Support NeoGAF

[EviLore]

How do you view the assassination of Gaius Julius Caesar by Marcus Junius Brutus? Was it justified response to tyranny, or a profound betrayal of trust and love? Something in between?

We of course have the benefit of hindsight, and know that the assassination didn't accomplish what the conspirators had hoped. It led to Augustus consolidating power and becoming emperor. But Brutus didn't know that at the time, and believed he was doing the right thing to preserve the Republic against tyranny, or whatever his inner motives were.

We also know that Caesar spared Brutus, raised him up at every opportunity, intended for Brutus to succeed him, and it's very plausible that Brutus was his illegitimate son, which Caesar believed plausible too.


A summary of the timeline:

~~~~~~

85 BCE - Marcus Junius Brutus is born. Although there is uncertainty about his paternity, it is often claimed that Julius Caesar might have been his real father, as Caesar had a relationship with Brutus' mother, Servilia.

78 BCE - Caesar begins his political career following the death of the dictator Sulla.

58-50 BCE - Caesar conducts the Gallic Wars, expanding his military power and political influence, while Brutus is being educated and starting his own political career.

49 BCE - Caesar crosses the Rubicon, igniting the Great Roman Civil War between him and Pompey the Great. Initially, Brutus aligns with Pompey, who is also his mother's brother-in-law.

48 BCE - After the Battle of Pharsalus, Caesar defeats Pompey. Despite Brutus fighting on Pompey’s side, Caesar pardons him, and this act is seen as the beginning of their closer personal relationship. Caesar is said to have trusted Brutus and valued his abilities.

46 BCE - Caesar appoints Brutus as the governor of Cisalpine Gaul. This is a sign of trust and a politically prestigious position.

45 BCE - Caesar defeats the remaining opposition in the Battle of Munda, and upon his return to Rome, he is appointed dictator perpetuo (dictator in perpetuity).

44 BCE, February - Caesar is named dictator for life, causing significant concern among the senators, who fear his power is becoming too great and that he may establish a monarchy.

44 BCE, March 15 (The Ides of March) - Julius Caesar is assassinated by a group of senators, including Brutus. The act is done under the banner of 'liberating' the Republic from a potential monarch and restoring traditional Roman values and institutions.

44 BCE, March-April - The immediate aftermath of the assassination is chaotic. Brutus and his fellow conspirators initially manage to stay in the city, thinking they will be hailed as liberators. However, the public reaction is mixed, and the political situation is unstable.

44 BCE, April - Marc Antony, Caesar's ally, delivers a stirring eulogy at Caesar's funeral, turning public opinion against the assassins. Brutus and the other conspirators are forced to flee Rome due to rising tensions and threats of violence against them.

44-43 BCE - Brutus and Cassius leave Italy and take control of the eastern provinces. During this time, they gather their forces for the inevitable conflict against Caesar's supporters, mainly Marc Antony and Octavian (the future Emperor Augustus), who have formed the Second Triumvirate along with Lepidus.

42 BCE, October - The forces of the Second Triumvirate and the armies of Brutus and Cassius meet in two engagements known collectively as the Battle of Philippi in Macedonia. The first battle is indecisive, but in the second battle, the Triumvirs' forces decisively defeat the Republican armies.

42 BCE, October 23 - Following the loss at the second battle of Philippi, Brutus commits suicide. His death is seen as the symbolic end of the Republic, as it extinguished the hopes of those wishing to restore the old ways of Roman governance without a dictator or emperor.

After Brutus' death, the Republic continued in form for several decades, but the real power increasingly lay with the emperors, starting with Octavian, who became Augustus, the first Roman Emperor, marking the end of the Roman Republic and the beginning of the Roman Empire.

~~~~~

No direct writing by Brutus survives, but Plutarch recorded a history of Brutus in his The Parallel Lives. I'll provide some relevant excerpts below.

Plutarch • Life of Brutus

An English translation. All of Plutarch's Lives are onsite; in turn part of a very large site on classical Antiquity.

penelope.uchicago.edu

5. It is said, moreover, that Caesar also was concerned for his safety, and ordered his officers not to kill Brutus in the battle, but to spare him, and take him prisoner if he gave himself up voluntarily, and if he persisted in fighting against capture, to let him alone and do him no violence; and that Caesar did this out of regard for Servilia, the mother of Brutus. 2 For while he was still a young man, as it seems, Caesar had been intimate with Servilia, who was madly in love with him, and he had some grounds for believing that Brutus, who was born at about the time when her passion was in full blaze, was his own son. 3 It is said also that when the great conspiracy of Catiline, which came near overthrowing the city, had come to the ears of the senate, Cato and Caesar, who were of different opinions about the matter, were standing side by side, and just then a little note was handed to Caesar from outside, which he read quietly. But Cato cried out that Caesar was outrageously receiving letters of instruction from the enemy. 4 At this, a great tumult arose, and Caesar p137 gave the missive, just as it was, to Cato. Cato found, when he read it, that it was a wanton bit of writing from his sister Servilia, and throwing it to Caesar with the words "Take it, thou sot," turned again to the business under discussion.6 So notorious was Servilia's passion for Caesar.

6. After the defeat at Pharsalus, when Pompey had made his escape to the sea and his camp was besieged, Brutus went out unnoticed by a gate leading to a place that was marshy and full of water and reeds, and made his way safely by night to Larissa. 2 From thence he wrote to Caesar, who was delighted at his safe escape, and bade him come to him, and not only pardoned him, but actually made him a highly honoured companion. 3 Now, since no one could tell whither Pompey was fleeing, and all were in great perplexity, Caesar took a long walk with Brutus alone, and sounded him on the subject. 4 Certain considerations advanced by Brutus made his opinion concerning Pompey's flight seem the best, and Caesar therefore renounced all other courses and hastened towards Egypt. 5 But as for Pompey, he put in at Egypt, as Brutus conjectured, and there met his doom; as for Caesar, however, Brutus tried to soften him towards Cassius also. 6 He also served as advocate for the king of Africa,7 and though he lost the case, owing to the magnitude of the accusations against his client, still, by supplications and entreaties in his behalf he saved much of his kingdom for him. 7 And it is said that Caesar, when he p139 first heard Brutus speak in public, said to his friends: "I know not what this young man wants, but all that he wants he wants very much."8 8 For the weight of his character, and the fact that no one found it easy to make him listen to appeals for favour, but that he accomplished his ends by reasoning and the adoption of noble principles, made his efforts, whithersoever directed, powerful and efficacious. 9 No flattery could induce him to grant an unjust petition, and that inability to withstand shameless importunity, which some call timidity,a he regarded as most disgraceful in a great man, and he was wont to say that those who were unable to refuse anything, in his opinion, must have been corrupted in their youth.

8 1 However, even Caesar was not wholly without suspicion, nor free from the effects of accusations against Brutus, but, while he feared his high spirit, his great repute, and his friends, he had faith in his character. 2 Once, when he was told that Antony and Dolabella were plotting revolution, he said it p143 was not the fat and long-haired fellows that troubled him, but those pale and lean ones;10 meaning Brutus and Cassius. 3 And again, when certain ones were accusing Brutus to him, and urging him to be on his guard against him, he laid his hand upon his breast and said: "What? Think ye not that Brutus can wait for this poor flesh?" implying that no one besides Brutus was fit to succeed him in such great power. 4 And verily it appears that Brutus might have been first in the city with none to dispute him, could he have endured for a little while to be second to Caesar, suffering his power to wane and the fame of his successes to wither. 5 But Cassius, a man of violent temper, and rather a hater of Caesar on his own private account than a hater of tyranny on public grounds, fired him up and urged him on. 6 Brutus, it is said, objected to the rule, but Cassius hated the ruler, and among other charges which he brought against him was that of taking away some lions which Cassius had provided when he was about to be aedile; 7 the beasts had been left at Megara, and when the city was taken by Calenus,11 Caesar appropriated them. And the beasts are said to have brought great calamity upon the Megarians. For these, just as their city was captured, drew back the bolts and loosened the fetters that confined the animals, in order that they might obstruct the oncoming foe, but they rushed among the unarmed citizens themselves and preyed upon them as they ran hither and thither, so that even to the enemy the sight was a pitiful one.

