Julius Caesar

Brutus said "Let's be sacrificers but not butchers." He was speaking to Caius and other conspirators.

Titinius is the officer you are referring to.

trebonius

It was the crossing of the river Rubicon. This river was the boundary between the Roman Province of Gallia Cisalpina (in northern Italy) and Italy. Caesar was the governor of that province and was entitled to have troops there, but was not entitled to lead troops in Italy. The Roman senate ordered Caesar to disband his troops and return to Rome. Caesar, instead, crossed the Rubicon with one of his legions and marched on Rome.

Brutus, Marullus and Casca.

The ides of March was not an institution. It was the 15th of March. Romans months had the Kalends, the nones and the ides. The kalends were the first day of the month. The nones was the 8th day before the ides and fell of the 5th or 7th day of the month, depending on the position of the ides. It is thought that originally it was the day of the half moon. The ides was fell on the 13th day of months with 29 days and on the 15th day of months with 31 days. It is thought that originally it was the day of the full moon.

The main issues facing Rome during the time of Julius Caesar were:

1) Veteran resettlement

In the leadup to Julius Caesar's life changes were made to Rome's military referred to as the Marian reforms. Due to severe losses in conflict with the German tribes migrating south new armies were required but Rome did not have enough men left who met the criteria of land and money to be allowed to serve in the army and who had to fund their own equipment. On top of this Rome's Italian allies were unwilling to see their remaining men die under poor leadership in the name of Rome leaving them without men to work their land - as a result their land was being bought by wealthy Romans and Roman slaves were getting the jobs on that land.

To resolve this Marius created a professional army from the capite censi - the Roman 'head count' who had neither land, wealth or employment. With these new armies Rome crushed the German invasion.

However, the dilemma remained of what to do with these professional soldiers when they were no longer required or had reached retirement age. A long running issue on granting land to former soldiers for them to settle on and farm raged in the senate for decades and was a key factor in Julius Caesar's garnering support from the people during elections.

2) Egyptian plague, civil war and grain shortage

During the time before Julius Caesar's affair with Cleopatra Egypt was in turmoil. Plague had ravaged the people of the Nile delta, the Nile had not risen enough to water the the plains that allowed crops to flourish and civil war was brewing between the indigenous Egyptians and the Macedonian Egyptians. The result of all this impacted Rome in the form of grain shortages which Rome depended on heavily.

3) Resistance to change and corruption in the Senate.

Julius Caesar lived at the tail end of the Republic of Rome, for a long time the politics in Rome had descended into chaos and corruption. Around the time Julius Caesar rose to power a faction in the senate under the leadership of Marcus Porcius Cato called the Boni or "good" men believed in resisting change and keeping the old ways of the Roman Republic. This would lead to a civil war because Julius Caesar faced faced being branded a traitor and exiled losing all property in Rome for not heeding the demands of the Boni in the senate to disband his armies and returning to Rome to face the senate over his 'illegal' invasion of Gaul.

4) Buildup of armies in Parthia

The Parthians (modern day Syria/Iraq/Iran were developing to become a major threat at the time of Julius Caesar and at the time of his death Julius Caesar was planning to invade Parthia. Rome had previously failed to invade Parthia under the leadership of Marcus Crassus whose motivation was to glorify himself to the people of Rome and attain the gold and riches Parthia was famous for - resulting in the loss of his complete army and the irony of the Parthians pouring molten gold down the throat of Crassus.

Marcus Antonius would eventually lead Roman Armies to a second defeat against the Parthians before the civil war that ended the Roman Republic once and for all. Luckily for Rome, in-fighting within the Parthian royal family put an end to the threat posed to the lands around the Mediterranean.

Caesar and Pompey clashed and went to war

Caesar and Cleopatra was a play by George Bernard Shaw which was filmed with Claude Rains and Vivien Leigh in the title roles in 1945.

She wants him to stay home because she had been dreaming of his death and is afraid they will come true.

In Latin, "Caesar" means "hairy" or "having a full head of hair". It was an ironic surname for Julius Caesar who was half bald.

You're probably thinking of "The Ides of March" - The day that Julius Caesar was stabbed to death was March 15th.

Unless you are thinking of College basketball's "March Madness" in Texas; The Eyes of March - They are upon y'all...

We have no record of Julius Caesar ever ordering a gladiator's death, although it could have been possible as he sponsored gladiatorial combats. Remember that there is controversy about the "thumbs" business. Hollywood would have you believe that thumbs down meant death but historians believe that it was a turning of the thumb that signaled the death blow. To explain, the thumb was a symbol for the sword. If the editor of the games turned his thumb up, it meant "put up your sword" or don't fight. If he turned his thumb sideways, it meant "run him through" or kill as death wounds are generally given with the sword in a stabbing or straight position.

We have no record of Julius Caesar ever ordering a gladiator's death, although it could have been possible as he sponsored gladiatorial combats. Remember that there is controversy about the "thumbs" business. Hollywood would have you believe that thumbs down meant death but historians believe that it was a turning of the thumb that signaled the death blow. To explain, the thumb was a symbol for the sword. If the editor of the games turned his thumb up, it meant "put up your sword" or don't fight. If he turned his thumb sideways, it meant "run him through" or kill as death wounds are generally given with the sword in a stabbing or straight position.

We have no record of Julius Caesar ever ordering a gladiator's death, although it could have been possible as he sponsored gladiatorial combats. Remember that there is controversy about the "thumbs" business. Hollywood would have you believe that thumbs down meant death but historians believe that it was a turning of the thumb that signaled the death blow. To explain, the thumb was a symbol for the sword. If the editor of the games turned his thumb up, it meant "put up your sword" or don't fight. If he turned his thumb sideways, it meant "run him through" or kill as death wounds are generally given with the sword in a stabbing or straight position.

We have no record of Julius Caesar ever ordering a gladiator's death, although it could have been possible as he sponsored gladiatorial combats. Remember that there is controversy about the "thumbs" business. Hollywood would have you believe that thumbs down meant death but historians believe that it was a turning of the thumb that signaled the death blow. To explain, the thumb was a symbol for the sword. If the editor of the games turned his thumb up, it meant "put up your sword" or don't fight. If he turned his thumb sideways, it meant "run him through" or kill as death wounds are generally given with the sword in a stabbing or straight position.

We have no record of Julius Caesar ever ordering a gladiator's death, although it could have been possible as he sponsored gladiatorial combats. Remember that there is controversy about the "thumbs" business. Hollywood would have you believe that thumbs down meant death but historians believe that it was a turning of the thumb that signaled the death blow. To explain, the thumb was a symbol for the sword. If the editor of the games turned his thumb up, it meant "put up your sword" or don't fight. If he turned his thumb sideways, it meant "run him through" or kill as death wounds are generally given with the sword in a stabbing or straight position.

We have no record of Julius Caesar ever ordering a gladiator's death, although it could have been possible as he sponsored gladiatorial combats. Remember that there is controversy about the "thumbs" business. Hollywood would have you believe that thumbs down meant death but historians believe that it was a turning of the thumb that signaled the death blow. To explain, the thumb was a symbol for the sword. If the editor of the games turned his thumb up, it meant "put up your sword" or don't fight. If he turned his thumb sideways, it meant "run him through" or kill as death wounds are generally given with the sword in a stabbing or straight position.

We have no record of Julius Caesar ever ordering a gladiator's death, although it could have been possible as he sponsored gladiatorial combats. Remember that there is controversy about the "thumbs" business. Hollywood would have you believe that thumbs down meant death but historians believe that it was a turning of the thumb that signaled the death blow. To explain, the thumb was a symbol for the sword. If the editor of the games turned his thumb up, it meant "put up your sword" or don't fight. If he turned his thumb sideways, it meant "run him through" or kill as death wounds are generally given with the sword in a stabbing or straight position.

We have no record of Julius Caesar ever ordering a gladiator's death, although it could have been possible as he sponsored gladiatorial combats. Remember that there is controversy about the "thumbs" business. Hollywood would have you believe that thumbs down meant death but historians believe that it was a turning of the thumb that signaled the death blow. To explain, the thumb was a symbol for the sword. If the editor of the games turned his thumb up, it meant "put up your sword" or don't fight. If he turned his thumb sideways, it meant "run him through" or kill as death wounds are generally given with the sword in a stabbing or straight position.

We have no record of Julius Caesar ever ordering a gladiator's death, although it could have been possible as he sponsored gladiatorial combats. Remember that there is controversy about the "thumbs" business. Hollywood would have you believe that thumbs down meant death but historians believe that it was a turning of the thumb that signaled the death blow. To explain, the thumb was a symbol for the sword. If the editor of the games turned his thumb up, it meant "put up your sword" or don't fight. If he turned his thumb sideways, it meant "run him through" or kill as death wounds are generally given with the sword in a stabbing or straight position.

Caesar won the right to become ruler of Rome by winning the civil war with Pompey. Pompey was commissioned by the senate, and as Caesar defeated Pompey, he also, in effect, defeated the senate.

Caesar won the right to become ruler of Rome by winning the civil war with Pompey. Pompey was commissioned by the senate, and as Caesar defeated Pompey, he also, in effect, defeated the senate.

Caesar won the right to become ruler of Rome by winning the civil war with Pompey. Pompey was commissioned by the senate, and as Caesar defeated Pompey, he also, in effect, defeated the senate.

Caesar won the right to become ruler of Rome by winning the civil war with Pompey. Pompey was commissioned by the senate, and as Caesar defeated Pompey, he also, in effect, defeated the senate.

Caesar won the right to become ruler of Rome by winning the civil war with Pompey. Pompey was commissioned by the senate, and as Caesar defeated Pompey, he also, in effect, defeated the senate.

Caesar won the right to become ruler of Rome by winning the civil war with Pompey. Pompey was commissioned by the senate, and as Caesar defeated Pompey, he also, in effect, defeated the senate.

Caesar won the right to become ruler of Rome by winning the civil war with Pompey. Pompey was commissioned by the senate, and as Caesar defeated Pompey, he also, in effect, defeated the senate.

Caesar won the right to become ruler of Rome by winning the civil war with Pompey. Pompey was commissioned by the senate, and as Caesar defeated Pompey, he also, in effect, defeated the senate.

Caesar won the right to become ruler of Rome by winning the civil war with Pompey. Pompey was commissioned by the senate, and as Caesar defeated Pompey, he also, in effect, defeated the senate.

Caesar's ambition and ego were the factors that brought him down. Although accomplished in many areas, Julius Caesar was not hesitant to accept any and all honors that were offered to him and it's even suspected that when he was offered the crown, that it was a set up to judge the reaction of the Roman people. He insulted the delegation from the senate when they went to him to present him with new honors, and at the time of his death was planning an invasion of Parthia which, if successful, would boost his public standing even higher. All the honors and authority that Caesar accumulated, built up resentment and outrage in his enemies and you know the results. Perhaps you could use a statement such as "ambition and ego eventually cause resentment" and back it up with incidents from the ancient writers, Seutonius being a gossipy one. Be careful if you try to back up your statements with material from modern writers because some, not all, tend to "interpret" the facts to fit their own ideas.

Caesar's ambition and ego were the factors that brought him down. Although accomplished in many areas, Julius Caesar was not hesitant to accept any and all honors that were offered to him and it's even suspected that when he was offered the crown, that it was a set up to judge the reaction of the Roman people. He insulted the delegation from the senate when they went to him to present him with new honors, and at the time of his death was planning an invasion of Parthia which, if successful, would boost his public standing even higher. All the honors and authority that Caesar accumulated, built up resentment and outrage in his enemies and you know the results. Perhaps you could use a statement such as "ambition and ego eventually cause resentment" and back it up with incidents from the ancient writers, Seutonius being a gossipy one. Be careful if you try to back up your statements with material from modern writers because some, not all, tend to "interpret" the facts to fit their own ideas.

Caesar's ambition and ego were the factors that brought him down. Although accomplished in many areas, Julius Caesar was not hesitant to accept any and all honors that were offered to him and it's even suspected that when he was offered the crown, that it was a set up to judge the reaction of the Roman people. He insulted the delegation from the senate when they went to him to present him with new honors, and at the time of his death was planning an invasion of Parthia which, if successful, would boost his public standing even higher. All the honors and authority that Caesar accumulated, built up resentment and outrage in his enemies and you know the results. Perhaps you could use a statement such as "ambition and ego eventually cause resentment" and back it up with incidents from the ancient writers, Seutonius being a gossipy one. Be careful if you try to back up your statements with material from modern writers because some, not all, tend to "interpret" the facts to fit their own ideas.

Caesar's ambition and ego were the factors that brought him down. Although accomplished in many areas, Julius Caesar was not hesitant to accept any and all honors that were offered to him and it's even suspected that when he was offered the crown, that it was a set up to judge the reaction of the Roman people. He insulted the delegation from the senate when they went to him to present him with new honors, and at the time of his death was planning an invasion of Parthia which, if successful, would boost his public standing even higher. All the honors and authority that Caesar accumulated, built up resentment and outrage in his enemies and you know the results. Perhaps you could use a statement such as "ambition and ego eventually cause resentment" and back it up with incidents from the ancient writers, Seutonius being a gossipy one. Be careful if you try to back up your statements with material from modern writers because some, not all, tend to "interpret" the facts to fit their own ideas.

Caesar's ambition and ego were the factors that brought him down. Although accomplished in many areas, Julius Caesar was not hesitant to accept any and all honors that were offered to him and it's even suspected that when he was offered the crown, that it was a set up to judge the reaction of the Roman people. He insulted the delegation from the senate when they went to him to present him with new honors, and at the time of his death was planning an invasion of Parthia which, if successful, would boost his public standing even higher. All the honors and authority that Caesar accumulated, built up resentment and outrage in his enemies and you know the results. Perhaps you could use a statement such as "ambition and ego eventually cause resentment" and back it up with incidents from the ancient writers, Seutonius being a gossipy one. Be careful if you try to back up your statements with material from modern writers because some, not all, tend to "interpret" the facts to fit their own ideas.

Caesar's ambition and ego were the factors that brought him down. Although accomplished in many areas, Julius Caesar was not hesitant to accept any and all honors that were offered to him and it's even suspected that when he was offered the crown, that it was a set up to judge the reaction of the Roman people. He insulted the delegation from the senate when they went to him to present him with new honors, and at the time of his death was planning an invasion of Parthia which, if successful, would boost his public standing even higher. All the honors and authority that Caesar accumulated, built up resentment and outrage in his enemies and you know the results. Perhaps you could use a statement such as "ambition and ego eventually cause resentment" and back it up with incidents from the ancient writers, Seutonius being a gossipy one. Be careful if you try to back up your statements with material from modern writers because some, not all, tend to "interpret" the facts to fit their own ideas.

Caesar's ambition and ego were the factors that brought him down. Although accomplished in many areas, Julius Caesar was not hesitant to accept any and all honors that were offered to him and it's even suspected that when he was offered the crown, that it was a set up to judge the reaction of the Roman people. He insulted the delegation from the senate when they went to him to present him with new honors, and at the time of his death was planning an invasion of Parthia which, if successful, would boost his public standing even higher. All the honors and authority that Caesar accumulated, built up resentment and outrage in his enemies and you know the results. Perhaps you could use a statement such as "ambition and ego eventually cause resentment" and back it up with incidents from the ancient writers, Seutonius being a gossipy one. Be careful if you try to back up your statements with material from modern writers because some, not all, tend to "interpret" the facts to fit their own ideas.

Caesar's ambition and ego were the factors that brought him down. Although accomplished in many areas, Julius Caesar was not hesitant to accept any and all honors that were offered to him and it's even suspected that when he was offered the crown, that it was a set up to judge the reaction of the Roman people. He insulted the delegation from the senate when they went to him to present him with new honors, and at the time of his death was planning an invasion of Parthia which, if successful, would boost his public standing even higher. All the honors and authority that Caesar accumulated, built up resentment and outrage in his enemies and you know the results. Perhaps you could use a statement such as "ambition and ego eventually cause resentment" and back it up with incidents from the ancient writers, Seutonius being a gossipy one. Be careful if you try to back up your statements with material from modern writers because some, not all, tend to "interpret" the facts to fit their own ideas.

Caesar's ambition and ego were the factors that brought him down. Although accomplished in many areas, Julius Caesar was not hesitant to accept any and all honors that were offered to him and it's even suspected that when he was offered the crown, that it was a set up to judge the reaction of the Roman people. He insulted the delegation from the senate when they went to him to present him with new honors, and at the time of his death was planning an invasion of Parthia which, if successful, would boost his public standing even higher. All the honors and authority that Caesar accumulated, built up resentment and outrage in his enemies and you know the results. Perhaps you could use a statement such as "ambition and ego eventually cause resentment" and back it up with incidents from the ancient writers, Seutonius being a gossipy one. Be careful if you try to back up your statements with material from modern writers because some, not all, tend to "interpret" the facts to fit their own ideas.

The Senate were jealous of Julius Caesar because he had power, popularity, and all these things

Marullus and Flavius, for pulling scarfs off Caesar's

images, are put to silence.

Yes he did. Read the book called "Caesar".

The translation of the Latin phrase, "Iacta alea est" refers to a die, the singular of dice. Not "dye". The phrase is not, "The dye is cast." It is, "The die is cast."

The original meaning of this phrase nothing to do with dice. it refers to the time when Julius Caesar took his army into Rome. Once he crossed the Rubicon with his forces there was no turning back as it was forbidden to enter Rome with ones Legion and he was now classed as an invader under Roman Law. Caesar said Jacta Alea Est

literally meaning Let the dye be cast. The phrase refers adding dye or ink to water. Once mixed you cannot get it back out.

"The die (singular of dice) has been cast" basically means one has committed to a decision.

It literally means, "The die has (dice have) been rolled." The decision can't be reversed beyond this point. It is believed to have been said first by Julius Caesar when he committed cross the Rubicon river (a related saying, crossing the Rubicon also means committed to a decision that now can't be taken back). To protect the state from it's own military, it was forbidden to bring a legion of Roman soldiers across the Rubicon river into Italy. It was an act of war against the state. When he cross that line he is rumored to have said, "Iacta alea est (The die has been cast)."

Note: The correct word is "die" (singular of dice) and not "dye" (substance used to stain or color something, like hair, clothing or shoes).

Julius Caesar is a name, which means it is a noun. So you use it as a noun in a sentence. For example, "Julius Caesar was a great general" or, "The man who reformed the calender was Julius Caesar".

No single event marked Rome as the dominant power in the Mediterranean. It was more of a process than an event, one which involved victories in wars. One was the Pyrrrhic War. The First and Second Punic Wars established Rome's dominance in the western Mediterranean. The Roman-Syrian War and the Third and Fourth Macedonian Wars made Rome the great power in the eastern Mediterranean and the Third Mithridatic War ended challenges to her power and led to her dominance over Turkey and the Levant.

The Romans did not say anything about Casca's thoughts. Any thoughts of his come from fiction: from Shakespeare's play. In Shakespeare's play, Casca does not explicitly disclose what he thinks Caesar's motive was for refusing the crown, but his scornful description of the reaction of the crowd when he did so ("the rabblement shouted, and clapped their chopped hands, and threw up their sweaty night-caps, and uttered such a deal of stinking breath because Caesar refused the crown, that it had almost choked Caesar") it would appear that Casca was of the view (surely correct) that the whole process was to amplify Caesar's already popular status with the mob.

He was a very bad man!

The principle defect or "bad" in Marc Antony was his self-indulgence. Because of this character trait, he was criticized as having lost his Roman values. Although he may have had sound reasons for many of his actions, they were such that they could be twisted into negative deeds. By his abandoning of Rome for Alexandria, he helped to bring bring about the final civil war which brought the republic to an end.