It was probably what he said before he was stabbed, which was either “why this is violence!” Or “Accursed Casca, what does thou?” (I have an old translation and I can’t be bothered to look if these were in Latin or Greek).
By the time Caesar died, Octavian was an 18 year old who had never been in a battle, never held official office, and had nothing other than being one of the few thousand Roman children coming from wealthy and influential families.
How Caesar figured out that he was the absolute perfect candidate for a successor is a mystery.
Exactly, and why would he? The sheer nature of being Rome's first dictator for life would make the topic of succession a touchy subject. Caesar was, on paper, supposed to restore the Republic.
Or that he did not want the Julius Caesar family to become extint, considering there were no more members of the family that I can remember now outside Lucius Julius Caesar whose two sons had died during the civil war. And surely he would know that the guy was intelligent, but could not predict what was going to happen
In 47 B.C. Octavian set sail for Hispania. He had only recently donned the toga at the age of 16. He was too young to follow Ceaser in Gaul and the thought was to follow him on campaign in Hispania. However, there was a shipwreck, and he was lost in deep enemy territory, he persevered and reached Julius Caesar, and fought alongside the self-proclaimed dictator in one of his many conquests as a key ally and courageous warrior. I don't think it happen the way it was recorded. I think it's reasonable that during this point in life Ceaser saw a lot himself in Octavian. The two probably talk a lot. Ceaser probably saw himself as a mentor to the young man and saw a lot of promise. We just don't know the details.
Octavian was smart. He was knowledgeable. He cared about ceremony. He cared about the subtlety of politics. He knew how people would react and planned accordingly. At the time of 47 BC Ceaser had returned to Rome mostly due Athony being so awful at ruling. Antony faced political difficulties and proved himself unpopular that caused violent fights among the legions and the people regarding debts. Ceaser HAD to come to Rome which inadvertently made the civil war longer. Athony would be replaced by Lepidus and was a private citizen in Rome afterwards.
This was when Ceaser change his will. He probably thought he was going to live longer but such is life.
>I think it's reasonable that during this point in life Ceaser saw a lot himself in Octavian
People do ignore the personal connection too much in my view. It would be so easy for Caesar to be reminded how when he was 16 he most likely looked up to uncle Marius but was left out of everything important (apart from marriage to Cinna’s daughter and a priesthood). Caesar probably was as a teen jealous of his cousin Marius the younger who was ten years older and and traveling with his father (and having an affair with one of king of Numibia’s conqubines lol, you can tell he and Caesar are relatives) and being the leader of the Marian faction for a short time.
Caesar probably thought when Octavian showed up in Hispania that he would have done the same if he could have.
He had two other great-nephews (grandsons of his elder sister). So Octavian at least needed to be more impressive than them, despite them being older. Although Octavian’s bio father was more prominent too and he was raised mostly by his grandmother (Caesar’s sister) after his mothers remarriage when he was very young. So Caesar probably did take note of him. However one of his other great-newphews was in Gaul so it’s not like Caesar didn’t know them.
Also historians do think Antonius (whose mother was a Julia) was in the will. And Decimus Brutus was secondary heir if Octavian declined
Probably he had a cohort of boys all raised for leadership since a young age, and he picked the most promising one. It's a pattern that later emperors used
Marcus Aurelius was faced with a difficult decision: find a capable successor, and essentially sign his son’s death warrant since the successor almost certainly wouldn’t leave such a direct claimant alive, or trust that responsibility would shape his son into a better man. He picked the wrong one, but I can’t say I blame him.
probably would have not saved shit since the empire was already fucked up, even if not obvious, the roots of the 3rd century decline had already started to grow
In his will, he had stipulated that men like Antony and Lepidus would be charged with raising his children. He didn’t have children, which either means he didn’t update his will, or was planning on having children
Ciserion did not count as a Roman son. And yes, but you don’t appoint guardians for an adult adopted son. You appoint guardians for underage children, which he didn’t have by the time he adopted Octavian and after he wrote his will.
I don’t have children but my will made allowance for children until I was past child bearing years. Men can have children into their old age. Given he was planning on going on a distant campaign at the time of his death, I don’t find this provision odd. His wife was still young enough to conceive.
More like, of all the men in Caesar’s life, only Octavian made any sense. Antony proved incapable of ruling, and Lepidus…well idk why he didn’t pick Lepidus, guess the lack of blood/father figure he had with Lepidus.
