Ancient and ArchaeologyΒ permalink
Caesar's downfall
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Β
Posted by Andrew Host (U1683626) on Tuesday, 15th May 2007
Here's a poser (the question - not me!)....
One detail - an almost throwaway remark - that has stayed with me from a seminar during my Uni days was that apparently Caesar once appeared in public wearing boots in the style of the old kings. This, my professor suggested, may have just been rather insensitive vanity but may also have been taken by the populace at large as a sign that Caesar's ambition was to see himself crowned king, greatly disturbing the Senate. Given the implications for the Republic and the genral horror of a return to monarchical rule this contributed to his fall from grace.
Does anyone else know of this event? Does it have any real significance regarding his eventual demise?
Andrew -
Message 2
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Tuesday, 15th May 2007
I remember the story about the boots and it being interpreted as him wanting to be king. Isnt there a school of thought now that he may have engineered his own assination? to concel his epilepsy?
-
Message 3
Posted by Andrew Host (U1683626) on Tuesday, 15th May 2007
Hi bttdp(d)FS!
I've never heard of the fake assassination/epilepsy cover-up theory...presumably retiring to some quiet island to grow cabbages (?).
'...dreatly disturbing the Senate.' - looking back that sounds like a line straight out of the Star Wars prequels!!!
Andrew -
Message 4
Posted by RainbowFfolly (U3345048) on Tuesday, 15th May 2007
Apart from his choice of footwear, Julius also made a big mistake in showing clemency to his enemies, as this would probably have been seen as the prerogative of kings.
hmmm...
Marius - proscribes his enemies and survives.
Sulla - proscribes his enemies and survives.
Caesar - shows clemency to his enemies and gets stabbed to death.
Octavian - proscribes his enemies and survives.
The moral of this story is that "forgive and forget" can be fatal, and that if you ever get the chance you should slaughter your enemies and their families whilst they sleep...
Cheers,
RF (A peace-lovin' man - honest) -
Message 5
Posted by VaudinCaesar (U8374567) on Tuesday, 15th May 2007
Caesar always had an ambition to be king as he always appears in writings as insanly popular with the people. We also know that Caesar made several atempts at revieving the old ways when his motions for Emperor failed. I wouldn't put much wait on the boots being a definte sign but is really something that should not be dissmised without further investigation. I will research this matter and post my results
-
Message 6
Posted by generallobus (U1869191) on Wednesday, 16th May 2007
Could be wrong but wasn't there an episode where Anthony offered ceasar the crown only for ceasar to theatrically turn it down?
-
Message 7
Posted by RainbowFfolly (U3345048) on Wednesday, 16th May 2007
Hi general,
You're right - it gets mentioned in a couple of sources. I think at least one of them says that he refused it after seeing the response from the crowd.
Cheers,
RF -
Message 8
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Wednesday, 16th May 2007
It's amazing how much of Shakespeare gets quoted as historical fact, even when the old spoof blatantly ripped passages out of classical works, beefed them up for dramatic effect with a few extra 'forsooths' (forseeth?), and then laughed all the way to the bank (Mannie Syhlock & sons, Moneylenders to the Crown, the Goats Bum And Thistle, and the Globe Old Queens Society).
The 'crown' incident as described in Plutarch's "Antony" rings a bit truer.
The 'boots' incident also varies widely according to sources. Cato, according to Cicero with no reference to 'past kings' at all, criticised Caesar for wearing boots well past the age acceptable (young senators wore them as an indication of their readiness for military service). If Caesar was making a point, it was probably that he wanted everyone to know that he considered his military usefulness far from over, despite several attempts to 'curtail' his ambitions and successes in that area. This may well have been the root also of the later association between his wearing of boots and regal ambition, since in truth his highest contemporary critics were those who indeed harboured such suspicions, just as they were extremely jealous of his military accomplishments 'to boot'. (sorry couldn't resist the last bit) -
Message 9
Posted by RainbowFfolly (U3345048) on Wednesday, 16th May 2007
Hi Nordmann,
So would you say that Caesar wearing boots that only a teenager would wear is evidence that he was going through a mid-life crisis? It actually makes sense when you think of the comb-forward thing he did with his hair.
Still, as far as mid life crisises go, it can't even begin to compete with a 60-odd year old Marius stripping down to a thong and doing his keep-fit on the Field of Mars...
Cheers,
RF -
Message 10
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Wednesday, 16th May 2007
Hi Andrew,
It comes from a half watched programe on TV while.
