The Assassination of Julius Caesar
The Senate voted him dictator for life. Forty days later, twenty-three senators voted with knives.
- Open
- The Theatre of Pompey, the fifteenth of March
- The Forum, minutes later
- The Forum, the twentieth of March
- Rome, forty three BCE
- Actium, the second of September, thirty one BCE
- Five accounts
- Republican: The Last Defenders of Libertas
- Caesarian: The Reformer and His Oligarchs
- Roman Plebeian: The People's Grief
- Provincial: The Conquered Peoples
- Shakespeare vs. History: The Play That Shaped Political Imagination
- The turn
- Close
Open
Say the assassination of Julius Caesar and one line comes to mind before any fact does. "Et tu, Brute." You too, Brutus.
Caesar never said that. Suetonius, writing more than a century later, records that he made no reply at all, just a groan, and that only "certain writers" claim he spoke two Greek words to Brutus: "You too, child."
Forty days before the killing, the Senate had voted Caesar dictator for life. Forty days later, twenty three senators voted with knives.
The killing did not save the Republic they said they were saving. It ended it.
Scene 1The Theatre of Pompey, the fifteenth of March
Caesar takes his seat. Senator Tillius Cimber approaches with a petition, and Caesar waves him off.
Cimber grabs Caesar's toga and pulls it off his shoulder. That is the signal.
Publius Servilius Casca strikes first, stabbing Caesar in the neck from behind. Caesar seizes Casca's arm and stabs him back with his stylus.
Then the others close in: Gaius Cassius Longinus, Decimus Brutus, Marcus Brutus, and at least nineteen more.
Caesar falls at the base of a statue of Pompey, the man he had defeated in a civil war four years earlier, in a building that carries Pompey's name.
Suetonius wrote this more than a century and a half after the killing, compiling accounts from people who were not there either.
· The Twelve Caesars, Life of Julius Caesar, Chapter 82 · c. 121 CE
“He was stabbed with twenty-three wounds. He said nothing, but merely groaned at the first blow, though certain writers have related that when Marcus Brutus rushed at him, he said in Greek, "You too, child?"”
Twenty three senators stabbed Caesar. The physician who examined the body afterward found that only one of those wounds, the second one, actually killed him.
Every other blow was a man proving he had taken part.

Scene 2The Forum, minutes later
The killers call themselves the Liberatores, the liberators, and they expect the Senate to rally to the Republic they believe they have just saved.
Instead, the Senate flees. The conspirators march to the Capitol carrying their bloody daggers and find the Forum empty.
Marcus Brutus is the conspiracy's moral figurehead, a descendant of the Lucius Junius Brutus who overthrew Rome's last king five hundred nine years before. Gaius Cassius Longinus is the organizer, a veteran commander who resents Caesar's monopoly on power and patronage.
Cassius Dio was writing two hundred seventy years later, about men Caesar had personally pardoned turning on him. He gives Caesar this line as a paraphrase, attributed to him rather than transcribed from anyone who heard him say it.
· Roman History, Book 44, paraphrased · c. 229 CE
“I have killed many a man in many lands, as a general does on the battlefield, but I have never before spared an enemy and then been betrayed by the one I spared.”
Twenty three of the men who killed Caesar had been pardoned by him. Sulla, the dictator before him, had simply killed nine thousand men rather than take that risk.
Caesar chose mercy. Mercy is what killed him.

Scene 3The Forum, the twentieth of March
Mark Antony, Caesar's co consul, reads the dictator's will aloud at the funeral. Caesar has left his gardens across the Tiber to the people of Rome, and seventy five denarii, about three months' wages for a laborer, to every citizen.
Antony displays Caesar's toga: slashed, blood soaked, pierced with twenty three rents.
Antony did speak that day. Plutarch says so but records no text of the speech at all. A century later, Appian gives Antony this line, though no source any closer to the day confirms he actually said it.
· Civil Wars · second century CE
“Here was a man. When comes such another?”
The crowd already has the will; it needs no convincing. They burn the body on a pyre in the Forum itself, then grab burning branches and run for the houses of Brutus and Cassius.
A poet named Helvius Cinna, no relation to the conspirator Cornelius Cinna, is caught by the mob anyway. They kill him and carry his head through the streets on a spear.

Scene 4Rome, forty three BCE
Caesar's eighteen year old grandnephew and heir, Gaius Octavius, arrives from Apollonia in April to claim his inheritance.
By November, Octavian, Antony, and Lepidus form the Second Triumvirate and proscribe three hundred senators and two thousand equestrians.
Cicero, who had publicly celebrated the killing, is put to death by Antony's soldiers on the seventh of December, forty three BCE. His head and hands are nailed to the Rostra, where he had denounced Antony.
Brutus and Cassius raise armies in the east and are defeated at Philippi in October, forty two BCE. Cassius dies by suicide after the first engagement, Brutus after the second.
Scene 5Actium, the second of September, thirty one BCE
Octavian and Antony turn on each other next. Octavian destroys Antony's fleet at Actium. Antony and Cleopatra flee to Alexandria, where both die by suicide.
In twenty seven BCE, the Senate grants Octavian the title Augustus. He will rule for forty one years. The Republic the Liberatores killed a dictator to save no longer exists.

Five accounts
Five accounts survive the killing of Julius Caesar, and one of them is not about Rome at all. It is about a play written sixteen centuries later that replaced the history it was based on.
victorRepublican: The Last Defenders of Libertas
Republican: The Last Defenders of Libertas
Brutus minted coins after the killing. His own portrait on one side. On the other, a cap of freedom between two daggers, and beneath it, the words EID MAR: the Ides of March.
Rome had expelled its last king five hundred nine years earlier and built a Republic on one principle: no one person holds permanent, unchecked power, not even for six months at a time.
Caesar broke that. He held the consulship continuously from forty eight BCE, and in February of forty four accepted the title dictator perpetuo, dictator for life, then put his own face on coins while he was still alive.
Cicero called killing a tyrant civic duty, not murder. Brutus, in a letter to Cicero the following year, put the case in his own words.
“What we did was done not out of ambition, but out of a love for the freedom of the Republic.”
The plan failed. Caesar had already made the Republic's old constraints impossible to restore.
Read the full account
Narrative
Brutus minted coins in the months after the assassination. On the obverse: his own portrait. On the reverse: a pileus (the cap of freedom given to emancipated slaves) flanked by two daggers, and below it the legend EID MAR. The Ides of March. It was the first time a living Roman had put his face on a coin, an irony Brutus either did not notice or did not care about.
The Republican case for tyrannicide rested on five centuries of constitutional precedent. Rome had expelled its last king, Tarquinius Superbus, in 509 BCE. Lucius Junius Brutus, claimed as Marcus Brutus's ancestor, had led the revolt and established the Republic's founding principle: no individual should hold permanent, unchecked power. The consulship was shared by two men, elected annually, each with veto power over the other. The dictatorship was a temporary emergency appointment, limited by custom to six months. Caesar broke every constraint. He held the consulship continuously from 48 BCE, combined it with the tribunician power, and in February 44 BCE accepted the title dictator perpetuo, dictator in perpetuity. He appointed senators directly instead of allowing election. He controlled the treasury. He placed his image on coinage while alive, a prerogative previously reserved for gods and dead men.
Cicero, who was not part of the conspiracy but celebrated it publicly, articulated the philosophical framework in De Officiis, written in the months after the assassination. He argued that a tyrant (one who seizes permanent power over a free people) forfeits his membership in the political community. Killing a tyrant was not murder but civic duty, equivalent to amputating a diseased limb. Cicero drew on Greek precedent: the Athenian tyrannicides Harmodius and Aristogeiton, celebrated with public statues for killing the tyrant Hipparchus in 514 BCE.
The Liberatores' military failure does not refute their political diagnosis. Caesar had already concentrated power to a degree incompatible with republican governance. He had conducted a census of the plebs and enrolled clients directly. He had settled 80,000 veterans on colonial land, creating a private army of obligation. He had extended citizenship to Cisalpine Gaul, adding millions of new citizens who owed their status to him personally, not to the Senate. The conspirators understood (correctly, as events proved) that these structural changes were irreversible. Their failure was strategic, not moral: they killed Caesar but had no plan for the day after. Brutus believed the Republic would reassert itself spontaneously once the tyrant was removed. It did not. But the principle, that concentrated power corrupts and must be resisted, survived the Republic and animated revolutionary thought from Machiavelli to Montesquieu to the American founders.
Arguments
- Caesar systematically dismantled every constitutional constraint on personal power over four years
- Tyrannicide was sanctioned by five centuries of Roman precedent and Greek political philosophy
- Caesar's title of dictator perpetuo was a formal end to the Republic's foundational principle of limited, temporary authority
- The conspirators' failure was strategic (no plan for aftermath), not moral (the diagnosis of tyranny was correct)
Sources
- De Officiis (On Duties)
- The Last Generation of the Roman Republic
- The Assassination of Julius Caesar: A People's History of Ancient Rome
victorCaesarian: The Reformer and His Oligarchs
Caesarian: The Reformer and His Oligarchs
A century before Caesar crossed the Rubicon, the Republic was already killing itself. Sulla marched on Rome twice and proscribed thousands. Catiline attempted a coup in sixty three BCE.
Caesar redistributed land to eighty thousand veterans and urban poor who had gone landless for decades while a few hundred senatorial families held vast estates. He fixed a calendar that had drifted ninety days out of alignment with the sun, and the fix stayed in use for sixteen hundred years.
The Liberatores were defending a Senate of six hundred men from a handful of families, not the Roman people. Brutus himself lent money to Salamis in Cyprus at forty eight percent interest and sent Roman soldiers to collect it.
Caesar pardoned Brutus, Cassius, and Decimus Brutus after the civil war; Sulla, before him, had simply killed nine thousand men rather than take that risk.
“Let this be our new method of conquering: to fortify ourselves with mercy and generosity.”
Twenty three of the men who stabbed him had been pardoned by that policy. The lesson every Roman leader after him drew was the opposite one.
Read the full account
Narrative
By the time Caesar crossed the Rubicon on January 10, 49 BCE, the Roman Republic had been failing for a century. Tiberius Gracchus had been beaten to death by senators on the Capitol in 133 BCE for proposing land reform. His brother Gaius was killed in 121 BCE for the same cause. Sulla had marched on Rome twice, proscribed thousands, and ruled as dictator before voluntarily resigning, proving that the republican system could be overridden by any general with loyal legions. Marius before him had held seven consulships and massacred his enemies. Catiline had attempted a coup in 63 BCE. Pompey had held extraordinary commands that bypassed the Senate's authority. The Republic that the Liberatores claimed to defend had been an oligarchic cartel, not a democracy, and it had been hemorrhaging legitimacy for generations.
Caesar's reforms addressed structural failures the Senate had refused to touch. He redistributed land to 80,000 veterans and urban poor, families who had been landless for decades while a few hundred senatorial families controlled vast estates worked by slave labor. He extended citizenship to Cisalpine Gaul and planned further extensions to Hispania and parts of Africa, incorporating provincial populations into the political body instead of treating them as subjects. He reformed the calendar. The old republican calendar had drifted 90 days out of alignment with the solar year because the pontifex maximus, a political appointee, had manipulated intercalary months for electoral advantage. The Julian calendar, introduced January 1, 45 BCE, remained in use for 1,600 years.
The Liberatores were not defenders of the people. They were defenders of the Senate, a body of 600 men drawn from a handful of aristocratic families who had monopolized land, military commands, and provincial governorships for centuries. Brutus himself was a notorious usurer who lent money to the city of Salamis in Cyprus at 48% annual interest and used Roman soldiers to collect; Cicero found this scandalous and documented it in his letters (Ad Atticum 5.21). Cassius had extorted 500 talents from the people of Judaea as governor of Syria. The Liberatores' "liberty" was the liberty of the senatorial class to continue governing without accountability to the urban plebs, the Italian allies, or the provincial subjects who constituted the vast majority of Rome's population.
Caesar's clementia (his policy of pardoning defeated enemies) was both genuine and strategic. He pardoned Brutus after Pharsalus. He pardoned Cassius. He pardoned Decimus Brutus, who had commanded his fleet in Gaul. He restored Marcellus, who had publicly advocated stripping Caesar of his command. The policy was unprecedented: Sulla had killed 9,000. Marius had killed more. Caesar's mercy was turned against him. Twenty-three of the men who stabbed him had been personally pardoned by him. The message the assassination sent to every future Roman leader was clear: mercy is fatal. Augustus learned the lesson. He never made his great-uncle's mistake.