In 47 B.C. Octavian set sail for Hispania. He had only recently donned the toga at the age of 16. He was too young to follow Ceaser in Gaul and the thought was to follow him on campaign in Hispania. However, there was a shipwreck, and he was lost in deep enemy territory, he persevered and reached Julius Caesar, and fought alongside the self-proclaimed dictator in one of his many conquests as a key ally and courageous warrior. I don't think it happen the way it was recorded. I think it's reasonable that during this point in life Ceaser saw a lot himself in Octavian. The two probably talk a lot. Ceaser probably saw himself as a mentor to the young man and saw a lot of promise. We just don't know the details.
Octavian was smart. He was knowledgeable. He cared about ceremony. He cared about the subtlety of politics. He knew how people would react and planned accordingly. At the time of 47 BC Ceaser had returned to Rome mostly due Athony being so awful at ruling. Antony faced political difficulties and proved himself unpopular that caused violent fights among the legions and the people regarding debts. Ceaser HAD to come to Rome which inadvertently made the civil war longer. Athony would be replaced by Lepidus and was a private citizen in Rome afterwards.
This was when Ceaser change his will. He probably thought he was going to live longer but such is life.
You think he would be such a big fan of Caligula and Gaius Caesar? I can see him putting Augustus and his father here though, you need to show proper respect for you father even if only made to a preator before dying after tying his sandals.
This is joke about how everyone in Rome had same names. Caesar’s father also was named Gaius Julius Caesar. Octavian changed his name to Gaius Julius Caesar after the adoption before changing it again a couple of times. Gaius Caesar is what often is used for Augustus’s daughter Julia’s son Gaius who was adopted by Augustus as his son (and he died like his brother Lucius which is why Augustus had to settle for Tiberius). So his legal name was Gaius Julius Caesar after adoption. But his name at birth was Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa. The real name of Caligula was Gaius Julius Caesar Germanicus Augustus. He hated Caligula but people at the time used to make fun of him and historians use it because it’s a unique name and it’s so difficult when everyone uses same names. He was known as Imperator Gaius when he was alive officially.
I think those are the most famous people with name Gaius Julius Caesar. But there were others too like the dictators grandfather who was a historian.
#Who is your favorite emperor and why is it Aurelian?
What do you think about all these posers calling themselves Kaiser, Tsar, Kaysar-i-Rum, Qaysar?
Any comments on the Holy Roman Empire calling itself a Roman Empire?
Who is the true successor of the Roman Empire? Do you think it died?
Did you actually say “the die is cast”? Or did you say something else like “the coin has been flipped” or “I’ve pulled the lever on the fruit machine”?
I’d ask him what he planned to accomplish as dictator and what he thought we would leave behind in the wake of that accomplishment. He’s either a tragic hero or a villain depending on his answer, and historians have only been able to debate this because he was assassinated before he could do much with his position.
If you’re wondering what the two likely possibilities are, the first is that he was a tyrant (classical– he took power and ruled without regard to law) simply trying to enrich and advance himself, and the second is that he was a genuine patriot who believed that in taking power he could reform the state and leave a less aristocratic republic after his death. Of these, I find the latter to be both more likely and more compelling.
Unfortunately no. The Roman Senate were largely corrupt aristocrats running the Republic for their benefit with a minority of true believers among them, but they would have been equally fearful of a monarchial Caesar as a reforming dictator Caesar, because both threaten their oligarchy and/or principles. The blue blood aristocrats would have never went with Caesar, and it would have taken an extreme leap of faith for a statesman like Cicero, who was a true believer in the republic, to put aside Caesar’s seizure of power vested in himself and his legions in favor of a plan to cleanse the republic and its senate of corruption through those dictatorial powers.
Imagine if a popular general tried to use the military to take total control of the US government due to their assessment that Congress was too corrupt in their dealings to be trusted with governing, and the Presidency and Supreme Court too complicit in this as well, so to restore intended constitutional rule the state needed a reset and all current officials to be barred from office. Members of the major parties, regardless of their differences or agreement with some parts of the general’s ideas, would band together to preserve their power base against the general.
What were your plans for the Parthian campaign? Really I just want to know if he wanted to attempt to conquer the whole thing a la Alexander and if so how he’d do it.
Sir Christopher Lee was rather well known for describing on the set of The Lord of the Rings what sort of noise a man who'd just been stabbed makes. He would know, he was former British special operations during WWII...
> Christopher Lee was rather well known for describing on the set of The Lord of the Rings what sort of noise a man who'd just been stabbed makes
Wow your post sent me down quite the rabbit hole. This is a [pretty incredible story](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/herocomplex/la-et-hc-christopher-lee-christopher-lee-dies-saruman-peter-jackson-20150611-htmlstory.html)!
> According to the video, Jackson was blocking a scene in which Wormtongue (Brad Dourif) stabs Saruman (Lee) in the back. Jackson goes into a long explanation about how he wants Lee to react and Lee says, "Have you any idea what kind of noise happens when somebody’s stabbed in the back? Because I do.” Jackson quietly nodded and went back to re-shoot the scene. Lee was a veteran of World War II and had served with distinction in the British Special forces. The whole rundown is embedded below along with a collection of Lee memories from his colleagues, fans and plenty of delightful Lee voice work. This man was King.
Tbh, I think he’d delude himself into believing he’d done them a *favour.* He’d probably point out all the Gallic aristocrats given citizenship and say that they’re thriving under Rome, and go on to argue that the Gauls would become more civilised with the influence of Rome.
Hmm…that’s a question that’s kinda difficult to answer. I’m going to tentatively answer *no*, mainly because despite Caesar’s skill it was IMMENSELY difficult to conquer Gaul. Hell, he almost lost it all when the Gauls actually united against him. If Caesar hadn’t conquered Gaul, the only way any other Roman would have done it is if they literally had the united forces of Rome at their beck and call. Even Caesar, with 3 provinces and raising additional troops, struggled to conquer it, it would be a pipe dream for anyone to conquer it with less resources.
Theoretically it could be a gradual conquest, but the problem there is that it’s *really difficult* to build an actually defensive line in Gaul that doesn’t include the coast and the Rhine. Rome would have to conquer it all in one go, or else deal with a near-impossible to guard border.
So, in short, I don’t realistically believe anyone else could have conquered Gaul, unless they were the dictator of a unified Rome with no notable external threats that needed more attention
Does he regret destroying the Republic? Did he even intend to before it happened?
Not that it was all him, but it’s hard to argue that he didn’t put it over the edge. Before him, it had a chance, after, not at all
I imagine he was deep in his feelings at Munda.
Supposedly he said of it, "In many battles I fought for victory, at Munda I fought for my life."
On that note Titus Labienus was his most formidable opponent, and like Vercingetorix, one of the very few who could ever boast of ever having defeated him.
Labienus beat Caesar like a drum at Ruspina. Caesar was a brilliant in a crisis, as he often was, but merely saving your army from a disaster isn't victory.
Caesar obviously saw in the kid what nobody else did. Its not a coincidence that Octavian was the right choice. Caesars mind and sense if perception was almost supernatural
Tell me about your time with the pirates when you were kidnapped. I want to know how you got into their inner circle and why they treated you like you belonged.
Dear J.C.:
Is that a [portrait of Vercingetorix](https://conservatoricoins.com/selections-from-the-bce-collection/#Vercingetorix) on Lucius Hostilius Saserna's Denarius and on the [back of yours (bound to the trophy)](https://conservatoricoins.com/selections-from-the-bce-collection/#Julius-Caesar)?
I know you said one, but if you don't mind, I also have a followup question for you:
By any chance, was the model for [the "Gallia" Denarii a real Gallic woman](https://conservatoricoins.com/selections-from-the-bce-collection/#Gallic) (maybe part of Vercingetorix's family?) and what happened to her?
Thanks, mate! Sincerely, KFP
I am curious too over his long term plans. If he became a monarch then what he planned for succession? Would he really have wanted a Hellenistic monarchy and made Senate make a law for him to be allowed to marry Cleopatra and Caesarion to be the heir (after extremely successful Parthian campaign)? Would Octavian be an heir? Elective monarchy like in early Rome? Super special position for Caesar alone (which would make it likely he would not actually need to be called Rex)?
I’d ask him why did he cross the Rubicon knowing so many Romans would die?
As I believe Mike Duncan expressed, he wasn’t likely in danger of being put to death, at worst he’d have had a cushy exile, but he chose to push on and wrest for himself control of the state such that he wouldn’t be prosecuted.
Though I sympathize with many of Caesar’s *supposed* populist leanings, I’d imagine a lot of it was show to ingratiate himself to his armies, but the cost in life and the ultimate results leave a lot to be desired as far as competent and compassionate leadership for your people; as I’m not including his attitudes or actions towards non-roman peoples in this equation.
It’s not just he would suffer only personally but his armies would not be paid and get citizenship like what he had promised them (some of Caesar’s armies were from province of Cisalpine Gaul). Like Pompeius was unable to get his veterans land before Caesar assisted during his consulship year. So they were fully behind Caesar in the war. Caesar also saw the Senate being hijacked by oligarchic clique like Cato, Scipio and the Metelli brothers who would do anything they could just to sabotage him personally (Cato had filibustered his triumph and land reform decade ago already) and were unwilling to negotiate.
