Boris Johnson, Brexit and the Roman Empire

• "The grain market in ancient Rome was as rigged as anything in the common agricultural Policy "(p.136);
• The emperor Domitian ordering all vineyards in Provence "to be grubbed up….an agricultural intervention common place in Europe over the last 50 years." (p.138).
• Romans decided that there should be no growing wine north of the alps "anticipates the mad control freakery of the EU's wine regime." (p.161).
• The inhabitants of the then empire "wanted to become Roman in a way that they never wanted to become European." (p.179).
• The legions abandoned Britannia in 410 BC. Britain's "dark ages began" although the last emperor of the west did not flee until 476 BC. The country's early exclusion "gave us a series of complexes about membership in the Europen Union." (p.209).

Johnson completes his history with two issues. One is on the advent of Christianity and the parallels between the divinity of Augustus and that of Jesus Christ. The other was Islam. Augustus, heir to a deified Julius Caesar, was titled son of god, Divi Filius. Virgil and Horace both stated Augustus to be divine. Johnson also draws parallels with several of the bible stories on the slaughter of the innocents, the coming of the saviour, and the virgin birth, all of which also occurred in the history of Ancient Rome. He describes them as "not entirely coincidences. They can't be." (p.81).

The final issue was Islam. That last chapter, "And then came the Muslims", is strongly anti -Muslim, and would have only distant connections with Rome and no connection with the European Union.

This writer came away with two overriding impressions of Boris Johnson. One was the overwhelming impact of the breadth of education and classical knowledge of the British Prime Minister. The second was that his commitment to power and political success has dubious ethical overtones. He describes Augustus in very flattering terms, "The man who made it all possible," yet Augustus acceded to the proscriptions that killed 130 senators and 3000 Romans. Cicero was one of them, yet as noted, Johnson believes that Augustus concurred with the killing.

One of the themes of Johnson's thoughts on Augustus is that "it will be very hard to create a single Europen consciousness without such a figure." (p.76)

This writer, however, does disagree with Johnson on BREXIT in several respects. Many have noted that Europe after centuries of constant conflict had enjoyed its longest period of peace in its history. In 2012, the EU was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. The European Union has also proved its worth as a counter to the unpredictable follies of the president of the United States, particularly on Iran. But finally there are the disastrous economic consequences in Britain of Brexit. With the possible exit of Scotland, and even Wales, Great Britain could become a Little Britain.

This writer is thankful to Boris Johnson in one respect. He had always wondered why the people of Rome, and the Senate, accepted Augustus as emperor when they had earlier assassinated his uncle Julius Caesar, for claiming the imperial crown. The answer appears to be Augustus' ruthless streak, ambition, and high level of competence, attributes that Johnson himself in his book has stated that he admires. The Battle of Philippi in 44 BCwas of course, the principal reason. It was the final battle in the Wars of the Second Triumvirate between the forces of Mark Antony and Octavian and the leaders of Julius Caesar's assassination, Marcus Junius Brutus and Gaius Cassius Longinus, known as the Liberatores, in 42 BC, at Philippi in Macedonia. The Second Triumvirate declared this civil war ostensibly to avenge Julius Caesar's assassination, but the underlying cause was a long-brewing conflict between the Optimates– the conservative political faction in the late Roman Republic, formed in reaction to the reforms of the Gracchi brothers - and the Populares who favoured the cause of the plebeians. Many politicians of the Republic postured as Populares to enhance their popularity among the plebs, notably Julius Caesar and Augustus, who enacted many of the Populares' objectives during their rule.

The question arises then, as to the motivations behind the Populares in their assassination of Julius Caesar. It does seem that the principal motivation was their objection to Caesar's usurpation of power, and his declaration of himself as emperor. Cicero, although not involved in the assassination, supported the return to the Republic. The Optimates, then cannot be classified entirely as wealthy conservatives, seeking to maintain their own benefits, but more as senior politicians seeking to stop a military takeover. Although they may not have realised it at the time, the usurpation of power by Caesar, and then by his nephew, Augustus, was the start of the decline of the colossus that was ancient Rome.