Arguments
- The Republic had been failing for a century; political violence, proscriptions, and military coups preceded Caesar by generations
- Caesar's reforms (land redistribution, citizenship expansion, calendar reform) addressed genuine structural injustices
- The Liberatores defended senatorial oligarchy, not popular liberty. Brutus and Cassius were usurers and extortionists
- Caesar's clemency toward his assassins proved that mercy without structural change was politically suicidal
Sources
- Caesar — Life of a Colossus
- The Storm Before the Storm: The Beginning of the End of the Roman Republic
- Commentarii de Bello Civili (On the Civil War)
bystanderRoman Plebeian: The People's Grief
Roman Plebeian: The People's Grief
The crowd at the funeral did not need a speech to convince them. They had already heard the will: gardens across the Tiber turned into a public park, and cash for every citizen.
Rome's urban poor, something like seven hundred fifty thousand people, had a transactional relationship with Caesar that was entirely real. His grain dole fed as many as three hundred twenty thousand citizens.
When the Senate talked about liberty, the plebs heard a different word. Senatorial liberty meant six hundred families keeping the wealth of an empire to themselves.
The record does not give this crowd a name. Appian preserves one line from the plebeian reaction at the funeral, from a Roman citizen he never identifies.
“They killed him who was voted sacred and inviolable, and the very man whom they called Father of his Country.”
Two years later the Senate declared Caesar a god. The temple built where the plebs had burned his body stood for centuries after they lit that fire.
Read the full account
Narrative
The mob at Caesar's funeral did not need Antony's speech. They had read the will. Caesar left his private gardens across the Tiber (the Horti Caesaris) to the people of Rome as a public park. He bequeathed 75 denarii to every male citizen. Seventy-five denarii was roughly three months' wages for a laborer. The crowd that gathered in the Forum on March 20 had come to collect from a patron, and they found him dead on a bier, his toga slashed and stained, his body displayed by arrangement of Antony, who understood that the visible evidence of violence would do more than rhetoric.
Suetonius records that after Antony's speech, the crowd "heaped together dry branches, benches, and whatever else they could lay hands on" and built a pyre in the Forum itself, burning the body on the spot. They then seized brands from the fire and ran to the houses of Brutus and Cassius. The poet Helvius Cinna, who had no connection to the conspirator Cornelius Cinna, was caught by the mob, and when he protested his identity, they killed him anyway, as Plutarch reports, "out of sheer rage." The violence was spontaneous and indiscriminate. It expressed a simple equation: Caesar had given them land, grain, spectacles, and status. The Senate had taken him away.
The urban plebs of Rome (perhaps 750,000 people in 44 BCE) had a transactional relationship with power that historians have often dismissed as clientelism or mob politics. But the transactions were real. Caesar's grain dole fed 320,000 citizens; he reduced the rolls from 320,000 to 150,000 by resettling 80,000 in colonies, but those who remained depended on the subsidy. His building program (the Forum Julium, the Basilica Julia, planned expansion of the city) employed thousands. His veterans received land allotments in Italy, Gaul, Africa, and Spain. When the Liberatores proclaimed "liberty," the plebs heard a different word: austerity. The Senate had blocked land reform for a century. Senatorial "liberty" meant the freedom of 600 families to monopolize the wealth of an empire. Caesar's dictatorship meant distributions.
The deification of Caesar (declared divus Julius by the Senate in 42 BCE, partly under Octavian's pressure) formalized what the funeral pyre had expressed. A comet appeared during the funeral games in July 44 BCE; Octavian declared it Caesar's soul ascending to heaven. The Temple of the Deified Julius was built on the spot where the body had been burned. Octavian titled himself divi filius, son of the divine. The plebs, who had built the pyre from benches and branches, had created the kindling for a monarchy.
