Brutus: The Noble Conspirator, by Kathryn Tempest.
Summary:
Conspirator and assassin, philosopher and statesman, promoter of peace and commander in war, Marcus Brutus (ca. 85–42 BC) was a controversial and enigmatic man even to those who knew him. His leading role in the murder of Julius Caesar on the Ides of March, 44 BC, immortalized his name forever, but the verdict on his act remains out to this day. Was Brutus wrong to kill his friend and benefactor, or was he right to place his duty to country ahead of personal obligations?
In this comprehensive and stimulating biography Kathryn Tempest delves into contemporary sources to bring to light the personal and political struggles Brutus faced. As the details are revealed—from his own correspondence with Cicero, from the perceptions of his peers, and from the Roman aristocratic values and concepts that held sway in his time—Brutus emerges from legend, revealed to us more surely than ever before.
My mini-review:
Kathryn Tempest does an excellent job at exploring the history and the legend of Marcus Junius Brutus, the chief conspirator against Julius Caesar. The period at the end of the Roman Republic is one of the best documented in ancient history, and yet it is still hard to tease fact from both contemporary and posthumous interpretations, so that Brutus can be read in sharply contrasting ways, depending on one’s take on issues such as friendship, autocracy, liberty, and the ethics of tyrannicide. One of the astounding things, of which Tempest makes full use, is that we actually have some of the letters written by Brutus himself, as well as those of some of his close friends and collaborators, like the statesman and philosopher Marcus Tullius Cicero. Which means that we can hear, at least in part, these people speak in their own voices, not just in official documents made for public consumption, but in intimate correspondence exchanged with their friends in times of both distress and elation. Tempest rightly refrains from delivering her own verdict about Brutus. Was he a traitor to his friend or a freedom fighter? Both? How should we weigh the moral duties of friendship and defense of one’s own country? What, if anything, should we do with a tyrant?