Is the murder of Caesar justifiable?

Answer 1

He became dictator and there was a ceremony for Caesar to crown him king. His bodyguard Marc Anthony had the crown and placed it on his head but Julius refused. He did that because Rome was just a Republic during the time and no one really wanted to have a king.

Answer 2

I belive that it was unjust of 60+ Senators to murder Caesar, but I had to write a school report saying it was a good thing Caesar died. It sounds a little weird because its court style, Ill just copy paste: Opening Statement/Summary Without a doubt, the assassination of Julius Caesar was justified. Caesar was becoming a threat to the Senate. After becoming dictator in 45 BC, the Senate noticed that he was destroying the Republic and turning it into a Monarchy. Caesar was also becoming a tyrant. He increased the Senate's population to 900 people, and put his friends and allies in the Senate. This weakened the power of the Senate. More than sixty members of the Senate were included in the assassination of Caesar. This means that there must have been some sort of consensus reached. It is unlikely that more than sixty important people would conspire against the dictator unless there was a good reason. The one person formally responsible for killing Caesar was Marcus Brutus. Brutus believed that although Caesar hadn't done anything wrong yet, he was going to in the near future. The SPQR trusted him to make the right decision. He decided to eliminate Caesar just to be safe and the people praised his great decision. Gain of Power Julius Caesar was greedy for power. In the First Triumvirate, Caesar, Marcus Crassus, and Pompey ruled Rome. Crassus ruled Syria, Pompey ruled Spain and Julius Caesar ruled Cisalpine and Transalpine Gaul and Illyricum. Due to Caesar's greed, he ruled three areas while the other members of the Triumvirate ruled only one each. This fact proves that if Caesar had been left in full power, he would have become corrupt and treat the people like scum. After the First Triumvirate was formed, Crassus was killed in battle, leaving Pompey and Caesar in command. By now, the Senate had already noticed Caesar's power and ordered him to lay down his command, making Pompey absolute ruler. Caesar disobeyed the Senate, and led his army across the river Rubicon, into Italy. This started a civil war between Pompey and Caesar. After Caesar won, he was in complete control over Rome. Caesar took this power by force, you see, he was a greedy man who did not care about the people of Rome and disobeyed the Senate. After the Assassination After Caesar's death, a time of happiness entered Rome. Augustus ruled and had conquered much of the mainland. Shortly after that, the Pax Romana occurred for the next 200 years. This was an era of peace and tranquility. The Roman Empire flourished. None of this would have happened if Caesar was not assassinated. Questions I. Are you aware that nearly all records of Caesar's assassination come from Octavian, Caesar's own bloodline? Wouldn't you say that Octavian would be more biased to say that the Senate was wrong in attacking Julius Caesar, since Octavian was Caesar's heir? This means that your entire defense could be completely based off of biased information, while my information is based off of the weaker side of biased reports. You see, the defense is weak.

II. I disagree. There were signs that Julius Caesar would make slaves of his people. Caesar was greedy for land and power. He disobeyed the Senate who told him just to back down a little, and then literally stabbed his partner, Pompey, in the back, all out of jealousy and a craving for power. Do you disagree? You see, the defense is weak.

III. You say the assassination was done out of jealously, yes? How likely is it that more than sixty Senators with a huge political responsibility would kill their ruler just because they were jealous of him? Likely? Why?........See, it is not likely. Plus, if Caesar choose the Senators himself, wouldn't he know not to make people with weak minds and greed for power part of the Senate? You see, the defense is weak.

Answer 3

Yes; he was overstepping his boundaries WAY too far, according to Roman laws of the time. Though he was never given the title of king, he practically was one, and a self proclaimed one at that

Answer 4

It was justified in the eyes of the conspirators. They thought that Caesar was going to end the Republic by making himself a king as he was concentrating power in his hands. The republic was created with the overthrew of the Roman Monarchy nearly 500 years earlier because the last king was a despot. At that time the Romans vowed never to have a king again. The Republic had been structured in a way that prevented a single man to concentrate power in his hands to ensure that there was not a return to tyranny. Therefore, in their eyes Caesar was a threat to the Republic. They called themselves liberators because they thought that they freed the republic from Caesar's threat.

Answer 5

He believed he was. Cassius convinced Brutus that Caesar was tyrannical and would grind Rome under foot if he came in to power. As a Stoic, Brutus accepted this logic and killed Caesar.

Answer 6

Yes, because it brought Octavian int power, who was the named successor of Caesar. He was a very successful emperor.

Answer 7

Yo hommy i think he should not have been murdered b cause he was too young

Answer 8

No, but the did to stop his Dictatorship.

Answer 9

Me asking u