So That's Why

The very dice obey him,
And in our sports my better cunning faints
Under his chance. If we draw lots, he speeds;
His cocks do win the battle still of mine
When it is all to naught, and his quails ever
Beat mine, inhooped, at odds. I will to Egypt...

It's a funny irony. You would think the consummate partier, the more easy-going guy, would have the better luck. It's like saying Stephen Harper is a great gambler. Not that I want to compare Stephen Harper to Augustus Caesar. Or maybe I do: banisher of the greatest poet of fin de siecle ancient world, despite the most famous ass-kiss in the history of the world. Due to licentiousness.


Augustus also had a bachelor tax to encourage family values. But he was still a good gambler. Why does this continue to surprise me? And what is a 'good gambler' anyway? One who wins? After all, Antony lost; Ovid lost. But they're celebrated for the times they had. Or rather, Antony is celebrated for the times he had, Ovid is celebrated for writing about the times he had, as well as centaurs and stags, Pythagorus and - er - Icarus. Caesar, on the other hand, had a minority government (triumverate with Antony and Lepidus) before the majority that founded a dynasty. And succeeded because of his luck. Hmm, hmm, and hmm again.