Julius Caesar's Motivation Analysis

Augustus Caesar used many forms of trickery to get what he wanted. He pretended that he did not want any power so that the people would feel safe and secure when it came to giving him all of the power. His plan worked and once he had gained enough power, he created the first Roman Empire. Augustus acted without any regard to anyone else’s needs but his own in order to satisfy his fiery ambition and covered up his true motivations by saying his actions were for the people’s own good. He fooled people into believing his motivations were good by making the public impression seem to be that he was performing his duties solely out of his sincere concern for the populace . Augustus Caesar was not very interested at all in what the people actually …show more content…
He started by using reverse psychology and giving up all of his power which led to him ultimately gaining full power. He does this to get the people to want him to be their ‘king’ in a method similar to the way that Julius Caesar rose to prominence. But rather than a king, they wanted him to be their dictator. Augustus felt there was very great risk in accepting this and he did deny the people their desire three times, claiming that Rome was a republic and that it should always remain that way. This is not correct and its sounds just like what Julius Caesar did. Julius denied the throne three times, claiming that he wanted Rome to remain a republic, He does this as part of a devious plot in order to trick the senate and all of the people of the land into thinking he was just your everyday person with good intentions, and that he was not at all greedy or selfish. Augustus finally accepted the offer after quite some time, but he managed to convince the people that he was not ruling as a …show more content…
It mainly comes down to the fact that either he really did think what he was doing helped everyone, or as we have seen so far, he is only doing these things to satisfy his ambition. This has been a conundrum that historians have not been able to fully solve even up to today. Nobody can be certain if he was a ‘good’ or ‘bad’ leader. There is really no way to absolutely determine this because through his deceiving, he was pragmatic to the point of betrayal, but by his war tributes and the accounts of the people, he was a hero that pulled Rome out of civil war and made it stronger than ever. But the people could have just been accounting for the false face they saw and thought was the ‘real him’. With what evidence history has, Augustus did it to suffice his roaring