10 1 Moreover, when Cassius sought to induce his p147 friends to conspire against Caesar, they all agreed to do so if Brutus took the lead, arguing that the undertaking demanded, not violence nor daring, but the reputation of a man like him, who should consecrate the victim, as it were, and ensure by the mere fact of his participation the justice of the sacrifice; 2 otherwise they would be more timid in doing the deed and more suspected after they had done it, since men would say that Brutus would not have declined the task if the purpose of it had been honourable. 3 After reflecting on this, Cassius made Brutus his first visit since the quarrel above mentioned,13 and when they were again on a friendly footing, asked him whether he had made up his mind to attend the meeting of the senate on the Calends of March; for it had come to his ears, he said, that Caesar's friends would then move to have him made king. 4 When Brutus answered that he should not attend, "What, then," said Cassius, "if we should be summoned?" "It would at once be my duty," said Brutus, "not to hold my peace, but to defend my country and die in behalf of liberty." 5 Then Cassius, elated, said: "But what Roman will consent to have thee die in such defence? 6 Dost thou not know thyself, Brutus? Or dost thou think that thy tribunal was covered with inscriptions by weavers and hucksters, and not by the foremost and most influential citizens? From their other praetors they demand gifts and spectacles and gladiatorial combats; but from thee, as a debt thou owest to thy lineage, the abolition of the tyranny; and they are ready and willing to suffer anything in thy behalf, if thou showest thyself to be what they expect p149 and demand." 7 After this, he embraced Brutus and kissed him, and thus reconciled they betook themselves to their friends.

So, according to Plutarch, the conspirators felt they needed Brutus as the figurehead of the assassination in order to legitimize it. After all, if the man Caesar trusted and loved the most had branded him a tyrant and killed him for the sake of justice, then it must have been earned.

Fast forwarding to the day of the assassination:

17 1 When the senate had preceded Caesar into the session-room, the rest of the conspirators stationed themselves about Caesar's chair, as if they intended to have some conference with him, 2 and Cassius is said to have turned his face towards the statue of Pompey and to have invoked it, as if it had understanding; p163 but Trebonius drew Antony into conversation at the door and kept him outside.21 3 As Caesar entered, the senate rose in his honour, but as soon as he was seated the conspirators surrounded him in a body, putting forward Tulliusº Cimber of their number with a plea in behalf of his brother, who was in exile. The others all joined in his plea, and clasping Caesar's hands, kissed his breast and his head. 4 At first, Caesar merely rejected their pleas, and then, when they would not desist, tried to free himself from them by force. At this, Tullius tore Caesar's robe from his shoulders with both hands, and Casca, who stood behind him, drew his dagger and gave him the first stab, not a deep one, near the shoulder. 5 Caesar caught the handle of the dagger and cried out loudly in Latin: "Impious Casca, what doest thou?" Then Casca, addressing his brother in Greek, bade him come to his aid. 6 And now Caesar had received many blows and was looking about and seeking to force his way through his assailants, when he saw Brutus setting upon him with drawn dagger. At this, he dropped the hand of Casca which he had seized, covered his head with his robe, and resigned himself to the dagger-strokes. 7 The conspirators, crowding eagerly about the body, and plying their many daggers, wounded one another, so that Brutus also got a wound in the hand as he sought to take part in the murder, and all were covered with blood.

According to the account, Caesar stopped defending himself when he saw Brutus among the conspirators with dagger in hand, resigned to his fate. There was a frenzy of stabbing and the conspirators wounded each other in the mess of it, eager to get their part of the murder in.

