Why do you believe in Julius Caesar?

Question

Since the vast majority of people responded that they do indeed believe in Julius Caesar and many reported that they do indeed believe he was the emperor of Rome: Why evidence have you seen that leads you to believe that?
(Reference: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071115102204AAY7j12&cp=2)

Note: No cheating! Leave internet searches out of it until you answer!

Answer 1

because there are independent sources that wrote extensively about him

there are statues of him

we have documents written by him

his face is on money

Answer 2

Okay...I do see where this may be going.
I wouldn't say I believe 'in' Caesar but yes I believe he was an historical person and a ruler of Rome.
Didn't Livy write about J. Caesar in his life's work on the history of Rome? Caesar was a governor when Livy was a boy.
We have the historian 'Plutarch's Lives' with a book about Caesar.
Didn't Julius Caesar write the history of the Gallic Wars and Roman civil wars himself -- from his perspective anyway? Haven't his writings been used as a primary source for history?

Answer 3

Because there are artefacts dating to the time he lived bearing his likeness. These artefacts seem to suggest that he was the living ruler of Rome. And there are multiple artefacts, made by multiple craftsmen, all of which seem to indicate that he was an actual, living person, and actually did rule Rome, not just one artefact, such as a Bible. Further, there are several writers, who were writing at the time Julius Caesar allegedly lived (not decades after he supposedly died, as in the case of Jesus), who claimed to have witnessed him doing ordinary Rome-ruling things.

I understand the point you're trying to make, and I'm not sure whether you're on "their side" or "my side." But in any case, Jesus probably didn't exist, and even if he HAD existed, there is no proof of any kind that he actually did anything miraculous or that he was of supernatural origins.

Fortunately for Julius Caesar, all he ever claimed to be was the ruler of Rome, not a god or a miracle-worker. so right there he's got the leg-up on Jesus in terms of credibility, even IF he never actually existed.

Sorry to all those who think the Bible is proof of Jesus's divine nature, let alone his existence, but there is more technical proof that Hatshepsut was the daughter of a god than there is proof of Jesus's life, let alone his miracles. Forget Caesar - why don't you Jesus-believers believe that Hatshepsut was the daughter of Amun?

Answer 4

Different sources and indirect evidence speak of a person called Caesar who all share the same properties (rank, appearance, actions, events). Also, people like ceasar have existed before. A nation needs a leader, if no leader is available one is quick to present itself. So we can assume that a leader was present between 100 BC and 50 BC. Unless no leader was present but we would have found evidence of this. Evidence dated between 100 a 50 BC all speak of a leader of the roman empire with the name Caesar. Nothing weird so far. After that is becomes a story about politics. I'm sure nation-leaders buzy themselves with politics. So far: Species: Human Gender: Male Rank: Nation Leader Name: Caesar Nothing weird, all of these properties have been seen before. Since you wish to compare this with God, lets compare: Species: God Gender: None Rank: Creator of everything Name: Unpronounceable (weaponized name) Its rather exceptional, and compound of rather far-fetched properties. And these properties come from a single source of information, the bible. The only things we can find from other sources are information about water and land masses. This day we still have leaders of nations, with the rank to command a nations. However, Godlike creatures seem to be in short supply, or have been actively keeping a low profile.

Answer 5

Though he is counted as one of the Roman Emperors he was indeed proclaimed Dictator for Life after he won the civil war in 49 BC, he was a powerful militar leader and a clever politician, he made good reforms in Rome, he is said to be affected with a minor case of epilepsy.

He was married at least three times and cheated at least one of them, Calpurnia (the third wife), he had an affaire with Cleopatra and had a son with her, Ptolomey Caesar, on his last years he had pretensions of being of divine birth he was stabbed and killed in the Ides of march by Brutus and a group of angry Senators, 44BC that was him.

Answer 6

Contemporary historical records. Both Roman and from other cultures.

Multiple statues and images made during his life time.

Archaeological evidence.



As for jinenglish's answer - Yeah right. Just like Richard III is historically accurate. Shakespeare told stories, he altered historical events to match the story he wanted (Like vilifying the person the Queen's grandfather defeated.)

Answer 7

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Since no one claimed that Julius Caesar turned water into wine or walked on water, there's a low-threshold for evidence of his existence -- an entry in a history book would suffice for me.

Answer 8

There are a large number of different sources of information dating to the time period that he was alive. The sources come from different groups, not just his 'friends'. There are coins with his likeness that were created at the time of his life. Historical evidence and being able to back it up from multiple sources is the key.

Answer 9

I guess you question is in believing Caesar was a true Historical Character..yes????
Well there's no doubt he was...but who knows; some Historians swear that the prophet Mohammad never lived and Hitler was a saint.

Answer 10

I don't believe half the people here exist, to be honest. There's a lot more evidence for Mr. Caesar.

Answer 11

Ummm...

Contemporary accounts, including the writings of Cicero and LOTS of other people who happened to actually know or encounter him...

The claim that there is more evidence for the existence of Jesus than Caesar is pretty much rubbish.