People, Power, and Politics: Populism and the Roman Republic (82-27 BC)

这篇多学科的论文将分析罗马共和国晚期的修辞、制度和政治活动，利用民粹主义的核心概念和当代研究。这一分析旨在对罗马共和政治文化学术研究中尚未解决的问题提供新的认识。在此过程中，本文还将研究古代民粹主义的分析如何阐明我们对当代民粹主义作为一种风格、框架或意识形态的理解。本文的问题是，民粹主义的现代政治理论如何加深我们对罗马共和国晚期制度、群体、个人和权力之间复杂关系的理解？此外，这种民粹主义的理解——其中社会分为“腐败的精英和纯粹的人民”——人民权威是至高无上的，并使其成为威权主义和反宪政主义（Tarchi 2016； Mudde和Skenderovic 2017）——如何重新构建和解决当代罗马政治学术中最紧迫的辩论：真正的人民权力是如何与精英统治政治舞台并存的（Millar 1998; Hölkeskamp 2010; Mouritsen 2017）？反过来，这种“罗马民粹主义”如何帮助我们理解现代民粹主义？民粹主义政治理论中相互冲突的分类差异——不同的意识形态（Taggart 2000）、风格（Sengul 2019），甚至心态（Tarchi 2016）——在多大程度上有助于定义一个异质思想的“核心”（Zanatta 2002） ？利用一系列古代证据，从西塞罗的著作（演讲、信件和哲学论文）和史学证据（特别是萨勒斯特、李维和卡修斯·迪奥）中提取，我将评估民粹主义的修辞和实践如何为大众威权主义创造了一个强大而可识别的平台。考察古物证据（主要是瓦罗）和古代政治哲学证据——尤其是柏拉图和亚里士多德——我将把这种民粹主义政治写作置于其精英知识环境中。此外，我将利用铭文和硬币来展示个人和“国家”如何在实践中随着时间的推移投射权力。通过分析修辞学、史学、铭文和哲学证据，我将展示民粹主义如何为重新定义“人民”、“精英”和“人民主权”等概念提供了一个极其有用的工具，这些概念如何影响了罗马的政治格局，并促进了意识形态向反宪政和威权主义的转变。

This multi-disciplinary thesis will analyse the rhetoric, institutions and political activity of the late Roman Republic, utilising the core concepts of and contemporary research on populism. This analysis aims to bring a new understanding of unresolved issues in scholarship on Roman republican political culture. In doing so, the thesis will also examine how the analysis of populism in antiquity illuminates our understanding of contemporary populism as a style, framework or ideology today.This thesis asks, how does modern political theory of populism deepen our understanding of the complex relationships between institutions, crowds, individuals, and power in the late Roman Republic? Furthermore, how does this populist understanding - in which society is divided between 'a corrupt elite and the pure people' popular authority is sovereign, and lends itself to authoritarianism and anticonstitutionalism (Tarchi 2016; Mudde and Skenderovic 2017) - reframe and resolve the most pressing debate in contemporary Roman political scholarship: how real popular power existed side-by-side with elite domination of the political arena (Millar 1998; Hölkeskamp 2010; Mouritsen 2017)? In turn, how can this 'Roman populism' help us understand modern populism? To what extent can the conflicting taxonomic distinctions in political theories of populism - variously, an ideology, (Taggart 2000) a style, (Sengul 2019) or even a state of mind (Tarchi 2016) -help define the 'core' (Zanatta 2002) of an otherwise heterogeneous idea?Using a range of ancient evidence, drawing from across Cicero's work (speeches, letters and philosophical treatises) and historiographical evidence (particularly Sallust, Livy and Cassius Dio), I will assess how populist rhetoric and praxis created a powerful and identifiable platform for popular authoritarianism. Examining antiquarian evidence (primarily Varro) and ancient political philosophical evidence - especially Plato and Aristotle - I will contextualise this populist political writing within its elite intellectual environment. Additionally, I will make use of inscriptions and coins to demonstrate how individuals and 'the state' projected power in practical terms over time. By analysing the rhetorical, historiographical, epigraphic, and philosophical evidence I will show how populism provides an extremely useful tool for redefining how conceptions like 'people', 'elites' and 'popular sovereignty' coloured the Roman political landscape and facilitated an ideological shift toward anti-constitutionalism and authoritarianism.