In my humble it was more to do with Ciceros tendency to change his views and not play at left back which combined with the incredibly volatile situation after Julias Caesars murder would ultimately lead to his downfall.Do you think Cicero was right to unilaterally condem Catiline and have him executed under his orders or do you think by doing so it gave his enemies an excuse to have him killed?
After the death of Julias Caesar as Rome descended into civil war he condemned Mark Antony as an enemy of the state only then upon the defeat of Pompay the great and for Mark Antony, Octavian and Lepidus to make peace in the form of the Lex Titia commonly called the Second Triumvirate which in turn issued its own lists condemning individuals as enemies of the state.
Mark Antony looking for revenge was instrumental in ensuring Cicero’s name was at the top of the list and the young Octavian who was becoming a shrewd politician willing to sacrifice Cicero for his own needs.
Cicero having been an advocate for Rome‘s return to a republic had been a thorn in the side of Julius Caesar and his very good friend Mark Antony.
Ultimately Cicero miscalculated the intentions of Octavian and it cost him his life.
In the end the second Triumvirate broke-down Into civil war which ended with the deaths of Mark Antony, Cleopatra and Lepidus.
Leaving Octavian unchallenged to become the Emperor Augustus it finally ended all hope of any return to a republic
but Augustus was able to bring stability and with it Egypt as a new province cultured and vastly wealthy it became the breadbasket of the Empire keeping the Plebeian’s in Rome happy with free grain a tradition which was to continue for centuries.
As is often said History is written by the victor and that was true in this case
Last edited: