THE CORRUPTED FORMS OF DEMOCRACY AS THE CAUSE OF THE CIVIL WAR AS SEEN IN CONN IGGULDEN’S EMPEROR: THE GATES OF ROME
AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Sarjana Sastra in English Letters
By
JOHN ABRAHAM STEVE KALALO
Student Number: 014214146
ENGLISH LETTERS STUDY PROGRAMME DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS FACULTY OF LETTERS SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA 2009
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
To begin with, I surely want to thank and praise my Heavenly God, Jesus
Christ who has given me this wonderful life to live in. Millions of thanks to Ni
Luh Putu Rosiandani, S.S., M.Hum as my thesis advisor and to Adventina
Putranti, S.S., M.Hum as my thesis reader as well as to the board of examiners.
I definitely thank my beloved Papi and Mami for the patience, prayer and support all of the time. Thanks to my dearest brother and sisters, Bill, Eudia and
Ita for praying for me and for taking care the business while I am doing the thesis.
My special gratitude goes to my dearest Maria Benedicta Dian Savitri for the love, prayer and support.
I dedicate my gratitude to my lovely family in Kalasan as well as in
Jakarta and Tobelo and my pals, 2001 English Letters fellows. In addition, thanks to Stenly, Evy Lesar, and Andrie Pinem for such support and prayer.
I thank all the lecturers and the staff of the Department of English Letters
USD for helping me in all occasions, and to the staff of USD library for helping me finding so much information.
John Abraham Steve Kalalo
iv TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE ...... i APPROVAL PAGE ...... ii ACCEPTANCE PAGE...... iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... iv TABLE OF CONTENTS...... v ABSTRACT...... vi ABSTRAK ...... vii
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION...... 1 A. Background of the Study...... 1 B. Problem Formulation...... 3 C. Objective of the Study...... 4 D. Definition of Terms...... 4
CHAPTER II THEORETICAL REVIEW...... 5 A. Review of Related Studies ...... 5 B. Review of Related Theories ...... 7 C. Review on the Social Condition of Rome...... 19 D. Theoretical Framework ...... 32
CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY ...... 34 A. Object of the Study...... 34 B. Approach of the Study...... 36 C. Method of the Study...... 36
CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS ...... 38 A. Democracy Depicted in the Novel Seen through the Plot and the Setting ...... 38 B. The Civil War as a Consequence of the Democracy Depicted in the Novel...... 53 C. The Corrupted Forms of the Democracy as the Source of the Civil War ...... 59
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION ...... 66
BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 69
v ABSTRACT
JOHN ABRAHAM STEVE KALALO. The Corrupted Forms of Democracy as the Cause of the Civil War as Seen in Conn Iggulden’s Emperor: The Gates of Rome. Yogyakarta: Jurusan Sastra Inggris, Fakultas Sastra, Universitas Sanata Dharma, 2009.
Government system is crucial in one nation’s life since the political policy is determined by the government system. Therefore, the nation’s upshot has much dependence on the system applied. Democracy as a form of a government system is the most common applied system nowadays. In fact, it is used long before the modern era, when the tyranny was applied everywhere. It can be seen from Conn Iggulden’s Emperor: The Gates of Rome where the democracy in the novel is very significant to be explored. There are three problems revealed from the topic. The first problem is how plot and setting reveal a democracy as a form of government of Rome in the novel. The second is how the war as a consequence of the democracy is depicted in the novel. The last is how the corrupted forms of the democracy can be the cause of the civil war. In answering the problems, this study uses library research and sociocultural-historical approach. This approach is applied in this study since the study needs some evidences on the corrupted forms of the democratic that can be the cause of the civil war. The democracy in the novel is depicted through the plot and the setting. Through the first element of the plot, that is the exposition, it is clear that there are social classes: the Patricians, the Plebeians and the slaves exist in the Roman society. From the next element of plot, it is found out that Caesar has to face many challenging things outside his estate after his father’s death. Even, the conflicts are getting harder when there is another riot in Greece. It forces one of the Generals to get into the war. Later, it leads to the climax, where another war is happened and one of the Generals gets killed in the war. The resolution tells that Caesar is not arrested and predicted to be a fair and challenging opponent for the General in the future. In the way of the setting, the study sees the situation of Consul and Senate’s life at that time, as well as the Forums. Furthermore, the picture of democracy is shown from some forms: freedom of expression, free elections, majority rule and minority rights, political parties, the division of power, constitutional government and private organization. The civil war between two Consuls, Marius and Sulla, that leads to the climax, destroys everything in the society. Even, there are many corrupted forms of democracy that can be found in the system. One branch of the government system, judicative, becomes more powerful than others. It is the final form of conflict of interest among several powers that want to convert the democracy country to be a tyranny in which will bring many benefits to the dictator. Therefore, the corrupted forms of democracy in the novel are the cause of the civil war.
vi ABSTRAK
JOHN ABRAHAM STEVE KALALO. The Corrupted Forms of Democracy as the Cause of the Civil War as Seen in Conn Iggulden’s Emperor: The Gates of Rome. Yogyakarta: Jurusan Sastra Inggris, Fakultas Sastra, Universitas Sanata Dharma, 2009.
Sistem pemerintahan adalah sangat penting dalam kehidupan suatu negara. karena kebijakan politik suatu negara ditentukan oleh sistem pemerintahannya. Karena itu, bisa dikatakan bahwa kemajuan atau kemunduran suatu negara akan sangat bergantung dari sistem yang dianut. Demokrasi sebagai suatu bentuk dari sistem pemerintahan adalah salah satu sistem yang paling banyak dianut pada zaman ini. Faktanya, demokrasi itu sendiri sudah digunakan jauh-jauh hari sebelum zaman modern, saat di mana kekuasaan tirani masih merajai. Ini bisa terlihat dalam buku karya Conn Iggulden yang berjudul Emperor: The Gates of Rome yang segi demokrasinya sangatlah menonjol untuk dibahas. Ada tiga pokok permasalahan yang bisa dibahas dari topik ini. Masalah pertama adalah bagaimana alur dan seting di dalam novel mengungkapkan demokrasi sebagai bentuk pemerintahan di Roma. Masalah kedua adalah bagaimana perang sebagai konsekuensi dari bentuk pemerintahan demokrasi dalam cerita digambarkan. Masalah yang terakhir adalah bagaimana bentuk- bentuk demokrasi yang rusak dapat menjadi penyebab terjadinya perang saudara. Untuk menjawab ketiga masalah tersebut, penelitian ini menggunakan studi pustaka dan pendekatan sosiokultural-sejarah. Pendekatan ini dilakukan karena dibutuhkan bukti-bukti mengenai bentuk demokrasi yang rusak yang dapat menjadi penyebab terjadinya perang saudara. Demokrasi di dalam novel ini terlihat melalui alur dan seting ceritanya. Dari elemen pertama alur, yaitu eksposisi, jelaslah bahwa ada kelas-kelas social yaitu Patrician, Plebeian dan kaum budak dalam masyarakat Roma. Dari elemen alur yang berikutnya, diketahui bahwa Caesar harus menghadapi banyak tantangan di luar kediamannya setelah ayahnya meninggal. Konflik bahkan menjadi lebih rumit saat muncul pemberontakan di Yunani. Pemberontakan ini mengakibatkan salah seorang Jenderal harus maju ke medan perang. Kemudian, perang lainnya pun terjadi pula, dan inilah yang merupakan klimaks, di mana salah seorang Jenderal tewas dalam perang tersebut. Bagian resolusi menjelaskan bahwa Caesar tidak ditangkap melainkan diramalkan akan menjadi lawan yang seimbang dan menantang bagi sang Jenderal di masa yang akan datang. Dari seting, penelitian ini memandang keadaan kehidupan Consul, Senate dan Forum yang ada pada waktu itu. Selanjutnya, gambaran demokrasi nampak dari beberapa bentuk ini: kebebasan berekspresi, kebebasan memilih, hak kaum minoritas yang tidak dilupakan oleh kaum mayoritas, pembagian kekuasaan, pemerintahan yang berdasarkan hukum, dan organisasi politik. Perang saudara yang terjadi di antara kedua Consul, yaitu Marius dan Sula, yang membawa kepada klimaks,
vii menghancurkan segala sesuatu yang ada di masyarakat. Selain daripada itu, ada banyak bentuk-bentuk demokrasi yang rusak yang dapat ditemukan di dalam sistem pemerintahan tersebut. Salah satu cabang sistem tersebut, yaitu dari segi yudikatifnya, menjadi lebih berkuasa dibandingkan segi lainnya. Inilah bentuk akhir dari konflik kepentingan yang terjadi di antara beberapa kekuasaan yang ingin mengubah negara yang demokratis menjadi negara tirani yang malah membawa lebih banyak keuntungan bagi si diktator. Oleh karena itu, bentuk- bentuk demokrasi yang rusak di dalam novel inilah yang menjadi penyebab terjadinya perang saudara.
viii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study
History is very important. Napoleon Bonaparte says that history is a version of past events that people have decided to agree upon. Cicero, who is one of Roman greatest leaders and lives long time before Bonaparte, has a very strong thought about history. He argues that history is the witness that testifies to the passing time; it illumines reality, vitalizes memory, provides guidance in daily life and brings tidings of antiquity. Therefore, to study history is something interesting and indeed important (http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/297.html).
People can learn many things from history. One of them is the system of government. The system, of course, plays the most important role in a nation history. The policies made, based on the system, can determine the advancement of the nation. The policies, which are based on the system, can bring war to the nation as well as peace and wealth. In modern era, one system that is very famous is democracy.
The word democracy is very well-known. Nowadays, almost all government call themselves as democratic government. Great Britain, France,
United States of America, China and even a small and new country, such as Timor
Leste call their system of government as democratic. The People’s Republic of
China proclaims itself democratic even as protestors demanding freedom of speech and of the press, hallmarks of democratic polities, are routinely
1 2
imprisoned. It seems that no one wants to be called as antidemocratic. If all government try to say that they are democratic, then a problem of what the real democracy is or who the real democratic government is will appear.
According to Winston Churchill, democracy is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. In other words, democracy is a way of life recognizing the equality and dignity of all persons regardless of race, religion, sex, or social standing. It holds that everyone is equal in court trials and other legal matters. It provides freedom of speech, freedom of press, and the freedom of religion. A goal of democratic society is to assure each person an opportunity to make full use of his abilities. Despite the fact, democracy as a system of a government for instance, can be the source of conflict (Hallowell, 1971:104).
Related to the history of democracy, literature can be one way to study democracy. Van de Laar says that it introduces us into living world: in some respect resembling the world we live in (Van de Laar, 1963:163). The author that creates the work makes an observation in the real world before creates the work.
Therefore, the literary work becomes an important part of human life, because the literary work is one of the important mediums to express our thought, feeling, and experience as William Henry Hudson says:
“Literary is a vital record of what men have seen in life, what they have experience of it, what they thought and felt those aspect of it, which have the most immediate enduring interest all of us. It is thus fundamentally an expression of life through the medium of language” (Hudson, 1958: 10). Some literary works are created on the experience of its author, some others based on the fantasy, but there is a genre of literature work that is crated 3
based on history. One of the literary works, in this case a novel, that created based on history is Conn Iggulden’s Emperor Series.
