Cover Image: Mortal Republic

Mortal Republic

Pub Date:   |   Archive Date:

Member Reviews

The Mary Beard School of Skepticism About Past as Prologue is in session.
The past is no Oracle and historians are not prophets, but this does not mean that it is wrong to look to antiquity for help understanding the present.

This is intensely controversial. I am not at all sure it is true, but after reading this thoroughly researched and well sourced in the facts that we can know book, I'll put a pin in my inclination to doubt. I can enjoy this book on its factual merits quite well enough.

The author focuses his attention on the period between the victory of the Romans over Carthage in the Second Punic War, and Octavian's usurpation of power, effectively beginning the Empire. That time, its unrest and gradual normalization of political gridlock and, ultimately, violence, does bear a resemblance to the current pass in US–and world–politics.

I have no kick with that fact being pointed out. I am pretty confident the author's analysis of what led up to the events, and how what went down made the resolution of the problems seem pretty obvious. The way he has used the chapter order is, pretty clearly, tendentious...a downward slide from functioning, if troubled republic into one-man rule and autocracy just *feels* more and more inevitable as the facts we know are marshaled.

Where I go a little off his carefully laid rails is where he posits his ideas for how the slide was not inevitable, and the autocracy could've been avoided. That is allohistory which, by itself, is fine by me. But this is presented with a very authoritative air, not differentiated from the text based on facts that surrounds it, and that felt a bit like I was being led to agree without any facts or evidence that his conclusions were plausible. There can not be any such evidence or facts because that isn't how things *did* play out. I can't say he's wrong for all the same reasons.

The desire to show us how to fix the ugly, scary passage we're going through by using the past as a model makes a lot of sense. It still shouldn't be presented as being the equal of the fact-based narrative around it.

Your history-loving giftee, your anxious old uncle who just knows The End Is Nigh, will lap up this story. The good thing is that, as the facts pile up, the author hands the reader this double-edged aerçu:
No republic is eternal. It lives only as long as its citizens want it.
That is hopeful, if you believe there is a chance to warn and arm people against what is occurring; and disheartening, because look what happened to Rome.

The author is of the former opinion, and this book is the case he makes for it.

Was this review helpful?

I want to thank NetGalley, the publisher and the author for giving me the opportunity to review this book. I admit in my joy at joining NetGalley I may have been overzealous in my requesting numbers. As this book has already been published, I am choosing to work on the current upcoming publish date books in my que. As I complete those I will work on my backlogged request and will provide a review at that time. I again send my sincere thanks and apologies.

Was this review helpful?

A great historical book. Thank you to NetGalley for allowing me to read this book. I recommend reading this book.

Was this review helpful?

Popular histories of the fall of the Roman Republic are not in short supply. There are excellent entries in this crowded field. One can look to Tom Holland’s Rubicon or the recent New York Times bestseller The Storm Before the Storm by popular podcaster Mike Duncan. Into this crowded field we have Mortal Republic by Edward J. Watts. Dr. Watts is Professor of History at the University of California, San Diego. His previous works have focused on the period of late antiquity and the clashes between pagan and Christian culture. In his newest work Dr. Watts examines the forces that brought about the end of the Roman Republic.

This book does not start, as is common, with the rise of the Gracchi brothers. Those radical reformers whose lives and deaths plunged the Republic into short periods of chaos. Instead he begins in 280 BC, with the wars between Rome and the Greek King Pyrrhus. Why this period? He wants to show the nature of the Roman leaders in this period. Roman leadership was a duty that was held by men who held honor above wealth.

