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。这一分析的目的是带来一个新的认识，在罗马共和政治文化的学术悬而未决的问题。在此过程中，本文还将探讨对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。本文问道，现代民粹主义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--社会被划分为“腐败的精英和纯粹的人民”--是如何至高无上的，并使自己成为威权主义和反宪政的呢（Tarchi 2016; Mudde and Skenderovic 2017）-重构和解决当代罗马政治学术中最紧迫的争论：真实的民众权力如何与政治竞技场的精英统治并存（Millar 1998; Hölkeskamp 2010; Schaitsen 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区别--各种意识形态、（Taggart 2000）风格、（Sengul 2019）甚至是一种精神状态（Tarchi 2016）--在多大程度上有助于定义一个异质思想的“核心”（Zanatta 2002）？使用一系列古老的证据，从西塞罗的作品（演讲，信件和哲学论文）和史学证据（特别是萨卢斯特，李维和卡西乌斯迪奥）中汲取，我将评估民粹主义的言论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。研究古物证据（主要是瓦罗）和古代政治哲学证据-特别是柏拉图和亚里士多德-我将在其精英知识环境中将这种民粹主义政治写作置于语境中。此外，我将利用铭文和硬币来展示个人和“国家”如何随着时间的推移在实践中投射力量。通过分析修辞、史学、铭文和哲学证据，我将展示民粹主义如何提供一个极其有用的工具，用于重新定义“人民”、“精英”和“人民主权”等概念如何影响罗马政治格局，并促进意识形态转向反宪政主义和威权主义。

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.