Conclusion

Similarities Between Caesar and Augustus

While Augustus was Julius Caesar’s adoptive son, they shared more in common than just blood. Their family held hearty political ties (albeit lacking money before Caesar’s political career took off), and both came to power amidst political turmoil. Both men pleased the population with propaganda, enticing crowds with promises of change. In the eyes of the public during their respective eras, both men were looked upon favorably.

Differences Between Caesar and Augustus

Caesar began his career essentially from the bottom, having to pick up what was left of his family’s power and attempt to make something out of it. His nephew and adopted son was far more privileged; Augustus was able to start from the top due to Caesar’s will, and bypassed the struggles of advancing his political career. Caesar had put in years of work too reach his high political standing, while Augustus “owes everything to [Julius Caesar’s] name” (Cicero Philippics 13). Caesar’s charisma and military prowess made it so the public below him adored him. On the other hand, Augustus was not so much loved by the public as he was well respected.

Additionally, where Caesar had ruled over a war torn country, Augustus took over and implemented major reform. The first Emperor of Rome may not have had the military skills of his uncle, but he restored order to the chaos of the nation ensuring that Rome would not fall apart like it had in the past. The Senate was reduced back to its original size from the increase Caesar had implemented, and Augustus made it so Senators participated in discussion rather than blindly agree with the popular vote. August made great changes within the empire to bring back the glory seen in the past.

So, why did Augustus succeed where Caesar failed?

Caesar made enemies of the Senators around him when his power threatened to create a new tyranny. He was obsessed with the glory of leadership and power, and did little to affect permanent, positive change in the Roman Republic. Any ratifications that he implemented saw short term success, and he did not survive long enough to see them become permanent. Additionally, he had participated in civil wars and while he was revered by the masses those wars were still fresh in the Senators’ minds. Meanwhile, Augustus took the ruins of an empire ravaged by civil war and turned life around into a relatively peaceful era. By contrast, the era of Octavian to Augustus was grand and more peaceful than the Republic had experienced in a long while. He had the time and wealth to ensure his reforms achieved reality all the while maintaining an image of humility in the eyes of the Roman people. He manipulated Romans and the government to achieve positions of power that were higher than the ones he claimed he wanted, and worked the system so that he garnered the majority of military command. The emperor saw to it that the Senate was reduced in size to increase effectiveness and reduce their threat to his place as leader. Augustus also made it so Senators must pay attention to discussion, created new jobs in offices which also promoted safety, and reformed the way the government functioned. Caesar’s term in office was spent glorifying himself and his accomplishments instead of focusing on the major underlying issues causing Rome to crumble, such as the constant competition for power amongst the members of the Senate. The Senate and Caesar were on the fast track to failure when they turned their focuses on taking each other out and conspiring amongst themselves instead of cementing true reform. When it comes down to it, Caesar failed because he was too focused on himself, Augustus succeeded because he turned his focus to the empire despite his manipulation of power.

Leave a Reply