This is an important point that will be seen throughout this book. In the early days of the Republic the nobles of Rome “agreed that virtue lay in service to Rome and that dishonor fell upon those who put their private interests above those of the Republic.” This noble ideal would become stressed as the Roman Republic grow in size, power and wealth. The change can be seen as the Romans fight the Carthaginians for control of Sicily. The Punic Wars spread Roman power abroad and soon the Republic had foreign territories to manage. With those territories came officials needed to run them. Those officials tended to become wealthy in those jobs. That wealth became the new motive for public service. Now honor gave way to avarice. As the quest for wealth and glory became the prime motivator factions began to arrive. Those factions would eventually wear away at the fabric of the Republic until it frayed and crumbled. As Dr. Watts puts it “The new economy produced great wealth for a few winners, but the frustration of the newly poor and the fear that some of the old elite were losing their grip on power created conditions in which a fierce populist reaction could occur.

The great weakness in the Roman system was the reliance on personal honor to maintain itself. Tradition and honor were no defense against personal ambition and tremendous wealth. The populism ushered in by the Gracchi would be used as a weapon by one group of power Romans in order to gain control over the more traditionalists. The fight would rage back and forth for over a century. The ethics and values of the Romans devolved to the place where strong men like Marius, Sulla, Cataline, Clodius, Milo, Crassus, Pompey, and Caesar could tear it apart.

The book is written for the general reader. One does not need a specialized background in Roman history to understand. The topic is indeed timely. In the Preface to the book Dr. Watts hopes “that this book allows its readers to better appreciate the serious problems that result both from politicians who breach a republic’s political norms and from citizens who choose not to punish them for doing so.” That is as far as he goes in trying to connect the past and the present. It is up to the readers to notice the signs and to take warning. These warnings are prescient. The United States was founded as a Republic with the Roman Republic very much in the conscious minds of the Founders.

The book ends as did the Republic: with the reign of Augustus. For over half a century the Republic had been torn by one faction after another competing for power. What are we supposed to gather from this book? Why read another book on the fall of a government that fell 2,000 years ago? Because the freedoms and laws of a republic must continually be upheld and protected. Ronald Reagan famously said “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.” Perhaps the closing statement of the book sums it up best. “When citizens take the health and durability of their republic for granted, that republic is at risk. This was as true in 133 BC or 82 BC or 44 BC as it is in AD 2018. In ancient Rome and in the modern world, a republic is a thing to be cherished, protected, and respected. If it falls, an uncertain, dangerous, and destructive future lies on the other side.”

Was this review helpful?

