Decem rain

Language is for me like a handful of stones. Ordinary. Always at hand use. There's little treasures when we take a closer look. 

A few weeks ago I learned my two daughters could count in Spanish to 20. Next to that we rehearsed counting to twelve in English, German, French and Italian.

I showed them something special. A little treasure hidden in the way Dutch name their months. 'September', 'October', 'November' and 'December' are derived from the Latin words for 7, 8, 9 and 10. Someone has added 2.

The 9th month 'September' - of the Julian Calender - is derived from the Latin word 'Septem' = '7'.  Julius Ceasar (100-44 BC) ) added 2 in 45 BC. Why? Because his Calender starts with 'January' and not with 'March'.

Another treasure when we take a closer look at the months. Julius Caesar named the 7th month after him. So did Caesar Augustus (63 BC - 14 AD) with the 8th month. For the rest the names of the months are unchanged for more than 2,500 years.

It's raining on my part of planet Earth. December rain. Decem :) rain.

Did you find treasures lately?

He was an outsider

A couple of weeks after I wrote my blog 'River crossing' I wrote an e-mail to professor Fik Meijer (University of Amsterdam). I asked him "Why did  Julius Caesar  cross the Rubicon and wanted to stay at the top in old Rome and was not satisfied that his consulship finally ended?" He wrote that there is not an easy (in dutch "niet zo maar") answer on this question. He pointed me at the biographies on Caesar of Luciano Canfora and Christian Meier.

Best biography on Caesar (100-44 BC)

Last week I finished reading Christian Meier's 'Ceasar. A biography' (1982). Bookjacket "Of the maybe half a dozen books on Ceasar that are worth reading, Meier's is the best."

Points of interest in Meier's biography on Julius Caesar:

• Caesar's world was dominated by two principles: care (latin 'cura') and competition. This accorded with his thinking in term of honour (latin 'dignitas') and fame. (p. 449)
• In Caesar's eyes no one existed but himself and his opponents. It was all an interpersonal game. He classified people as supporters, opponents or neutrals. (p. 359)
• Compared to his aristocratic senatorial peers Caesar was an outsider and alien. (p. 358)
• In Caesar's time the old institutions, designed for a city state, had been "overstretched", as Rome now ruled over a world-wide empire. In a way the Senate didn't recognise that their institutions were out of date and had to be transformed. The ancient thinking about social structures was static. (p. 12, 50, 195, 357, 361, 479, 483 and 491)
• For Caesar the senators were mainly Sullans: the heirs of the winning party of the civil war. Not representatives of the whole commonwealth. He could only see them as selfish instruments of the interplay of forces. Caesar had no feeling for the power of institutions to guarantee law and security. (p. 358-9, 449)
• Civil war, by crossing the Rubicon:
• Caesar was not in principle opposed to the Roman order. He acted against it because he put his own interests above the rules of Rome. (p. 219)
• He wanted to free the Roman people, Senate from the small clique of Sullans. (p. 358-360 and 364)
• Must be an "expression of the greatness" of Caesar's personality. Throughout his career he displayed an extraordinary ability and strength of mind, staying power and steadfastness. (p. 362 and 483)
• Plea for his personal right, for the honour he was owed on the basis on his achievements. It was Caesar's claim for honour against the defence of the Republic.
• After he won the civil war Caesar was not able to remove from the scene because he had not eliminated his opponents. He had to defend himself and consolidate his position. (p. 431)

Crossing Rubicon? Personal honour more important than Republic

The career of Caesar can't be understood without Sulla (138 BC - 78 BC). Sulla was the first Roman general who crossed the Rubicon for a march (91 and 87 BC) on Rome with his army. After his victory Sulla eliminated his opponents. Caesar belonged to the circle of Sulla's victims but relatives obtained a pardon for him. It made him an outsider.

Caesar crossed on his turn the Rubicon (49 BC) after the Senate refused him the honours he owed after he conquered Gaul. For him the Senate was a biased set or clique of opponents who refused to him the honours he felt entitled to. His personal honour (latin 'dignitas) was more important than the Republic. The Republic was low on his list of priorities.

Old Rome's static social structures

I read this biography because I want(ed) to understand why Caesar was so selfish. In a way I want to understand why our democracy is or should be worth fighting for.

The ancient roman world is strange to us. It's a world of Others. For Rome the social structures were static. And they didn't notice that themselves. And for us? We know that we have to adapt. We know that we have to fit social structures and conditions if it's urgent. We know - don't we?

