6 myths about the Ides of March and killing Caesar

Vox ^ | March 15, 2015 | Phil Edwards

[BenLurkin]

All that is necessary for the bad guys to triumph isw for everybody else to stand around and do nothing — regardless of their motives.

[SunkenCiv]

Sort of a Caesar in reverse. :’)

[ConservativeMind]

Caesar trusted Decimus much more than he trusted Brutus — and that made his betrayal more shocking. Misspelled in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar as “Decimus,” Decimus was much more important than most of us realize. “There were three leaders of the assassins’ conspiracy,” Strauss says. “Brutus, Cassius, and Decimus....”

Can someone pull out of that paragraph what the correct spelling of “Decimus,” is?

[Texan5]

His mother always lamented his being born on that day-she believed it was a bad omen to have the Ides of March for a birthday-and he was always a bigtime risk taker-so it might have been a self fulfilling prophecy...

[SunkenCiv]

Pompey was not just any senate dilettante, and had learned not to trust the senators. He and Caesar were about the same age (Pompey about 5 years older; usually it's portrayed as a much larger gap), and Pompey had better people skills; they were probably equal in military skills. Pompey had backed Sulla, but later cleaned out Mediterranean piracy, and conquered most of Anatolia and Syria. This resulted in a big payday for Rome, but the main beneficiaries (the senators) did all they could to screw Pompey, who then aligned with Crassus (victor over Spartacus) and Caesar (first Triumvirate), whose daughter Pompey married.

Caesar was sent to Spain, raised legions, then conquered Gaul. Another big payday for Rome, and again the senators did all they could to screw Caesar, before, during, and after the Pompeian War. If anything, he was too lenient with his senatorial enemies. He also should never have gone anywhere without bodyguards, but doing that was considered a sacrilegious practice.

Murdering someone holding office was also considered sacrilegious, but Caesar's killers thought they'd get away with it, as they had when they'd gone after the Gracchi. Caesar was staggeringly popular, so even if they'd had the law on their side -- and they did not, they were just common murderers, and deserved death under Roman law -- the likelihood of their long-term survival was pretty low.

For generations the senators had been nabbing land, putting people into slavery, and starting wars (fought by others of course) against the rest of Italy and the Mediterrannean, and had previously gotten away with that. It was the senate that started the Roman Empire; adding a full-time emperor was a natural evolution of their (non-existent) constitution (they didn't have a written constitution), it was merely the addition of an executive branch. Prior to that, laws were for the little people.

Myth 6: The assassins failed to win the hearts of the Roman people

I haven't had much use for Barry Strauss when I've seen him as a talking head in a number of documentaries, but that one is both a straw man (#1 and #4 don't belong on the list either) -- senators weren't elected, they were appointed, and mostly self-appointed, and only from the very high end aristocratic households from about three dozen Roman families -- but it also isn't a myth because commoners wanted their heads on poles. The oligarchic makeup of the senate was another thing that had to change, and it did.

[SunkenCiv]

;’)

[Beowulf9]

Sunken Civ,

You are pretty well versed in most of these matters of history and so I am asking you:)

Strauss makes the claim that the myth was Brutus was not Caesar’s best friend but Decimus was.

However in the 12 Caesar’s, Suetonius writes: “Myth 3: Brutus was the assassins’ ringleader and Caesar’s best buddy.

As far as epic betrayals go, we tend to imagine Brutus in the same league as Judas. In reality, that infamy should be reserved for someone called Decimus.

Caesar trusted Decimus much more than he trusted Brutus — and that made his betrayal more shocking. Misspelled in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar as “Decimus,” Decimus was much more important than most of us realize. “There were three leaders of the assassins’ conspiracy,” Strauss says. “Brutus, Cassius, and Decimus....”

But what I don’t understand is in Suetonius’s The Twelve Caesars (translated by Robert Graves) it says:

“More than sixty conspirators banded together against him, led by Gaius Cassius and Marcus and DECIMUS BRUTUS.”

In other words, Brutus was DECIMUS.? He also claims Caesar spent his last night dining with Decimus but Suetonius claims Caesar spent his last night dining with Marcus Lepidus.

Since Suetonius is used as one of the historical references to Julius Caesar I don’t really understand these discrepancies.

Can you shed light on them?

[Beowulf9]

Made a mistake in this line:
“However in the 12 Caesar’s, Suetonius writes: “Myth 3: Brutus was the assassins’ ringleader and Caesar’s best buddy “ the following sentence beginning with ‘as far as epics go, is also a quote from the Strauss book.

That myth is the one Strauss purports to disprove.

[Pollster1]

A bit of trivia that seems to have dropped out of general knowledge is the meaning of “the Ides”. The Ides of March is March 15, but the Ides of April is not tax day.

The Kalends is the first day of the month: March 1, April 1, May 1, June 1, July 1, August 1, September 1, October 1, November 1, December 1, January 1, February 1.

