Jump to content
UNRV Ancient Roman Empire Forums

Brutus and Caesar in 53 BC


Ingsoc

Recommended Posts

I found this reference from the 4th century to the fact that Julius Caesar had offered Brutus to serve as his questor at Gaul in 53 BC.

 

"82.1 Marcus Brutus, auunculi Catonis imitator, Athenis philosophiam, Rhodi eloquentiam didicit. 2 Cytheridem mimam cum Antonio et Gallo amauit. 3 Quaestor in Galliam proficisci noluit, quod is bonis omnibus displicebat. 4 Cum Appio socero in Cilicia fuit, et cum ille repetundarum accusaretur, ipse ne uerbo quidem infamatus est. 5 Ciuili bello a Catone ex Cilicia retractus Pompeium secutus est, quo uicto ueniam a Caesare accepit et proconsul Galliam rexit; tamen cum aliis coniuratis in curia Caesarem occidit. 6 Et ob inuidiam ueteranorum in Macedoniam missus, ab Augusto in campis Philippiis uictus Stratoni ceruicem praebuit." (Aurelius Victor,De viris illustribus urbis Romae)

 

Now to me it's seem strange since by this date Brutus was identified with the Optimates and I found no mention of this in another source.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found this reference from the 4th century to the fact that Julius Caesar had offered Brutus to serve as his questor at Gaul in 53 BC.

 

"82.1 Marcus Brutus, auunculi Catonis imitator, Athenis philosophiam, Rhodi eloquentiam didicit. 2 Cytheridem mimam cum Antonio et Gallo amauit. 3 Quaestor in Galliam proficisci noluit, quod is bonis omnibus displicebat. 4 Cum Appio socero in Cilicia fuit, et cum ille repetundarum accusaretur, ipse ne uerbo quidem infamatus est. 5 Ciuili bello a Catone ex Cilicia retractus Pompeium secutus est, quo uicto ueniam a Caesare accepit et proconsul Galliam rexit; tamen cum aliis coniuratis in curia Caesarem occidit. 6 Et ob inuidiam ueteranorum in Macedoniam missus, ab Augusto in campis Philippiis uictus Stratoni ceruicem praebuit." (Aurelius Victor,De viris illustribus urbis Romae)

 

Now to me it's seem strange since by this date Brutus was identified with the Optimates and I found no mention of this in another source.

 

Some Modern sources -

 

"Elected quaestor for 53 BC, Brutus refused to join Caesar's staff in Gaul but went to Cilicia" (The McGraw-Hill encyclopedia of world biography By David I. Eggenberger)

 

"In 53 Brutus was quaestor : apparently Caesar wished to have him with him ..." (Caesar's son and heir By Monroe Emanuel Deutsch)

 

"In 53 Brutus was quaestor : apparently Caesar wished to have him with him ..." (University of California Publications in Classical Philology By University of California)

 

 

Did not a Marcus Iunius Silanus served as Legate under Caesar in gaul in 53 ? Maybe Victor confused them ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found this reference from the 4th century to the fact that Julius Caesar had offered Brutus to serve as his questor at Gaul in 53 BC.

 

"82.1 Marcus Brutus, auunculi Catonis imitator, Athenis philosophiam, Rhodi eloquentiam didicit. 2 Cytheridem mimam cum Antonio et Gallo amauit. 3 Quaestor in Galliam proficisci noluit, quod is bonis omnibus displicebat. 4 Cum Appio socero in Cilicia fuit, et cum ille repetundarum accusaretur, ipse ne uerbo quidem infamatus est. 5 Ciuili bello a Catone ex Cilicia retractus Pompeium secutus est, quo uicto ueniam a Caesare accepit et proconsul Galliam rexit; tamen cum aliis coniuratis in curia Caesarem occidit. 6 Et ob inuidiam ueteranorum in Macedoniam missus, ab Augusto in campis Philippiis uictus Stratoni ceruicem praebuit." (Aurelius Victor,De viris illustribus urbis Romae)

 

Now to me it's seem strange since by this date Brutus was identified with the Optimates and I found no mention of this in another source.

 

It shouldn't really be seemed odd that Caesar would attempt to re-establish an older alliance, while potentially breaking ranks within the opposition faction. Caesar was alot of things, two of them being politically shrewd and cunning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
It shouldn't really be seemed odd that Caesar would attempt to re-establish an older alliance, while potentially breaking ranks within the opposition faction. Caesar was alot of things, two of them being politically shrewd and cunning.