There was an italian police man? I think he'd made a study of it because he found it a bit odd that the plot was as overlooked as it was. His theory was that the type of epilepsy that cesar has normally if untreated gets worse with age. He thinks that Ceasar was aware that the fits were coming more often and more frequently andthat given his position atthe time of his death firmly in the public eye sooner or later he would throw a fit in public. Epilepsy seems to have been something the romans were especially afraid of? either way it would have handed his enemies a golden oppurtunity to sideline him. His conclusion was that Cesar was aware of the plot, and allowed it to go ahead so that he died at his peak leaving memories of an all conquering hero not a invalid.
I cant vouch on its accuracy, Ive a working knowledge of the Roman empire but I'm not an expert on it. Personality wise Ceasar like a lot of great men seems to be a bit of an egotist but weather he was egotist enough to orchestrate his own death so as to make a pretty corpse I do not know. -
Message 11
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Wednesday, 16th May 2007
Marius - proscribes his enemies and survives.
Sulla - proscribes his enemies and survives.
Caesar - shows clemency to his enemies and gets stabbed to death.
Octavian - proscribes his enemies and survives.
Talking about a real argument Mr Rain! -
Message 12
Posted by RainbowFfolly (U3345048) on Wednesday, 16th May 2007
Hi E_Nik,
You must admit that it was a huge mistake of Julius not to get rid of his enemies. It really was a shoddy piece of dictatorship.
Now if I was in his boots, I'd have sent them all letters saying that they'd won a speedboat and that they could collect it from the Tiber at noon on a certain day (preferably before the Ides of March). Once I'd got them all in one place, it would be a simple matter of running them through and then disposing of the bodies in the river that happened to conveniently be a couple of yards away.
hmmm... You're not an enemy of mine by any chance are you?
Cheers,
RF -
Message 13
Posted by Coeur_de_Lion (U2789688) on Wednesday, 16th May 2007
Either way, its quite true that his downfall was down to his lack of proscriptions, sulla and marius killed their enemies, so realistically there was no one left to kill them,Perhaps a certain lack of luck played a part in Julius's downfall, sulla wasnt in rome when marius took over, nor was marius in rome when sulla took over, (it was his luck that he died before he reached rome). When Caeser died, all the main conspritors were present.
(first post in over a year i think....) -
Message 14
Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Saturday, 19th May 2007
It strikes me as rather extreme to engineer your own assassination just to be well thought of when you're gone... sounds rather like Henry V expiring "at the ideal time" in '1066 And All That'! Still, reputation even after death was pretty important to the Romans.
-
Message 15
Posted by mickeymay (U3600416) on Saturday, 19th May 2007
Well he must have done something right, because he is the most famous Roman dictator
-
Message 16
Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Tuesday, 22nd May 2007
coming in rather late to this one, and I have rather delibratly not read the subsequent posts, so forgive me if I drop myself in it.
My understanding was that the boots he wore were an old symbol of the Alban Kings of which Caesar was a direct descendant of. His enemies largely feared him because his background was almost purely First Family. He could claim descent from Venus on the one hand and on the other of the ancient kings of the Alba (forget the second half og the Alban name)
People like Cicero and Cato were always looking for some symbol that he intended to establish himself either as dictator or actually as a King and these boots just added fuel to the fire
I did read somewhere that the boots were medicinal in purpose with the strapping helping the circulation in his legs but for the life of me I cannot remember where or when I read that snippet, false though it might be
Did the event help hasten his demise? I think so yes. It would have helped the cause of Cato et all, by fixing an image of "regal" caesar in the minds of some who might have sat longer on the fence. Symbols in ancient Rome had a resonance, especially when you were dealing with someone who was Pontificus Maximus, a first class Senator and a man in command of the loyalty of more than his fair share of troops -
Message 17
Posted by RainbowFfolly (U3345048) on Tuesday, 22nd May 2007
Alba Longa?
-
Message 18
Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Wednesday, 23rd May 2007
thats the fella
all i could think of was alba fuchlla (or something similar sounding, my spelling is quite awfull sometimes) -
Message 19
Posted by Andrew Host (U1683626) on Wednesday, 23rd May 2007
Hi Richie,
Your message rang several bells with my patchy memory of that seminar - blimey over TEN years ago!! I think the issue of symbolism being more resonant in the past is an interesting one. In the present-day our focus is so much more disprate given the plethora of mass media. Before then I wonder if individual acts, statements and objects came under much greater scrutiny and were held to be more meaningful...