Arguments
- Caesar's will and personal generosity created a bond with the urban poor that the Senate could not match
- The plebeian riot at Caesar's funeral was a rational response to the loss of a patron who provided land, grain, and employment
- Senatorial "liberty" meant oligarchic privilege; Caesar's "tyranny" meant redistribution
- The spontaneous deification at the funeral pyre laid the groundwork for the imperial cult
Sources
- The Twelve Caesars
- Parallel Lives: Life of Caesar and Life of Brutus
- The Crowd in Rome in the Late Republic
vanquishedProvincial: The Conquered Peoples
Provincial: The Conquered Peoples
Caesar kept his own count. At Avaricum in fifty two BCE, his legions killed the entire population of the town, forty thousand men, women, and children, by his own tally. Eight hundred survived.
Plutarch put Caesar's nine year campaign in Gaul at one million dead and another million enslaved. Even conservative modern estimates place the dead at several hundred thousand, in a population of five to seven million.
This was not defense. Caesar's opening pretext, a tribe moving within Gaul in fifty eight BCE, was never authorized by the Senate.
“Of all the Gauls, the Belgae are the bravest, because they are farthest from the civilization and refinement of the Province.”
The gold looted from Gaul was so abundant that its price in Rome dropped twenty five percent. That wealth paid for the civil war and the seventy five denarii in Caesar's will. It had been extracted from Gallic skulls.
Caesar's death changed nothing for the provinces. Rome had extracted tribute under the Republic too, and it kept doing that after him.
Read the full account
Narrative
Caesar's own accounting of the Gallic Wars, written in the third person with the detachment of a field report, records the numbers. At Avaricum in 52 BCE, his legions killed the entire population of the town, 40,000 men, women, and children, by Caesar's count. Only 800 survived. At Uxellodunum, the last Gallic holdout, he ordered the hands of every defender cut off and the mutilated men released to wander as living warnings. Plutarch estimated that Caesar's nine-year campaign in Gaul killed one million people and enslaved another million. These numbers may be inflated (they come from hostile or propagandistic sources), but even conservative modern estimates place the dead at several hundred thousand in a population of perhaps 5 to 7 million.
The Gallic Wars were not a defensive campaign. Caesar was a provincial governor who invaded independent territories to build personal glory, wealth, and a loyal army large enough to challenge the Senate. The Helvetii migration of 58 BCE (his initial pretext) involved a tribe moving within Gaul, not threatening Rome. Caesar's intervention was unauthorized by the Senate and legally dubious even by Roman standards. The profits were staggering: the gold he looted from Gaul was so abundant that the price of gold in Rome dropped by 25% when it flooded the market. The wealth funded the civil war, the grain distributions, the building programs, and the bequests in his will. The 75 denarii left to each Roman citizen had been extracted from Gallic skulls.
For the provinces more broadly, Caesar's death changed little. The Roman system extracted tribute, requisitioned grain, and imposed legal jurisdiction regardless of who ruled in Rome. Provincial governors under the Republic had been notoriously rapacious. Cicero's prosecution of Verres in 70 BCE documented the systematic plunder of Sicily. Caesar's extension of citizenship to Cisalpine Gaul and his plans for wider enfranchisement were genuine reforms, but they served his political needs: new citizens meant new clients who owed their status to Caesar, not the Senate. The citizenship grants died with him. Augustus later extended citizenship selectively, always as a tool of control.
Cleopatra's position illustrates the provincial predicament. She allied with Caesar, bore his son (Caesarion), and depended on Roman military power to maintain her throne against her own brother's faction. Caesar's death left her exposed. She realigned with Antony. When Antony fell, she tried to negotiate with Octavian. Failing, she died. Octavian annexed Egypt as a personal possession, not a senatorial province but the emperor's private estate, its grain reserves funding the military that kept him in power. For conquered peoples, the debate between "republic" and "tyranny" was a dispute among their masters about how to divide the spoils.
Arguments
- Caesar's Gallic Wars killed and enslaved millions to build the personal army and fortune that fueled his political rise
- The wealth that funded Caesar's generosity to Roman citizens was extracted through conquest and plunder
- Citizenship extension was a tool of political clientage, not a principled expansion of rights
- For conquered peoples, the Republic-vs-Empire debate was irrelevant; both systems extracted tribute and imposed subjection
Sources
- Commentarii de Bello Gallico (The Gallic Wars)
- The Enemy of Rome: Culture and Identity in Roman Gaul
- Cleopatra: A Life
academicShakespeare vs. History: The Play That Shaped Political Imagination
Shakespeare vs. History: The Play That Shaped Political Imagination
William Shakespeare wrote Julius Caesar in fifteen ninety nine, drawing on Thomas North's translation of Plutarch, and staged it at the Globe while an aging, unmarried Elizabeth the First presided over an anxious succession crisis.
