율리우스 카이사르(Iulius Caesar)의 쿠데타 (Coup d'État of Julius Caesa)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국서양사연구회
· 수록지 정보 : 서양사연구 / 45호 / 5 ~ 35페이지
· 저자명 : 김경현

초록

This study aims to review Caesar's crossing of the Rubicon river as a coup and analyze it under the terms of the rise and fall of democracy within the Roman Republic.
Due to the continual ‘Struggle of the Orders' which lasted nearly 200 years since BC 494, the government form of the Middle Republic had a characteristic of the mixed-constitution, in which the elements of kingship, oligarchy, and democracy were balanced and harmonized. Especially, the elective, legislative, and judicial affairs were decided in the popular assemblies where all the male adults could participate and cast their votes. From the fact that freedom of voting was recognized as a social system, we can see that the Roman Republic had a factor of the 'procedural democracy'. In spite of this fact, as the oligarchs monopolized all the political power and the economic wealth, the procedural democracy ceased to develope and mutated into the 'delegative democracy' or 'illiberal democracy'.
However, generally around the era of the Gracchan brothers started the era of the 'democratic consolidation', a series of efforts which tried to cease the retreat of democracy and prevent the return of 'authoritarian regime'. As an answer to these efforts, the oligarchs heightened their defenses. The oligarchical principle strengthened during the Sullan period, but after his death, democratic principles began to rise again. Like this, the society of the Late Roman Republic was riddled with the conflict between oligarchy and democracy. These conflicts were spurred on by the overwhelming competition within the oligarchs and the agitations by the populist politicians. As a result, the well-established terms of the procedural democracy, represented by its faith in free elections and fair voting, were neglected and gave way to unfair and even violent means leading to the crisis of democracy within the Republic.
In this period of the democratic crisis, Caesar crossed the Rubicon river with his army, ostensibly to protect democratic values. However, this was just disguised as a social revolution. In reality, it was a 'punitive coup' in which Caesar aimed to rid his oppositions and achieve his needs. It is true that Caesar effectuated a whole variety of policies, but none of them was substructured upon the understanding of the problems which came to rise in the Late Roman Republic. Rather, these policies were mainly customed to steady his political status. In this aspect, his coup was a 'palace coup'.
In conclusion, Caesar's coup completely eradicated the possibilities of healing the problems of democracy within the Republic and therefore achieving the 'democratic consolidation'. This resulted in Rome returning to its 'authoritarian regime'. Soon after, the Roman Republic and freedom were gone and this in turn led to downfall of Roman commoners, who are now only remembered as addicts of 'bread and circus'.

영어초록

This study aims to review Caesar's crossing of the Rubicon river as a coup and analyze it under the terms of the rise and fall of democracy within the Roman Republic.
Due to the continual ‘Struggle of the Orders' which lasted nearly 200 years since BC 494, the government form of the Middle Republic had a characteristic of the mixed-constitution, in which the elements of kingship, oligarchy, and democracy were balanced and harmonized. Especially, the elective, legislative, and judicial affairs were decided in the popular assemblies where all the male adults could participate and cast their votes. From the fact that freedom of voting was recognized as a social system, we can see that the Roman Republic had a factor of the 'procedural democracy'. In spite of this fact, as the oligarchs monopolized all the political power and the economic wealth, the procedural democracy ceased to develope and mutated into the 'delegative democracy' or 'illiberal democracy'.
However, generally around the era of the Gracchan brothers started the era of the 'democratic consolidation', a series of efforts which tried to cease the retreat of democracy and prevent the return of 'authoritarian regime'. As an answer to these efforts, the oligarchs heightened their defenses. The oligarchical principle strengthened during the Sullan period, but after his death, democratic principles began to rise again. Like this, the society of the Late Roman Republic was riddled with the conflict between oligarchy and democracy. These conflicts were spurred on by the overwhelming competition within the oligarchs and the agitations by the populist politicians. As a result, the well-established terms of the procedural democracy, represented by its faith in free elections and fair voting, were neglected and gave way to unfair and even violent means leading to the crisis of democracy within the Republic.
In this period of the democratic crisis, Caesar crossed the Rubicon river with his army, ostensibly to protect democratic values. However, this was just disguised as a social revolution. In reality, it was a 'punitive coup' in which Caesar aimed to rid his oppositions and achieve his needs. It is true that Caesar effectuated a whole variety of policies, but none of them was substructured upon the understanding of the problems which came to rise in the Late Roman Republic. Rather, these policies were mainly customed to steady his political status. In this aspect, his coup was a 'palace coup'.
In conclusion, Caesar's coup completely eradicated the possibilities of healing the problems of democracy within the Republic and therefore achieving the 'democratic consolidation'. This resulted in Rome returning to its 'authoritarian regime'. Soon after, the Roman Republic and freedom were gone and this in turn led to downfall of Roman commoners, who are now only remembered as addicts of 'bread and circus'.

참고자료

· 없음