18 1 Caesar thus slain, Brutus went out into the middle of the session-room and tried to speak, and p165 would have detained the senators there with encouraging words; but they fled in terror and confusion, and there was a tumultuous crowding at the door, although no one pressed upon them in pursuit. 2 It had been firmly decided not to kill any one else, but to summon all to the enjoyment of liberty. 3 All the rest of the conspirators, indeed, when they were discussing their enterprise, had been minded to kill Antony as well as Caesar, since he was a lawless man and in favour of a monarchy, and had acquired strength by familiar association with the soldiery; and particularly because to his natural arrogance and ambition he had added the dignity of the consulship, and was at that time a colleague of Caesar. 4 But Brutus opposed the plan, insisting in the first place on a just course, and besides, holding out a hope of a change of heart in Antony. 5 For he would not give up the belief that Antony, who was a man of good parts, ambitious, and a lover of fame, if once Caesar were out of the way, would assist his country in attaining her liberty, when their example had induced him to follow emulously the nobler course. 6 Thus Antony's life was saved by Brutus; but in the fear which then reigned, he put on a plebeian dress and took to flight.

7 And now Brutus and his associates went up to the Capitol, their hands smeared with blood, and displaying their naked daggers they exhorted the citizens to assert their liberty. 8 At first, then, there were cries of terror, and the tumult was increased by wild hurryings to and fro which succeeded the disaster; 9 but since there were no further murders and no plundering of property, the senators and many of the common people took heart and went up to p167 the men on the Capitol. 10 When the multitude was assembled there, Brutus made a speech calculated to win the people and befitting the occasion. 11 The audience applauding his words and crying down to him to come down from the Capitol, the conspirators took heart and went down into the forum. The rest of them followed along in one another's company, but Brutus was surrounded by many eminent citizens, escorted with great honour down from the citadel, and placed on the rostra. 12 At sight of him the multitude, although it was a mixed rabble and prepared to raise a disturbance, was struck with awe, and awaited the issue in decorous silence. 13 Also when he came forward to speak, all paid quiet attention to his words; but that all were not pleased with what had been done was made manifest when Cinna began to speak and to denounce Caesar. The multitude broke into a rage and reviled Cinna so bitterly that the conspirators withdrew again to the Capitol. 14 There Brutus, who feared that they would be besieged, sent away the most eminent of those who had come up with them, not deeming it right that they should incur the danger too, since they had no share in the guilt.

Clearly Brutus was proud of himself and expected to be celebrated by the people as a champion of liberty, but that's not quite how it played out. Brutus took the side of the Republic, leading them into battle, but lost and committed suicide. Augustus became emperor, and the Roman Empire lasted ~500 years.

Did the ends justify the means? Justice, or betrayal? Share your thoughts.

 

[German Hops]

 

[IDKFA]

Brutus' love for the Republic outweighed his love for Caesar. Brutus believed that Caesar's extended dictatorship was undermining the fabric of Roman Republic. Neither Brutus or any of the senate that helped kill Caesar wanted to see a return of Kings ruling Rome, which is what they feared would happen if they didn't take action.

I doubt Brutus took pleasure in the act, but in his eyes this was for the greater good of the Republic.

Ironically this action resulted in the death of the Republic anyway and the rise of the Empire and the senate having very little power from there on. However, Brutus, Longinus, Cicero or anyone for that matter would have imagined the end result would be Octavian of all people becoming Emperor of Rome.

Also, another day thinking about Rome.

 

[AJUMP23]

Sic Semper Tyranus,

Rome would have probably been better off under Caesar instead of the insuring civil war.

Brutus was a betrayer. Even if he did it for the republic.

 

[winjer]

I just blame Cleopatra for manipulating Caesar and Marcus Anthony, to do her bidding.
Had she and Marcus won the battle of Actium, changing the center of power to Alexandria, the world today would be very different. Politics, religion, economics, etc....

 

[DryvBy]

I think without knowing where Caesar would have lead them and how things would have went, it's tough to say exactly. If Brutus had the intention of actually wanting the Republic to stand, maybe, but he could have possibly arrested him just as easily or held him captive. The betrayal doesn't sit well.

