Was Caesar right to levy taxes on cities that aided the Republicans' cause? - Historum

Catilina_Sergius · January 17th, 2013, 12:28 AM

When the civil war ended victoriously in favour of Gaius Julius Caesar, he levied exorbitant taxes on cities such as Utica, Sardinia, etc. Although he justified his actions by opining that Rome had been impoverished on account of the same war, I find that this particular action on the part of Caesar as one that was inordinately wrong. Though in small part, he too was responsible for the war. The cities and the provinces had sided with a cause they believed was right. So, was Caesar right in doing what he did?

**Toltec** · January 17th, 2013, 12:57 AM

Has nothing to do with right or wrong, has to do with pragmatics. He rewarded his allies and punished his foes a good policy for anyone seeking to plant his posterior on a throne.

Catilina_Sergius · January 17th, 2013, 01:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toltec

Has nothing to do with right or wrong, has to do with pragmatics. He rewarded his allies and punished his foes a good policy for anyone seeking to plant his posterior on a throne.

If one were to view the matter pragmatically too, Caesar would have rather appeared as a villain in the eyes of the people of these provinces, would he not? If all he really intended to do was to ensure the loyalty of these provinces to his Rome, he could have afforded to be more clement. Yes, he certainly was more merciful than Sulla, but then what's wrong is wrong, is it not? After all, he did tax them rather unreasonably.

**Toltec** · January 17th, 2013, 01:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catilina_Sergius

what's wrong is wrong

One man's wrong is another man's right, and they both end up being ruled by a third man who doesn't believe in right or wrong.

johnincornwall · January 17th, 2013, 04:33 AM

Do I detect a thread once more attempting to put 21st century values on historical actions?

Strikes me Caesar didn't care whether he was right or wrong, doesn't seem the type to take on board criticism.

**Mandate of Heaven** · January 17th, 2013, 05:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catilina_Sergius

If one were to view the matter pragmatically too, Caesar would have rather appeared as a villain in the eyes of the people of these provinces, would he not? If all he really intended to do was to ensure the loyalty of these provinces to his Rome, he could have afforded to be more clement. Yes, he certainly was more merciful than Sulla, but then what's wrong is wrong, is it not? After all, he did tax them rather unreasonably.

Caesar was probably the most lenient ruler in his era. Taxing unreasonably was really not so bad as a punishment, but you know that.

**Sargon of Akkad** · January 17th, 2013, 06:29 AM

Wasn't practically everything Caesar did in Gaul and onwards illegal anyway?

**Mandate of Heaven** · January 17th, 2013, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sargon of Akkad

Wasn't practically everything Caesar did in Gaul and onwards illegal anyway?

The key is illegal according to who?

Catilina_Sergius · January 18th, 2013, 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mandate of Heaven

Caesar was probably the most lenient ruler in his era. Taxing unreasonably was really not so bad as a punishment, but you know that.

That Caesar was by far the most lenient of his era is one thing that cannot be gainsaid. But, does that extenuate Caesar completely? I disagree. By the end of the civil war, his patience was wearing thin and he embarked on a no mercy policy there on wards. Caesar kept on prattling that he would go to any lengths not to do a Sulla. While Sulla carried out proscriptions, Caesar meted the punishment of slow death to his enemies.

Profesor Plum · January 18th, 2013, 03:41 PM

Quote:

If all he really intended to do was to ensure the loyalty of these provinces to his Rome, he could have afforded to be more clement.

It's just a theory, but Caesar could have done it to strike fear into their minds by showing them the power he has over them, preventing a rebellion.