Conn Iggulden’s Emperor has a very unique plot as well as the conflict.
Since the novel is based on the life of Julius Caesar, one of Roman greatest leaders, and also based on the history happened around Caesar’s life, the novel offers us a story of vivid life of a nation which is well-known as the biggest nation at its era, indeed biggest empire that earth ever has. The struggle of the nation, the politics maneuver of the politician, the romance of the protagonist, all actions are poured in one great novel. The novel became bestseller in many countries. Even, producers create serial from the novel.
From the novel, people can study many things. The war, as the rising conflict leading to the conflict of the story, for instance, is something that can be explored more. Questions, such as why the war happened, what the purpose of the war was, who were involved on the war, who became victims in the war, who won the war, what the result of the war was, and many other interesting topics can be explored from it. Therefore, people can collect information from the novel and make a study about those several things.
B. Problem Formulation
Based on the background of the study, there are three questions formulated that will be the discussion of this thesis as following: 4
1. How do plot and setting reveal a democracy of Rome in Conn Iggulden’s
Emperor: the Gates of Rome?
2. How is the civil war as a consequence of the democracy depicted in the
novel?
3. How can the corrupted forms of the democracy be the cause of the civil
war?
C. Objective of the Study
This thesis has three objectives. First is to find out how the democracy revealed in the novel through plot and setting. The second objective is to discover how the war as a consequence of democracy depicted in novel. The final objective is to reveal the corrupted features of the democracy as the cause of the civil war.
D. Definition of Terms
To avoid ambiguity the writer wants to gives a definition on the special term that is used in this study, namely democracy. According to John Hallowell in his article in the World Book, democracy means a form of government, a way of life, and a goal or ideal (1971:104). CHAPTER II
THEORETICAL REVIEW
There are four parts discussed in this chapter. The initial part is the review of certain studies related to the work and the topic of this study. Then, there is the review of several theories used in this study. The third part is the review on the democracy. Next is the review on the sociocultural-historical background that is the social condition of Rome. The last one is the theoretical framework where the contributions of all previous studies, theories and reviews in solving the problems of the study are stated.
A. Review of Related Studies
There are some studies talking about Conn Iggulden’s Emperor: the Gates of Rome. For example, in Jack Whites’s article in
5 6
This first from Mr. Iggulden features two young boys--Gaius, the son of a Roman Senator, and Marcus, an orphan--growing up on an estate just outside Rome. With Gaius's father often absent because the rise of Sulla threatens the Roman Republic and with his mother prey to madness, much of the boys’ upbringing is left to the estate overseer, Tubruk, a former gladiator. He in turn brings in one of the most famed gladiator's of the day, Renius, to train the boys to become soldiers worthy of Rome. Much of the book deals with the brutal regimen that Renius imposes, one that makes them men but causes them to hate their harsh mentor. When the final test he subjects them too leads to almost murderous violence an elderly healer, Cabera, fortuitously appears on the scene and the lives of the two young men and the three older become entwined as the action moves to the city and then to service in the Legions (www.brothersjudd.com /index.cfm/fuseaction/reviews.detail/book_id/1494/Gates%20of% 20Rom. htm).
In this review, it is added that the strength of the novel is in the ability of
Iggulden to put the historic setting and background as well as the characterizations of five great men and women with whom they become involved. All these things were wonderfully performed by Iggulden.
The great strengths of the novel include not just Mr. Iggulden's facility with the historic setting and background but his ability to render action scenes in virtual Sensurround and, most of all, the characterizations of these five and of the great men and the women with whom they become involved. Tubruk, Renius and Cabera are perhaps the best trio of supporting characters this side of the Musketeers (www.brothersjudd.com /index.cfm/fuseaction/reviews.detail/book_id/1494/Gates%20of% 20Rom. htm).
Another review is from Roz Kaveney’s article in www.amazon.co.uk.
Here, the reviewer said that this first volume of a sequence of novels about Julius
Caesar at its best in its scenes of grueling training in swordplay and dirty fighting.
It means that Iggulden showed a great display of fighting and struggling during the story. He specifically put the politics side on the view. Even, Roz Kaveney, who is the reviewer, said that Iggulden “simplifies the pushing and shoving of
Rome's two most powerful men to a degree that makes Caesar's choices and 7
loyalties too simple.” It creates such perception that politics is only about power and never about ideas in Rome.
The next review on this book is from www.ebay.com which tells that the book is a historical novel. Moreover, it shows the fortunes of Julius Caesar, from his early childhood, when he was still called Gaius, his life adventure before becoming the Caesar of Rome, until his rise to be the ruler of Rome.
From all these studies, it is clear that the novel pictures the early life of
Gaius Julius Caesar, the great ruler of Roman Empire. He is surrounded by many people from his childhood. All of them have great possibilities to influence or to develop the personality and the character of Julius Caesar. These studies may help to discover the way the people around Caesar help him to be the great ruler of
Rome.
This study which has not been done by anybody will focus on the setting and plot that reveals the democracy in the novel. Also the study will focus on the war as the consequent of the form of democracy that employed in the novel.
Lastly the focus is to reveal the weakness of the form of democracy employed in the novel that causes the war.
B. Review of Related Theories
1. Theories on Plot
One of the elements that form a novel is a plot. It is the structure of its actions, as these are ordered and rendered toward achieving particular emotional and artistic effects (Abrams 1981: 137). It means plot is the incidents or action 8
that being done in the novel. Plot it self has many form variety, for example some plot is made to achieve tragic effect, others to achieve comedy effect, romance, or satire (1981:137).
Murphy in Understanding Unseens says that a plot is a carefully thought out plan in which all the events, all the actions and reactions of the characters, contribute towards the forward movement of the story. The story then moves on, carrying the reader with it up and over a series of crests until the climax of the story is reached and everything is resolved, generally to the reader satisfaction
(Murphy, 1972: 134).
Another theory on plot is Kennedy’s theory. Kennedy divides plot into three parts, it is the beginning, the middle, and the end. The initial statement of the conflict is stated in the beginning and as called the exposition. The middle comes from the rising conflicts to the climax. After climax, there will be a crisis to a denouement in which the resolution is stated in the end (Kennedy, 1999:14-19).
For Stanton, plot’s structure tends to follow regular forms which are exposition, complication or rising action, climax and denouement. The reason is that the basic function of plot is to provide the structure of a unified and complete dramatic function (Stanton, 1965: 16-17).
2. Theories on Setting
The setting of a story not just merely means its time and place but sometimes refers to the spiritual background where the story takes place. A better understanding of the setting will be gained from Holman and Harmon’s 9
explanation in their A Handbook to Literature that there are four elements forming a setting, namely:
(1) the actual geographical location, its topography, scenery, and such physical arrangements as the location of the windows and doors in a room; (2) the occupations and daily manner of living of the characters; (3) the time or period in which the action takes places, for example, epoch in history or season of the year; (4) the general environment of the characters, for example, religious, mental, moral, social, and emotional conditions through which the people in the narrative move (1986: 465).
In other words, the setting is the environment of the events in the story and the immediate world in which they occur.
The setting is generally presented through descriptive passages. However, during the reading of a work of literature, the readers should be aware of all the possibilities why the author has chosen such a background and stressed such details. The readers then may imagine how the setting is changed and how the story is described with different details in order to get to know how this change will affect the rest of story. Furthermore, the readers may find out how the setting directly or indirectly influences the characters and exemplifies the theme of the story (Stanton, 1965: 18).
Murphy in his Understanding Unseen also has some points about how the setting is important. Firstly, he talks about the setting of time: a. Present time
Murphy explains that an author may write a story about his or her own time, the things that are happening around him or her, or the events about them. 10
b. Past time
An author may choose to go backwards in time and writing about historical events to attempt to light up the past to readers. Some imagination may be used to go back to past historical times. c. Future time
Through his imagination, an author may also take readers to the future.
The story may deal with the condition of the world free from any economic- social-political pressure (totalitarian tyranny, anarchy, capitalism), or with the development of human civilization exploring other planets in the universe or dealing with robots. d. No specific time
An author has the right to give the readers no indication of the time in which the story takes place. The story is something like the old fairy stories; they happen ‘once upon a time’ (1972: 143-144).
Secondly, Murphy states some points on the setting of place. He says that a story may have four kinds of place as the settings. The first is a familiar place, which is considered by the author to be familiar to most of the readers, whether from experience or by close acquaintance. Thus a British writer may choose to write about events that take place in London or any other part of Britain. The second place is an unfamiliar place. The story may also be set in a place that is likely to be unfamiliar to many of the readers of the author’s own nation. An imaginary place is the third type of setting of place mentioned by Murphy. An 11
entirely imaginary place which is not familiar to anyone at all may be used as well by the author to be the setting of his or her work of literature (1972:145).
3. Theories on Conflict
Abrams states that generally plot deals with conflict. It is the relation of protagonist and the antagonist character. But in addition to the conflict between individuals, there may be the conflict of protagonist against the fate, or against circumstances that stand between the protagonist and the goal that he or she sets himself or herself to be achieved and in some works the conflict is between opposing desires or values in a character’s own mind (Abrams, 1981: 137).
According to Holman and Harmon, conflict is the struggle that grows out of interplay of two opposing focus in the plot. They furthermore state that conflict may occur in the struggle against nature, against another person, against society and the struggle for mastery. Conflict may be an argument of opposing forces, like man against man, man against nature, man against fate or perhaps the internal one between two opposing parts of men personality (1986: 107).
Stanton mentions that there are two important elements of plot, which are conflict and climax, and he divides conflict into two parts: i. Internal Conflict
Internal conflict is a conflict between two desires within a character, here the conflict happened because the opposing desires in the character’s mind, and the character has to choose the best one for him or her. 12
ii. External Conflict
External conflict is the conflict between a character and his environment.
It can be the conflict between character against fate, or the character against the circumstances that exist between the character and the goal that he or she sets himself or herself to be achieved (Stanton, 1965:54).
4. Theory of Democracy
According to Hallowell in the World Book, democracy is a form of government, a way of life, and a goal or ideal. The term also refers to a country that has a democratic form of government. The word democracy means rule by the people. Abraham Lincoln described such self-government as “government of the people by the people, for the people” (Hallowell, 1971: 104).
In addition, Hallowell says that the democratic way of life recognizes the equality and dignity of all persons regardless of race, religion, sex, or social standing. It holds that everyone is equal in court trials and other legal matters. It provides freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion. A goal of democratic society is to assure each person an opportunity to make full use of his abilities (1971:104).
The characteristics of democracy vary from one country to another.
According to John H. Hallowell in his article in the World Book, certain basic features are more or less the same in all democratic nations: 13
a. Freedom of Expression
According to Montesquieu, all people in democratic nation have power
(Errikson, 1971:106). It means the citizens of a democratic nation are able to select their leaders and influence the policies of their government. For this reason, discussion and understanding of public issues are necessary. To encourage the exchange of ideas, democracies guarantee freedom of speech, the press, assembly, and petition (giving a written request to a government official).
Citizens of a democracy have many opportunities to make their government truly representative. Chances for taking part are usually greatest at the local level. In many local school districts in the United States, for example, voters elect the school board members, and may run for office themselves. Citizens may attend school board meetings and meetings of city councils, and listen to debates on matters that affect them. The people may form groups to influence opinion on public issues and policies. School bond issues and other steps that involve the spending of large sums of money must be given to the voters for approval.