In Plutarch, Brutus is one figure among many conspirators. Shakespeare makes him the tragic hero, tortured by conscience, killing from principle rather than ambition. This is a line the playwright gives his own invented Brutus, addressing the plebeians right after the killing, and no Roman source records the historical Brutus saying anything like it.
“Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more.”
Antony's whole funeral speech in the play, "Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears," is Shakespeare's invention too.
"Et tu, Brute" is not historical either. It compresses what Suetonius says may have been two words in Greek into three words of Latin, and the compression won. The play shaped the French Revolution's own imagery and the American founders' idea of themselves.
Read the full account
Narrative
Shakespeare wrote Julius Caesar in 1599, drawing primarily from Thomas North's 1579 English translation of Plutarch's Parallel Lives. The play premiered at the Globe Theatre while Elizabeth I (old, unmarried, without an heir) presided over an anxious succession crisis. The Essex Rebellion was two years away. The question of what happens when supreme power meets no legitimate successor was not academic in London. Shakespeare gave the audience ancient Rome and let them see England.
The play's central distortion is the elevation of Brutus. In Plutarch, Brutus is one figure among many; in Shakespeare, he becomes the tragic hero, "the noblest Roman of them all," as Antony eulogizes him in Act V. Shakespeare's Brutus is a philosopher tortured by conscience, a man who kills not from ambition but from principle. The historical Brutus was a moneylender who charged 48% interest and used soldiers to collect debts in Cyprus. Shakespeare omits this entirely. The play creates a Brutus who is morally serious, politically naive, and ultimately destroyed by his own idealism, a template that has shaped how Western culture understands the dilemma of political violence ever since.
Antony's funeral oration ("Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears") is Shakespeare's invention. Plutarch records that Antony spoke and displayed Caesar's toga but provides no text. Shakespeare created the speech as a masterclass in demagogic persuasion: Antony praises the conspirators as "honourable men" while systematically undermining every claim they made. The speech has been studied by rhetoricians, politicians, and propagandists for four centuries. It taught generations that democratic assemblies could be manipulated by a skilled speaker who appeared to praise what he destroyed.
"Et tu, Brute?" (the play's most famous line) is not historical. Suetonius records that Caesar said nothing, or possibly gasped in Greek, "Kai su, teknon?" ("You too, child?"), a phrase whose meaning scholars still debate. Shakespeare compressed it into three Latin words that became the Western shorthand for intimate betrayal. The phrase entered law, literature, and common speech. It appears in courtroom arguments, political cartoons, and editorial pages whenever an ally turns. Shakespeare did not record history. He replaced it. For most of the world, the assassination of Caesar is not what Plutarch or Suetonius described. It is what Shakespeare staged. The play is now more historically consequential than the event: it shaped the French Revolution's iconography (Charlotte Corday compared herself to Brutus), the American founders' self-image (the Federalist Papers invoke Brutus as a cautionary figure), and every subsequent debate about whether violence can serve liberty.
Arguments
- Shakespeare's Julius Caesar (1599) replaced the historical record as the primary Western source for understanding the assassination
- The play elevated Brutus from a historical usurer and political actor to a tragic philosophical hero, reshaping the tyrannicide debate
- Antony's funeral speech (Shakespeare's invention) became the definitive case study in democratic manipulation through rhetoric
- The play's influence on the French Revolution, American founding, and political assassinations makes it historically consequential in its own right
Sources
- Parallel Lives: Life of Caesar and Life of Brutus
- Shakespeare's Roman Plays and Their Background
- Julius Caesar (play)
The turn
Each account leaves out exactly what would complicate it.
Republican: The Last Defenders of Libertas
The Republican case explains the constitutional violation and says far less about the land Caesar redistributed or the clemency he showed the very men who killed him.