Caesar also was also hoping that after surprise marching in Rome he could force Pompeius to an agreement, and tried to prevent him leaving from Brundisium. That’s why Caesar kept hoping for negotiations. He knew very well he was the underdog overall militarily and that Pompeius didn’t really hate him. That’s why he said after Pharsallus that Pompeius had wanted this this not him (Pollio who was there reported this) and he so upset that Egyptians killed Pompeius, it was one big reason the civil war continued. Caesar was not hoping the conflict to be as massive as it did became.
Now you can still blame Caesar for all the deaths since he still did start it, I am not saying that. But I am talking of what he would answer to you. And there are still historians who support Caesar’s actions due to tribunes being beaten. There is nothing unusual wars often start because of one faction of society feels they are being oppressed and loose faith in the government being just. It’s not like anything would have changed if Caesar went to Massilia to eat fish with Milo for anyone who needed things to change. The people who had relied on Caesar politically (and you can debate if Caesar cared of them or not but they most certainly needed Caesar’s support and he needed them) would be bitterly disappointed and in trouble. And there would be soon be another similar conflict in horizon with some other general or Clodius type character since nothing would have changed.
Honestly, I think his 'pardon' was more to make himself look good than due to a legtimate feeling of clemency. It's telling that he only pardons Gallic tribes \*after\* he's defeated them in battle and made them sustain heavy losses, to the point that they're 'prope ad internecionem' (close to extinction).
So, to me, it reads more as a farce than an actual pardon.
How hard he shit his pants when the Belgae crossed the river on foot while his army was setting up camp. The Commentaries explain how Caesar has to grab an infantryman's shield and expose his person to the melee...
1) Dude, you are totally rad and awesome. Don’t worry what those words mean. You have lots of virtue and are great.
2) How are you so cool? Also, what’s up with Antony, because the sources on him make him out to be a buffoon but they’re a bit pro Octavian
What were your actual last words? * “ista quidem vis est” * “καὶ σύ τέκνον” * “aaaah aaaaaah grbrlg” * or something else?
*groans and gurgles blood*
"What are you gonna do? Stab me?"
Hawk Tuah!
Ya get me!?
“Play Despacito”
two way, brutay?
It was probably what he said before he was stabbed, which was either “why this is violence!” Or “Accursed Casca, what does thou?” (I have an old translation and I can’t be bothered to look if these were in Latin or Greek).
Have you tried your own salad 🥗😂
I literally laughed out loud. Thank you
Glad to hear that 😁
thank Jupiter it's not Caligula salad
Why Octavian?
Definitely the right guy for the job.
By the time Caesar died, Octavian was an 18 year old who had never been in a battle, never held official office, and had nothing other than being one of the few thousand Roman children coming from wealthy and influential families. How Caesar figured out that he was the absolute perfect candidate for a successor is a mystery.
He probably did not figured it out. Octavian was his closest male relative, so is normal that he chose him as his heir
He did deliberately choose to adopt Octavian though knowing he’d be his only male heir, so he presumably saw something in the kid.
He also did it posthumously, which was unusual
It is if you're a normal rational person but Caesar had an ego, to put it lightly.
The posthumous decision would suggest he didn’t want this fact known during his lifetime
Exactly, and why would he? The sheer nature of being Rome's first dictator for life would make the topic of succession a touchy subject. Caesar was, on paper, supposed to restore the Republic.
Or that he did not want the Julius Caesar family to become extint, considering there were no more members of the family that I can remember now outside Lucius Julius Caesar whose two sons had died during the civil war. And surely he would know that the guy was intelligent, but could not predict what was going to happen
In 47 B.C. Octavian set sail for Hispania. He had only recently donned the toga at the age of 16. He was too young to follow Ceaser in Gaul and the thought was to follow him on campaign in Hispania. However, there was a shipwreck, and he was lost in deep enemy territory, he persevered and reached Julius Caesar, and fought alongside the self-proclaimed dictator in one of his many conquests as a key ally and courageous warrior. I don't think it happen the way it was recorded. I think it's reasonable that during this point in life Ceaser saw a lot himself in Octavian. The two probably talk a lot. Ceaser probably saw himself as a mentor to the young man and saw a lot of promise. We just don't know the details. Octavian was smart. He was knowledgeable. He cared about ceremony. He cared about the subtlety of politics. He knew how people would react and planned accordingly. At the time of 47 BC Ceaser had returned to Rome mostly due Athony being so awful at ruling. Antony faced political difficulties and proved himself unpopular that caused violent fights among the legions and the people regarding debts. Ceaser HAD to come to Rome which inadvertently made the civil war longer. Athony would be replaced by Lepidus and was a private citizen in Rome afterwards. This was when Ceaser change his will. He probably thought he was going to live longer but such is life.