River crossing

Yesterday I finished reading for the second time Tom Holland's book 'Rubicon: The Last Years of the Roman Republic'. I wanted to find out why Julius Caesar (100 - 44 BC) crossed the Rubicon in 49 BC. The river Rubicon marked the boundary between the Roman province of Cisalpine Gaul to the north and Italy proper to the south.  Any Roman general was by law of the Roman Republic (509 - 44 BC) obliged to disband his army before crossing the Rubicon. Otherwise both he and his men were guilty of high treason and automatically condemned to death. This law was set to protect the Roman Republic from internal military threat. In 50 BC the Senate ordered Caesar to disband his army and return to Rome because his term as proconsul had finished. He did not disband his army. Instead he used the power of his succesful army to stay in power. In retrospect we know that he defeated Pompey the Great and became Rome's (perpetual) dictator. It was generally accepted that the dictatorship ("one who dictates") was limited to 6 months. Julius Ceasar used (some say 'abused') this office to stay in power year after year. Unprecedented!

The precise event which signalled the end of the Roman Republic and the transition into the Roman Empire is a matter of interpretation. Some say Sulla's (138 – 78 BC) route to power  paved the way for Julius Ceasar. Some say it's Julius Ceasar's crossing of the Rubicon or his appointment as perpetual dictator in 44 BC. Others point at the defeat of Mark Antony at the Battle of Actium in 31 BC or the grant of extraordinary powers to Augustus in 27 BC.

According to me Julius Ceasar holds the key by crossing the Rubicon. Sulla misused his army too for staying in power but  in the end he resigned for the office of dictator, retiring to private life. Julius Ceasar gave the deathblow to the Roman Republic by crossing the Rubicon, defeat his "enemies" and stay in power through the office as dictator for year after year and finally as perpetual dictator.

Why did Julius Caesar cross the Rubicon?  

Tom Holland's book does not give a direct answer to my question. In a bookreview Holland says "Caesar of course had the option and the moral duty as a citizen not to cross the river. But for the ambitious Roman who he was his own  honour (dignitas) weighed heavier than the ancestral tradition (dignitas maiorum)." 

Wikipedia's answer: "In 50 BC, the Senate, led by Pompey, ordered Caesar to disband his army and return to Rome because his term as Proconsul had finished.  Caesar thought he would be prosecuted and politically marginalised if he entered Rome without the immunity enjoyed by a Consul or without the power of his army."

Suetonius (69/75 – 130 AD) attributes the crossing to a supernatural ghost (source english and latin): "As he stood in doubt, this sign was given him. On a sudden there appeared hard by a being of wondrous stature and beauty, who sat and played upon a reed; and when not only the shepherds flocked to hear him, but many of the soldiers left their posts, and among them some of the trumpeters, the apparition snatched a trumpet from one of them, rushed to the river, and sounding the war-note with mighty blast, strode to the opposite bank."

To be honest I still don't know why Julius Ceasar crossed the Rubicon. I guess we will never really know. For me it feels like a mix of personal and group survival and being afraid of losing his personal honour. Above all I think he was an ape fighting for his personal survival and clinged to his power as general. It's vanity if you think about his whole project/ life in retrospect. Everything blown away with the wind of time. The kid of Julius & Cleopatra was murdered. He never became a grandpa.

Why is all this so important to me? What's my point? It's important because in all of us there is a part of  Julius Ceasar too. We as species 'Homo sapiens' are apes fighting for our own personal survival. Fighting for the survival of our family and the groups we live in. We all are citizens and we all are dictators. We all are Roman Republicans and at the same time Perpetual Dictators. We all are a mixture of vanity, honesty, dishonesty, cruelty, forgiveness, lust for power, need of affirmation, law abiding and law infidel. All of us are very able to kill and murder. And if you don't recognise all this is yourselves ... look better. Look!

Life in progress. List 28th June 2010 12.27h

My to do list. My public to do list concerning Twitter and Blogging (disordered):

• Check out writer Dulce Maria Cardoso. I want to read one of her books because she said “I love just let time pass by”. I blogged about her before.
• Re-read Tom Holland's  book 'Rubicon'. Find out why Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon. Was it survival? Vanity? Or ...? It's a spin-off on this blog.
• Read poems of one of my friends.
• Listen to music of one of my friends.
• Decide if I'll write a bookreview on Robin Olds book 'Fighter Pilot'. I finished it last week.
• Write a non-read-review on book ''THE TEN COMMANDMENTS. How Our Most Ancient Moral Text Can Renew Modern Life'. A book I'll never read.
• Check out website of cloud lovers:  www.cloudappreciationsociety.org. They really exist!
• Find out why Winston Churchill refused twice his Duke title after winning World War II. He was such a proud men and jealous on his nephew's title. Why did he refuse the title he earned himselves? Vanity?
• Re-reading Gerald Brenan's book 'South of Granada'. It's input for a #dream #travel post for @kirsty_wilson
• Pick out the 7 books I'll read in this years summerholiday. I love puzzling on this. Pick up books. Browse a little. Smell at the book - I really do. 

Question: What's your list?

Birthday. Almost 1 year old

Yesterday I was not happy with my blog 'On Cincinnatus and Julius Caesar. Do selfish genes feel by definition: the chosen ones?'. For me it was a good blog: informative, personal and to the point. I do not really know why I was discontent. In a way my final blog didn't meet the unwritten expectations I had before I wrote one sentence. All I wanted was write about Cincinnatus. And end with the remark that this modest role model male from old Rome is rare is history. After written the first paragraph I was puzzling on the reason why Cincinnatus behaviour is rare in history. Why is power over others addictive and tempting? Why  do we want to stay on the top and is it difficult to give power back? To be honest I don't really know. I entered a world full of fat words: groups, aggression and power. I entered a world I not always want to enter: what is a human being? why do we do what we do? how to live my life?

In a couple of weeks I'll be blogging for 1 year. I started blogging after I realized that Twitter's format of 140 characters is too oppressive for me sometimes. In retrospect my main unconscious target past year was: being honest to myself about all the facts, dreams, illusions of life in order to being able to live life. In a way I'm trying to define "life". For me my blog is a mirror. My mirror. My public mirror. 

Question: Is my public mirror worth reading? If yes or no: 'why? What blinkers do I have? You can comment on this blog in public or send me a private e-mail.

On Cincinnatus and Julius Caesar. Do selfish genes feel by definition: the chosen ones?

He was a model of Roman virtue in early Rome. He was a role model for the Founding Fathers. George Washington felt honored if people would call him Cincinnatus. I'm talking about L.Q. Cincinnatus (519 BC - 430 BC?). Who? A Roman male who lived a couple of centuries before Year 0. A farmer who was called to serve Rome as dictator. Who defeated the Aequians, Sabinians and Volscians and immediately gave up his absolute power as dictator at the end of the crisis. He was nominated dictator ('Master of the People') for 6 months. After 16 days he gave up his absolute power after having conquered the Aequi. And returned to his farm. He was regarded a hero because of his outstanding leadership, service to the greater good, civic virtue and modesty. Cincinnatus is rare is history.

Why is he rare? Why is the species 'homo sapiens' so fascinated by honor and glory? Is it typical of our species? Is it typically male? Is it typical of Western civilization? If we look back in history we find out that emperors, kings and popes founded their power base on the blood of the conquered others. Once on the top most of them wanted to stay in power till "eternity". Giving up power is mostly regarded as weakness and act of stupidness. Why? Why do we want power? Why do males want to be on the top and stay there? Why are we not satisfied with living with our family on a farm?

Why am I telling you all this? I'm always puzzling and wondering why Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon and wanted to stay at the top in old Rome and was not satisfied that his consulship finally  ended. After Julius more than 4 centruries of emperors of whom most not died in their bed.

Look at Maslow's hierarchy of needs - mark the 'pyramide' is an image you can read it as a 'beehive' too. Why was Julius so afraid of being politically marginalised? Julius was save. He was respected and rich after defeating the Gauls. Why was he not satisfied?  Did he not love others? Did he only love himselves? Was there something wrong with his procreation? Was he bullied or humiliated in his youth? For me there is only one thing that explains it all: Julius felt he was The Chosen or Messiah. (Mark that there is no religious or bodhi dimension in Maslow's hierarchy of needs.)

Once again, why am I telling all this to you? It's not about Cincinnatus. Allthough I admire his modesty. It's not about Julius Caesar. Allthough I admire his art of war. It's about me. I try to define what living my life means.

What do you think? Why do we want to reach the top and stay there? Is it all about selfish genes? Do selfish genes feel by definition: the chosen ones? For me it feels that modest people gain more advantage in evolution than people at the top.

