I find this
question interesting, but I wouldn’t take Julius Caesar as an example of the
struggle between good and evil ambition. Julius Caesar had the project from the
very beginning to overthrow the Republic and place himself as only tyrant, as
can be understood from this excerpt by Plutarch relating young Julius’ thoughts
on his way to conquer Spain
:
“In his journey, as he was crossing the Alps, and passing by a small village of the barbarians with
but few inhabitants, and those wretchedly poor, his companions
asked the question among themselves by way of mockery, if there
were any canvassing for offices there; any contention which
should be uppermost, or feuds of great men one against another.
To which Caesar made answer seriously, "For my part, I had
rather be the first man among these fellows than the second man in Rome." It is said
that another time, when free from business in Spain, after
reading some part of the history of Alexander, he sat a great while very thoughtful, and at last burst out into tears. His friends
were surprised, and asked him the reason of it. "Do you
think," said he, "I have not just cause to weep, when
I consider that Alexander at my age had conquered so many
nations, and I have all this time done nothing that is memorable."” (Caesar By Plutarch ,Written
75 A.C.E. Translated by John Dryden)
And in this
other passage Plutarch describes a key moment in his getting power :
“...he had
recourse to a piece of state policy by which everybody was
deceived but Cato. This was the reconciling of Crassus and
Pompey, the two men who then were most powerful in Rome. There had been a
quarrel between them, which he now succeeded in making up, and by this
means strengthened himself by the united power of both, and so under the cover of an action which carried all the appearance of a piece
of kindness and good-nature, caused what was in effect a
revolution in the government. For it was not the quarrel
between Pompey and Caesar, as most men imagine, which was the
origin of the civil wars, but their union, their conspiring together
at first to subvert the aristocracy, and so quarrelling afterwards between
themselves. Cato, who often foretold what the consequence of this alliance
would be, had then the character of a sullen, interfering man, but
in the end the reputation of a wise but unsuccessful counsellor.”
Putting Caesar
aside, I think it is an important moral question. Is ambition a vice or a
virtue?
Books Discussed