In a democratic society, it is important that politicians know how the people feel about public issues, if for no other reason than to be re-elected.
Government officials are influenced by public opinion. They often can-and must- try to lead and change public opinion, but they are limited in the methods they can use. In seeking support for their own ideas, they must respect the rights of others to express different ideas. 14
b. Free Elections
John Locke argues that man by his nature has certain rights and duties.
These rights include liberty, life and ownership of property (Errikson, 1971: 107).
The liberty here is related to the political right to have equality or the same power.
It can be applied in the freedom of electing national leaders. Free elections give the people a chance to choose their leaders or representatives and express their opinions on various issues. Elections are held periodically in democracies to ensure that elected officials truly represent the people. The possibility of being voted out of office helps assure that these officials pay attention to public opinion.
In most democracies, the only legal requirements for voting or for holding public office have to do with age, residence, and citizenship. The democratic process permits citizens to vote by secret ballot, free from force or bribes. It also requires that election results be protected against dishonesty
c. Majority Rule and Minority Rights
Decisions in a democracy are made according to majority rule. The people accept the choices made by the majority of voters in free elections. After legislatures pass laws, the people follow the will of the majority of representatives. Such majority rule is based on the idea that the judgment of the many is likely to be better than the judgment of the few.
Majority rule does not mean that the majority can do whatever it wants.
The majority must keep in mind the rights and freedoms of the minority.
Democratic countries guarantee that certain rights can never be taken from the 15
people, even by extremely large majorities. These rights include the basic freedoms of speech, press, assembly, and religious worship. The majority must be willing to listen to the views of the minority. The majority also must recognize the right of the minority to try to become the majority by legal means (Hallowell,
1971:104).
d. Political Parties
Parties are a necessary part of democratic government. Rival parties make elections meaningful by giving voters a choice among candidates who represent different interests and points of view. Most political parties try to unite as many of these divided interests and opinions as possible through a broad party program.
The United States and Great Britain have found that a two-party system works best in uniting various interests. In a system with more than two major parties, it is more difficult to get and keep majority rule.
In democratic countries, the party or parties that are out of power serve as the "loyal opposition." That is, they criticize the policies and actions of the party in power. In this way, the party in power is called on to justify its actions, and is made responsible to the people. In a totalitarian country, criticism of the party in power may be labeled as treason. Often, only the "government party" is allowed to exist. Elections mean little in these countries. The people have no real choice among candidates, and no opportunity to express dissatisfaction with the government (Hallowell, 1971:105). 16
e. Division of Power.
Democratic societies believe it is important to divide and spread out political power. According to Montesquieu, a democratic nation should divide its power into three institutions, namely Executive, Legislative, and Judicative (Sills,
1972: 110). Under the separation of powers, each branch is independent, has a separate function, and may not usurp the functions of another branch. However, the branches are interrelated. They cooperate with one another and also prevent one another from attempting to assume too much power. This relationship is described as one of checks and balances, where the functions of one branch serve to contain and modify the power of another. Through this elaborate system of safeguards, the Framers of the Constitution sought to protect the nation against tyranny.
Nowadays, those ideas of division of power by Montesquieu are improved.
The Institution function and its rights and its duties become clearer.
- Legislative: According to Roche and Stedman, the primary function of the
legislative body has always been to declare law, to make law, or to act as a
forum in which the merits of particular laws can be discussed. In other words,
the function of Legislative are to become a law maker, and a government
policy controller based on the voice of the people that they represents (1954:
196).
- Judiciary: Roche And Stedman state in their book that the judiciary stands as
the arbiter of differences between individuals and between individuals and the
state. Its task to apply social norms, whether derived by common law 17
techniques or from specific statutes or codes, to conflicts that arises in society
and to see that these conflicts are settled in accordance with regularized
procedure (1954: 320).
- Executive: Roche and Stedman state that executive as a democratic institution
is an institution that has objective to supply strong, responsible direction to the
community. It means its duty to enforce the decision of the community upon
recalcitrant elements in the society and in the bureaucracy with a strong
responsibility to make sure the power given is not misused to create a tyranny
(1954:333).
Democracy has various arrangements to prevent any person or branch of government from becoming too powerful. For example, the constitution of the
United States divides political power between the states and the federal government. Some powers belong only to the states, some only to the federal government, and some are shared by both.
The constitution further divides the powers of the US government among the President, Congress, and the federal courts. No one can serve in more than one of these branches of government at the same time. The power of each branch is designed to check or balance the power of the others. Powers not granted to governments by a constitution or charters are often reserved for the citizens.
f. Constitutional Government
Democratic government is a government based on law, and in most cases is a constitutional government. Constitutions state the powers and duties of the 18
government, and limit what the government may do. They also say how laws shall be made and enforced. Most constitutions include a detailed bill of rights that describes the basic liberties of the people and forbids the government to violate those rights.
A constitution may be written or unwritten. The United States has a written constitution. The British constitution is unwritten. It consists of laws passed by Parliament, such documents as the Magna Charta, and common-law customs and beliefs (Hallowell, 1971:105).
g. Private Organization
In a democracy, individuals and private organizations carry on many social and economic activities that are, for the most part, free of government control. For example, newspapers and magazines are privately owned and managed. Labor unions are run by and for the benefit of worker, not the state. Democratic governments generally do not interfere with religious worship. Private schools operate along with public schools. Most businesses in democratic societies are privately owned and managed. Great Britain, Sweden and some other democratic nations have government ownership and control of certain basic industries and services.
In totalitarian societies, the government alone organizes and controls most associations. The people are not permitted to establish or join most groups without the permission of the state. In such countries as the Soviet Union, the economy is almost completely owned and managed by the state (Hallowell, 1971:105). 19
C. Review on the Social Condition of Rome
1. Social life
This novel is a historical-based novel. Therefore, the history of Rome around 2nd century BC has to be revealed to create an additional information.
According to Franco Cavazzi’s article in www.roman-empire.net, every five years, each male Roman citizen has to register in Rome for the census. In this census, he has to declare his family, wife, children, slaves and riches. If he fails to do this, his possessions will be taken away and he will be sold into slavery.
Throughout the entire republican era, registration in the census is the only way that a Roman can ensure that his identity and status as a citizen is recognized.
Fathers registered their sons, employers, as well as their freedmen.
Above all, the census is made to count the number of citizens and to review the potential military strength and future tax proceeds. However, the census performs a highly symbolical function. To the Romans, the census makes them more than a mere crowd or barbarian mass. It makes them a populus, a people, capable of collective action. The census is one of the foundation stones of their civilization. The job of compiling the lists is left to the incorruptible and noble-blooded men of substance who are appointed for their proven integrity and authority. They inspect each man, carefully evaluating his riches and his rank and placing him in his rightful place within the civic hierarchy of Rome.
The whole concept of Roman life seems to center around the city.
The countryside is a nice place to retire as well as to stay in touch with nature. 20
However, Romans are social creatures. The truly civilized citizen has to be more than educated or successful. The Roman needs a community, a family, or at least a group of friends around him. Therefore, there is no better place for him than the city. In the Roman mind, cities form its inhabitants into greater, abler, nobler beings. However, the barbarian tribes still live isolated all over the countryside.
In the earliest days of Rome, the Forum changes several times, but it always remains the center of Roman life. In the early days, political life is restricted to the comitium, the northern corner of the Forum, while the rest of the open square is occupied by the market. In the later days of the republic, the shops and the market are largely moved to make way for a greater public meeting space, as well as for Caesar's Forum.
Generally it is Caesar's contribution which initiated the Forum's greatest luxury. Every emperor in turn set out to add to the architectural glory of Rome's centre. With the growth of the empire and the increase in Rome's population, the old Forum becomes too small to cope with the total mass of numbers. In time other forum are added, the Forum of Caesar, of Augustus, of Vespasian, of Nerva and that of Trajan.
The people in the Forum vary considerably as the day went on. Life in the
Forum reaches its height at about 11 o'clock each day. Wheeled vehicles are prohibited from driving through the streets of Rome from sunrise until 4 o'clock in the afternoon. It means that during the daytime pedestrians alone made up the huge crowds which filled the streets and squares, except for some wealthy people, 21
particularly women, being carried in litters by their slaves. During these busy hours in the city centre there iss a tremendous hustle and bustle in the Forum.
Affairs of state are debated in the offices. In the basilica businessmen make deals, financiers discuss loans and the money-changes have their stands and stand jingling their money noisily in their hands to attract the attention of any potential customers. Close to the courtrooms the baying of the spectators and the loud voices of the lawyers can be heard from quite a distance. In other places perhaps the loud shout of a quarrel or a fight, about to break out can be heard.
Sometimes, if a public figure had died, his funeral procession would lead through the Forum. Fathers would traditionally bring their sons to the Forum when their offspring wear his toga for the first time.
As the empire expanded, the crowds on the Forum become yet bigger and more colorful. It seems that nearly every nationality is present on the Forum in the days of empire. However, the Romans are not very fond of such foreigners. Most despised of all are the Orientals. Eastern businessmen and scholars are the targets of a traditional Roman hatred of the eastern civilizations.
Nobles that are moving about on the Forum always followed by a group of clients who is eager to please their patron and sure to see that he comes to no harm. Many such nobles show off their wealth. In addition, they are adorned in costly clothes as well as expensive rings. They have with them their exotic pets as well. Where there is such wealth, there are, of course, also many doubtful characters moving about, keen to reap the benefit of such riches. Quacks, 22
soothsayers and charlatans of all shapes and sizes are all around. The Forum may have lain at the heart of the centre of Rome, but it is not the only place of public life. Other areas too are busy during the day.
2. Social Class
Franco Cavazzi in his article in www.roman-empire.net says that it is to others that a Roman had to look for any confirmation of his ability and identity. In
Roman society, confirmation by others is sought as well as required. No Roman can be his own judge, but he or she can see himself or herself only through the eyes of others. One needs also to consider that Romans do not know of modern day psychology and hence do not analyze their thoughts and feelings. They look not inwards but to others to understand themselves. For it is the opinion of others which dictated the opinion a Roman ultimately held of himself. 'A good man' is hence a man deemed worthy by others, a man deemed honorable. Glory or honor is also measured only in the recognition it drew from others.
To Romans the only advantage to be gained from glory and honor is to use it to climb the social ladder. Any credit among one's fellow men gained by one's ability, either in office or on the battlefield, is immediately used to further one's political fortunes; all in the hope of finally achieving that distant goal—a seat in the Roman Senate. Therefore, any achievement is obviously boasted about to make absolutely sure everyone knows about it. For anyone who is too dignified to 23
do the bragging oneself, simply finds others who will do it for him.
In Rome, where nobility, military and political leadership are all intertwined, there will be no end of bragging, showing-off and a boundless supply of flattering rumors.
However, in a society in which so much depended on the light in which others see you, their view can not only elevate others, but it could destroy others as well. Any news, whether it is good or bad, spread like wildfire in a society that spends much of the day gossiping in the public baths, or mingling at the forum. In the theatres, actors would in their plays praise or deride public figures of the day.
