We've now heard Fustel de Coulanges' understanding of the disturbances in Ancient Rome as revolutions brought on by changes to their religious belief structure. We've considered Machiavelli's fawning historical interpretation of Rome, through Livy, as a people who were more virtuous than any other, and maintained that virtue by subjecting themselves to privation and hardship, and who fell into unrest when they strayed from virtue. And we've now heard Turchin's view, that the unrest of the Roman Republic was created by structural-demographic factors. Now, we hear the people's history of Ancient Rome, from Marxist-Leninist Michael Parenti, whose view I wanted to include because it was so different from any other in how he views Julius Caesar and his role in Roman history: as a reformer and liberator of the people, killed by an entrenched oligarchy who wished for nothing other than to hold on to their wealth. Parenti walks through the history of the Late Republic as a history of increasing excesses of the nobility, which was then challenged by people's tribunes and other attempts at reform. In all cases, the nobility put down the reformer, but Caesar was different because he was only assassinated after he'd managed to succeed, and to redistribute the land and the wealth. The legitimacy of the senate was forever shaken, for Caesar was forever the people's champion, and it was thus that it required a civil war afterwards, and only the man who most successfully presented himself as Caesar's heir was able to win and secure order once again - even if he was not revolutionary that Caesar was. Parenti attacks the view of the 'gentleman historians' of Great Britain, and throughout history, who have viewed Rome as a true republic, with democratic representation. Instead, Parenti makes the case that Rome was ruled by a closed-off patriciate who cared for nothing other than their own wealth, and were even willing to undermine the health and stability of their empire in order to extract more. Caesar was the incarnation of this popular uprising into one man, who was willing to break all of the limitations and decorum the nobility had put into place as a means of ensuring that nothing ever changed. Caesar, rather than a tyrannical villain who was justly killed by Brutus, the "noblest Roman of them all", Parenti portrays Caesar as a tragic hero, who was the only hope for saving the republic and achieving justice.