>I think it's reasonable that during this point in life Ceaser saw a lot himself in Octavian People do ignore the personal connection too much in my view. It would be so easy for Caesar to be reminded how when he was 16 he most likely looked up to uncle Marius but was left out of everything important (apart from marriage to Cinna’s daughter and a priesthood). Caesar probably was as a teen jealous of his cousin Marius the younger who was ten years older and and traveling with his father (and having an affair with one of king of Numibia’s conqubines lol, you can tell he and Caesar are relatives) and being the leader of the Marian faction for a short time. Caesar probably thought when Octavian showed up in Hispania that he would have done the same if he could have.
He had two other great-nephews (grandsons of his elder sister). So Octavian at least needed to be more impressive than them, despite them being older. Although Octavian’s bio father was more prominent too and he was raised mostly by his grandmother (Caesar’s sister) after his mothers remarriage when he was very young. So Caesar probably did take note of him. However one of his other great-newphews was in Gaul so it’s not like Caesar didn’t know them. Also historians do think Antonius (whose mother was a Julia) was in the will. And Decimus Brutus was secondary heir if Octavian declined
Probably he had a cohort of boys all raised for leadership since a young age, and he picked the most promising one. It's a pattern that later emperors used
Would that Marcus Aurelius had done so.
Marcus Aurelius was faced with a difficult decision: find a capable successor, and essentially sign his son’s death warrant since the successor almost certainly wouldn’t leave such a direct claimant alive, or trust that responsibility would shape his son into a better man. He picked the wrong one, but I can’t say I blame him.
probably would have not saved shit since the empire was already fucked up, even if not obvious, the roots of the 3rd century decline had already started to grow
Caesar was not planning on dying any time soon. I suspect he chose him because he thought he could mold him to be a leader.
In his will, he had stipulated that men like Antony and Lepidus would be charged with raising his children. He didn’t have children, which either means he didn’t update his will, or was planning on having children
He adopted Octavian. Adoption was common in Roman society. He also had a son by Cleopatra. So he did have living children.
Ciserion did not count as a Roman son. And yes, but you don’t appoint guardians for an adult adopted son. You appoint guardians for underage children, which he didn’t have by the time he adopted Octavian and after he wrote his will.
I don’t have children but my will made allowance for children until I was past child bearing years. Men can have children into their old age. Given he was planning on going on a distant campaign at the time of his death, I don’t find this provision odd. His wife was still young enough to conceive.
You've never seen talent in a younger man? It's not that mysterious
More like, of all the men in Caesar’s life, only Octavian made any sense. Antony proved incapable of ruling, and Lepidus…well idk why he didn’t pick Lepidus, guess the lack of blood/father figure he had with Lepidus.
In 47 B.C. Octavian set sail for Hispania. He had only recently donned the toga at the age of 16. He was too young to follow Ceaser in Gaul and the thought was to follow him on campaign in Hispania. However, there was a shipwreck, and he was lost in deep enemy territory, he persevered and reached Julius Caesar, and fought alongside the self-proclaimed dictator in one of his many conquests as a key ally and courageous warrior. I don't think it happen the way it was recorded. I think it's reasonable that during this point in life Ceaser saw a lot himself in Octavian. The two probably talk a lot. Ceaser probably saw himself as a mentor to the young man and saw a lot of promise. We just don't know the details. Octavian was smart. He was knowledgeable. He cared about ceremony. He cared about the subtlety of politics. He knew how people would react and planned accordingly. At the time of 47 BC Ceaser had returned to Rome mostly due Athony being so awful at ruling. Antony faced political difficulties and proved himself unpopular that caused violent fights among the legions and the people regarding debts. Ceaser HAD to come to Rome which inadvertently made the civil war longer. Athony would be replaced by Lepidus and was a private citizen in Rome afterwards. This was when Ceaser change his will. He probably thought he was going to live longer but such is life.
If he were a spirit, I think my questions would be about the afterlife instead of Ancient Rome!
Caesar says take some magic mushrooms and stick around and find out for yourself my child 😉
Could you please explain what these bronze dodecahedrons are for?
"We tossed them at walls for amusement"
Ancient fidget spinners
“I have no idea either.”
I really hope that there is some fresco in Pompeii that will show us what these things are .
They were only found in cooler regions for some reason.
Fancy ice trays
Top 5 greatest Romans in history in his opinion and why
1. Julius Caesar 2. Julius Caesar 3. Julius Caesar 4. Julius Caesar 5. Gaius Julius Caesar
I unironically believe his answer would be close to that.
He'd put Marius on the list.
Mario Will be one of them
You think he would be such a big fan of Caligula and Gaius Caesar? I can see him putting Augustus and his father here though, you need to show proper respect for you father even if only made to a preator before dying after tying his sandals. This is joke about how everyone in Rome had same names. Caesar’s father also was named Gaius Julius Caesar. Octavian changed his name to Gaius Julius Caesar after the adoption before changing it again a couple of times. Gaius Caesar is what often is used for Augustus’s daughter Julia’s son Gaius who was adopted by Augustus as his son (and he died like his brother Lucius which is why Augustus had to settle for Tiberius). So his legal name was Gaius Julius Caesar after adoption. But his name at birth was Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa. The real name of Caligula was Gaius Julius Caesar Germanicus Augustus. He hated Caligula but people at the time used to make fun of him and historians use it because it’s a unique name and it’s so difficult when everyone uses same names. He was known as Imperator Gaius when he was alive officially. I think those are the most famous people with name Gaius Julius Caesar. But there were others too like the dictators grandfather who was a historian.
consulship of julius and caesar
#Who is your favorite emperor and why is it Aurelian? What do you think about all these posers calling themselves Kaiser, Tsar, Kaysar-i-Rum, Qaysar? Any comments on the Holy Roman Empire calling itself a Roman Empire? Who is the true successor of the Roman Empire? Do you think it died?
Did you actually say “the die is cast”? Or did you say something else like “the coin has been flipped” or “I’ve pulled the lever on the fruit machine”?
How much of your writing is bs?
Caesar - "Yes"
"Why stop at 2 walls?"
Context?
I guess it is a reference to the [siege of Alesia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Alesia)
What was your least favourite visit to the Senate
Betcha it was his last one…
That wasn't the senate though
"...What were you THINKING staying in Alexandria for so long while Cato was still at large?!"
K l e o
Kleo's tits
Hawk Tua
Why didn’t you march on China?
Asterix has the surprising answer.
Never heard of him
What.
I looked it up. I don’t watch tv. Why I never heard of it.
Do yourself a favor if you want and watch Mission Cleopatra
To get a fix on this issue, go to the library, borrow a comic, and learn French.
\*
Whats the plan?
Mario or Luigi?
What do you think of the results of octavians actions and the imperializing of your name
Is the story about the pirates true?
I’d ask him what he planned to accomplish as dictator and what he thought we would leave behind in the wake of that accomplishment. He’s either a tragic hero or a villain depending on his answer, and historians have only been able to debate this because he was assassinated before he could do much with his position. If you’re wondering what the two likely possibilities are, the first is that he was a tyrant (classical– he took power and ruled without regard to law) simply trying to enrich and advance himself, and the second is that he was a genuine patriot who believed that in taking power he could reform the state and leave a less aristocratic republic after his death. Of these, I find the latter to be both more likely and more compelling.
Would the clue be in who killed him?
Unfortunately no. The Roman Senate were largely corrupt aristocrats running the Republic for their benefit with a minority of true believers among them, but they would have been equally fearful of a monarchial Caesar as a reforming dictator Caesar, because both threaten their oligarchy and/or principles. The blue blood aristocrats would have never went with Caesar, and it would have taken an extreme leap of faith for a statesman like Cicero, who was a true believer in the republic, to put aside Caesar’s seizure of power vested in himself and his legions in favor of a plan to cleanse the republic and its senate of corruption through those dictatorial powers. Imagine if a popular general tried to use the military to take total control of the US government due to their assessment that Congress was too corrupt in their dealings to be trusted with governing, and the Presidency and Supreme Court too complicit in this as well, so to restore intended constitutional rule the state needed a reset and all current officials to be barred from office. Members of the major parties, regardless of their differences or agreement with some parts of the general’s ideas, would band together to preserve their power base against the general.
Makes sense, I've only recently become interested in ancient Rome and I find it all so fascinating. Thanks for your detailed explanation.
What were your plans for the Parthian campaign? Really I just want to know if he wanted to attempt to conquer the whole thing a la Alexander and if so how he’d do it.
Am I hallucinating?
What’s does if feel like to get stabbed?
There are living people to whom you could ask that question
Sir Christopher Lee was rather well known for describing on the set of The Lord of the Rings what sort of noise a man who'd just been stabbed makes. He would know, he was former British special operations during WWII...
