Leadership in Times of Civil War: The Case of Marcus Aemilius Lepidus

Abstract

What might it look like to behave ‘correctly’ in civil war? This question unsurprisingly preoccupied every citizen engaged in political life in late republican and triumviral Rome. To some, the primary concern was survival, for others peace, while others still sought honours and power. In the chaos of the 40s and 30s, both individual politicians and the community had to judge, justify, and reevaluate appropriate behaviour at all stages of civil conflict, including points of potential reignition and shaky aftermath. Experimentation was rife. This thesis seeks to emphasise the development of a new specialised model for leadership, one that was amorphous and problematic, and that remains under appreciated in the modern scholarship: the ideal civil war leader. To do this I take as my central case study Marcus Aemilius Lepidus, a political player and general of whom intriguing glimpses are caught but often neglected in favour of those more charismatic and ultimately impactful leaders. I refocus on Lepidus’ unique circumstances, how he negotiated them, and especially how his contemporaries chose to represent and respond to that negotiation, in order to shed new light on the discourses of leadership that surfaced during periods of upheaval.

Through a series of glimpses, I show that Lepidus was a useful figure for testing often uncomfortable ideas. I argue that he relentlessly transgressed, blurred, and overlapped boundaries. As a result, he exposed a number of tensions deeply embedded within the community, including concerns over victory through non-violence; appropriate avenues to express praise, blame, and protest; the articulation of relationships to power; the impact of social and familial legacies on community expectations; and, crucially, the ability to inhabit a space of contradiction. Together, this rich tapestry illustrates the ways Lepidus challenged and informed the tumultuous negotiation of contemporary discourses surrounding the ideal civil war leader.