I’m always a bit wary of books claiming to draw connections between ancient Rome and the modern United States. For one thing, such comparisons are as old as our country itself, and for another they tend to try too hard to find connections between the ancient empire and the modern one. If they aren’t there, then many authors usually just resort to distortion to get their point across.
Every so often, however, a book comes along that makes a convincing case for why the ancient world does have lessons to teach us in the present, and Mortal Republic: How Rome Fell Into Tyranny is one such book. It’s a fast-paced narrative history that traces the decline and fall of the Roman Republic into autocracy under the rule of Augustus.
The story that Watts tells is one that stretches across several centuries. It involves a republic originally set up to function as a delicate balancing act between the various competing interests and groups that comprised Roman society. As it grew steadily larger, however, the Roman Republic found itself faced with challenges that it increasingly couldn’t fully address. The institutions that it had erected proved unable to provide for the people and, as a result, powerful men stepped into the breach. The key, however, was that they did so not for the benefit of the Republic (whatever they might like to say), but instead for self-aggrandizement.
The cast of characters of Mortal Republic is comprised of the usual suspects. There are, of course, the Brothers Gracchi, who used their populist credentials to put incredible pressure on the established classes, earning both of them a brutal death at the hands of the state. There were the great generals Marius and Sulla, both of whom marched on Rome, and the latter of whom made possible (and desirable) for powerful men to enforce their will by cultivating the love of the soldiers. Then, of course, there were the two Triumvirates, the first composed of Julius Caesar, Pompey the Great, and Crassus, the second of Octavian, Marc Antony, and Lepidus, both of which largely acted outside of the normal channels and institutions in order to achieve their ambitions. Time and again, the old ways of doing things, the very system that the Republic had erected that enabled the formation of coalitions and alliances between various parties, were torn down to feed the voracious egos and political appetites of the powerful.
As Watts demonstrates, it was precisely this slow erosion of the old systems that ultimately enabled the meteoric rise and success of Augustus. Had he not emerged at just the moment that he did, and had he not shown such a ruthless and subtle grasp of political realities, it’s entirely possible that the Roman Republic would have collapsed with no Empire to replace it. As it was, Augustus managed to coalesce great power around himself by both promising the people security (from continued civil war and from starvation) and the elites the same offices as they’d had under the Republic (without, for the most part, the responsibilities that went with them). While Watts seems fairly hostile to Augustus — with good reason, considering the damage that he did to the Republic — he also shows us that here was a man of genius.
Watts’ central philosophical argument is that republics are fragile things, that they require work and dedication on the part of those who live in them to sustain themselves. The Roman Republic didn’t fall into autocracy simply because of the actions of powerful and cunning men such as Pompey, Crassus, Julius Caesar, and Octavian, though they obviously played a significant role in its collapse. The slide into dictatorship was just as much the result of the many people of the Republic who were willing to let it happen, who allowed themselves to bribed or stood on the sidelines while the great men of the age squabbled and tore the republic to shreds in their own pursuit of power, wealth, and fame. Though Augustus put the final nails in the coffin, he didn’t begin the process.
What sets Watts’ book apart, however, is that he doesn’t make the connections between the past and the present overly explicit. He doesn’t, for example, make some sort of facile claim that Trump and Augustus have a lot in common (Augustus probably would have looked at Trump as the sort of jumped-up boor that he is). Instead, he lets the parallels speak for themselves. Then, as now, a republic found itself increasingly unable to provide the sorts of services that the majority of its citizens needed and then, as now, there were those more than willing to exploit those structural weaknesses for their own political benefit, with little to not thought for the common good. Then, as now, there were several inflection points at which history could have gone differently, when the Republic might have been saved. It’s a cautiously optimistic reminder that now, as then, we have a chance to arrest our slide into autocracy.
Obviously, Mortal Republic is very much focused on individuals and their impact on history, but that works for the story that Watts wants to tell. This was a period when the course of events was truly shaped by individuals (though obviously there were also deeper, structural processes at work, which Watts also references). However, Watts’ skills as a historian are such that the people he describes practically leap off of the page.
Even as someone very familiar with this period of history, I still found myself swept up in Watts’s telling. He’s one of those historians who has a firm command of narrative, and he understands what makes for a good story. He also manages to find the right balance between providing information and not getting bogged down in the details. Though I’m not sure that I necessarily learned anything new, I do think that it’s valuable sometimes to see the events that led to the fall of the Republic in light of the events of the present. Trite as it is, it is nevertheless true that those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Was this review helpful?

This thorough exposé of the fall the great Roman Empire is a timely read during the current political climate in the United States. Author Edward J. Watts provides a detailed history lesson of the events that lead a civilized, prosperous and civil society to ruin by its greedy leaders. Mortal Republic should be required reading for today's high school and college civics classes.

Was this review helpful?

Books on the fall of Rome are definitely not a rare breed, however Mr. Watts has a welcomed addition to the swelling ranks, one of the great things about books on this subject is no one really knows why Rome collapsed, some blame the "Barbarians", some economics, some tyranny, but it's always interesting to read a new (to you) historian's perspective.

This is a well written and readable account of Rome from 280 BC to 27 BC, the jumping off point is a bit different from most books on the subject, starting with the war against Pyrrhus. You may run into a few instances of fact heavy, and slightly dry writing, however it's sometimes necessary in order to set up the stage so to speak, shortly after you're in a wonderfully flowing narrative that is easy to follow and enjoyable to read. If you have any interest in Rome, it's fall, the time period, or history in general I would definitely recommend this book.

This was my first book by Edward J. Watts, but I've added him to my followed authors list and look forward to new books!

Was this review helpful?