 

[Grildon Tundy]

I don't know much about the history here, outside of what was in the OP.

It sounds like Caesar was a sort of benevolent dictator, which I don't think is a bad system of governance (kind of tautological because "benevolent" is in the term).

I don't think Caesar himself would've suddenly became a tyrant, but it does seem inevitable that eventually his successors would be.

So Brutus, in my mind, jumped the gun/nipped it in the bud.

 

[Dacvak]

Sweet Christ, I’m gonna have to spend at least four hours getting through this post before I feel comfortable voting. Good shit, OP. This is gonna be a fun weekend read.

 

[IDKFA]

I just blame Cleopatra for manipulating Caesar and Marcus Anthony, to do her bidding.
Had she and Marcus won the battle of Actium, changing the center of power to Alexandria, the world today would be very different. Politics, religion, economics, etc....

I've never bought into the idea that Cleopatra manipulated Caesar or Anthony. The original sources this comes from were written by the Augustus propaganda machine, and therefore should be approached with caution.

 

[SlimySnake]

Imagine if instead of writing et-tu brute, Shakespeare had written, I AM YOUR FATHER as Caeser's last words.

My view of this event has been totally shaped by Shakespeare's play so not sure I have an opinion thats worth a damn. I will do some research this weekend and report back.

 

[winjer]

One thing to consider is that the duty of Dictator in ancient Rome, had a mystique about it. (Let's not confuse with modern Dictators, as these are different things)
These were supposed to be hero's that would be elected in time of crisis, to protect Rome and it's people. And it was a strong tradition of honor, that a Dictator would resign his post after the end of such crisis.
When Caesar made himself Dictator Perpetuo, and when he crossed the Elba with his army, he betrayed the Roman Law and it's most sacred traditions. And in a deep sense, he betrayed Brutus by doing this.

But Caesar had always been a populist. He knew how to manipulate the army and the populace.
And when he paraded and executed Vercingetorix, that was a clear sign to gather the populace around him.

The Senate and Brutus misread the populace and killed Caesar, when he was the most famous. had they waited some time, Caesar's popularity might have been diminished.
Especially if the people found out his dealings with Egypt and Cleopatra.

 

[winjer]

I've never bought into the idea that Cleopatra manipulated Caesar or Anthony. The original sources this comes from were written by the Augustus propaganda machine, and therefore should be approached with caution.

Maybe the idiom that history is written by the victors is true in this case.
But when we have two wanna be Emperors, doing the exact same thing, after they meet Cleopatra, it raises come validity to Augustus.

 

[NeoIkaruGAF]

Can’t blame people living in momentous times for not being able to read the writing on the wall.

The republic was dead when Rome grew too big and a bunch of people became too rich and powerful to not end up either sharing the power (the triumvirate) or fighting against each other for absolute domination (the civil war).

The senate was impotent against such powerful people. Crassus could pretty much buy Rome. Pompey and Caesar commanded the most powerful and organized armies in the known world. Caesar was probably a lucky case when the better man and the lesser evil came out on top. He won vast territories for Rome, and he was genuinely dedicated to improving the city in many other respects. He could never be a total innovator, coming from a very different age and being close to 60 when he died. But he was the best tyrant the city ever got until then. He didn’t want to be another Sulla.

His assassination was an ill attempt at bringing back something that was already dead. It wasn’t justice, because Caesar didn’t really threaten the spirit and institutions of Rome. When he attended public games, apparently he always brought along lots of paperwork to do. Very different from the likes of Nero and other actual tyrants. The conspirators possibly just saw Caesar as the personification of the end of the republic because he just had to say the word to be named king. But he never did.

It wasn’t really betrayal either, just probably fear for a future nobody could really envision. The conspirators didn’t have a plan beyond killing Caesar. They couldn’t really think that things would get back to what they were before the triumvirate. They all knew Mark Anthony and they probably suspected he’d be Caesar‘s heir - not really the best outcome Rome could get, and the man proved everyone’s worst fears true.
God knows what those people really thought they could accomplish, what outcome they figured would be better than letting old man Caesar leave for a military campaign that could very well kill him in so many ways at his age. Maybe they seriously thought the man was a walking god and would finally accept the crown if he won in the East. Maybe they thought that, having no other child, Caesar would name Cleopatra’s son as his heir and they couldn’t accept the idea of the kid of a foreign queen claiming absolute rule on Rome. Too much is lost to time and there may be undisclosed reasons for a bunch of people planning to assassinate the greatest man of his time without a shred of an idea about what to do next. If they really thought things would just fix themselves, they were first-grade idiots.

It’s also pretty incredible that a man as shrewd as Caesar could just ignore all the hints and signs about the conspiracy. It’s been said that his last words to Brutus may not have been incredulous, but a threat, like “You’re in big trouble too, son”.

 

[Nobody_Important]

Not justified imo on the count that the issues that followed should have been obvious to anyone involved. Caesar had laid the groundwork for a system that once he was gone left a gaping hole just ready to be filled and many power hungry people just ready to fill it.


A peaceful return to the Republic was a pipe dream.

 

[Dice]

I am almost always against violent revolutionaries because they are almost always being presumptuous and arrogant while also naive about what the stakes are and what their wanton violence will accomplish. More so in a case like this, though, where one does not spare a man who spared him. It was a grave injustice, an attempt at playing God with an empire for fear that the victim only might have been able to do so; reason not only abandoned but not even attempted in the first place, setting a precedent for more of the same to follow. It is a mindset that has played out again and again in kingdom after kingdom, eventually on the grandest scale in WW1. He deserves his legacy, for his name to be associated with every impatient, distrustful, uncommunicative, violent, oafish halfwit.

 

[SJRB]

I too think of the Roman empire every day.

PAX ROMANA

 

[Hudo]

I think they were justified because they wanted to save the republic from they perceived as an upcoming tyrant. But I take issue with how Brutus and Cassius behaved like little hypocritical bitches afterwards with no real regard for the future at all.

Shoutout to Octavian for being a based chad.

 

[Artoris]

I think they stabbed him in the back for personal gain rather than ideology

 

[DeepEnigma]

Can’t blame people living in momentous times for not being able to read the writing on the wall.

The republic was dead when Rome grew too big and a bunch of people became too rich and powerful to not end up either sharing the power (the triumvirate) or fighting against each other for absolute domination (the civil war).

Sounds eerily familiar.

 

[Wildebeest]

Not justified. It was a power play and replaced one tyranny with another tyranny. The republic had been reeling from one crisis to another for a long time.

 

[winjer]

I think they stabbed him in the back for personal gain rather than ideology

Yes, it was a power struggle.
But with the Senate, power was distributed among several people. Not just one.
Not that the Senate were the good guys. But when many people compete for power, there is some balance and they have to buy favor from the people. So there is a strange democratic action at play, though very corrupt.

 

[jason10mm]

Isn't it a little early (or late?) for the Ides of March?

But I think the seeds of Romes destruction were already sown, so whether or not Caeser lived to rule probably doesn't change much for us.

But just imagine the FORTITUDE of politicians willing to PUBLICALLY KILL one of their own as a display of rebellion(?) or civic virtue. The Rest is History has a great bit on this, most highly recommend that podcast if you have any interest in history at all.

How much of this assassination was mythologized later on is such a great topic. How much of ALL our history is myth is an even better one. Hell, we are watching myths get spun at us RIGHT NOW and we have 4k video of events!

 

[Dice]

I think they were justified because they wanted to save the republic from they perceived as an upcoming tyrant.

So the justice of an act is determined by intentions? I can't get behind that. Every atrocity has been justified to the mind of the perpetrators. We need clear parameters of demonstrable evidences for our discernment and processes of justice. Law did not just come from nowhere, it was negotiated into being as an application of consequentialism being proven through experience to be the most fair and stable order of society amid all of our disagreements, biases, fears, and volatile reactionary tendencies.

 

[winjer]

Some people might be wondering why this guy is named after a salad.

 

[Hudo]

So the justice of an act is determined by intentions? I can't get behind that. Every atrocity has been justified to the mind of the perpetrators. We need clear parameters of demonstrable evidences for our discernment and processes of justice. Law did not just come from nowhere, it was negotiated into being as an application of consequentialism being proven through experience to be the most fair and stable order of society amid all of our disagreements, biases, fears, and volatile reactionary tendencies.

I agree with you, I just looked at it from their perspective. I certainly would not have resorted to violence. Mostly because I think Caesar was right in turning it into an empire.

 

[IDKFA]

Maybe the idiom that history is written by the victors is true in this case.
But when we have two wanna be Emperors, doing the exact same thing, after they meet Cleopatra, it raises come validity to Augustus.

It's a possibility. We can't know for sure.

However, I think it's a lot more nuanced than Cleopatra pulling strings. Cleopatra needed help against her brother, Ptolemy XIII. Ceaser provided the protection and ultimately it gave Cleopatra full control of the state. Ceaser also benefited from this relationship as it gave him access to the wealth and resources of the region.

Regarding Marc Anthony, again this relationship benefited both parties. Anthony had the resources of her kingdom to fund his Parthia campaign and Cleopatra needed Anthony's help to take back the lost boundaries of the Ptolemaic state.

There's an argument to be had here that it was Cleopatra and Ptolemaic Egypt who were manipulated and used.

 

[newtypepilot]

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

As someone who knows absolutely nothing of the facts, and only knows of this event from TV + Movies...

I viewed it as a tragedy/betrayal. IE, the good guy got killed by corrupt politicians.

 

[Raven117]

Now this is the kind of content Im looking for.

Damn good thread Evilore.

 

[Raven117]

The real moral of the story here is not to focus on the individual Brutus (who you can either agree or disagree with regarding his intentions and justifications....it becomes MORE interesting if you think he is justified in what he did in light of the below), but instead take a step back and look at the broader picture. The broader picture is that in a democracy, the ensuing of chaos gives way to Tyranny not to a more balanced and peaceful republic.

Apply that principle to modern day issues with democracy. How when something chaotic happens (either politically or even something unrelated like 9/11) tyranny ensues (freedoms get limited).

Its better to work the system from within to ensure stability and peace rather than thrust a country into chaos where unintended consequences and tyranny lie.

 

[Happosai]

Somewhat negative. Seemed like this would have happened inevitably. Julius was somewhat of a tyrant (which is a polite way of putting it) and I'm sure plenty of psychologists have examined his history from every angle. Nothing super definitive there either.

Reminded me too of how they portrayed this in Xena: Warrior Princess. They left it as a separate historical event if I recall from Xena's story. That way Xena would end up screwing with history by killing him instead of Brutus.

 

[SJRB]

 

[*Nightwing]

Almost made it through the day without thinking about the Roman Empire

 

[NecrosaroIII]

The real moral of the story here is not to focus on the individual Brutus (who you can either agree or disagree with regarding his intentions and justifications....it becomes MORE interesting if you think he is justified in what he did in light of the below), but instead take a step back and look at the broader picture. The broader picture is that in a democracy, the ensuing of chaos gives way to Tyranny not to a more balanced and peaceful republic.

Apply that principle to modern day issues with democracy. How when something chaotic happens (either politically or even something unrelated like 9/11) tyranny ensues (freedoms get limited).

Its better to work the system from within to ensure stability and peace rather than thrust a country into chaos where unintended consequences and tyranny lie.

Pretty much this. By assassinating Caesar, Cassius and Brutus quickened the very thing they feared.

 

[jason10mm]

Almost made it through the day without thinking about the Roman Empire

It was still a Republic at the time so you are OK

 

[Raven117]

Pretty much this. By assassinating Caesar, Cassius and Brutus quickened the very thing they feared.

Yup. The real lesson.

 

[sharp weiner]

Haven’t thought about Rome since it was on HBO around 06. Brutus is a sweet name though!

