You ask good questions, Cimon - although TH was so patient with us, I hesitate to ask another question now that his 'week' is over. But I disagree with you somewhat. I don't find much trouble feeling I understand Clodius - demagogue seems to cover the situation.

I think Clodius was a perfect example of the man driven solely by personal ambition - and I mean SOLELY. He was obviously without any ethical boundaries at all - after all, this is the man who discovered how useful mob violence could be to get what he wanted. I don't think you can easily describe how destructive that particular political tool turned out to be. As a Claudii, I suppose he found it aristocratically amusing to be on the 'wrong' side and cause disruption for his own private gain. Nothing I've ever read about him suggests that he held any higher vision than his own personal aggrandizement and that of his friends. He was corrupt down to his toes, and while Caesar and others may have thought him a willing tool, I think his personal loyalty was entirely to himself.

I think that his very existence was a mushroom on the decaying trunk of the Republic. Can you tell I don't like the guy?