Here are 9 lessons from a brilliant early speech of his,
that made his career take off.
Early in his career, Caesar had no military victories to his name.
Even though came from a good family, most serious politicians didn't take him seriously.
He was in deep debt, and had a reputation as a playboy.
But at age 37, he took a stance everyone would remember.
In 63 BC, the conspiracy of Catiline was unearthed.
Evidence came forward of plots:
To murder senators, burn the city of Rome, overthrow the Republic.
(See Cost of Glory Episode 66 for more background)
Senate declares martial law to avert the danger.
Catiline flees Rome, joins his ARMY;
But his co-conspirators are caught.
Cicero (consul) summons the Senate.
He recommends immediate execution for the conspirators.
The idea: "No time for a trial, the city is still in danger"
Emotions were high,
Nobody doubted the conspirators' guilt. Many in the Senate wanted blood.
Caesar delivered a speech in the Senate, against summary execution.
His speech is a master class in swaying a group, gripped by fear and anger, away from acting on their urges.
#1: Name the emotions your audience is feeling
(That you need them *NOT* to act on)
Chris Voss calls this "Tactical Empathy"
Caesar begins by doing this, in order to clear a little room for reason:
But this is not enough.
#2: Tell a story as quickly as possible
(Or several)
Preferably stories that appeal to the audience's identity.
Stories from History are good,
Especially if you are speaking to a group.
#3 Make very clear what the story means and how it relates to your point
Caesar's point in this speech:
Showing restraint was essential to the Romans coming to dominate the world.
(Respect from allies, civic concord, etc.)
--> Restraint here is in YOUR BEST INTERESTS
#4 Affirm emotions while making clear they are not relevant to the decision.
Especially if other voices are actively trying to stir up those emotions against your advice.
Again, Empathy + Reason.
"Are they trying to get us angry? we're already angry!"
#5 Praise your opponents' good intentions
This builds common ground with the real people you need to persuade
= the ones who don't already agree with you
(Decimus Silanus, below, was a senator and an ally of Cicero):
#6 Appeal to tradition.
Throughout the speech, Caesar calls summary execution "a **novel** form of punishment"
Roman law required consuls to get a vote of the citizens before scourging or executing any citizen, even with a trial. (exile was the standard)
(Senate =/= court)
#7 Cite more history to show this is a dangerous precedent.
Every senator in the room remembered Sulla's proscriptions (only 20 years earlier).
Executions without trial -> more executions without trial.
#8 Recommend an alternative
Caesar recommended they have all their assets confiscated, and then be sent to prisons throughout Italy.
(probably to await a trial once the danger passed)
The Senate was swayed at first, then Cato the Younger delivered a speech in favor of execution.
The Senate adopted Cato's proposal, and recommended Cicero (w/ consular authority, under martial law) execute the prisoners.
So, Caesar lost.
But this brings us to...
#9: Taking a stance for moderation can be good, even if you lose.
Caesar probably knew he wouldn't win.
But he had an additional motivation.
Catiline raised an army of 10,000 by championing the interests of the poor, downtrodden, disaffected of Rome,
"The 99%" ...
Whe Catiline failed and died, the poor and downtrodden remembered Caesar as a champion of their lost cause.
Moderate senators remembered Caesar as a reasonable advocate of tradition, and the Senate's interests.
Caesar became "The populist you can do business with."
Remember Caesar's speech when you need to calm a room down:
1. Tactical Empathy 2. Tell a Story 3. Identify its point 4. Affirm emotions 5. Praise opponent 6. Appeal to Tradition 8. Recommend Alternative 9. It's worth it even if you lose
IF you learned something, RT the first in the thread.
Follow for more from history's greatest.
Nietzsche called Catiline "The antecedent form of every Caesar."
I just covered Catiline on the Cost of Glory podcast, episodes 66-68.
History’s most effective weapon never killed anyone…
Yet it toppled empires, crushed civilizations, and is destroying us right now.
The French revolutionaries discovered it.
The Soviets perfected it.
And for the past decade, we’ve been drowning in it... 🧵
“Demoralization” is the weapon of choice for revolutionaries.
Their ambition?
Break the will of the mighty without direct conflict (spiritual warfare).
Their method?
Make the strong doubt their own strength (disillusionment).
The result?
The undefeatable become self-defeated.
What essential power do they seek to extinguish?
Moralis (Latin): relating to character, conduct, custom, and mores.
Why?
Because mores are your guiding star to excellence.
It anchors your sense of honor, focuses your purpose, and grounds your judgment.
Without it, you're a ship without a compass, your willpower becomes aimless, scattered to the winds.
Demoralization is designed to strip the heroic of their moral compass — An assault against the spirit of man that ungrounds him from his self-understanding and higher purpose.
Cato never wore a crown, yet corrupt Roman officials TREMBLED at his name.
Rome’s most unyielding senator revealed a paradox of power that’s been hiding in plain sight for 2,000 years... 🧵
1. Make disagreeable choices with conviction
While Roman senators wore purple-trimmed togas to flaunt status, Cato entered the Senate with simplicity, dressed in a plain tunic.
When Caesar offered him a lucrative provincial post to get him out of Rome, he refused.
Cato did not budge, his statements held true integrity.
Even his enemies had to admit it: Cato could not be bought.
When both Caesar and Pompey tried to draw him into political alliance through family marriage offers, he rejected them. Every refusal amplified his independence.
2. Stand firm in the face of mockery
The Roman elite mocked Cato for his simple lifestyle and stubborn principles.
Plutarch records that Cato never responded, he simply kept living the same way. This unnerved his rivals.
Caesar even wrote a pamphlet titled "Anti-Cato", an entire essay meant to discredit him. That’s how much his integrity stung.
In 54 BC, Caesar faced impossible odds in Britain.
His response revealed 3 principles that can separate a world historical conqueror from a forgotten also-ran... 🧵
1: Adaptability wins. Be the Fox.
Caesar's legions were struggling against British charioteers who were riding up and down the field around like Indo-European warlords. (They used effective hit-and-run tactics). So, Caesar didn't stick to Roman doctrine. Instead, he innovated.
His heavy infantry was outmaneuvered, so he adapted his cavalry tactics:
He ordered them to fight in loose formation, to maintain gaps between riders, thereby dispersing the momentum of the chariots in useless pass-throughs. It's kind of wu-wei.
Then, his enemies refused open battle.
He changed his strategy:
- Burned villages in "King" Cassivellaunus's territory.
- Destroyed British grain fields that were ready for harvest.
They eventually came out to fight, and exposed themselves to defeats on the battlefield.
Great leaders evolve fast (and Caesar was faster than most)
2: Information Gluttony
Before landing, Caesar meticulously gathered intelligence about Britain's geography, tribes, and politics.
But then, he kept gathering intel after arriving. He discovered, for instance, that the Britons practiced family wife swapping, a fact which your average grug might consider just weird and useless, but you never know when that kind of information might come in handy. Caesar loved the details.
He loved studying their technology too: besides the chariots, he was particularly struck by a special kind of light raft the Britons used to navigate rivers. This technology proved decisive later in the Civil War, when a historic flood crippled supply lines during the Battle of Ilerda.
Caesar also learned about the family feuds of the various tribes in the coalition opposing him. It wasn't gossip, it was crucial intel.
When British tribes united under Cassivellaunus, Caesar knew their weaknesses and internal rivalries. This knowledge proved decisive: