English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Was Julius Caesar assassinated by the Roman senators .'cos they didn't want him to become the first Emperor of Rome (power struggle), or they just didn't want his Egyptian wife (Cleopatra) to become the Queen of Rome?

2006-06-05 11:00:43 · 4 answers · asked by eslperfect88 2 in Social Science Sociology

4 answers

Caesar is actually not the first great dictator of Rome, and couldn’t be compared that way to Sulla his predecessor – a great general, reformer and ruler and also bloody tyrant – which Caesar relating and following and repeating in many ways (except sure last from pointed characteristics). Sulla was the general defeating great Mithridates, king of Pontus, in the first 2 from 3 Mithridatic wars – that is the greatest Hellenist power, and rival and enemy of Romans, he’s advancing in the Roman Anatolia where giving secret order for all locals in Roman dominions of Anatolia for bloodshed – in one night 150 thousand Romans are killed, same time Athens is becoming center for the Anti-Roman struggle in Greece.
But though, besides defeating and repelling great king Mithridates and pillaging Athens, Sulla is becoming sadly known for his dictatorship (in 82-79 B C) – becoming first absolute dictator of Rome and establishing a regime of exceptional tyranny, terror and bloody repressions for Rome and whole Italy (already devastated from the Allies’ war – which ended, despite victory of Romans, with finally attributing Roman citizenship for populations of allied regions of Italy), exterminating the whole populations and tribes.
Rome is three times taken – 2 times from Sulla and second time between those two from his political enemies – and every time the population is subject of extreme outrages – like in occupied city, Sulla is the first taking by assault the city for becoming absolute ruler. The freed 10 thousand slaves, of his eliminated political enemies, whose patron Sulla becoming, like settled in Italy 120 thousand from Sulla’s war veterans are becoming the mainstay of his terrorist power. Sulla is sure clearly supporting the aristocratic rule and principles (of Optimates”) against the Roman Plebs.
Sulla is retiring from power by his own will and is dying next year (the magnificent funeral on Mars fields is making the Roman author Apian saying “he is frightful even after his death”), the introduced from him constitution is abolished in 70 B C 8 years after Sulla’s death.

Caesar was, like two decennia earlier for Sulla, starting so his own great rising with a foreign campaign, but when rising as political figure in Rome and when still sharing and dividing power among three of First Triumvirate (where Caesar succeeding reconciliation of Pompeus and Crassus) he is occupying his place as recognized leader of Plebs and “Populares” political party – defending democracy and interests of Plebs against aristocracy, and aspiring towards democratic principles of the Republic (the Latin “Res Publica” is translated as “Common Wealth” or “Common Good”); when promoted for Consul Caesar’s laws are defending the interests not only of soldiers and veterans returning from East campaigns (where Pompeus finally defeating king Mithridates), but also of the Roman Plebs and large social layers.
As a provincial governor of provinces of Cisalpine (the today’s North Italy) and the Transalpine Gaul (then only small parts of now South France) he is starting his Gallic campaign for conquest of Gallia – which was then representing the most populated area on Earth with its 5 millions population (from which 1 million are sold as slaves from Caesar) that is 2 % of the World one (later France was staying, until its bloody Revolution and following Napoleonic wars, from far most populated country of West Europe), starting in 58 in 56 conquest of Gallia can be considered finished – giving to Caesar enormous power, money, wealth, resources or influence. In 49 B C already Caesar is establishing the Roman citizenship for province of Cisalpne Gallia becoming part of Imperial Italy divided in 11 regions.

First Triumvirate is ended with death of Crassus (dreaming of exploits of great Alexander he’s departing for Iran where his army is totally routed and sadly he is perfidiously killed), supported from the aristocracy Pompeus has trying eliminating his principal rival – Caesar, that is start of the long Civil wars, where in 3 great battles held on Balkans (in the second half of 1st B C) – on land of the future Central-Balkan Balkan Protectorate is decided fate of Republic with the victories of Caesarians and Monarchists. The victory of Caesar is meaning his establishment as “eternal” dictator “for life”, like also a Tribune for life, attributed numerous titles like “Imperator” (becoming part from his name for affirming his relation with the army), and “Pontifex’ (High Priest) and of “Father of the Fatherland” (attributed already earlier to his predecessors), supported from his legions Caesar is receiving the absolute power in state (he is also the one introducing legal possibility for one man to occupy few state positions), and is starting using the monarchic symbols of king’s power.
In Cybilian Prophetical Books is discovered besides prophecy that only man having royal power can win the victory over Parthians in East. That is the pretext for Marcus Antonius before the crowd in the theater trying crowing Caesar with king’s diadem – which is demonstratively repulsed from Caesar himself. That is provoking the endless ovations of public, as Roman society is still mostly attracted then from principles and traditions or values of Republic.
Caesar is introducing number of reforms inside and outside Rome and Italy, his principal goal is through a system of reforms establishing fusion of Rome and provinces in one monarchy of the Hellenist type, where Rome should be so staying (already sharing almost all its privileges with parts of disformed Italian federation) only center and capital of the World empire and power, and residence of monarch.
Caesar’s policy balancing between different interests and directions – having the social reforms, breaking the Republican Constitution, elimination from their positions of the numerous magistrates (mostly Optimates) and introducing his personal, quasi-monarchical power are winning him an important number of personal, political and social enemies and oppositions and finally the great Caesar is killed from a Conspiracy (which leaded from Longinus and Brutus) including more than 60 from Senators
That is sure meaning renewing the Civil war and oppositions where assassins of Caesar and their Republican directions are now finally loosing and eliminated with victory of Caesar’s nephew and adopted son of Octavianus (future August), and the so called Early Roman empire is finally established (with the direction started from Caesar) as Monarchy close to the East Absolutist Hellenist type, though keeping appearances of Republic.

2006-06-09 14:31:10 · answer #1 · answered by bornwitttthepunk 3 · 0 1

luxyfoxy, doesn't know what she is talking about. She claims that he "treated everyone but the very rich and powerful like poop". That's not true. In his will he gave money to every Roman citizen. He also wasn't power Hungry. They offered to make King and he would not take it. A power hungry man would have takin it.

Caesar was already emperor of Rome when he was assassinated. Cleopatra was really just a play thing. The people of Rome loved Caesar. There were mobs in the street after his death. As far as Roman emperors go, Caesar was one of the best. They get worst and crazy.The senators responsible for his death were later hunted down and killed.

The senators were the ones who were power hungry. they didn't see their time to shine with him in charge.

2006-06-05 12:32:54 · answer #2 · answered by Lexi 5 · 2 0

He was killed by a group of Roman Senators because they didn't want him to rule anymore. Cleopatra was just his lover, and was never married to him, so I don't think that was the reason.

He was not a very nice person as the other person said above.
:-)

2006-06-05 11:35:12 · answer #3 · answered by snl 3 · 0 0

he was a ****! he was a horrible leader, he was insane and power hungry. He treated everyone but the very rich and powerful like poop

2006-06-05 11:06:43 · answer #4 · answered by luxyfoxy 3 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers