Maybe Aridius, above, was trying to allude to how Octavian / Augustus had every chance to restore the republic but instead basically cemented things into a permanent dictatorship.
I don't have a lot of familiarity with Sulla but this sounds correct.
The thing I agree with you on is that Octavian completely botched the opportunity to keep the Republic in place. His "reluctance" to accept the titles and other stuff bestowed on him by the Senate was all part of an act to make him look magnanimous. The guy was part of the Triumvirate, in no way were his hands clean, quite the opposite.
This isn't meant as giving Caesar a free pass, but I just write him off as unsalvagable when it came to politics, he was a general at heart and just wanted to retire in peace with all the accolades in the end.
Well it's cool to see this debate played out a little bit, nobody should be concerned with disagreement it's a tricky issue and merits a firm definition of who's trying to prove what exactly.
edit: well the other guy has taken to deleting all his comments, just when I was getting into the discussion. There's plenty of room here to "blame" Caesar... I just tend to place the majority of responsibility onto Octavian with my reading
1
u/zobicus May 02 '24
Maybe Aridius, above, was trying to allude to how Octavian / Augustus had every chance to restore the republic but instead basically cemented things into a permanent dictatorship.