From the points of economic and social condition, generally Romans can be divided into three classes as stated by Franco Cavazzi’s article in www.roman- empire.net. The classes are: a. Patricians
The Patricians are the highest class of all. The right to be a member of
Patrician family is hereditary or in another words it is for highborn person. Every head of a Patrician family can join the Senate. It does not mean every Patrician man can be a senator after he is married. Only the head of a family has the right.
For example, the Julius family, the one that can be the senator is the older person of the family, or the head, except the person retires from the Senate. But it does not happen all the time. For family with has many sons, they can also promote their sons into the Senate, if they have power or position in the Senate. The 24
position such as Consul can do this action. Therefore almost every Patrician is a
Senate member.
Usually the Patrician family is a rich family. They have houses in the city but also they have estate, a land with house on it and field of plant to produce food, cattle and also other goods, outside the city. The man of Patrician family works as a politician or having a military career. They leave the estate to an overseer that controls the estate cash flow.
Beside the wealth Patrician also has a heredity rights in the religious cults,
Military rank. Since Patricians have to marry another Patrician the heredity rights, the wealth and other privileges usually can not be taken by the other class and it makes them so powerful in the society. They also can have clients as well as the
Senate. They have to protect their clients from other Patricians or powerful people and support them, financially or morally. In return they will have the favor of their clients to help them in vote or other tasks.
b. Plebeians
Another class of people exist in the novel is the Plebeians. This class consists of common people that are not born as the Patricians. Unlike the
Patricians, this class is more open in accepting other class member to join this class. It means that the member of class that has lower status can join Plebeians if they can fulfill the requirement indeed. Plebeians can have a politic or military career. Though, they have to start it from very beginning, except they have a recommendation from their patron or protector. 25
The Plebeians work in many fields. Some works as clients to the
Patricians, some other work as a military officer, craftsmen, merchant, and other common people job. However they can do a double job, for example as a client and also as a politician. They will provide the information and other help for their boss in return for money or protection. All clients are Plebeians but not all
Plebeians are clients.
The client is the loyal supporter to a high-standing Roman family. The head of the higher family is the patronus, the patron. Clients act as a kind of 'clan' to the patron. They support him loyally in any risk, whether it is military or political one. Meanwhile, the patron will aid his clients, representing their political interests through the office he held, or even defending them in the courts as their lawyer, when it is necessary. This bond between patron and client is one of the very foundations of Roman society. Fides, loyally, is a prized virtue, which holds together families, as well as the social order through the client system.
Such Roman loyalty is felt not merely to particular men, but to their families. If a patron died, his client would hence support his heir. Some noble families could indeed count on the support of very many people, in the city of Rome, as well as in the countryside towns. Even entire kingdoms could become clients to the very
Roman commander who had conquered them. It is worth pointing out just how deep the Roman idea of fides ran. Titus Labienus has been a general of Julius
Caesar's throughout his conquest of Gaul. However, whatever friendship may have formed between Caesar and his loyal commander, once the civil war began between Caesar and Pompey, Labienus has to change sides for he was from 26
Picenum, a town which is a client of Pompey's. This goes to show that the client system could also be very much military in nature—at least during the days of the
Roman republic.
A patron can raise an army, recruited from among his clients, if he has the means to maintain it. The patron also can create his own small force as a personal armed guard. A patron's armed guard may be used to protect the patron as well as his clients.
The client system truly forms the foundations of the Roman state. It creates stability, as the solid loyalty of clients can keep families in power for centuries. The client would act as a kind of police, making sure no harm came to their own, that nothing is stolen from them. If the patron may not always provide help personally, it would most often be he who coordinates it, perhaps asking other clients to help out one of his supporters who has fallen upon hard times.
However, the wealth of most patrons of course allows him to hand out money to those they deemed deserving of such aid. Maintaining guards, organizing any help, defending people in the courts, even openly handing out money, it is no wonder that the patrons are seen as protectors of their group. It is for the purpose of representing their clients in court that most sons of high-ranking families are trained in law. If some matters failed and one has to struggle to get a retrial, then a patron might always call on some of his clients to stage demonstrations outside the courthouse, making their 'public' outrage heard over such 'miscarriages of justice'. 27
It remains to be said that the word patronus later becomes the Italian word padrino, the expression used to describe the godfather in the Mafia. On closer inspection, the Roman client system with its loyalty and solidarity does show many similarities to the Mafia. It is also telling that the Mafiosi refer to a common cause as 'la cosa nostra' (our cause) and regard themselves as family, 'la familia.
c. Slave
For modern society frowns on the use of slavery, then what needs to be considered is that Rome followed in the footsteps of the ancient civilizations which had gone before it and who had all used slave labor. It is hence understood as quite a normal thing for the vanquished to be taken into slavery, or to purchase slaves from the barbarian realms. If ancient Egypt had used slaves at least two and a half thousand years before the Romans, then also the Babylonians, Indians,
Chinese, Persians and Greeks employed slavery as a normal part of their societies.
The fact that slavery continued in the west for as long as the nineteenth century on
American plantations shows that Rome is merely one period in a truly long lasting tradition.
It can be said that the Romans, from around 200 BC, based much of their society on the exploitation of slavery. Their economic systems become heavily dependent on the widespread existence of slave labor. Slaves labored in the mines and in the empire's many farms and potteries. The state's public works were 28
largely completed and maintained by slaves. Also the government's state bureaucracy depended very much on educated slaves to keep the administration of the empire running. Even key institutions like the state's mints or the distribution of the corn dole to poor Romans depended on slaves. Other educated slaves also kept the private industries going, by functioning as their accountants and clerks.
Other vital services were provided by literate slaves who served as teachers, librarians, scribes, artists and entertainers - even doctors. Also in the private houses of Rome, it was slaves who were the servants of their Roman masters, watching over their private lives. From the man who cleaned the sewers to the emperor's scribe, slaves were an essential part of Roman society. In the latter centuries of the Roman empire, slavery began gradually to decrease in importance, as the rise of Christianity demanded more benevolence, and - no less importantly - the supply of slaves began to dwindle.
Had the early Romans been content with a small number of household slaves, these numbers rose steeply with Rome's increasing wealth. Simple tasks, such as the master's bath, would require the attendance of more than one slave. A slave was used to take the children to school. In households of the rich where there were many slaves, they were divided into groups of ten, each under orders of a foreman. The running for the household was in some homes left in the hands of a freed slave, the so-called procurator (in earlier days he was called the atriensis).
Even those Romans with very moderate means expected to be well served, taken at least three slaves with them to the baths. Not to have one slave was a sign of the most degrading poverty. 29
Slaves used for industrial purposes were generally divided into gangs.
These gangs were closed groups of specialist workers who tended to work as a unit and were generally not split up again.
The acquiring of slaves through conquest was common practice among all the civilizations of the ancient world and Rome was no exception. Julius Caesar, having captured a town in Gaul, sold on the spot the entire population of a district of the place to the salve traders who accompanied his army. Once all were counted the slavers walked away with no less than 53,000 people. Up to the days of Augustus, a marriage between a slave needed not be recognized by its master and enjoyed no protection in law. The children of such a couple would be born as slaves. A slave who ran away would face branding or possibly even death. The treatment of slaves was totally in the hands of the owner, and usually varied according to their abilities. Some among them were trained as skilled fighters to perform as gladiators in the arena. And it was at one of those gladiator schools in
Capua that the famous revolt of Spartacus arose in 73 BC. If the gladiators' lot was cruel, then others too had a pitiful existence. Farm slave gangs would have to work in the fields in chains, and were locked up each night in barracks.
However, not all slaves in the countryside necessarily had such a terribly existence. Herdsmen for example, of which there was very many, were granted reasonable independence as they went about their lives, watching over the herds they were entrusted with. Some Romans would even see the raising of slaves as a form of investment. Cato the Elder bought young slaves whom he would then have trained in various skills, so he could sell them on later at a profit. It was also 30
from Cato's writings that one knows of his opinion that twelve slaves - a foreman and eleven workers - were deemed sufficient to run a farm of some 150 acres, which would grow olives and rear sheep.
The abundance of slavery is also seen as having hampered technological advances in many industries, not least agriculture. For with the existence of so plentiful supply of labor at almost no cost, there was little reason to develop any forms of labor saving equipment. Under the supervision of the aediles the slave dealers sold their wares publicly, either in the open forum or in shops. Slaves for sale would sometimes be stood on revolving stands. Those just brought from abroad were put on display with one foot whitened with chalk. From the neck of each slave for sale hung a plaque with all the information required by potential buyers, nationality, abilities, good and bad points, etc. The best slaves were to be found in the saepta near the forum, the meeting place of the fashionable world, where the best shops were. Naturally, prices varied with the age and quality of the slave. There are records of fabulous sums being paid, as well as very small prices.
One evidently particularly talented teacher of grammar (grammaticus) is supposed to have fetched 700,000 sesterces, a fortune. But such excessive prices were rare.
By general rule a slave at some skill was worth twelve times as much as an untrained one.
Intelligence and learning were the attributes which elevated the price of a slave the most. Next good looks and skills at various types of work. But also mentally retarded, dwarfed or disfigured slaves could fetch high prices by buyers 31
seeking 'jesters' for their own cruel amusement. Some slaves could buy their freedom. This principle, which became fairly widespread, consisted of allowing a slave to have a small 'part-time job' selling wares or services. The profits would be his to keep (the peculium). And in time he could purchase his freedom. But this system was far from being pure kindheartedness on part of the owners. Like this an old slave might buy his freedom, allowing his master to buy a new young slave with the money. Hence the master didn't lose his investment with the slave's eventual death. The practice became so popular after the fall of the republic that emperor Augustus saw it necessary to issue laws restricting it. For once freed, a slave enjoyed full citizenship except for the right of holding public office. And some freedmen used their skills, to become richer even than the masters who had once possessed them.
Another privilege a slave might be awarded by his master, apart from the the peculium, was the right to choose a mate from among the female slaves and live with her in a form of marriage, the so-called contubernium. This slave- marriage though had no legal status and any children born from it belonged as slaves to the master of the house. In imperial days the contubernium became legally recognized, forbidding any master to sell partners of the contubernium separately.
Roman law regarded slaves as mere chattels. They were subject to the will of their masters, against which they enjoyed no protection. Punishments inflicted upon slaves were merciless. Hard labor, whippings, branding, breaking of the 32
joints or bones, branding of the forehead with letters denoting the slave as a runaway, liar or thief and crucifixion were all punishments which were inflicted upon slaves. Even being thrown to the wild beasts in the circuses or even being burnt alive in a cloak soaked in pitch.
However, in the days of the empire the unlimited power of the master over his slaves was curbed to some extent. Hadrian decreed that a master should no longer hold power over a slave's life and death. Furthermore, Constantine the
Great defined the killing of a slave as murder.
However, deliberate cruelty against slaves was frowned upon by a society which did recognize slaves as human beings. Romans generally saw the difference between the slave and the freeman as a difference in status, not as a matter of any racial or cultural superiority and inferiority. Naturally there are many gruesome tales of abuse and brutal punishments. But in turn there are also reports of some slaves being utterly devoted to their masters; some enduring horrendous tortures and death rather than betraying their masters. Yet still the Roman view of slaves was one of contempt. Slaves were people one looked down upon. Kindness toward them was rare, even seen as a sign of weakness.