The Nones is variable: March 7, April 5, May 7, June 5, July 7, August 5, September 5, October 7, November 5, December 5, January 5, February 5.

The Ides is eight days after the Nones: March 15, April 13, May 15, June 13, July 15, August 13, September 13, October 15, November 13, December 13, January 13, February 13.

[minnesota_bound]

#6 It looks like new construction on the right side of the photo.
The Roman Empire is coming back!

[gleeaikin]

Nobody here has made much mention of Cassius, he of the lean and hungry look, and dangerous. Also, the main reason was that “Caesar was ambitious.” The usual take is that he wanted total power in Rome. Then I read a two century old history book which gave me a very different perspective.

Early in Caesar’s career, he was part of the triumvirate, Pompey in the West (Spain/North Africa, Crassus in the East (Syria, Palestine, etc., and Caesar in the center (Rome and Europe). General Crassus was in his 50’s and eager to make a big name for himself before he got too old to lead troops. He decided to go after the Parthians (a BIG mistake, Google more). Cassius was a young officer with his troops. Crassus f***ed up in a number of ways, got himself and his son killed, and Cassius managed to round up about 10,000 troops and retreat to Syria which prevented the Parthians from taking that importance Roman province.

Fast forward 20 years to our assassination story. Caesar, who was now sole ruler of Rome (defeated Pompey, and Crassus dead), decided to enhance his glory by defeating the Parthians and restoring Rome’s honor and avenging that loss and death of Crassus et al. Having been there himself, Cassius knew this was a terrible idea, and very bad for Rome in general. Thus the plot to kill Caesar for too much ambition. Having now spent/wasted? much of our treasure in Afghanistan and Iraq, I think perhaps he was a wise and prescient plotter.

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

You are right, as an aside Crassus was in effect a very wealthy real estate developer and military success was a way to higher office. He simply was in over his head in military matters.

[SunkenCiv]

I think they were cousins, at best, but Decimus was a cousin of Caesar’s, and both of them participated in the conspiracy and the assassination. He was also designated as Caesar’s heir if something happened to Octavian (it sez here).

As things shook out in the months after the assassination, Octavian and Antony were to all appearances opponents. Then Decimus’ army (the murderers will still in charge in the senate; they should have known better than to trust the rest of the senate) which he had been given to chase down Antony and take over his territory, deserted. They deserted to Octavian. Decimus fled, trying to reach Cassius, the better-known Brutus, and that lot, over in Greece, but was hunted down by Gauls in the employ of Antony. Buh-bye.

That particular episode was shown but altered in the HBO series “Rome” — young Octavian was chasing and beating Antony, but the fictional version has Lepidus (the eventual third member of the Second Triumvirate) as the commander that had his army leave for Antony. An event *like* that took place, but the Decimus character was never introduced, probably to simplify the story. The historical Lepidus seems to have had a good head on his shoulders, and yet wasn’t shy about lowering the boom when he had the advantage.

http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/caesarpeople/f/111708Brutus.htm

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/82460/Decimus-Junius-Brutus-Albinus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Vipsanius_Agrippa

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Aemilius_Lepidus_(triumvir)

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Pollster1!

[Beowulf9]

Yet Suetonius names Brutus as Decimus Brutus. Is this a different Brutus, a cousin? Is that what you mean?

[Talisker]

No wonder Rome fell - if you wanted to arrange a battle for tomorrow, you’d have to tell your army to attack three days less than the half-month starting from the second month after the day of the quarter-month changed.

Whereas the barbarians were just told, “we attack at dawn.”

On the other hand, I think I just got an insight as to how our legal system formed, and why it relies on Latin phrases...

[Verginius Rufus]

Suetonius leaves out parts of the names because they were such familiar figures.

He is referring to Gaius Cassius, Marcus Junius Brutus, and Decimus Junius Brutus.

Marcus Brutus (whose father had been killed by Pompey, but he sided with the Pompeians in the Civil War of 49 B.C. anyway) was the son of a Servilia who had a long affair with Caesar, but that started after Marcus was born (so Caesar wasn't his real father).

Marcus and Decimus may have been related but I don't think we know how closely--I would think that if they were close kin some ancient source might have noticed the fact.

[Beowulf9]

Thank you. Interesting to find this out.

I know that these early historians were not as concerned with detailing things as we would think, today.

Hence the need not to rely on one historian for all things. Good information. Appreciate it:)

[SunkenCiv]

“More than sixty conspirators banded together against him, led by Gaius Cassius and Marcus and DECIMUS BRUTUS.”

He means Marcus Brutus and Decimus Brutus, two different people. Sorry, I should have included that link, I must have forgotten it, I had it open and planned to paste it. :’)

IOW, what VR said. :’)

[SunkenCiv]

http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/people_brutus_decimus.html

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/82460/Decimus-Junius-Brutus-Albinus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Triumvirate

images:

http://www.google.com/search?q=decimus+brutus&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&tbm=isch

http://www.google.com/search?q=lepidus&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&tbm=isch