The decline and fall of the Roman Republic has been a prominent theme of discussion for 2,000 years. The reasons given for its demise are practically as numerous as the years that have followed it. Josiah Osgood, one of the nation’s leading scholars on Ancient Rome, presents a number of the most obvious reasons—such as corruption, vice, militarism, and political violence—for the Republic’s erosion into Empire. But it is less about those reasons and more about how he presents them that makes his new book so compelling.
“Lawless Republic: The Rise of Cicero and the Decline of Rome,” as the subtitle suggests, guides the reader through the final decades of the Roman Republic as witnessed through the eyes of one of the city-state’s most famous citizens: Marcus Tullius Cicero. It was, indeed, a most creative way to chronicle those final years.
Osgood presents Rome’s “new man,” (novus homo), which Cicero was, as he was not of a patrician family, and he was the first of his family lineage to be consul. Cicero rose to the highest rank of political life through his brilliance as a lawyer—both prosecutor and defender. His oratorical and literary skills placed him on a pedestal as a defender of Rome’s republicanism.
Cicero as History
“Lawless Republic” is a brilliant piece of history in that it is both a biography and a historiography. Osgood ties these two together so neatly that the reader is able to finish the book having a good grasp of the man and the city-state. The author presents Cicero’s genius regarding how he pursued particular cases, like murder or fraud; his dedication to his investigation and to his client; and his ability to manipulate court procedure, the jury and, for better or worse, the law.In one of the earliest cases, and one of his most famous, Cicero prosecutes the violent kleptomaniac and governor of Sicily, Gaius Verres. Osgood demonstrates how Cicero was so familiar not only with the law, but also Rome’s culture and festivals, that he could avoid a legal trap that would have allowed for Verres to postpone and possibly avoid the trial altogether. His decision to forego his opening statement put the defense on its heels, from which it never recovered.
The Beacon Is Darkened
The author, however, does not begin with governmental fraudulence. No, he draws the reader in with a much more intriguing vice: murder. In fact, murder plays such a significant role in many of Cicero’s cases that it becomes clear just how corrupt and destructive Rome—supposedly the beacon of civilization—had become. Furthermore, Osgood highlights how often the courts themselves had become places of corruption and destruction; gangs of supporters (“gangs” being the operative term) for the prosecution or defense would arrive and at times shout down or intimidate the other side. It exemplifies how far Rome had fallen.
Of course, there was always the hope that if one major case could be won, the Republic might move toward self-correction. One of those cases, which is one of history’s most important moments (and a valuable teaching moment concerning domestic policy), was the Catiline Conspiracy. This conspiracy took place while Cicero was consul, having defeated Catiline in the election. It is a moment where Cicero shines brightest, at least politically, because of his defense of the Senate and of Rome as a whole.
But, as Osgood demonstrates, Cicero’s love of the law is caught in contrast with expedience. As the author further demonstrates, it is a moment that comes back to haunt Cicero. Ultimately, however, that is the point of these parallel narratives between Cicero’s personal rise and the city-state’s precipitous fall: Everything comes back to haunt.
Defining Cicero and Rome
But was Cicero good? This is one of the major questions Osgood posits to the reader. Furthermore, was Rome good? For both, the answers are complicated. Just as Cicero is known for his pursuit of justice and his grand articulations on friendship and liberty, Rome is known for its tradition of law and justice; its glorious achievements on the battlefields; and, specifically for Americans, its form of government that greatly influenced our nation’s founding.By this same token, Cicero seemed less concerned about the freedoms of the common man than about the wealthy and powerful, whom he felt most represented Rome. At times, he seemed more concerned with winning a case than pursuing truth; though this is not a vice, it is certainly not a virtue. He often proved indecisive, which led to deadly results.
Rome, for all its glory, often gained that glory through bloodshed, at home and abroad. Its politics enabled bribery and corruption to an epidemic level and finally its worship of military might became untenable when the military heroes became its political leaders. These reasons, and many others, one can presume, led to perversions of justice. It is a symptom that no form of government can long endure. It becomes, as Osgood’s title indicates, lawless.
Osgood has indeed written a triumphant work. Its concision, even with its parallels between man and country (and perhaps because of that), provides insight and clarity into the inner workings of the Republic’s final decades. Furthermore, it is an engrossing read. Osgood presents a host of entertaining and colorful historical figures with their manifold character traits and faults. It was, indeed, a book that I was sad to see come to an end.
