Cato and Marius: Similarities and Differences Essay

Introduction

The destiny of this or that country depends on the people who are involved in the political processes, which occur in the society. People usually favor this or that politician or leader according to his/her personal qualities and the ideas and thoughts which people provide in the society. Rome is the country of public speakers and most of the modern thoughts and ideas are taken from that epoch. Different speakers and philosophers had their ideas, which differed in this or that way. Cato and Marius are ancient politicians who all their life referred to the country they lived in. Their thoughts were different in some way and these differences we are going to discuss in this work.

Main Body

To be able to compare the ideology of these politicians, their primary ideas should be discussed and evaluated. Cato was a statesman in the Roman Republic and his influence on the political life of the Rome was significant. Paying attention to the Roman education, Cato was sure that education must be valuable in the military service, that it should prepare good “leaders in political and military affairs”¹. Cato was frustrated when non-Romans tried to interfere the state affairs of the Rome and tried to apply their own ideas, which contradict the Roman virtues which were constructed for many years². Cato all his life followed the principles of Stoicism. The main doctrine, which was followed by Cato, was that the wise man is unmoved by others; that only the fool shows pity; that only the wise man is a king; that the wise man never changes his considered opinion; that all moral delicts are equal, so that he who wrings a chicken’s neck…is equal to the man who strangles his father³.

Cato was a very honest person. He had never taken bribes and hated those who provided corruption in the society. According to his moral qualities and features of character, Cato was straightforward, stubborn and tenacious, and these qualities helped him to earn his reputation in the Roman society as powerful and fair leader.

Cato was an “idealist and courageous patriot”⁴ who tried to provide the affairs in the political world which could be regarded as serving to the country. Considering his life and ideology, it is not difficult to understand that he wanted either everything or nothing. He was a wise politician and cared about welfare of simple people. He said that the republic may finish its existence if it appears that the price of “delicacies and good-looking boys”⁵ is higher than that of “farm and the slave who work it”⁵. The feeling of justice is the dominant in the Cato’s philosophy⁶, no matter who is right, whether the influential person or simple farmer.

It may be concluded that Cato was severe politician and military leader but at the same time justice, he was proud of this country and did not allow other nations to take up supremacy of his country. He was brave and opposed Caesar in the political and military way.

Gaius Marius was also a notable person in the political and military life of Rome. Marius’ philosophy was mainly concentrated on the military life of Rome. He longed for political power and tried to reach it by all means and was sure that political and military power should be “distributed more widely ion the society”⁷.

Gaius Marius was not the member of aristocracy but married an aristocratic lady⁸. First, the political life of Marius was successful, but then his intentions became to rise. Being a quaestor, we tried to use his power and to reduce the influence and power of the aristocracy to minimum, but the society was not ready to reject the aristocratic governing and the Senate made it all possible not to provide the Marius’ ideas. These intentions released Marius from political life for some time⁹. Marius wanted to implement military power in the Roman society that is why his desire was to depose the ruling aristocratic and to take up the governing positions by himself. As it was mentioned, society was not ready for such changes.

The whole life of Marius was devoted to war as it was really what he wanted to do. His desire to be powerful is reflected in his wars and battles, where he earned the reputation of wise commander and brave soldier¹⁰. He knew that he was powerful and could use either people or even the Senate in order to reach his goals¹¹. His power and influence on the political, and especially military, life of Rome was magnificent.

The main contribution to the political life of the Rome by Marius was the militarization of the society. The regions were mostly agricultural. Marius promised people everything only they left their farm and to join the army. The difference of his idea was that these poor rural people were trained before entering the war events, this managed to rise the military power several times^12. If earlier only aristocratic people were allowed to enter the army, the Marius reform allowed everybody to use this opportunity¹³.