Andrew -
Message 20
Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Wednesday, 23rd May 2007
Andrew,
I think you might have hit the nail on the head there. In todays society symbols are important, but we have so many different forms of media that for any one symbol to resonance is difficult, and most that do are counter-culture (Che Guevera's face a mass media, multi-million pound world wide industry, he must be rolling in his grave)
Back in the past however, there was only one or two forms of media, physically seeing someone, their statue, if you were versed then maybe their writings or papers, your acts rang far louder, the simple act of what boots one wore in a city obessed by omen and signs (dogs near the statue of Heracles anyone?) that for a sophisticated policitian (and anyone who doubts his military expertise cannot deny him his political mastery) to wear in public boots that symbolised a defunct ancient kingship in a city that held a "magical" boundary which no monarch or holder of imperium could cross was a either a bold symbol of intent, a warning to those who would oppose him, or a simple mistake. Now while I do not favour the view that Caesar was after the crown he was after political immortality and those boots must be seen in that light I feel -
Message 21
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Wednesday, 23rd May 2007
Or he had corns.
-
Message 22
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Friday, 25th May 2007
I must confess I had never heard the story about Caesar's boots. I am no expert on Roman footwear, but I would have thought that boots would be fairly common, if not in Italy, then certainly in colder climates where sandals in winter would not be ideal footwear. However, I agree that symoblism was powerful in Rome and perhaps there was some unwritten rule about wearing them. Whatever symbol they represented, though, surely Caesar would have been well aware of it and would know what sort of reaction it would get? I doubt that any astute Roman politician would inadvertently wear something that would cause an upset.
I do recall seeing the TV programme and it was an Italian police officer who was investigating the murder. Not that there were a lot of clues left after 2,000 years. It was interesting but it was only putting forward a theory and, as with many TV history documentaries, there was no real counter-argument to the theory. It was interesting but inherently incapable of proof. As I recall, I think the theory concentrated on the fact that Caesar believed he would not live much longer anyway do to health problems and so provoked his assassination, or at least did nothing to prevent it. It is, of course, impossible to accurately interpret his intentiosn and motivation, but it is not impossible that, being a man of action, perhaps he preferred that sort of death to slowly becoming an invalid? Illness was, after all, often seen as a curse from the gods. -
Message 23
Posted by RainbowFfolly (U3345048) on Friday, 25th May 2007
The gens Manlii were banned from ever using the name Marcus after Marcus Manlius Capitolinus was thrown from the Tarpeian Rock in 384BC for seeking kingship. Ironic considering that the Tarpeian rock is on the Capitoline Hill, which tradition has that he played a major part in saving from the Gauls a few years earlier in 390BC.
I know, I know - it's not exactly symbolism, but it shows how the Romans viewed the power of a name, and also their reactions to anyone who appeared to seek to become king.
Cheers,
RF -
Message 24
Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Friday, 25th May 2007
It isn't boots in general, but a specific type. There were various types - designs and colours - specific to social status (Patricians had red boots, IIRC). Presumably there must have been a type designated for kings.
-
Message 25
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Friday, 25th May 2007
There weren't, and that wasn't why he was wearing them in any case. I blame Shakespeare for all this muddled historical interpretation!
-
Message 26
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Sunday, 27th May 2007
It isn't boots in general, but a specific type. There were various types - designs and colours - specific to social status (Patricians had red boots, IIRC). Presumably there must have been a type designated for kings.Β
I must confess I thought the status was more linked to the use of coloured togas or coloured trims on togas. Still, I suppose there is no reason why it could not be extended to footwear.
There weren't, and that wasn't why he was wearing them in any case. I blame Shakespeare for all this muddled historical interpretation!Β
That makes me feel a little less ignorant for not having heard of the "status via boots" from ancient sources before.
Can anyone settle this by naming sources for the story? Nordmann has already claimed Shakespeare - does anyone know of any ancient sources? -
Message 27
Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Sunday, 27th May 2007
I must confess I thought the status was more linked to the use of coloured togas or coloured trims on togas Β
Partly, and tunics and rings too. Equestrians officially wore a white tunic with a narrow vertical purple stripe (augustaclavii) over each shoulder and down to the hem; patricians
had broad stripes (laticlavii). The purple trimmed toga was originally only to be worn by magistrates - even Emperors weren't permitted to wear it unless they had magistratorial powers. It was only from Nero onwards that more and more purple began to be worn by Emperors as standard. Eventually they started dressing entirely in purple and it became a treasonable offence for anyone else to. Mind you, not many people could afford to: with Tyrrihan purple at - IIRC - 1000 denarii per pound (about Β£2000 sterling) it was a bit pricy for most people!
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Β to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ iD
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ navigation
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ links
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.