D. Theoretical Framework
To conduct this study, some theories are applied. The theories used firstly in this study are the theories of setting and plot. These theories are needed since 33
this study deals with the pictured of democracy from the perspective of the setting and plot. The second theory used is the theory of democracy. It is needed since the topic of this study deals with the form of democracy. The review of the social condition in Rome will surely give more description and explanation about the condition and situation revealed in the story. Later, all the theories applied in this study will be very helpful in answering the problems. CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
This chapter consists of three subtitles, namely the object of the study, the approach of the study and the method of the study. The first subtitle covers the description of the object of this study. In the second subtitle, there is an explanation of the approach used in this study. The procedure of analyzing the work is explained in the method of the study.
A. Object of the Study
This study deals with Conn Igguldens’s Emperor: The Gates of Rome. The book was first published in Great Britain in 2003 by HarperCollins publisher. This study uses the paperback edition of the publication of the book in 2003, which has
591 pages and 35 chapters.
The book is the first book of Conn Iggulden’s historical fiction series. The
Emperor it self has 4 series. The three following series are Emperor: The Death of
Kings published in 2004, Emperor: The Field of Swords published in 2004, and
Emperor: The Gods of War published in 2007.
The Emperor series although those are Iggulden’s first novels have gone into top of best seller charts and also been made a TV series regarding the unique of the vivid character, delighting and stunning action also the unrelenting pace of story. The Emperor: The Gates of Rome enters the Sunday Times Bestseller. And all of the series have been made into HBO TV series.
34 35
The story of Emperor: The Gates of Rome is about the early life of Gaius
Julius Caesar, one of the Roman’s very famous leader. In the beginning of the story the author describes about the young Gaius daily live in his father’ estate.
The story also tells about Gaius’ problems with his neighbor and his interaction with some other characters such as Marcus, his best friend, Tubruk, the estate overseer. Then how he meets his fighting trainer and the process of hard training is also described vividly in the story. Finally the story flows into tragedy when
Gaius’ father killed by rebellion slaves and how he struggles to run his father’s estate though he is seventeen years old. The tragedy of his father dead leads into
Gaius’ real adventures into the real world. He enters the political world only several months after the dead of his father. His uncle Marius holds an important point as the guider of Gaius in the new World. Marius Himself is a Consul, the highest position in Rome at that time. It has the absolute power, the administrative power conferring command of the army and the interpretation and execution of the law. Or other words it can be said as the president of Roman Empire.
Though as a democracy nation Rome knows that absolute power on one man can bring the nation into a monarchy. Therefore they elect two consuls in every Year. Each Consul can block each other when discussing a problem in senate congress and each consul should respect one another because they have equivalent rights and duties. In fact the regulation is broken, and the civil war happens between the two consuls. The war and the politic intrigue later on will influence Caesar, one of the best Roman leaders. The name Caesar itself is so 36
famous thus several countries such as Russia adopt it for Tsar, German for Kaiser and indeed Indonesia as Kaisar. Those names mean king or conqueror or ruler.
B. Approach of the Study
Dealing with this study, the sociocultural-historical approach is applied.
Since this approach tries to place the real work in reference to the civilization that produced it, it is necessary to investigate the social environment in which a work was created and which it necessarily reflects (Rohrberger and Woods, 1971: 9-
10). This approach is considered suitable to be applied because it shows that the creation of literary work is embodied within the culture that produced it, so that the work becomes a reflection of and a commentary on social realities. In brief, the sociocultural-historical approach sees literary work as a reflection of civilization.
C. Method of the Study
This study uses library research, since many data and theories are collected from some books. Conn Igguldens’s Emperor: The Gates of Rome is the primary source of the study. The secondary sources are the books and the Internet online references. The theories of literature and its elements applied in this study are taken from M. H. Abrams’s A Glossary of Literary Terms, Rene Wellek and
Austin Warren’s Theory of Literature, Holman and Harmon’s A Handbook to
Literature, Stanton’s An Introduction to Fiction, Murphy’s Understanding
Unseens, and Little’s Approach to Literature. 37
The approach is taken from M. H Abram’s Rohrberger and Wood’s
Reading and Writing about Literature. Some data are also taken from online references, such as from
In analyzing the work, there are some steps taken. Firstly, the book was read and reread in order to get a better understanding of the story. Secondly, the plot and the setting were identified. When it had already identified, the democracy depicted through the setting and the plot in the novel was found out. Thirdly, the war as the consequence of the democracy was identified in the novel. Next, the corrupted forms of the democracy as the cause of the civil war were analyzed. CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS
This chapter covers three main parts, which are aimed to answer the problems. First, it talks about the democracy depicted in the story. Second, this chapter will also explain how the war pictured. The last, it will give an analysis on how the corrupted system of the democracy can be the source of the war.
A. Democracy Depicted in the Novel Seen through the Plot and the Setting
1. Democracy Depicted in the Novel Seen through the Plot
According to Kennedy and Gioia’s Literature: An Introduction to Fiction,
Poetry, and Drama, plot can be divided into three parts; it is the beginning, the middle, and the end. The initial statement of the conflict is stated in the beginning and called as the exposition. The middle comes from the rising conflicts to the climax. After climax, there will be a crisis to a denouement in which the resolution is stated in the end (Kennedy and Gioia, 1999: 14-19). In order to know the democracy depicted in the novel, formerly this study should discuss the plot of the story. From the plot, the democracy later can be pictured.
a. The Exposition
The story starts with Caesar’s early life in his estate. He has such peaceful life at that time. It is also told how his father’s job is and the early actions telling how the democracy works during that time. In addition, some routine works done
38 39
by his father as the Senator are pictured. Moreover, the social classes in Roman society can be identified: Patricians, Plebeians, and Slave. Each class has its own way of life. They have their own tradition, civil right, status in the society, power and wealth.
i. Patricians
The Patricians here in the novel are the same with the Patricians in the real life. They are the highest class of all. The right to be a member of Patrician family is hereditary. In other words, it is for highborn person. Every head of a Patrician family can join the Senate. It does not mean that every Patrician man can be a
Senator after he is married. Only the head of the family has the right. In this novel, in the Julius family, the one that can be the senator is the older person of the family or the head of the family, except the person retires from the Senate.
However, it does not happen all the time. For a family that has many sons, they can promote their sons into the Senate, if they have power or position in the
Senate. The position such as Consul can do this action. Therefore, almost every
Patrician is a Senate member.
“What is the vote about?” Gaius Asked. Marius laughed. “A simple matter of officially accepting you into the ranks of nobilitas and adulthood. In truth it is only formality. You have the right trough your father, or, indeed, my sponsorship would do it… (Iggulden, 2003: 294).
As seen in the real life, Patrician family here usually is rich. They have big houses, field and estate. They do not take care the estate by themselves, because they are busy with politic or business in town, they leave the estate to a estate 40
overseer. He is indeed has almost a whole control to the estate, including, the cash flow. Estate advancement therefore will be the responsibility of the overseer.
Tubruk stepped into the yellow light of the lamps and leaned forward. He was a powerfully built ex-gladiator, who’d bought the position of overseer to the small estate outside Rome and never looked back. Gaius’ father said he was one in thousand for organizing talent. The slaves worked well under him, some from fear and some from liking. He sniffed at the two young boys (2003: 11).
Caesar’s father as one of the Patrician has shown how to deal with his client and has thought his child about the rights and duty of the clients. When he takes his child Gaius and his friend, Marcus into a gladiator fight, two people meet them in the middle of the show. They are his clients, and they give him information, and for return he gives them some money (2003: 295).
ii. Plebeians
Another class of people exists in the novel are the plebeians. Plebeians work in middle segment of the society. They work as military officers, craftsmen, merchants, and other common people’s jobs. Some of them are positioned in the senate as well. Some others work as clients and politician in the same time.
"Greetings, my friends. Please take a seat. This is my son and another boy in my care. I'm sure they can spend a few minutes buying food?" Tubruk handed a coin to both of them and the message was clear. Reluctantly, they moved off between the rows and joined a queue at a food stall. They watched as the four men bent their heads close and talked, their voices lost in the crowd. After a few minutes, as Marcus was buying oranges, Gaius saw the two newcomers thank his father and take his hand again. Then each moved over to Tubruk, who put coins in their hands as they left. Marcus had bought an orange for each of them, and when they'd returned to their seats, he handed them out. 41
"Who were those men, Father?" Gaius asked, intrigued. "Clients of mine. I have a few bound to me in the city," Julius replied, skinning his orange neatly (Iggulden, 2003: 295).
The clients will provide the information and other help for their boss in return for money or protection. All clients are Plebeians but not all Plebeians are clients.
iii. Slave
The lowest class in the society is the slave. As all people know, slave does not have any rights. Nevertheless, what the novel says about the slavery is not exactly the same. It seems that the slave in the novel has several rights. First is the right to free him or herself, by buying him or herself from the owner.
“I could free you,” He whispered, in pain. Nothing seemed to make sense. Her eyes flashed in anger, quickly controlled. ‘No, you couldn’t. Oh you could take my pride and sign me free by Roman law, but I would have earned it in your bed. I am free where it matters, Gaius. I realize that now. To be free citizen in law, I must work honestly to buy myself back. Then I am my own (Iggulden, 2003: 407).
By working hard and honest, they can collect money, and when the money is enough they can buy themselves a freedom. Then they will enter the Plebeian class. The second right is the right to have a gathering. The slaves can make their own meeting and organize other slaves. The result of this gathering right, it can be seen from the plot that they make a riot and it causes a lot of damage to the city
(2003:164). In the future, the right of gathering is abolished.
This exposition is closed by the riot of the slaves as the form of dissatisfaction towards the social system and the government at that time. The riot destroys most of Rome (Iggulden, 2003: …). However, it creates such chaotic 42
governmental system as well as the security system. Even, the riot is becoming worse. It also happens outside the town and to Caesar’s estate. The slave group that plans to break in Gaius’ estate is blocked by the fight back from the estate.
Caesar’s father gathers all of his slaves and workers to fight back. Unfortunately, he is killed at the fighting. From this point, the story rises to the conflicts.
b. The Rising Conflicts
After his father’s death, Caesar, as the only son, has to take over all of his father’s duty. As soon as he finishes managing the work distribution in his estate,
Caesar goes to the town, where he is going to enter the government of Rome, taking over his father’s duty as a Senator. There he meets his uncle that is a
Consul as well as one of the highest Generals in Rome.
Next, he meets many events that automatically means he has to face more complicated conflicts, such as the conflicts between two biggest government sides in Rome: Marius and Sula. The political conflicts between them give such obvious picture how the democracy is done in Roman government. For example, in the free election to formulate the nation policy and in the way how to solve somebody’s claims on his or her rights.
However, the conflicts are getting hard when there is another riot in
Greece. It forces one of the Generals to get into the war. However, both Generals,
Marius and Sula, do not want to get into the war. Therefore, all of their ways and intelligence are formed so that they do not need to go into the war. They have such opinion that the one who keeps staying in the town will have the chance to 43
rule the entire Rome. With all his smart tricks and strategies, Marius is able to bribe all the Senate members although Sula has done it first. It makes Marius can rule the town of Rome and Sula has to go to the war in force to calm the riots in
Greece.
