The new Archbishop of Canterbury has argued against ‘pinning hopes on individuals’. The Roman historian Livy (59 BC–AD 17) would have found that most bizarre.
Livy’s 142-book Ab Urbe Condita traced the history of Rome from the city’s foundation in 753 BC to the first Roman emperor Augustus (died AD 14). For Livy, it was individuals above all that counted. The seven early kings of Rome shaped by their own decisions much of Rome’s later history. In the early republic (from 509 BC), the elite patricians, the land-rich, wealthy families who had advised the kings and now held all the top posts, were in constant conflict with the non-elite plebs, who wanted a share in power and a fairer distribution of the land. While Livy saw the plebs and their inviolate ‘tribunes’ as the main cause of the problems, he acknowledged that both sides threw up individuals who were able to bring them together in a crisis. It was strong, sensitive leadership that made all the difference.
For example, the tribunes often refused to allow war levies against local tribes unless the patricians agreed to political and land reform. In 406 BC, the senate made a breakthrough: the state should pay soldiers for their services. The plebs were ecstatic, the tribunes (seeing a threat to their power) less so: where was the money to come from? Clearly, from a tax on the people — the senate being generous at others’ expense! And what of veterans, who had enjoyed no such privileges, but would now have to subsidise others for what they had done for nothing? The tribunes promised protection for anyone who refused to pay. All very Bob Crow. But when patricians and rich plebs promptly paid up, everyone rushed to join in.
That, for Livy, was leadership, and that was what made Rome great. So he would have been baffled by the archbishop’s argument. Humility is all very well, but if you cannot pin your hopes on individuals, on whom, or what, can you pin them? Or is there no point in having hope? Livy would have found that a very strange message from any leader, let alone a man of God.
Comments