 

Hmmmm... in 53, how shrewd would this really have been? Brutus would have been an inveterate opponent of Caesar's ally Pompey (who had killed Brutus' father), so wouldn't it have also served to split his own faction too? Maybe Caesar just wanted Brutus to take love notes to Servilia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It shouldn't really be seemed odd that Caesar would attempt to re-establish an older alliance, while potentially breaking ranks within the opposition faction. Caesar was alot of things, two of them being politically shrewd and cunning.

 

Hmmmm... in 53, how shrewd would this really have been? Brutus would have been an inveterate opponent of Caesar's ally Pompey (who had killed Brutus' father), so wouldn't it have also served to split his own faction too? Maybe Caesar just wanted Brutus to take love notes to Servilia.

 

Sure, perhaps it was early, and in retrospect we can see the failure of the concept, but Caesar could've allowed a rift to grow larger or attempt to heal it... regardless of how misguided it may have been. In the post civil war era, we can see the struggle for Brutus to join against his old ally despite many obvious points of opposition. There is suggested evidence of Brutus' struggles to join the liberators at full capacity, and perhaps Caesar's attempts to reach out to him (be they superficial or legitimate) was part of the cause. Then again, had Caesar just removed Brutus as he did other opponents, perhaps his bid for unconstitutional authority may have gone completely unchecked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, perhaps it was early, and in retrospect we can see the failure of the concept, but Caesar could've allowed a rift to grow larger or attempt to heal it... regardless of how misguided it may have been.

 

Sure, I guess we could see it as a move against Pompey in an attempt to give Caesar a pretext to invade Rome, but this strikes me as giving Caesar clairvoyance on top of perspicacity. No need to gild the lily, is there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of the circumstance, I just don't find it unreasonable that Caesar would've offered a position to Brutus. Perhaps it was shrewd, perhaps it was at the request of Servilia, perhaps the source is wrong, perhaps it was cunning, or perhaps it was simply one more of many head scratching moments by Caesar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I thought it was Brutus' brother who was quaestor in Gaul at that time? I know when Caesar was killed he was. AM I wrong?

 

 

Regardless of the circumstance, I just don't find it unreasonable that Caesar would've offered a position to Brutus. Perhaps it was shrewd, perhaps it was at the request of Servilia, perhaps the source is wrong, perhaps it was cunning, or perhaps it was simply one more of many head scratching moments by Caesar.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it was Brutus' brother who was quaestor in Gaul at that time? I know when Caesar was killed he was. AM I wrong?

 

In addition to the references already given in this thread, Broughton confirms that it was Marcus Junius Brutus (Caesar's celebrated assassin) who, in 53 BCE, was Quaestor but "refused to serve under Caesar in Gaul, and accompanied his father-in-law Appius Claudius Pulcher to Cilicia (Auct. Vir. Ill. 82.3-4)."

 

It was Decimus Junius Brutus Albinus (a cousin of M. Junius Brutus) who served as a Proconsul of Cisalpine Gaul "by appointment of Caesar (Vell. 2.60.5 [and additional references given by Broughton])" in 44 BCE.

 

-- Nephele

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait I thought it was decimus who was the 3rd to strike Caesar and also convinced him to go to the senate. And I thought His brother was in gaul? I am feeling very ignorant now. need to look and read on this.....again for the 13th time.

"

<Pulled from wikipedia>

On the Ides of March (March 15), when Caesar decided not to attend the Senate meeting due to the concerns of his wife, Calpurnia, Decimus Brutus persuaded him to go, dismissing Calpurnia's concerns. When Caesar arrived in Pompey's theatre for the Roman Senate meeting, Decimus and the rest of the conspirators attacked and assassinated him. According to Nicolaus of Damascus, Decimus Brutus was the third to strike Caesar, stabbing him in the side

 

 

I thought it was Brutus' brother who was quaestor in Gaul at that time? I know when Caesar was killed he was. AM I wrong?

 

In addition to the references already given in this thread, Broughton confirms that it was Marcus Junius Brutus (Caesar's celebrated assassin) who, in 53 BCE, was Quaestor but "refused to serve under Caesar in Gaul, and accompanied his father-in-law Appius Claudius Pulcher to Cilicia (Auct. Vir. Ill. 82.3-4)."

 

It was Decimus Junius Brutus Albinus (a cousin of M. Junius Brutus) who served as a Proconsul of Cisalpine Gaul "by appointment of Caesar (Vell. 2.60.5 [and additional references given by Broughton])" in 44 BCE.