Cato and Marius are two persons who lived almost at the same time, in the same country, but which ideas and considerations about life were different to some extend. Cato paid much attention to political and social life of people, then their military education. He was brave and his desire for justice was significant. Marius cared mostly about reaching the huge power and influence on the society. His main idea was to reject the aristocratic ruling and to provide the military influence on the society. Being a successful soldier, Marius was sure that all conflicts should be decided by arms.

Considering the differences in the points of view of these politicians, it is impossible to avoid the similarities in their behavior. First of all, and all scholars agree with it, is that Cato and Marius may be called dictators “sidelining the Senate”¹⁴. They both provided changes in the Roman society, nut Cato diplomatically, and Marius in the military way. Cato was more peacefully concentrated in his thoughts, and the desire for justice was his main focus. While Marius was more direct and aggressive, he thought about his power and influence more than about people.

Conclusion

In conclusion, leaders, no matter how different their programs and political direction is, are always have some similarities. They are mostly shown through their thoughts and intentions than through actions, as political leaders mostly have different strategies in reaching their aims. Marius and Cato wanted to have influence in the society, but Marius wanted to reach it by all means, and Cato tried to earn that influence by diplomatic actions and earning people’s trust.

Bibliography

1. Blois, de Lukas. The statesman in Plutarch’s works: proceedings of the sixth international conference of the International Plutarch Society, BRILL, 2004
2. Bonta, Steve. “The Rise of Caesarism: The Weakened Roman Republic Was Crushed by Julius Caesar, a Charismatic Military Leader Who Exploited His Popularity with a Roman People Who Desired Security above All Else”, The New American, 2005.
3. Dillon, Sheila & Welch, Katherine E. Representations of war in ancient Rome, Cambridge University Press, 2006
4. Kamm, Antony. The Romans: An Introduction, Taylor & Francis, 2008
5. McCarty, Nick. Rome: The Greatest Empire of the Ancient World, The Rosen Publishing Group, 2008
6. Mclynn, Frank. “Power Games.” New Statesman, 2003, 49
7. Merry, Robert W. “Rome on the Potomac: Like It or Not, America Today Finds Itself an Imperial Power Committed to Maintaining an Empire. the Only Question Is What Kind of Empire?” The International Economy, 2003.
8. Morford, Mark. The Roman Philosophers: From the Time of Cato the Censor to the Death of Marcus Aurelius, London: Routledge, 2002.
9. Roberts, Peter. Excel HSC Ancient History, Pascal Press, 2006
10. Southern, Pat. The Roman Army: A Social and Institutional History, Oxford University Press US, 2007

Footnotes

1. Mark Morford, The Roman Philosophers: From the Time of Cato the Censor to the Death of Marcus Aurelius, (London: Routledge, 2002), 18
2. Morford, 19
3. Morford, 24
4. Steve Bonta, “The Rise of Caesarism: The Weakened Roman Republic Was Crushed by Julius Caesar, a Charismatic Military Leader Who Exploited His Popularity with a Roman People Who Desired Security above All Else”, The New American, 2005, 34
5. Sheila Dillon, & Katherine E Welch, Representations of war in ancient Rome, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 85
6. Lukas de Blois. The statesman in Plutarch’s works: proceedings of the sixth international conference of the International Plutarch Society, (BRILL, 2004),111
7. Robert W Merry, “Rome on the Potomac: Like It or Not, America Today Finds Itself an Imperial Power Committed to Maintaining an Empire. the Only Question Is What Kind of Empire?” The International Economy, 2003, 12
8. Pat Southern, The Roman Army: A Social and Institutional History, (Oxford: Oxford University Press US, 2007, 269
9. Southern, 269
10. Southern, 270
11. Peter Roberts, Excel HSC Ancient History, (Pascal Press, 2006), 320
12. Antony Kamm, The Romans: An Introduction, (Taylor & Francis, 2008), 32
13. Nick McCarty, Rome: The Greatest Empire of the Ancient World, (The Rosen Publishing Group, 2008), 39
14. Frank Mclynn, “Power Games.” New Statesman, 2003, 49