The journalist Robert Fisk[1] recently wrote an article comparing 
President Bush's failed expedition in Iraq to the Roman General Marcus 
Crassus'[2] failed expedition in Parthia (Iraq/Syria) in 53 BC.

Fisk suggests that the American empire, like the Romans' before us, is
failing and has lost the ability to influence the middle-east.

As seductive as it may be to compare these crucial historical
incidents and the characters involved, we might also consider several
obvious distinctions between them.

For starters, Plutarch tells us that Crassus was one of the best
speakers in Rome. Crassus was said to be well-versed in history and
philosophy. He was a decidedly successful businessman and an
experienced military strategist, having defeated a vast band of
insurrectionists during Rome's Third Servile War[3].

To Fiske's point, though, there are outright similarities. Crassus was
a "made man," being the son of a government leader who had received
the honor of a triumph. His wealth was obtained in part through
inherited silver mines, but he obtained the bulk of his wealth by
taking advantage of public calamities, looting the properties and
possessions of the masses which were grievously misappropriated by his
corrupt predecessors. Crassus was also by all accounts a brilliant
politician and a shameless hypocrite.  Plutarch tells us that "no man
was more cunning than Crassus to ensnare others by flattery" and
"though he was the most covetous man in the world, yet he habitually
disliked and cried out against others who were so."

In the final analysis, however, one must look beyond the man's avarice
and sordidness if only to grant him this one parting accolade: Marcus
Lucinius Crassus had the common decency to die along with his legions 
when the Parthian forces caught him entirely unprepared at the
Battle of Carrhae[4].

Certainly, every death in war is a tragedy. With this particular
death, however, the Roman's lot was arguably much-improved. The death
of Crassus marked the termination of the First Triumvirate, an
unofficial agreement between Crassus, Pompeius Magnus and Julius
Caesar which had effectively mitigated the power of the Senate for
seven years, placing nearly absolute judicial, legislative and
executive authority in the hands of a select few elites. The death of
Crassus resulted in outright conflict between the remaining triumvirs
and other demagogues, shattering any lingering illusions that the
Roman Republic was a viable representative government. Ultimately,
Crassus' death paved the way for the overthrow of the corrupt oligarchy 
which dominated the Senate and all political power within Rome.

O, Fates, that the American republic might be afforded such advantages!

And, yes, I'm pretty much going with the theory that Nixon was the
American Sulla. A stretch, perhaps, but I'm just riffing, here.

[1] http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1207-24.htm
[2] 
http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/mirror/classics.mit.edu/Plutarch/crassus.html
[3] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0054331/
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Carrhae

Pope[BRAK]
12/20/06