Marius tries to make a fortress in Rome since he has a thought that Sula will come back and attack his own town. The fortress is being built while the army is being trained and the facilities are being prepared. When Sula gets back from the war, he has prepared a plan to attack Rome. Another war is happened.
Marius plans to hold the war so that it will not go into the town and harm the civilians. c. The Climax
The war that was predicted to be a big war and takes a long time to end proved to be a short one because of Sula’s strategy to use a camouflage and to catch Marius. When Marius gets caught, Sula asks him to stop his army. Sula promises to give mercy and to guarantee the safety of all Marius’ army and their families, including Marius’ family. However, instead of commanding his army to stop the war, Marius orders his army to keep fighting until the end. Finally,
Marius is killed. Here is the climax. The war happens only in several days. All of
Marius’ army, that have lost their leader, are easily arrested and killed afterwards.
d. The Resolution 44
When Marius gets killed, all of his family and followers are in danger. His wife commits suicide, most of his army are killed, and most of his followers are arrested and sentenced to death by Sula. Caesar is arrested as well, but he is not sentenced to death. Sula releases Caesar, believing that Caesar will be such fair opponent for him in the future. Furthermore, it makes him satisfied because he thinks that he may have such new challenge.
2. Democracy Depicted in the Novel Seen through the Setting
Based on Holman and Harmon’s explanation in their A Handbook to
Literature, the setting is considered as the environment of the events in the story and the immediate world in which they occur. Therefore, in order to get the picture of the democracy in the novel, the study should reveal the forms of democracy that are shown in the novel through the setting. By seeing the environment of the events in the story and the immediate world in which they occur, that is the situation of Consul and Senate’s life as well as the Forums, these forms are revealed: a. Freedom of Expression
Like in other nations, aristocrat family always has a lot more rights than other people in a society. It can be seen from the setting that Roman aristocrat family indeed has the same case. In particular for those who have rank in Senate or in the military. In Senate, the aristocrat family has the power to choose some of the officers of Rome. They have rights to speak in forum or in the Senate.
“Then it is a simple choice. I will say the name of each legion and those who believe that it is the one to fight Mithridates will stand up and be 45
counted. The rest will stand up when they hear the second name. No man may abstain in such a vote on the security of the city. Are we all agreed?” The three hundred senators murmured their assent solemnly and Sulla smiled. Gaius felt fear touch him. Sulla paused for long moment, clearly enjoying the tension. At last he spoke one word into the silence (Iggulden, 2003:324).
The Plebeian people, at the same time, also have the right to speak, to vote and to express their idea. If the Plebeian is a Senator or client of the Patrician family, they can be involved in a Senate voting to vote special issues. However, if they are ordinary people, they can have their opinion expressed in a place named
Forum, which every free man can express their idea and opinion as well as bring their problems to be heard by the Senate. Almost everybody who has problem related to law or government can bring the problem to the Forum.
Hundreds of people were filling the forum from every direction, and jeers and calls could be heard echoing in the nearby streets. They are all watched Marius and his men and they left an avenue to the Senate, knowing his destination without having to be told (2003:248).
In the novel, the Slave does not have any rights. Therefore, they cannot vote or elect their representatives and their leaders. They are not allowed to express their opinion and idea. The limitations of slave’s rights agitate them.
Through the plot it is clear that it is the major factor that creates the riot in the novel.
A man stepped forward. He was heavily muscled and spotted a thick black beard that made him look like barbarian. Probably, only days previously, he had been meekly carrying rocks in a quarry, or training horse for some indulgent master. Now his chest was splashed with someone’s blood and his face was a sneer of hate, his eyes glimmering in the flames of his torch. “You on the wall. You are slaves like us. Kill those who call themselves betters. Kill them all and we will welcome you as friends” (2003:164). 46
In the novel, only certain classes of people have their rights to access freedom of expression. The Patrician as the highest class has much more freedom to express and to influence their leader or officer that elected. They have access in almost all places that can provide freedom of expression, such as Forum and
Senate.On the other hand, the Plebeians can have freedom to express their will with some limitation. They do not have much influence in the Senate, and if they are clients to some Patrician family, they have to obey the order of their master.
They have to express what their master’s will is, not their own will. The last class of the Romans is the worst. It does not have any rights. Their voice cannot be counted in the election as well as their ideas are ignored because they are not a free man.
b. Free Elections
The right to elect freely does not belong to all classes of Rome. In the novel, only Patricians and some of Plebeians are free to elect their leader. Most of people who can elect freely are people with power and money, especially the
Senators and their clients. The right to elect freely, in other words, means that they are free from forces or bribes. However, in the novel, when Gaius tries to enter the Senate, he feels worry that some of the Senators will vote to reject him, but
Marius tries to calm his nephew by saying that only a brave man can vote against
Marius while his thousands Legions are standing in front of the Senate room
(Iggulden, 2003:293). Marius’ statement shows that the election is not free from 47
force. In other parts of the story, when Marius has won the election, he said that he is the poorest General of Rome. The vote is won because of the bribes.
“What happens now? Do we go back to your house?” Marius smiled a little sadly in response. “No. I had to sell it for the bribes- Sulla was already bribing them, you see, and I had to double his offers in most cases. It took everything I own, except my horse, my sword and my armor. I may be the first penniless general Rome ever had.” He laughed quietly (2003: 330). c. Majority Rule and Minority Rights
In the novel, the decisions are made according to the majority rule. The vote happens in the Senate, for example, always follows this rule. The major voice will win, but it will not abandon the minority rights. Though the vote is loaded by the bribes, but the entire Senator will accept the result gently and fairly. The winner will not abandon the rights of the loose voter in the next vote. Even in important vote such as the vote to choose the Consul that will fight the Greek enemy, the result is accepted gently by the looser. It can be clearly seen when
Sulla looses the vote. Even though he loses the vote, he still greets all the senate after the vote and goes out the senate room gently. Although he knows that his rival will have a huge advantage from this vote (Iggulden, 2003: 325).
Furthermore, it happens almost in all votes on the novel.
d. Political Parties
There are no notes that show political parties in the novel. Senator can easily change their decision or opinion privately. All decisions are based on their own thought. No organizations that collect their opinion or manage the group have 48
the same thought and vision. It is totally individual. Therefore, it is a little bit hard and it takes more time to judge a problem because every person in the Senate has his own point of view to judge a problem. It is clearly shown when the senate is having the vote. Every member of the senate has the right to speak up his mind and show his expression (Iggulden, 2003: 322). In addition if every member of three hundred men in the senate has something to say then it will take a very long time to finish a discussion of an issue.
e. Division of Power.
The divisions of power depicted in the novel are institutionally the same with the modern one. The institutions in the novel are Senate, Consul and
Magistrate. i. Senate
Senate is an institution consists of more or less three hundred and fifty people. People elect some members of the Senate. Consul promotes some others.
Furthermore, some members get the right to enter the Senate because he is a highborn and it is hereditary.
“What is the vote about?” Gaius Asked. Marius laughed. “A simple matter of officially accepting you into the ranks of nobilitas and adulthood. In truth it is only formality. You have the right trough your father, or, indeed, my sponsorship would do it… (Iggulden, 2003:294).
The Senate’s main function is to make and to enforce laws to build the empire. They are the chosen people to whom the people of Rome put their hopes, dreams and lives. The laws that made by the Senate can influence many aspects of 49
life of the citizens of Rome. The taxes, the regulation of how people live, and things that relates to common people’s needs even the faith of the empire lays on the Senate’s hands.
“All too common. The people elect the Senate to make and enforce the laws- and to build the empire. They also elect the other, more senior posts: aediles, praetors and consuls.…” (2003: 295).
In fact, the Senates do not only do making laws and enforcing laws things, but they have to climb the rank in the Senate body. As a political institution, there are many political intrigues allowed in the Senate body. One of the allowed political movements is having a client, though this movement not only belongs to the Senate but also the rest of the Patrician family. It is supported by the structure of Roman society which is composed by powerful patrons and their dependent clients. The client is a free man who entrusted himself to the patronage of another and receive protection from his patron in return. The client helped his patron to succeed in public life and in the patron’s interest in powers, by providing news about what happens in the people, the willingness of the people, and news about other Senate officers’ movement. In addition, they vote for the candidate that the patron supports, bring message as well as spread news or gossip to the people about his patron’s willingness, and carry out others task to increase his patron’s popularity.
“Who are those men, Father?” Gaius asked intrigued. “Clients of mine. I have a few bound to me in the city,” Julius replied, skinning his orange neatly. “But what do they do? I have never seen them before.” Jullius turned to his son, registering the interest. His smiled. “They are useful men. They vote for candidates I support, or guard me in dangerous areas. They carry message for me, or…thousand other small things. In return, they get six denarii a day, each man” (2003: 87). 50
The Senate in the law has more power than any other institutions, because they have the power of people’s voice. In fact, they choose money better than to struggle for the good of their people. In addition, they are afraid of the power of
Consul. Therefore, sometimes they never remove Consul from its position or even vote against it, though they have the power to do it.
“”But how does the Senate control the Consuls? Gaus pressed, interested. Marius took a deep draught of the wine and patted his stomach, smilling. “They could vote against me, even remove me from office in theory. In practice, my supporters and clients would prevent any such vote going through, so for the whole year, a Consul is almost untouchable in power” (2003: 87). ii. Consul
Consul is an institution inside the Senate. An assembly of Roman citizens elects the officers in it. The Senate gives the list of the consulship candidates to the assembly. Consul consists of two officers who are invested with absolute power, the administrative power conferring command of the army and the interpretation and execution of the law. It is the center of political gravity. It does not responsible to other institution and only limits by the law. Though it seems that Consul is very supreme, it also has two other restrictions. First, the officer is elected for only a single year. Second, because Consul consists of two officers, they are subjected to one another’s vetoes. It means each of the Consuls can cancel each other. When one Consul does not agree with the other, what he only needs to say is veto, and the other Consul will have to accept that veto and leave the discussion closed. The closed problem will be discussed in the next year. 51
“Sulla and I are here because the people voted for us and the Senate do not forget that. If we disagree, a consul may forbid any piece of legislation and its passage stops immediately. Sulla or I have only to say, ‘veto’-I forbid it- as the speeches begin and that is the end for that year. We can also block each other in this way, although that does not happen often” (Iggulden, 2003: 295).
Consul also has the right to promote a Senate member. Furthermore, each of the Consuls can consult to the other Senate or representative member which they think their fellow.
“… Sulla and I are consuls- the supreme commanders of all military might of Rome. We lead the Senate not the other way around.” He smiled complacently and called for wine, having the full cup handed to him (2003: 295).
In the law, one only can be a Consul in one year and have to be replaced in the next year but Marius makes a legal exception. He has been a Consul more than two times in a row. The Senate chooses Marius, time and time again.
“You said a consul was only elected for one year and has to step down,” Gaius said. “The law bends for strong men, Gaius. Each year, the Senate clamours for an exception to be made and I should be re elected. I am good for Rome, you see-and you know it” (2003: 296). iii. Magistrate
Magistrate is an institution that becomes the hand of the Senate in enforcing the laws. The main duty is to make sure the people obey the law. Also to give a sanction for anybody who does not obey it. The Magistrate position is below the Consul and Senate, but this institution is powerful enough to kill anybody who does not respect it.