From the record
Caesar's popular reforms (land redistribution, calendar reform, citizenship expansion)The Republic's own dysfunction (corruption, electoral violence, senatorial gridlock for decades before Caesar)Caesar's clemency toward defeated enemies, including many of his assassinsThe conspirators' own aristocratic self-interest in preserving senatorial privilegeCaesarian: The Reformer and His Oligarchs
The Caesarian case counts a century of Republican dysfunction and says almost nothing about the million dead and million enslaved in Gaul that funded the reforms it praises.
From the record
Caesar's genocide in Gaul (his own count: 1 million killed, 1 million enslaved)Concentration of power in a single individual as a genuine constitutional crisisCaesar's manipulation of elections, census, and Senate compositionThe Republic's genuine achievements in limited government and rule of lawRoman Plebeian: The People's Grief
The plebeian account counts the grain and the land and says nothing about the power that came with them.
From the record
Constitutional principles at stake in the assassinationCaesar's authoritarian methods of concentrating powerLong-term consequences of replacing republican governance with personal ruleManipulation of popular sentiment by Antony and later OctavianProvincial: The Conquered Peoples
The provincial account, which names the dead in Gaul in the most detail, still passes over the reforms Caesar extended to conquered peoples in his own lifetime.
From the record
Internal Roman constitutional debates about legitimate authorityCaesar's genuine administrative reforms (calendar, urban planning, legal standardization)Integration of provincial elites into Roman governance over subsequent centuriesEconomic development and infrastructure (roads, aqueducts) that accompanied Roman ruleShakespeare vs. History: The Play That Shaped Political Imagination
And the academic account, tracing exactly how a play replaced a history, spends its four centuries on Shakespeare's Rome and none on Cleopatra's Egypt, waiting outside the frame entirely.
From the record
The actual historical complexity of Roman politics and class dynamicsCaesar's military conquests and their human costThe economic and social conditions of the late RepublicNon-Western perspectives on and parallels to the assassination
Close
In November eighteen sixty four, the three Booth brothers performed Julius Caesar together on a New York stage.
Five months later, one of them, John Wilkes Booth, assassinated Abraham Lincoln, shouting "Sic semper tyrannis."
The record
By the numbers
- Span
- 13 yrs44-31 BCE
- Killed
- 1Caesar; the ensuing civil wars killed an estimated…
- Displaced
- 55-70MThe entire Roman Republic, people across the…
- Place
- Roman Republic
Key figures
- Gaius Julius CaesarDictator of Rome, conqueror of Gaul, victor of the civil war against Pompey-100 to -44
- Marcus Junius BrutusSenator, praetor, leader of the Liberatores conspiracy-85 to -42
- Gaius Cassius LonginusSenator, chief organizer of the assassination conspiracy-86 to -42
- Mark Antony (Marcus Antonius)Caesar's co-consul, Triumvir, delivered the funeral oration-83 to -30
- Octavian (Augustus)Caesar's adopted heir, first Roman Emperor-63 to 14
- Marcus Tullius CiceroSenator, orator, defender of the Republic, proscribed and killed by the Triumvirate-106 to -43
- Cleopatra VIIQueen of Egypt, ally and lover of Caesar and later Antony-69 to -30
Primary sources
· The Twelve Caesars, Life of Julius Caesar, Chapter 82 · c. 121 CE
“He was stabbed with twenty-three wounds. He said nothing, but merely groaned at the first blow, though certain writers have related that when Marcus Brutus rushed at him, he said in Greek, "You too, child?"”
· Parallel Lives: Life of Brutus · c. 100 CE
“Of all the public acts of Brutus, there was none that drew down upon him more envy than his killing of Caesar.”
· Paraphrased in Cassius Dio, Roman History, Book 44 · c. 229 CE
“I have killed many a man in many lands, as a general does on the battlefield, but I have never before spared an enemy and then been betrayed by the one I spared.”
Threads
- Fall of the Western Roman EmpireThe last emperor was sixteen. The general who deposed him didn’t kill him. He gave him a pension and mailed the crown to Constantinople.
- The French RevolutionA Parisian laborer spent 88% of his wages on bread. On July 14, the crowd took 30,000 muskets. The Bastille fell by dinner.
- The Peloponnesian WarAthens told the island of Melos: submit or die. Melos chose neutrality. Athens killed every man and enslaved the women and children.