Post #3 The two great politicians of the Roman Republic, Julius Caesar and Cicero, can be seen as foils to each other: they both were brilliant orators and masters of language and rhetoric, and both understood the intricacies of the final decades of their empire (Miller, 2005). However, the two “great statesmen” could not have differed more. Parison and Romer (2014) suggest that they had “neither a friendship nor an alliance but a forced cordial relationship that dipped into elements of friendship and alliance whenever strategically possible” (p. 3). Unlike the highborn Caesar, Cicero was not born to prestige and privilege; although, he did receive a fine education, and, making the most of what was given to him, paved a path for himself to Rome. Troubled by Caesar’s degree of power and perceived tyranny, Cicero believed in and longed for the “Golden Age” of the republic (“Make the Republic Great Again????”). On the other hand, Caesar, an “impatient innovator” (Miller, 2005, par. 3), fought to alter and reform his society, but …show more content…
Cicero, conversely, was extremely circumspect in regards to difficult issues and courses of action; some said too careful (he was sometimes accused of indecisiveness, …show more content…
There seems to be a fine line between being obstinate and believing in yourself and your goals. Caesar was a man who seemed to have strong beliefs, beliefs that he was not willing to let others sway. Cicero seemed more to allow others to sway him; Plutarch even describes him once being “carried away and deceived….by a young boy” (Pluatrch, 2001, p. 439). To me, a great leader should have strong beliefs, but not be so proud as to take others advice and step back from the situation. However, since pride and arrogance often accompany the desire for power, being flexible oftentimes remains an unobtainable