"Our enemies have beat us to the pit. It is more worthy to leap in ourselves, than tarry till they push us." Marcus Brutus, "Julius Caesar" (Shakespeare).
I have come across this phrase while reading William Shakespeare's tragedy. The situation is well-known: Marcus Brutus and Caius Cassius lose the war to preserve the Roman republic against the armies of Mark Anthony and Octavius Caesar. In defeat, both decide to commit suicide.
It made me think. In Roman tradition, it was considered more honorable to take your own life when facing a certain defeat than falling into the hands of your enemy. The same tradition existed in other cultures as well, like among the Japanese samurais. According to Josephus Flavius, so did the Jewish rebels in Masada, when they were about to be overcome by the Romans.
However, is suicide really the better choice? We know that in Roman tradition, like in other empires, it was not unusual for the winner in war to spare the loser's life, or at least his commanders' or supporters' lives. Like Josephus (according to his story), the loser was often offered pardon for joining the side of the winner, and this could allow the loser to rise to a status higher than before. On the other hand, the loser could also suffer torture or a humiliating death as a result of giving in.
Then again, you can always fight to your last breath and die on the sword of your enemy; in my opinion, it could be more honorable than taking your own life.
We rarely have philosophical discussions here. Which would you consider best if you were in such a situation? Would you abandon your cause and join your enemy to preserve your own life? Would you yell "you'll never take me alive!" and die on your sword? Would you try to flee and survive? I would be interested to hear your opinions.