We Should Totally Just Stab Caesar (But Not Really 'Cause I Kinda Like Him)

So what I have gathered from these readings is that Plutarch did not write history. What he wanted to get across was importance, greatness, and legacy. He was not so much concerned about readers knowing facts about these people, he just wanted them to be remembered.

I started these readings knowing three things about Julius Caesar

(1) He was born via cesarean-section
(2) This allowed him to...do something great that I can't remember because I read it in high school...because the rule of "only a man born from a woman can do...(the thing I can't remember)" technically did not apply to him
(3) He is briefly mentioned in the forever-lovable Mean Girls

Having read Plutarch's and Goldsworthy's individual takes on Caesar and his life, I've grown to like the guy. Both depict him as a great and noble leader. While some may say that telling his pirate captures that his is worth far more than his ransom was foolish or cocky, I think it was a great strategy and survival tactic. If his captures thought he was so incredibly valuable, they were guaranteed to keep him alive so that they could get their proper reward. He was also kindhearted and merciful. His brother and wife had had an affair, and it was only discovered because his brother disrupted a sacred, all-female celebration and was put on trial. Caesar divorced his wife, and when asked for information for the trail, he did not admit to knowing about the affair, therefore saving his brother's and wife's lives. A blood-thirsty, arrogant, tyrant would not willing spare the lives of people who have betrayed him. He was also, the leader of the rebels in a war to take down the Roman empire, standing for what he believed the people deserved.

This is the kind of man I would want to lead my country, my people. A man who stood up for the little people and spare the lives of those close to him, but was not afraid to fight for what he believed in, even though it may have meant blood. I can understand why Plutarch wanted to write about him. As I said, Plutarch clearly explained that he did not write history, he wrote about the "lives" of people. But here's where we have to stop and think, relating novels and class discussions.

We learned in "The Daughter of Time" that what we believe to be history, may not always be correct. I'm sure that many of you read these passages and interpreted Caesar very differently than I did. So who's to say you're right and I'm wrong? That Caesar was arrogant and wanted nothing more than to rule all of Rome? We don't even know the details of his birth (aside from the cesarean-section)! This also makes me think of the candidate that came in and talked with us about Shakespeare because we don't know a lot about him but there are many things we can assume in order to "fill in the blanks," but that's something we can talk about in class.

I'm glad that Plutarch decided to write about these people the way he did. Not with textbook jargon or specific dates, facts, and names, but with "memories". He painted a picture of the man he wanted us to see and behold. I think Caesar would be thankful that people know him now as more than just a salad dressing.