tradition, knew always how to find out the mode of warfare by which in the given case the enemy was conquered, and which was consequently in the given case the right one; who, with the certainty of divination, found the proper means for every end; who, after defeat, stood ready for battle like William of Orange, and ended the campaign invariably with victory; who managed that element of warfare, the treatment of which serves to distinguish military genius from the mere ordinary ability of an officer—the rapid movement of masses—with unsurpassed perfection, and found the guarantee of victory, not in the massiveness of his forces, but in the celerity of their movements; not in long preparation, but in rapid and bold action, even with inadequate means. But all 10 these were with Cæsar mere secondary matters; he was no doubt a great orator, author, and general, but he became each of these merely because he was a consummate statesman. The soldier more especially played in him altogether an accessory part, and it is one of the principal peculiarities by which he is distinguished from Alexander, Hannibal, and Napoleon, that he began his political activity not as an officer, but as a demagogue. According to his original plan, he had purposed to reach his object, like Pericles and Gaius Gracchus, without force of arms, and throughout eighteen years he had, as leader of the popular party, moved exclusively amid political plans and intrigues-until, reluctantly convinced of the necessity for a military support, he, when already forty years of age, headed an army. It was natural that he should 11 even afterward remain still more statesman than general -just like Cromwell, who also transformed himself from a leader of opposition into a military chief and democratic king, and who in general, little as the Puritan hero seems to resemble the dissolute Roman, is yet, in his

development as well as in the objects which he aimed at and the results which he achieved, of all statesmen, perhaps, the most akin to Cæsar. Even in his mode of warfare this improvised generalship may still be recognized; the enterprises of Napoleon against Egypt and against England do not more clearly exhibit the artillery lieutenant who had risen by service to command, than the similar enterprises of Cæsar exhibit the demagogue metamorphosed into a general. A regularly-trained officer would hardly have been prepared, through political considerations of a not altogether stringent nature, to set aside the best-founded military scruples in the way in which Cæsar did on several occasions, most strikingly in the case of his landing in Epirus. Several of his acts are, therefore, cen

surable in a military point of view; but what the general 12 loses, the statesman gains. The task of the statesman is

universal in its nature, like Cæsar's genius; if he undertook things the most varied and most remote one from another, they had all, without exception, a bearing on the one great object to which with infinite fidelity and consistency he devoted himself; and of the manifold aspects and directions of his great activity he never preferred one to another. Although a master of the art of war, he yet, from statesmanly considerations, did his utmost to avert the civil strife, and, when it nevertheless began, to keep his laurels from the stain of blood. Although the founder of a military monarchy, he yet, with an energy unexampled in history, allowed no hierachy of marshals or government of prætorians to come into existence. If he had a preference for any one form of services rendered to the state, it was for the sciences and arts of


rather than for those of war. 13 The most remarkable peculiarity of his action as a

statesman was its perfect harmony. In reality, all the




conditions for this most difficult of all human functions were united in Cæsar. A thorough realist, he never allowed the images of the past or venerable tradition to disturb him; with him nothing was of value in politics but the living present and the law of reason, just as in grammar he set aside historical and antiquarian research and recognized nothing but, on the one hand, the living usus loquendi, and on the other hand the rule of symmetry. A born ruler, he governed the minds of men as the wind drives the clouds, and compelled the most heterogeneous natures to place themselves at his servicethe smooth citizen and the rough subaltern, the noble matrons of Rome and the fair princesses of Egypt and Mauretania, the brilliant cavalry officer and the calculating banker. His talent for organization was marvelous ; 14 no statesman has ever compelled alliances, no general has ever collected an army out of unyielding and refractory elements with such decision, and kept them together with such firmness, as Cæsar displayed in constraining and upholding his coalitions and his legions; never did regent judge his instruments and assign each to the place appropriate for him with so acute an eye.

He was monarch; but he never played the king. Even when absolute lord of Rome, he retained the deportment of the party leader; perfectly pliant and smooth, easy and charming in conversation, complacent toward every one, it seemed as if he wished to be nothing but the first among his peers. Cæsar entirely avoided 15 the blunder of so many men otherwise on an equality with him, who have carried into politics the tone of military command; however much occasion his disagreeable relations with the senate gave for it, he never resorted to outrages such as that of the eighteenth Brumaire. Cæsar was monarch; but he was never seized with

the giddiness of the tyrant. He is, perhaps, the only one among the mighty men of the earth who, in great matters and little, never acted according to inclination or caprice, but always, without exception, according to his duty as ruler, and who, when he looked back on his life, found, doubtless, erroneous calculations to deplore, but no false step of passion to regret. There is nothing in the history of Cæsar's life which, even on a small scale, can be compared with those poetico-sensual ebullitions—such as the murder of Kleitos or the burning of Persepolis

which the history of his great predecessor in the East 16 records. He is, in fine, perhaps, the only one of those

mighty men who has preserved to the end of his career the statesman's tact of discriminating between the possible and the impossible, and has not broken down in the task which for nobly-gifted natures is the most difficult of all—the task of recognizing, when on the pinnacle of success, its natural limits. What was possible he performed, and never left the possible good undone for the sake of the impossible better, never disdained at least to mitigate by palliatives evils that were incurable. But where he recognized that fate had spoken, he always obeyed. Alexander on the Hyphasis, Napoleon at Moscow, turned back because they were compelled to do so, and were indignant at destiny for bestowing even on its favorites merely limited successes; Cæsar turned back voluntarily on the Thames and on the Rhine; and at the Danube and the Euphrates thought not of unbounded plans of world-conquest, but merely of carrying into

effect a well-considered regulation of the frontiers. 17 Such was this unique man, whom it seems so easy and

yet is so infinitely difficult to describe. His whole nature is transparent clearness; and tradition preserves more copious and more vivid information regarding him than

[ocr errors]

regarding any of his peers in the ancient world. Of such
a personage our conceptions may well vary in point of
shallowness or depth, but they can not be, strictly speak-
ing, different; to every not utterly perverted inquirer
the grand figure has exhibited the same essential features,
and yet no one has succeeded in reproducing it to the
life. The secret lies in its perfection. In his character
as a man as well as in his place in history, Cæsar occu-
pies a position where the great contrasts of existence
meet and balance each other. Of the mightiest creative 18
power, and yet at the same time of the most penetrating
judgment; no longer a youth, and not yet an old man;
of the highest energy of will and the highest capacity of
execution; filled with republican ideals, and at the same
time born to be a king; a Roman in the deepest essence
of his nature, and yet called to reconcile and combine in
himself as well as in the outer world the Roman and the
Hellenic types of culture—Cæsar was the entire and per-
fect man. Accordingly, we miss in him, more than in 19
any other historical personage, what are called character-
istic features, which are in reality nothing else than de-
viations from the natural course of human development.
What in Cæsar passes for such at the first superficial
glance is, when more closely observed, seen to be the
peculiarity not of the individual, but of the epoch of
culture or of the nation; his youthful adventures, for
instance, were common to him with all his more gifted
contemporaries of like position, his unpoetical but strong-
ly logical temperament was the temperament of Romans
in general. It formed part, also, of Cæsar's full humanity
that he was in the highest degree influenced by the con-
ditions of time and place; for there is no abstract hu-
manity—the living man can not but occupy a place in a
given nationality and in a definite line of culture. Cæsar 20

« ElőzőTovább »