The book is Mortal Republic: How Rome Fell into Tyranny by Edward J. Watts

I became interested in Mortal Republic because the founding fathers of the United States had many of the ideas of the Roman Republic in mind when they wrote the Constitution. I would like to thank Netgalley for the chance to read this. This is a paperback edition of a book published about 2 years ago.

It is not only a history of the rise of the republic but of the republic’s decline into tyranny. The early Romans were honorable men. Reputation was more important than riches. And so when the politicians of ancient Rome dealt with other powers they were incorruptible. All was for the good of Rome and personal gain did not enter into it.

In some ways, that reminded me of the men who wrote our Constitution. Efforts were for the good of the country and not personal gain. They could imagine the occasional dishonorable man in government and included various checks and balances to limit the damage a dishonorable or corrupt person could cause. I think they could not imagine a government so full of dishonorable men that their checks and balances would not work.

The end of the Roman Republic came about with rising inequality resulting in a populist movement that was exploited by politicians. The parallels to the current situation in the United States and elsewhere are obvious to me.

I enjoyed much of this book. In some places the history was more detailed than I liked. If you think this book might be of interest, I would suggest reading some of the many review on Amazon (just click on the picture above).

Was this review helpful?

A good timeline and explanation of a few rulers. There is no conclusion to it. Topics like politics, water, class division, secret ballots, and more. Decent look for those who have an interest in this period of history.

Was this review helpful?

This is an excellent recounting of the centuries-long demise of the Roman Republic. Clear and concise, the book illustrates the destructiveness of personal power politics, the siren call of security for a society traumatized by internal violence and divisions and the power of demagoguery.. The parallels to today are stark and disturbing.

Was this review helpful?

This book contains far more detail regarding the history of the Roman Empire than most people desire but if that is your niche then this book is a must. Otherwise, stay away.

Was this review helpful?

Very well research. For anyone who loves history, especially Roman history, this book is for you. Recommend for any history buff. Thanks for the review copy.

Was this review helpful?

An interesting and informative read that I enjoyed.
It's well researched and well written, a good history book that i appreciated.
Recommended.
Many thanks to the publisher and Netgalley for this ARC, all opinions are mine.

Was this review helpful?

Republic is not eternal. The fate of its survival depend on its people.

At the peak of its survival republic had no parties, no written rules but were just a bunch of wise men worked for the true good for its people and they did this form of governance for centuries. Despite all its goodness it had to be retried in favour of dictatorship.

This books drills down every facet which had rooted for the republic's downfall. Details include maps and notable images of coins issued during various times. Author reminds this very republic was the foundation of American government model and doesn't provide any form of comparison to today events.

Interesting and a easy read

Was this review helpful?

The preface starts by unashamedly grounding this study in the present generally and current events facing the US more specifically. Like most Classicists, I tire of the endless quasi-literate comparisons between Rome and the US, but the refreshing honesty and pointed analysis makes this book a pointed exception.

The central thesis casts the various political and socio-cultural elements of the Republic as being aimed at arriving at consensus amongst competitive elites. Given what we know of early Rome - the tendency for aristocrats to form a comitatus of followers from amongst their wider clans and go off as private armies - this seems eminently sensible. As a corollary, then, the collapse of the Republic can be seen as the collective failure of the elite to trust in, and defend, the very system that made Rome great. To Watts' mind the eventual collapse was in some sense avoidable.

When August (in 27 or 31 BC, take your pick) would turn up to, eh, Make Rome Great Again he would revive many of these structures in name only. It is a fascinating and, at times, persuasive take on a problem that has had people scribbling for centuries.

The book is well written, shorn of obfuscating prose, and keeps a damned good pace throughout. I am not sure how great it would work outside of an American context and do not think I would recommend it as a first foray into the late Roman Republic. It is certainly a valuable addition to the field and, hopefully, the bookshelves of a large audience.

Was this review helpful?

Reviewed on the weekly Maine Beacon Podcast as a "ray of hope" at http://mainebeacon.com/podcast-preview/

Was this review helpful?