his deeds against Jugurtha.
After creating support among both the patricians and the plebians in his early consulships, Marius's ambition and drive for personal power lost him his support and led the disintegration of the Roman Republic, which never recovered.
"Though the law did not permit an absent man, or one that had not waited a given time after his first consulship, to be re-elected, the people would have no one but Marius; he was accordingly made consul a second time." I found this passage very important because it testifies to the trust the people had in Marius. His ability to unite the people and gain their unwavering faith is a strength.
Marius was excellent at fighting wars and started out working for the public good by changing voting to lessen the Patrichian authority, however, he became an evil and hated man, who would stoop to anything in order to get his way and be recognized.
"Without even the form of an election Cinna declared himself and Marius consuls, and then for five days there was nothing but massacre and bloodshed in the streets of Rome. At a word, or merely a nod of his head, the slaves of Marius would draw their swords and kill whoever failed to show him deference, so that even his friends approached him in fear and trembling. The most distinguished men of the state were butchered, and every town and [357] road was filled with the soldiers, who hunted down those that fled or hid themselves. One betrayed another in order to shield himself; all friendship and confidence was destroyed; still Marius required fresh victims every day, and revelled in the scenes of blood."
This paragraph stuck out the most for me because no matter what good deeds Marius had done in the past, they didn't excuse his ruthless, tyrant behavior on the people in his last days. He became a horrible man.
His first act after his election was to propose a change in the system of voting, which lessened the authority of the Patricians. This made him popular with the Plebeians; but when, on the other hand, he opposed certain laws regarding the distribution of corn that favored the people, he lost their good will, but gained favor with the Patricians. So he was honored by both parties as a man who worked only for the public good, and not for the interest of any particular party.
This shows how well Marius understood politics and showed his political strength. By using a basic political strategy, Marius was able to get quasi-support in both houses rather than complete support by one or another. He also applied this wit and smarts to his command and return after banishment.
The paragraph that stood out most to me was when Marius ran for his sixth consulship. This passage showed both Marius' strengths and weaknesses. "Marius worked as hard for his sixth consulship as any man had ever done for his first one." He wanted the consulship bad enough that he did anything to get it. His hard work and perseverence were great strengths but they also showed his weaknesses. "He did not care how low he stooped if only he could gain favor with the people; that meant to him votes, for which he even resorted to bribery." He wanted the consulship so bad that he would do anything to get it, even if that meant getting it dishonorably.
I agree that Marius did good things for Rome, but at the same time he crossed the line. The section which really caught my attention was:
He did not care how low he stooped if only he could gain favor with the people; that meant to him votes, for which he even resorted to bribery. And so he was elected, with Valerius Flaccus as his colleague.
I thought this was interesting. It seems Marius was caught up in the glory of being a hero and all the benefits that followed. He would have lost the election--if it had not been bribed. Therefore, the people of Rome really did not have a say in who was elected. Their democracy was threatened by Marius.
I rather liked the fact that he enlisted the help of the slaves in his army and the servents. This made him liked by the populace and I think it also is a smart thing to do. The more people that actually have a stake in the country the better off it is. And if the military is considered to be an elite or higher thing that I think it is smart to let other people in. This will make the slaves and servants feel like they are actually part of the state. It is also a smart thing to do because you are expanding the amount of men that an army can draw from. It did however anger some nobles but I think this is necessary every once in a while to keep them on their toes as well.
I believe that one of Marius' strengths early on was how he was simple enough to appeal to the people. Early on, he did not get caught up on fame and fortune. He was just a simple hard-working man who wanted to serve the people. I believe he got this from his parents who did hard labor and had to work for everything they had. Growing up in this envirnment, Marius did not have a chance to get caught up in money. This let him open his eyes up to other things such as being a great soldier.
Through this reading, one can see the importance of military prowess to the Romans.
While he enacted laws which were unpopular to the Patricians, he enacted others unfavorable to the Plebians. In this way he showed himself to be a man for all Romans.
But while he angered many, his victories in Africa gave him great political power. His victories in battle gave the people of Rome blind faith in their leader, thus electing him to seven terms as consul. By the end of his terms, he had lost this faith, and Rome as a republic, would never recover.
While marching, Marius trained his men to hardships by accustoming them to long, tiresome tramps, compelling every man to carry his own baggage and provide his victuals: so that afterwards "Marius's Mules" was a term applied to all hard workers who were patient and ready.
This is one particular passage which shows Marius commitment and strength. He wanted his soliders strong and ready for battle. He wanted them to understand hardship before it was thrust onto them, so that when hardship found its way, the soliders would be ready. This shows that Marius may not be the strongest leader, but he was commited and he was smart. He understood what it would take to push out the enemy. It was just dumb luck that the enemy chose to hit Spain and give Marius more time to work with his soliders.
I liked this passage in particular:
"His first act after his election was to propose a change in the system of voting, which lessened the authority of the Patricians. This made him popular with the Plebeians; but when, on the other hand, he opposed certain laws regarding the distribution of corn that favored the people, he lost their good will, but gained favor with the Patricians. So he was honored by both parties as a man who worked only for the public good, and not for the interest of any particular party."
I think that this passage shows strength in character because he was "middle of the road". He chose to side with the group based on what he felt was right morally, not politically. ALso, even though he was sometimes disliked by either group based on what policies he supported, he was also respected by both groups, which I think says alot about a person.
"His first act after his election was to propose a change in the system of voting, which lessened the authority of the Patricians. This made him popular with the Plebeians; but when, on the other hand, he opposed certain laws regarding the distribution of corn that favored the people, he lost their good will, but gained favor with the Patricians. So he was honored by both parties as a man who worked only for the public good, and not for the interest of any particular party."
This particular passage shows a strength in Marius. He's not interested in helping just one party out, but he's interested in helping everyone out to make sure that both parties are equal. Most people would help out the higher party because they could get paid more to do so or get more benefits. Marius helps out both knowing that he'll be loved or hated by both sides depending on what he does.
Without even the form of an election Cinna declared himself and Marius consuls, and then for five days there was nothing but massacre and bloodshed in the streets of Rome. At a word, or merely a nod of his head, the slaves of Marius would draw their swords and kill whoever failed to show him deference, so that even his friends approached him in fear and trembling. The most distinguished men of the state were butchered, and every town and [357] road was filled with the soldiers, who hunted down those that fled or hid themselves. One betrayed another in order to shield himself; all friendship and confidence was destroyed; still Marius required fresh victims every day, and revelled in the scenes of blood.
This passage is when Marius took control of the city and started killing the senators and everyone who apposed him. I believe it to be of the most importance because it shos his down fall and was no longer considered a hero.
Post a Comment
<< Home