Critical book analysis, Julius Caesar

Fuller, J.F.C. Julius Caesar: Man, Soldier, and Tyrant. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1965.

Major-General J.F.C. Fuller, or John Frederick Charles Fuller, was a long time British army officer during the early twentieth century. He was a military strategist and historian, as well as a gifted writer. Fuller is probably best known for his "Nine Principles of War" which have laid down the foundation of much of modern military theory since the early twentieth century.
Fuller starts off by identifying that we as human beings tend to make well-known historical figures almost immortal. We either tend to glorify them beyond measure or criticize them until they are seen as inhuman. What Fuller wants to do is show the real Julius Caesar instead of history’s idea of this perfect being, or classical study’s idea of someone who could do nothing right. Fuller states He says that “one of the great difficulties in history is to disentangle the true characters and activities of outstanding personalities from the distortions of their legends.”1 Fuller wants to present Julius Caesar in a non-biased way that will show the world the real ruler of the Roman Empire.
Fuller really stresses in this book that historians and those in classical studies have two very different views of the man that was Julius Caesar.

1. J.F.C. Fuller, Julius Caesar: Man, Soldier, and Tyrant. (New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1965), 11.
Historians tend to see a man who had a brilliant mind and was an excellent military strategist, always leading his men to victory. They also see someone who dominated the political scene with his talent for public speech and persuasion. On the Classical Studies side, however, individuals see “a far less exalted being: an unscrupulous demagogue whose one aim was power, and a general who could not only win brilliant victories but also commit dismal blunders.”2 Although this may have changed since the 1960’s, I believe that Fuller has a valid point. Julius Caesar has a tendency to be two different people. What he means by this is that on the one hand, Caesar was a mastermind of politics and war, however, his desire for power led him to do some unintelligent things, and overall is what led to his demise. In his book, Fuller cites certain historians to back up his thesis. He cites those such as Theodor Mommsen, James Anthony Froude, Dr. T Rice Holmes, and Professor E.L. White. They were quoted as saying things such as “Caesar was the entire perfect man”3 and “perhaps no commander who ever lived showed greater military genius.”4 Those such as Colonel Theodore A. Dodge claim that “If the months be counted, it will be seen that more than half of Caesar’s campaigns were consumed in extricating himself from the results of his own mistakes.”5 Fuller points out this

2. J.F.C. Fuller, Julius Caesar: Man, Soldier, and Tyrant. (New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1965), 13.
3. Theodore Mommsen, The History of Rome (Everyman’s Edit), vol. IV, 430, 343

4. James Anthony Froude, Caesar a Sketch. (1896 edit.), 550.

5. Colonel Theodore A. Dodge, Caesar, vol. II, 692.

fact about Caesar when he discusses that although Caesar was a brilliant military general and rarely lost a battle, his troops were rarely adequately prepared for lengthy journeys. His men were often underfed and lacking essential supplies. This is just one example Fuller provides about Caesar essentially being two different people. On the one hand, you have a bright man who could lead an army to victory in battle easily, but then you turn around and he can’t provide for them because of his irresponsibility and unwillingness to prepare.6 Although men such as Dr. T. Rice Holmes consider Caesar to be “the greatest man in antiquity”7, and essentially without fault, Fuller tends to lean towards the side of classical sources. Even though Fuller would agree that Caesar was a great and powerful man, he mentions at several points in the book how Caesar was a victim of his own hunger for power over the Roman Empire. He was a man who “looked upon war as a political instrument” and “with matchless boldness made himself tyrant of the Roman world.”6 In the end, Caesar’s desire for control and being tyrant was his weakness and ultimately led to his demise. This goes back to Fuller’s theory in his introduction that we as humans tend to make historical figures such a Caesar inhuman or immortal, but he is attempting to diffuse that by showing the weaknesses of Caesar and showing the more human, mistake-prone side of him. 6. J.F.C. Fuller, Julius Caesar: Man, Soldier, and Tyrant. (New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1965), 14.
7. Dr. T. Rice Holmes, Caesar’s Conquest of Gaul. (1911), xii, 42.

over for this research is slightly different in the way they present Julius Caesar than this particular book. For instance, an article I have been looking through on PBS’s website about Caesar, similar to most of my other sources, tends to present Caesar’s accomplishments only.8 It doesn’t actually go into depth about his personality, and who Caesar really was as an individual. Fuller really goes into what inspired Caesar and why he did what he did, instead of reviewing the history of what happened. He really allows the reader to look beyond the facts and see the man himself. This book by J.F.C. Fuller is a well-written and in-depth analysis of Julius Caesar as a man, a general, and a tyrant. We not only see what he did with these roles, but we are able to investigate why he did what he did and what really inspired him. Was Caesar a genius of a man who met an unfortunate fate, or did he seal his downfall with his thirst and desire for power? This book looks at both sides and considers many viewpoints. Personally I would take away from the book that Julius Caesar was indeed a man with a unique mind and a strong charismatic way of speaking to the general public, and that is what initially got him into a position pointed toward success. His determination to be in control got him the role of dictator, but it is also what inspired his assassination. Fuller really is able to portray the real Julius Caesar and tear down the immortal view of this historical figure, making for a very interesting read.
8. Julius Caesar. (PBS, 2006).