“Wait. That man’s path will cross ours. He is senior magistrate and must be hindered.” The others drew up and halted. 52
“How do you know he is?” Marcus asked. “Do you see the man beside him? He is a lector, a special attendant. Do you see that bundle on his shoulder? Those are wooden rods for scourging and a small axe for beheading. If Magistrate was bumped by one of our horses, say, he could order a death on the spot. He needs neither witness nor laws to apply. Best to avoid them completely, if we can”(Iggulden, 2003: 216). Democratic societies believe it is important to divide and spread out political power. But in the novel it is very clear that the power shared by the three institutions is merely unbalanced. Consul has too many powers. The Senate as the representative of the people is too afraid of the Consul military power and too weak against money. The main function of the Senate is to make the Consul decision is legal. They will not frontally vote against Consul, and the Consul foxily uses the weakness of the senator to control them. The drama of this pathetic condition can be seen clearly in most of the Senate vote. The person who opposes the Consul can be found murdered mysteriously.
One of the people’s tribunes had been found murdered, one who opposed Sulla whenever possible. This would not have been too remarkable in itself; he had been found in a pool, made red by a swiftly opened vein in his leg, a not uncommon mode of death. The problem was that his children too had been found killed, which looked like a warning to others. There were no clues and no witnesses. It was unlikely the murderer would ever been found, but before another tribune could be elected, Sulla had forced through a resolution that gave a general greater autonomy in the field (2003: 113). f. Constitutional Government
The government of Rome is based on the law. They know how to make it and how to use it. Marius, for example, as a general of Rome, has the right to hold a triumph through the city of Rome, but politically, Sulla, the other general, and the rival of Marius will not let it happens. If Marius has the triumph, his 53
popularity will raise in front of the people and of course in the Senate’s eyes. In order to achieve his goal, Marius makes a gambling decision by moving his force to claim a triumph. He goes to a place, which is according to the law of Rome is the place for Roman citizen to ask for the Senate help or to be heard by the
Senate. He goes to the forum, and asks for his triumph. He uses the diplomacy words using the law as the shield. Although Sulla does not want to fulfill Marius’ wish, he finally grants the rights for Marius to hold a triumph (Iggulden, 2003:
233). Although the law indeed exists in Rome, many intrigues are made by both
Consuls to protect their power. Indeed the broken law is legal because the Senate has made another law that is favorably to the power holders.
g. Private Organization
There are not many notes about private organization in the novel.
However, the government gives so much freedom to the citizen to create their own economic organization. Some organizations, such as money lender and party organizer are free from government involvement (Iggulden, 2003: 425). It shows that the government is not a tyranny type.
B. The Civil War as a Consequence of the Democracy Depicted in the Novel
In order to understand how the civil war can be the consequence of the democracy and how it depicted in the novel, the study finds out the background of the civil war, the process of the civil war and the consequence of the civil war. 54
1. The Background of the Civil War
The main source of the civil war is the scramble of power between two
Consuls, Marius and Sulla. Both are excellent generals. As Consuls, both has to respect and be respected. The scramble of power between two Consuls is very clear in the novel. It can be seen when Marius wants to ask permission to hold a triumph. According to the law of Rome, he deserves a triumph because he is a general. However, he has only one option that is to ask in a Senate meeting.
Unfortunately, Marius does not do the option. He chooses other way to ask permission. He uses his right as a citizen to talk to the Senate from the Forum. It indeed makes his opponent angry and it is done in front of the people of Rome
(Iggulden, 2003: 250). It makes Sulla will have no other option except to accept
Marius’ triumph. In the people’s eyes, Sulla will be the second Consul because he accepts an order from another Consul. In addition, the triumph will raise Marius’ popularity higher, indeed it decreases Sulla’s.
The battle still continues inside the Senate. Marius has planned to force
Sulla and his forces out of Rome because with his force inside the city, it is impossible to bring Marius’ force. The law of Rome states, it is scelus—a crime for soldiers to be on the streets (2003: 246). Marius knows that only Sulla’s soldiers are allowed to enter the city because Sulla is in charge of the security of the city. Therefore, Marius has to make a plan and legally forces Sulla’s army moved away. He creates a plan using the issue of a riot in one of Rome’s territories. Mithridates, a Greek general who has overrun the Roman army, needs to be taken care. The situation puts both Marius or Sulla has to response 55
immediately to eliminate the riot (2003: 322). Vote in the Senate has to be done, to choose, who is going to the war. Sulla and Marius have already known these riot months before, but they do not discuss this problem yet, to prepare for the better impact (2003: 330).
Sulla also knows that if he can push Marius’ legion, who has already gained high popularity and fame far from the city, he can gain more advantages.
Whenever Marius’ legion comes to the city again, Marius will have no power to bring his legion inside. Therefore, Sulla bribes the Senate to vote for Marius to attack Mithridates (2003: 331).
Marius knows Sulla has bribed all the Senates. To win the vote and to gain the advantage as the chief of the city, he has to double the bribe. He lost almost everything because of the gambling vote (2003: 331).
Gaius could not hold it any longer. “How did you swing the vote against Sulla?” Marius began to laugh and wiped his forehead free of sudden perspiration. “Planning, my lad. I knew the landing of Mithridates almost as soon as it happened, days before Sulla heard. I used the oldest lever to vote for me, even then, it was closer than I would have liked. It cost me a fortune, but tomorrow morning I have the control of Rome.” “He will back, though,” Gaius warned (2003: 330).
The conflict of both Consuls is the main source of the war. The conflict is becoming bigger and bigger. Both sides throw their attack using every legal intrigue that allowed. The vote to fight Mithridates ends the conflict for awhile.
However, the vote starts a much bigger conflict between two leaders of Rome.
This is the civil war. 56
2. The Process of Civil War
The war starts when Sulla has beaten the enemy of Rome in Greece. He sails home to Rome. As every Roman citizen knows, two generals cannot rule one city. Therefore, Sulla has two options, to attack the city and become the enemy of
Rome, or to enter peacefully and be controlled by Marius. As predicted by some people of Rome, including Marius, Sulla chooses to attack the city.
Marius, on the other hand, has prepared many tactics to block Sulla’s attacks. He has a very loyal army, as well as Sulla’s, named First Born. He has ordered First Born to be prepared for all the possibilities although some of his soldiers still do not believe that Sulla is going to attack his own city. Marius, who is very well-known of his leadership, charms, and affection towards his soldiers, tries to assure his men. It is very odd for Marius not to be trusted by his men.
Almost all of his men recognized him as their own father. Marius also knows all of his men personally. He knows their wife’s name, children’s name, and indeed, he knows their private life. Like a father knows about his son, that is the relationship between Marius and his men. Therefore, it is impossible for his men not to believe in him. The fact that Rome is going to be besieged by his own son makes his soldiers’ faith waver (Iggulden, 2003: 410).
Sulla’s tactic worries Marius. He does not prepare for this kind of tactic.
He has prepared many defensive tactics to block the attack, but to watch the enemy standing in front of the gate and do nothing is the only thing he does not prepared before.He walks around the meeting room while Julius Caesar, his nephew, is sitting and becoming very agonized because he never sees his uncle 57
walking around unconfidently. The only thing that Marius can do is just waiting for the messengers bringing new description of the battle condition outside each gate of Rome (2003: 477).
Because of the tension, Marius walks outside the command center and walks to the wall to make such an investigation. When he gets back, suddenly water carriers and robbed messenger jostle him. Only in few second he is surrounded by more than fifty men, his own man. His nephew Caesar who can see the situation clearly tries to save his uncle, unfortunately another soldiers attacks
Caesar and his men. They have a big fight while Marius is surrounded by more than fifty men. The unbalanced fight is won by Sulla’s man. More than five thousand soldiers of First Born are spread in all gates. They do not realize that their General has already been captured. When they see their general captured, they become wild and attack sporadically. Sulla’s men attack from outside the gate and from inside. Most of Sulla’s soldiers, inside the wall are undercover.
They use the first born attribute and uniform. It makes the battle become harder for First Born, because they cannot easily define which one is the real enemy.
Only in several time, Sulla’s army can enter the city and breaks the defense. To calm the First Born, Sulla brings Marius to the wall lively. He persuades Marius to surrender. He promises that he will leave Marius and his family live, and he also guarantees the safety of the rest of the First Born. In addition he persuades Marius in the name of Rome, for the peace of Rome. After thinking for a while, Marius agrees to surrender and he asks an opportunity to talk 58
to his men. Sulla hang Marius in the wall unfortunately Marius does not want to surrender, he asks his men to burn Rome and to kill their enemy.
"First-Born. There is no dishonor. We were not betrayed but attacked by Sulla's own men left behind. Now, if you love me, if you have ever loved me, kill them all and burn Rome!" He ignored the agony of the dagger as it tore into him, standing strong before his men for one long moment as they roared in fierce joy. Then his body collapsed.
"Fires of hell!" Sulla roared as the First-Born surged forward."Form fours. Melee formation and engage. Sixth company to me. Attack!" He drew his sword as the closest company clustered round to protect him. Already he could smell blood and smoke on the air, and dawn was still hours away (2003: 489).
The death of Marius does not stop the war. His army still fights till the end. They make a new commanding chain with Orso Ferito as an unofficial commander. They fight from street to street then hide after a small attack to the
Sulla’s force. They gather to arrange strategy in random place.
The meeting room had been chosen at random, a kitchen in someone's town house. The group of centurions had walked in off the street and spread the map out. The owner was upstairs somewhere. Orso sighed as he looked at the map. Breakthroughs were possible, but they would need the luck of the gods to beat Sulla. He looked around at the faces at the table again and was hard put not to wince at the hope he saw reflected there. He was no Marius, he knew that. If the general had remained alive to be in this room, they would have had a fighting chance. As it was… "They have no more than twenty to fifty men at any given point on the line. If we break through quickly, with two centuries at each position, we should be able to cut them to pieces before reinforcements arrive." "What then? Go for Sulla?" one of the centurions asked. Marius would have known his name, Orso acknowledged to himself. "We can't be sure where that snake has positioned himself. He is quite capable of setting up a command tent as a decoy for assassins. I suggest we pull straight back out, leaving a few men in civilian clothes to watch for an opportunity to take him" (2003: 543). 59
After they arrange the strategy they make an ambush then launch the attack and hide. For several times they have succeed. In spite of the fact Sulla knows and makes the counterstrategy. He gives a bait of small group of soldier to be attacked and when Orso and his group attacks he sweep them with many reinforcements that hiding. In the uncertain situation Orso launch a final attack, he does the attack without any strategy, indeed the result is predictable. It is a suicide mission. He is caught and tortured to death. The war ended when Orso dies.
3. The Consequence of the Civil War
The consequence of the war is almost predictable. Destruction is the most certain thing in the war. Both the winner and the loser will lose something they love. Marius here loses everything; he loses his life, his wife, his fortune, his legions and many others. He endangers his people, especially people who believe in him. On the other hand, Sulla as the winner also loses several things; he loses the trust of his own people although he can gain it back by force. The people of
Rome are on the sufferer side. They lose their house, their fortune, their wealth, and their safety. The hardest thing is they lose their beloved ones. They have to fight for something unsure.