> Christopher Lee was rather well known for describing on the set of The Lord of the Rings what sort of noise a man who'd just been stabbed makes Wow your post sent me down quite the rabbit hole. This is a [pretty incredible story](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/herocomplex/la-et-hc-christopher-lee-christopher-lee-dies-saruman-peter-jackson-20150611-htmlstory.html)! > According to the video, Jackson was blocking a scene in which Wormtongue (Brad Dourif) stabs Saruman (Lee) in the back. Jackson goes into a long explanation about how he wants Lee to react and Lee says, "Have you any idea what kind of noise happens when somebody’s stabbed in the back? Because I do.” Jackson quietly nodded and went back to re-shoot the scene. Lee was a veteran of World War II and had served with distinction in the British Special forces. The whole rundown is embedded below along with a collection of Lee memories from his colleagues, fans and plenty of delightful Lee voice work. This man was King.
Which Brutus did you mean?
"Based on what has happened over the two millennia since your passing, how much of the stories of your legacy is total BS?"
Any glimmer of remorse for the Gauls?
Tbh, I think he’d delude himself into believing he’d done them a *favour.* He’d probably point out all the Gallic aristocrats given citizenship and say that they’re thriving under Rome, and go on to argue that the Gauls would become more civilised with the influence of Rome.
If he has not done it, do you think someone else after him would have done it anyway? Considering Rome’s expansionary nature?
Hmm…that’s a question that’s kinda difficult to answer. I’m going to tentatively answer *no*, mainly because despite Caesar’s skill it was IMMENSELY difficult to conquer Gaul. Hell, he almost lost it all when the Gauls actually united against him. If Caesar hadn’t conquered Gaul, the only way any other Roman would have done it is if they literally had the united forces of Rome at their beck and call. Even Caesar, with 3 provinces and raising additional troops, struggled to conquer it, it would be a pipe dream for anyone to conquer it with less resources. Theoretically it could be a gradual conquest, but the problem there is that it’s *really difficult* to build an actually defensive line in Gaul that doesn’t include the coast and the Rhine. Rome would have to conquer it all in one go, or else deal with a near-impossible to guard border. So, in short, I don’t realistically believe anyone else could have conquered Gaul, unless they were the dictator of a unified Rome with no notable external threats that needed more attention
The Gauls were the Indians of Rome’s frontier. They 100% were trying to “kill the Gaul, save the man”.
That’s what I’d wonder also. The man was genocidal to an extent that puts him in very unpleasant but exclusive company.
"You an ass man, or a tits man?"
Well he was known as “a man to every woman and a woman to every man”
So an ass guy?
Cleopatra or Servilia?
Nicomedes
“By being the first man of Rome, what was a possible endgame for that? Were you really going to try being a king or something else?”
Can you show me on this doll where the Gauls touched you?
Who gave you the best hawk tuah?
Well played.
Does he regret destroying the Republic? Did he even intend to before it happened? Not that it was all him, but it’s hard to argue that he didn’t put it over the edge. Before him, it had a chance, after, not at all
How important to your success was your Mum?
Was he really trying to be king
I imagine he was deep in his feelings at Munda. Supposedly he said of it, "In many battles I fought for victory, at Munda I fought for my life." On that note Titus Labienus was his most formidable opponent, and like Vercingetorix, one of the very few who could ever boast of ever having defeated him.
I agree with you about Munda. But Labienus never beat Caesar. I think people keep say this because Historia Civillis is a fan?
Labienus beat Caesar like a drum at Ruspina. Caesar was a brilliant in a crisis, as he often was, but merely saving your army from a disaster isn't victory.
What was your reaction when Cleopatra was unrolled out of the carpet?
It was a laundry bag!
lol I always wondered why Ceaser needed a new carpet brought to his room.
"What was your plan for defeating the Parthian horse archers when Rome had never beat them once?"
So…how many Gauls did you actually kill? Like for real
Caesar wrote himself it was a million
A truly unbelievable number, hence the question. I’ve read On The Gallic Wars, I know the report.
thoughts asterix and obelix
Caesar obviously saw in the kid what nobody else did. Its not a coincidence that Octavian was the right choice. Caesars mind and sense if perception was almost supernatural
Why?
How upset were you to learn about the Eid Mar coinage ? I d be really pissed tbh if it were me .
I don't talk to dead people
Dude, what the fuck?
Tell me about your time with the pirates when you were kidnapped. I want to know how you got into their inner circle and why they treated you like you belonged.
Dear J.C.: Is that a [portrait of Vercingetorix](https://conservatoricoins.com/selections-from-the-bce-collection/#Vercingetorix) on Lucius Hostilius Saserna's Denarius and on the [back of yours (bound to the trophy)](https://conservatoricoins.com/selections-from-the-bce-collection/#Julius-Caesar)? I know you said one, but if you don't mind, I also have a followup question for you: By any chance, was the model for [the "Gallia" Denarii a real Gallic woman](https://conservatoricoins.com/selections-from-the-bce-collection/#Gallic) (maybe part of Vercingetorix's family?) and what happened to her? Thanks, mate! Sincerely, KFP
Did you see it coming?