 

-- Nephele

 

It was Marcus Junius Brutuswho is the celebrated Conspirator?.I got the 2 confused because of their names. But what I wrote below was pulled from wiki. OKay. I am now being confused. Even reading wikipedia is confusing me. They have the 2 mixed up it seems also. Even in the HBO show rome I thought it was Decimus brutus who with Cassius did the deed. Read these 2 links and tell me what's going on please? IN one it say's Decimus Did the final blow and also convinced Caesar to go into the senate. IN the Marcus Brutus link it says simply "Brutus convinced him" referring to Marcus. Can anyone make this clear for me? I have read PLutarch's "Life Of marcus JUnius Brutus" SO I am not ignorant on the subject. It seems alot of people are confused by the 2 brothers also. Or just me.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Junius_Brutus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Julius_Caesar

"

 

On the Ides of March (March 15), when Caesar decided not to attend the Senate meeting due to the concerns of his wife, Calpurnia, Decimus Brutus persuaded him to go, dismissing Calpurnia's concerns. When Caesar arrived in Pompey's theatre for the Roman Senate meeting, Decimus and the rest of the conspirators attacked and assassinated him. According to Nicolaus of Damascus, Decimus Brutus was the third to strike Caesar, stabbing him in the side

 

 

I thought it was Brutus' brother who was quaestor in Gaul at that time? I know when Caesar was killed he was. AM I wrong?

 

In addition to the references already given in this thread, Broughton confirms that it was Marcus Junius Brutus (Caesar's celebrated assassin) who, in 53 BCE, was Quaestor but "refused to serve under Caesar in Gaul, and accompanied his father-in-law Appius Claudius Pulcher to Cilicia (Auct. Vir. Ill. 82.3-4)."

 

It was Decimus Junius Brutus Albinus (a cousin of M. Junius Brutus) who served as a Proconsul of Cisalpine Gaul "by appointment of Caesar (Vell. 2.60.5 [and additional references given by Broughton])" in 44 BCE.

 

-- Nephele

 

It seems the people who write articles for wiki have the 2 brutus' confused.

I am pretty clear on this now. WHy did I think It was Decimus who was the main conspiritor? Geez. I have read and studied enough I should know!

 

However there seems to be no confusion in this article that I took a tiny snip from.>>

 

<<<When Caesar returned to Rome as dictator after the final defeat of the Republican faction in the battle of Munda (45 BC), Decimus Brutus joined the conspiracy against him after being convinced by Marcus Brutus. However, Caesar continued to trust in Decimus Brutus and even mentioned him in his will. On the Ides of March (March 15), when Caesar decided not to attend the Senate meeting due to the concerns of his wife, Calpurnia, Decimus Brutus persuaded him to go, dismissing Calpurnia's concerns. When Caesar arrived in Pompey's theatre for the Roman Senate meeting, Decimus and the rest of the conspirators attacked and assassinated him. According to Nicolaus of Damascus, Decimus Brutus was the third to strike Caesar, stabbing him in the side.>>>>>>credit to wiki.

 

It seems in the 2 links I gave there's some confusion between the 2 or I just skimmed over it to fast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems the people who write articles for wiki have the 2 brutus' confused.

I am pretty clear on this now. WHy did I think It was Decimus who was the main conspiritor? Geez. I have read and studied enough I should know!

 

However there seems to be no confusion in this article that I took a tiny snip from.>>

 

<<<When Caesar returned to Rome as dictator after the final defeat of the Republican faction in the battle of Munda (45 BC), Decimus Brutus joined the conspiracy against him after being convinced by Marcus Brutus. However, Caesar continued to trust in Decimus Brutus and even mentioned him in his will. On the Ides of March (March 15), when Caesar decided not to attend the Senate meeting due to the concerns of his wife, Calpurnia, Decimus Brutus persuaded him to go, dismissing Calpurnia's concerns. When Caesar arrived in Pompey's theatre for the Roman Senate meeting, Decimus and the rest of the conspirators attacked and assassinated him. According to Nicolaus of Damascus, Decimus Brutus was the third to strike Caesar, stabbing him in the side.>>>>>>credit to wiki.

 

It seems in the 2 links I gave there's some confusion between the 2 or I just skimmed over it to fast.

Your quotation comes from the current article on Decimus Brutus from en.wikipedia; as far as I can tell, the passage is exact, including the reference on the order of the strokes on Caesar, from the fragment FGrHF 130 of Nicoalus' Life of Augustus, sec. 24:

 

"First Servilius Casca stabbed him on the left shoulder a little above the collar bone, at which he had aimed but missed through nervousness(1).

Caesar sprang up to defend himself against him, and Casca called to his brother, speaking in Greek in his excitement. The latter obeyed him and drove his sword into Caesar's side. A moment before Cassius had struck him obliquely across the face(2).

Decimus Brutus struck him through the thigh (3)."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...