C. The Corrupted Forms of the Democracy as the Source of the Civil War
There are several corruptions of the system of democracy that depicted in the novel that can be the source of war. It can be seen through some of the forms of the democracy itself. Those forms are: 60
1. Freedom of Expression
Not all Roman people at the time have the freedom of expression. Only the aristocrats and some of the Plebeians have. In addition, the slave has no right at all. This phenomenon can bring into an unbalanced system of government.
According to Montesquieu, every person in the democracy has power (Errikson,
1971: 685). Therefore, this kind of unbalanced system can bring a nation into a big conflict.
France Revolution, for example, or the slaves’ riot that kills Caesar’s father is because of the unbalanced freedom. This kind of freedom can be a time bomb. If there are only some people allowed to have their freedom of expression, the rest will feel irritated. On one hand, the corrupted feature of freedom of expression creates such irritated people and the irritated people can be very dangerous when they have reached their limit of passion. They can go wild and attack or even kill others people, like the riot of slaves in the novel (Iggulden,
2003: 164).
On the other hand, this corrupted system may push the people who have the freedom to expand their freedom limit. For example, the Senate has much freedom to express and to give their opinion as well as to gain more freedom to be famous and free from gossip. To gain this status they will use their client’s help, and to use clients means adding expenditure. If the topic has come to expenditure or money then bribery is the word that always accompanies the senate. The senate will welcome the bribe money because they need it. In a consequence, they decision in a discussion in senate floor will not based on their own argument but 61
on who has given more. Just like the time bomb, this situation can blow and becomes horrible if the unwise decision is accumulated.
2. Free Elections
In the novel as mentioned above, the election in the novel most of the time are not free from factors such as bribing and military force that can give terror to the people that elect.
"Could they prevent my acceptance then?" Marius chuckled. "Take off the worried look. They do not vote in internal matters, such as new members, only in city policy. Even if they did, it would be a brave man to vote against me with my legion standing thousands deep in the forum outside. Sulla and I are consuls—the supreme commanders of all the military might of Rome. We lead the Senate, not the other way around" (Iggulden, 2003: 295).
Indeed it gives a pressure for those who elect in giving their voice. Their voice will not be free and not objective. The person that elect will not elect based on their own choice but based on the bigger power. The decision made by the elector will bring no good but for them. According to Errikson, free elections should give the people chance to choose their leaders or representatives and to express their opinions on various issues (1971: 564). However, what seen in this model of democracy is that the elector elects their leaders and makes a decision not based on their opinions on various issues but based on the power that presses them.
Besides the military force, another factor that presses the elector is money.
Bribery is very common in the novel. An amount of money can decide how the nation policies go. One factor that blows the war is the bribery of the Senate, when choosing one of the General that fight outside the nation. If the Senate does 62
not elect based on the bribery then there will be no war. Because the Senate chooses Sulla fight the enemy, Marius has a change to control Rome in several times and build a fortification from Sulla. When going home Sulla knows that he has no other choice than a war. If he pretends nothing happened and enters the city he will be dead.
3. Political Parties
The fact that no political parties are found in the novel can be the other corrupted form of this model of democracy. Hallowell says that political parties functioning as the vehicle to unite as many of these divided interests and opinions as possible through a broad party program (1971: 354). Therefore without political parties it will be easy for some people to seduce other elector with personal interest seduction, such as bribery, in making a decision. The Senate can be bribe personally, and the bribed senator does not have any obligation or responsibilities to his party, his responsibly are in his own interest. If they have party then it will organize the party’s members and the party can control its member to obey the party’s regulation. For example when a member of a party does not pay attention to party regulation then the party will remove the member position from the Senate.
4. Division of Power. 63
Though the divisions of power depicted in the novel institutionally are the same with the modern one, there are many corrupted features in the implementation of the regulation. a. Senate
Senate as depicted is an institution that according to Roche and Stedman as a law maker and a government policy controller based on the voice of the people that they represent (1954: 196). In fact, the Senate in the novel does not control the government policy. It can be seen from what Marius says when his nephew is afraid of being rejected by the Senate. Marius says the Senate will not dare to vote against him while his army standing in front of the gate (Iggulden,
2003: 295). Another corrupted system of this Senate is shown when Marius has won the vote because he has bribed the Senate.In addition, the Senate can change the regulation they made only because they are afraid of the power of a military force.
"You said a consul was only elected for one year and has to step down," Gaius said.
"The law bends for strong men, Gaius. Each year, the Senate clamors for an exception to be made and for me to be reelected. I am good for Rome, you see—and they know it."
Gaius felt pleased at the quiet conversation, or as quiet as the general ever managed, at least. He understood why his father had been wary of the man. Marius was like summer lightning—it was impossible to tell what he would strike next—but he had the city in the palm of his hand for the moment, and Gaius had discovered that was where he too wanted to be: at the center of things (2003: 296).
Those facts show that Senate does not struggle for the people but for their own sake gives clear vision that this kind of Senate cam endangers their own 64
people. If the Senate as the government’s controller functions well then it will be no such as too powerful general that lead Rome and block the power of the generals from having a civil war.
b. Consul
Consul acts as the government of Rome in the novel. In the regulation it should be under control of the Senate. For Roche and Stedman the government is the selected people by the people to run a nation and given responsibly to make sure the power given not to create a tyranny (1954: 196). The fact here is that the consuls are the main force that controls the empire at the time. They can control the Senate, change the regulation and make everything looks legal. In addition, no other power in Rome that can beat the Consul. It is the supreme power at the time.
However, there are two Consuls in novel. Only the other consul can block the other one from creating a tyranny. In fact, both of the Consuls want to be the one that controls Rome. It makes them fight each other. Later, it creates chaos and horror for the people of Rome.
5. Constitutional Government
According to Hallowell, a government should be based on the law (1971:
354). Rome in the novel indeed based on it. There are many changes that given by the government that makes the government can legally do whatever they want.
However, the basic and important law, such as Consul only lasts for one year is broken (Iggulden, 2003: 296). The Senate makes an exception; unfortunately it is 65
not for the good of the whole people of Rome, but for the good of the Consuls who govern Rome. This kind of exception can damage a whole nation. The chosen Consul can grow his power and fortune bigger and bigger every single year. When his power is enough, he will attack his country to change it into a dictatorship country. CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION
History is said to be the witness that testifies to the passing time. People can learn many things from history. One of them is the system of government.
Policies in one nation are usually made according to the system of government that may determine the advancement of the nation. One system that is applied in most countries around the world is democracy.
Defined as a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, democracy indeed claims that everyone should have an opportunity to make full use of his or her abilities. However, it may be the source of conflicts as pictured in
Conn Iggulden’s Emperor: The Gates of Rome for instance. Here, through the plot and the setting, the novel presents how democracy described during that time.
In the way of the plot, firstly it is presented in the exposition, where the early life of Caesar is presented as well as the social condition, in particular the social classes that the society has at that time. There are the classes of the
Patricians, the Plebeians, and the slaves. The Patricians have the right to be a
Senate, the Plebeians have to be the protector of the Patricians when they become the Clients, and the slaves have to obey all their owner’s commands.
Secondly, through the rising conflicts, it is known that Caesar has to face many challenging things outside his estate after his father’s death. The political conflicts between two biggest government sides in Rome at that time give such obvious picture how the democracy is done in Roman government. For example,
66 67
in the free election to formulate the nation policy and in the way how to solve somebody’s claims on his or her rights. Even, the conflicts are getting harder when there is another riot in Greece. It forces one of the Generals to get into the war. Later, it leads to the climax, where another war is happened after the riot in
Greece finished and one of the Generals gets killed in the war. It changes everything in Caesar’s life, because the dead General is his uncle. This is the resolution, where Caesar is not arrested and is believed to be a fair and challenging opponent for the General in the future.
In the way of the setting, the study sees the situation of Consul and
Senate’s life at that time, as well as the Forums. The picture of democracy is shown from some forms: freedom of expression (the Patricians and the Plebeians have right to speak in the Forum or in the Senate, while the slaves do not have any right to speak their own ideas), free elections (only Patricians and some of
Plebeians are free to elect their leader), majority rule and minority rights (the major voice will win, but it will not abandon the minority rights), political parties
(there is no political party stated in the story so that all decisions are based on the
Senator’s own thought), the division of power (there are Senate—the chosen people of Roman whose duty is to make and to enforce laws to build the empire,
Consul—two officers who are invested with absolute power, the administrative power conferring command of the army and the interpretation and execution of the law, and Magistrate—an institution that becomes the hand of the Senate in enforcing the laws), constitutional government (the government of Rome is based on the law), and private organization (the government gives so much freedom to 68
the citizen to create their own economic organization, such as money lender and party organizer).
The war that is one of some points leading to the climax happens because of the scramble of power between two Consuls, Marius and Sulla. The war starts when Sulla has beaten the enemy of Rome in Greece. He sails home to Rome. As every Roman citizen knows, two generals cannot rule one city. Therefore, Sulla has two options, to attack the city and become the enemy of Rome, or to enter peacefully and be controlled by Marius. As predicted by some people of Rome, including Marius, Sulla chooses to attack the city. The consequence of the war is almost predictable. Destruction is the most certain thing in the war.
In spite of the fact, there are many corrupted forms can be found in the system. As the result of the corrupted forms, one branch of the system, judicative, becomes more powerful than others. The Consul as the Judicative branch has more power to do almost anything. They modify the regulation, they do bribery, they spread terror, etc. Because there are two Consuls, and each of them wants to rule Rome as a single dictator, they have a fight and it becomes a war. It is the final form of conflict of interest between several power that want to convert the democracy country to be a tyranny in which will bring many benefits to the dictator. Therefore, the corrupted forms of democracy in the novel are the cause of the civil war. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abrams, M. H. A Glossary of Literary Terms. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publisher, 1981.
Cavazzi, Franco. Roman Society, Roman Life. 2008.
Errickson, Stephen A. The World Book Of Encyclopedia volume 13. Chicago: Field Enterprises Educational Corporation, 1971.
Hallowell, John. The World Book Of Encyclopedia volume 5. Chicago: Field Enterprises Educational Corporation, 1971.
Holman, C. Hugh and William Harmon. A Handbook to Literature. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1986.
Hudson, William Henry. An Introduction to the Study of Literature. London: George G. Harrap, 1958.
Iggulden, Conn. Emperor: The Gates of Rome. London: HarperCollins, 2003.
Kaveney, Roz. Amazon Review. 2003.
Kennedy, X. J. and Dana Gioia. Literature: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, and Drama. New York: Longman, 1999.
Murphy, M. J. Understanding Unseens. London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1972.
Roche, John P. and Murray Stedman Jr. The Dynamics of Democratic Government, New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, Inc., 1954.
Rohrberger, Mary and Samuel H. Woods, Jr. Reading and Writing about Literature. New York: Random House, Inc., 1971.
Stanton, Robert. An Introduction to Fiction. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1965.
Sills, David L. Melvin Richter International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, Volume 9. New York: The Macmillan Company & The Free Press, 1972.
69 70
Van de Laar, E. and N. Schoonderwoerd. An Approach to English Literature. New York: S-hertogenbosch, 1963.
White, Jack. Emperor: The Gates of Rome. 2006.