A boss' toolbox & personal mission statement 'fatherhood'

Last year I took Covey’s course '7 habits of highly effective people'. One of the things that had to be done was '360-degree feedback'. I had to fill in a list of questions. The same questions had to be answered (in my case) by a few of my staff, my boss and my wife. As predicted my self-image differs partly from the “others”. No big differences. No real surprises. Nice to have a mirror once in a while! I wrote a letter to my feedbackgivers in which I explained my point of view as a boss and as a human being. For me the most important thing in life is: my family. I want to give my children: food, love and a set of values ‘how to behave as member of our society’. To give them fish and at the same time learn them to fish themselves. I want to be a scout leader who gives his kids a toolbox and learn them how to use it in order to make it possible for them to live their lives independently from their parents.

I usually eat in a hurry. I hardly drink alcohol. Eat much candy. I like to take a 20 minutes shower. Try to watch 20.00 o’clock news everyday. My favorites on TV are 'Spoorloos' (in English ‘lost track of’) and 'Memories'. Love to watch a comedy. I read a lot of books. Usually books on a historical topic. I never analyze why I read the books I read. For me it's a long trail of books that bring up other books. When I read a book I always discover thousands of things and details I never thought of before. Details that shift my opinions, judgements, prejudices and assumptions. The details make everything fluid. One of my favorite books is 'Bello Gallico' by Julius Cesaer. It’s his report of his conquest of Western Europe. A beautiful and exciting story with it’s ups and downs. If you realize what happened to Rome, Cleopatra and the child of Julius and Cleopatra when Julius was murdered … everything blown away with the wind.

As a boss this is my toolbox:
1. There is not 1 way of organizing. How to organize depends on the organizational configurations, the life cycle of the organization and the environment it lives in.
2. There is not 1 way of leadership. Depending on the situation a certain style has to be chosen.
3. There is not 1 human being. All people are individuals and are therefore different.
4. Fog. Decisions always have to be taken with information that is not perfect, well balanced and completely validated. Sometimes I have to decide in foggy weather. In retrospect information can show up that tells me that in hindsight I should have taken a different decision.
5. People are people with their own dreams, hopes and fears. People act on their level of consiousness. Some come for the money. Others look for a teacher. Some look for spiritual challenges.
6. A constraint solved? The next constraint pops up. Not all constraints and problems have to be solved.
7. Final end. All people die. I will one day die too. I’m your boss now but will I be your boss too next year? The show must go on when I’m no longer here. The show must go on when an individual staffmember moves on.

The above toolbox ensures that I am not very straightforward in my conduct. Pragmatic or situational acting sometimes seems "old school" but it suits me very well. Sometimes I do this. Sometimes I do that. Sometimes I want to find out every tiny little detail of the incident. The other time I only want to talk about the proces to ensure that next time the same incident won’t happen again. To be short: let us keep on communicating. I’ll tell you what I’m doing. You tell me when something happens you don’t like.

Mission statement. Next to the 360-degree feedback a personal mission statement had to be made. I've been thinking a lot about it. One statement came back every time: "Fatherhood". For me this is the only meaningful image and metaphor of my life. Biological father to my children: one who gives and receives love, someone who teaches them ... and then set them free. Father to my staff: someone who gives priorities, makes decisions and takes care that the show goes on when I am gone.

Cursed, coined & crusified. Footnote on a song

Listen to the instrumental song 'Cursed, coined & crusified' from Gorky's Zygotic Mynci.

Did you listen? Where does the cursing starts? Any sounds of coining? Anyone hear the sounds of a hammer nailing someone on a cross?

'Cursing, coining & crusified'? Who are they talking about? About JC? JC as Jesus Christ of Nazareth ... but he was first cursed after that crusified and finally coined. It can't be him. JC as Julius Ceasar ... but he was coined first, after that cursed and killed but never crusified. It can't be him. I have no idea who they are talking about. Is there somewhere in history someone who was cursed first, made it then to the top and became coined and finally literally crusified on a cross? Spartacus ... but he wasn't coined. It can't be him. I have no idea about the history of crusifying and (worldwide?) use of this instrument of deliberatly let another human being slowly die.

Or is it only a joke? Is it a mirror? Is it an invitation to all of us to reconsider the way human beings ('homo sapiens') treat other human beings? If we skipp the christian terminology and translate it into "our" hedonistic and egocentric terminology of 2009. What would the title of the song be:"You are a stranger & I hate you by bias. I love you as myself. &Fuck up"?