This week, a discussion in my Roman history class really reminded me of some of the things we have learned about in regards to rhetoric through this course. In depicting the accomplishments of Julius and Augustus Caesar, many authors and people have very different opinions as to whether the men were tyrants or visionaries who pushed Rome to its fullest potential, and it is interesting to see how they attempt to portray the characters.
For example, Julius Caesar wrote “Commentaries” as he was leading Romans in the Gallic Wars. These “Commentaries” were truly just propaganda on the part of Caesar as he used exaggerations to overemphasize his contributions. His adopted son, Augustus did the same thing with his self-written “Res Gestae” which was essentially a list of Augustus’ accomplishments to be published after his death. Augustus’ use of the word “I” as in “I led Rome in many civil and foreign wars” was a rhetorical tool that was very effective in controlling the viewpoint of the audience. The “I” put Augustus at the forefront of every action that happened during his powerful presence in Rome, whether he directly played a hand in the event or not. This set up such an incredibly strong ethos for the character of Augustus, that the people happily appointed him leader of all of Rome.
This discussion led me to think about the fact that during the ancient Roman times, politicians had a great handle on how the public viewed them. Though the Senate of the Roman Republic was nearly always concerned about certain members because it wanted to retain its authority as a governing body, outside of the Senate, many people did not view leaders as tyrannical or threatening just because they desired power. (This, incidentally, is a great example of networks of interpretation. The Senate, who wants their own power, is obsessed with controlling the influence of others, whereas the public is willing to support whichever leader best supports them). It was incredible to look at the ancient accounts and see how much control the politicians of this time had over their own public image, and therefore their ethos. Even though Julius Caesar was feared by the Senate (enough for a group of Senators to plot and kill him), his popularity had been so well cultivated with the people that they wept at his funeral and eventually led his murderers to either death or exile. The character of a man was something that he could easily mold and present to the people as he wanted, cultivating favor by being generous, well spoken, and in favor of the people always.
It’s kind of amazing to see how effective rhetoric was for these ancient politicians. They really knew how to play up their strengths and cultivate a favorable character for themselves that the people would eat up. This proved to be a very useful skill to have, and the most successful men at this time had complete control over their portrayal and the public opinion through great rhetoric and calculation.