 

[yansolo]

I think about the Eastern Roman Empire

 

[NecrosaroIII]

I think about the Eastern Roman Empire

Underrated IMHO

 

[yansolo]

Underrated IMHO

Im Greek so im biased, but yeh you never really see or hear about it, no movies about it etc. Most just learn about it through strategy games, but in time im sure people will come around lol

 

[BlackTron]

The origin story of "didn't think my cunning plan all the way through". The guy was obviously very passionate about his principles and willing to sacrifice for them which I can appreciate. But he made the assumption that common people would always support what's ostensibly best for them, and won't ask questions when they get it through murder.

 

[Rentahamster]

I thought about the Roman Empire today.

 

[demigod]

I think I watched this back in the 90s during junior high and thought it was fucked up they stabbed him in the back.

 

[AJUMP23]

I think I watched this back in the 90s during junior high and thought it was fucked up they stabbed him in the back.

Well they stabbed him everywhere they could.

 

[The Cockatrice]

Dunno, maybe we should go back in time and save Caesar and see if society would be better on the new timeline.

 

[EviLore]

I think without knowing where Caesar would have lead them and how things would have went, it's tough to say exactly. If Brutus had the intention of actually wanting the Republic to stand, maybe, but he could have possibly arrested him just as easily or held him captive. The betrayal doesn't sit well.

He had popular support and a powerful army, so you couldn't really arrest him. Your options are basically to ally beneath him, oppose him army to army, manipulate him, erode his base of support, or assassinate him.

He famously pardoned many of his enemies and gave them favorable outcomes, not just Brutus, which some resented even more than if they had been treated badly, since they saw him attempting to act as a god who had no fear of his Earthly subjects and forgave them for their misdeeds.

 

[IDKFA]

Im Greek so im biased, but yeh you never really see or hear about it, no movies about it etc. Most just learn about it through strategy games, but in time im sure people will come around lol

Real shame as well.

Belisarius should be a household name.

 

[22:22:22]

Jfc EviLore that's quite some homework. Do i need to cross reference sources? What are are you leaning towards? I take it you 100% use the source material you've come across

 

[Daneel Elijah]

My opinion on this has been made after looking at videos from extra history and historia civilis. Not the best and more accurate story sources but I really liked them and hope that they did a good work about this part of history. I voted Somewhat negative. I can see why he wanted to do it, but it was a bad idea. Ceasar won the civil war. The part that irks me the most outside of the possible parricide of course, is that he was harrassed by the conspirators to do so. Having a bunch of senators from wealthy families that wanted to continue having large estates and getting richer on the back of the populace telling you about the people is peak hypocrisy to me. Another point is the fact that doing so made the senate not safe forever since. As the senat had a part in the religion back then it would be like seeing the pope go and kill Putin or whatever dictator you would want to see killed in recent history. Not their job and really not the way to do it in my opinion.

 

[EviLore]

Jfc EviLore that's quite some homework. Do i need to cross reference sources? What are are you leaning towards? I take it you 100% use the source material you've come across

I think in some ways it's a proxy for whether you can rationalize an act based on the belief that the ends justify the means. With the benefit of hindsight, knowing that the ends were pointless, it give less credibility to Brutus's choices, but you don't know what kind of history you'll create with your choices in the moment. Several of the Founding Fathers admired Brutus for standing up for the republic against tyranny, e.g. John Adams and Thomas Jefferson.

If I were living back then and someone spared my life and raised me up to the highest ranks of society when by all rights they could have killed me, I would not be inclined to assassinate them, short of an extreme, Nero-level madness taking hold of them. And stabbing in the back is for cowards. If you’re weaker than someone and they won the political game, you could argue that’s the natural order of things and you’re making society worse by undermining the hierarchy to your ends.

But we should also keep in mind that pure power dynamics are amoral. Cleopatra killed her immediate family members too in order to consolidate power. It’s grotesque on an ethical and moral level. But they weren’t concerned about that back then. Some still aren’t.