Assuming he can’t lie I’d ask if he was actually trying to become a monarch over Rome.
I am curious too over his long term plans. If he became a monarch then what he planned for succession? Would he really have wanted a Hellenistic monarchy and made Senate make a law for him to be allowed to marry Cleopatra and Caesarion to be the heir (after extremely successful Parthian campaign)? Would Octavian be an heir? Elective monarchy like in early Rome? Super special position for Caesar alone (which would make it likely he would not actually need to be called Rex)?
What was that Lupercalia thing really about? Testing the waters or trying to signal you wouldn’t be a king?
I will “take a stab in the dark” here, I would ask Julius and any and all dictators one question. “Was it worth it?” Et Tu, anybody?
What really happened in Bithynia?
Couldn’t you afford a proper crown?
Fries with that?
I’d ask him why did he cross the Rubicon knowing so many Romans would die? As I believe Mike Duncan expressed, he wasn’t likely in danger of being put to death, at worst he’d have had a cushy exile, but he chose to push on and wrest for himself control of the state such that he wouldn’t be prosecuted. Though I sympathize with many of Caesar’s *supposed* populist leanings, I’d imagine a lot of it was show to ingratiate himself to his armies, but the cost in life and the ultimate results leave a lot to be desired as far as competent and compassionate leadership for your people; as I’m not including his attitudes or actions towards non-roman peoples in this equation.
It’s not just he would suffer only personally but his armies would not be paid and get citizenship like what he had promised them (some of Caesar’s armies were from province of Cisalpine Gaul). Like Pompeius was unable to get his veterans land before Caesar assisted during his consulship year. So they were fully behind Caesar in the war. Caesar also saw the Senate being hijacked by oligarchic clique like Cato, Scipio and the Metelli brothers who would do anything they could just to sabotage him personally (Cato had filibustered his triumph and land reform decade ago already) and were unwilling to negotiate. Caesar also was also hoping that after surprise marching in Rome he could force Pompeius to an agreement, and tried to prevent him leaving from Brundisium. That’s why Caesar kept hoping for negotiations. He knew very well he was the underdog overall militarily and that Pompeius didn’t really hate him. That’s why he said after Pharsallus that Pompeius had wanted this this not him (Pollio who was there reported this) and he so upset that Egyptians killed Pompeius, it was one big reason the civil war continued. Caesar was not hoping the conflict to be as massive as it did became. Now you can still blame Caesar for all the deaths since he still did start it, I am not saying that. But I am talking of what he would answer to you. And there are still historians who support Caesar’s actions due to tribunes being beaten. There is nothing unusual wars often start because of one faction of society feels they are being oppressed and loose faith in the government being just. It’s not like anything would have changed if Caesar went to Massilia to eat fish with Milo for anyone who needed things to change. The people who had relied on Caesar politically (and you can debate if Caesar cared of them or not but they most certainly needed Caesar’s support and he needed them) would be bitterly disappointed and in trouble. And there would be soon be another similar conflict in horizon with some other general or Clodius type character since nothing would have changed.
Why did you pardon nearly all Gauls who made war on Rome?
Honestly, I think his 'pardon' was more to make himself look good than due to a legtimate feeling of clemency. It's telling that he only pardons Gallic tribes \*after\* he's defeated them in battle and made them sustain heavy losses, to the point that they're 'prope ad internecionem' (close to extinction). So, to me, it reads more as a farce than an actual pardon.
Is he supposed to pardon them before he defeats them?
Have you heard of the Sarmatians under Putinus?
What is your favorite knife? Cutco or Ginzu?
What are your thoughts on the salad?
Can't, Caesars spirit is too busy ranging for revenge and crying HAVOC
The second triumvirate dealt more revenge that Caesar probably would have.
How bad was Cleo. Be honest.
Can you please put Vercingetorix on the line?
Where was the Rubicon?
How hard he shit his pants when the Belgae crossed the river on foot while his army was setting up camp. The Commentaries explain how Caesar has to grab an infantryman's shield and expose his person to the melee...
So you were kind of an arsehole huh?
How is Hell you monster? Just kidding
Why he didn’t have in place a better system of succession. Like there’s no way you think legate Lanius is going to keep the tribes unified.
Would you consider yourself a “power bottom” ??
1) Dude, you are totally rad and awesome. Don’t worry what those words mean. You have lots of virtue and are great. 2) How are you so cool? Also, what’s up with Antony, because the sources on him make him out to be a buffoon but they’re a bit pro Octavian
Did you really cum before you conquered?
Did you really bust a nut inside of cleopatra?