Talk:Assassination of Julius Caesar

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 11 January 2022 and 6 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): BsKulp (article contribs).

Caesar’s last words

The article says "Suetonius, who reports that Caesar's last words were the Greek phrase 'καὶ σύ, τέκνον;' ", but when you check Suetonius' text you find "Atque ita tribus et viginti plagis confossus est uno modo ad primum ictum gemitu sine voce edito, etsi tradiderunt quidam Marco Bruto irruenti dixisse: καὶ σὺ τέκνον;" - "And thus he was stabbed twenty-three times, in which he only sighed once, at the very first stab, without actually speaking a word, even if some have claimed he had said to Marcus Brutus as he was rushing in on him: "You too, my child?", which to me implies that Suetonius doesn't subscribe to the "You too ..." version.
EpicuriDeGregePorcus (talk) 10:44, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, then fix it... Editorofthewiki 13:31, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Done it - I hadn't felt confident enough to go ahead just like that ...
EpicuriDeGregePorcus (talk) 17:35, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Derives from Shakespeare?

The article states that "Et tu, Brute" (1) derives from Julius Caesar, and (2) was already in use before Julius Caesar was written. This is contradictory.

the lines reads like this currently "The version best known in the English-speaking world is the Latin phrase "Et tu, Brute?" ("And you, Brutus?", commonly rendered as "You too, Brutus?"); this derives from Shakespeare's Julius Caesar" Which is not contradictory. the "this" that derives for Shakespeare is the fact of it being "the version best known" part. the reason for it being the best known is due to Shakespeare, the next sentence is to clarify that he did not write it, just popularized it. Smitty1337 (talk) 03:07, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

There's a lot of references to Shakespeare, such as the speech to the public. How come this is rendered as a version of the true events? The play is meerely a play, and because of its popularity it is important to stress the fact that it is fiction. /89.160.42.23 (talk) 13:16, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

I tend to agree - Shakespeare used Seutonius, in particular, as a source but he was really writing fiction, not serious history (leaving aside, for the moment, the question of the factuality of ancient historians, even Roman ones!!). I have cut the reference to the "Friends, Romans, Countrymen" speech, which is great poetry, but has no historical basis. The "Et tu, Brute?" bit, on the other hand, is so VERY well known, and so universally believed to be historical, that an explanation of it is valuable. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 04:41, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Slightly tangential, I just flagged this section for original research. The claim that Shakespeare borrowed the expression has a footnote (currently #24) that does not cite any original sources; it presents the evidence as original research.Narc (talk) 04:09, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Suetonius

Throughout Wikipedia, I have found references to a physician 'Suetonius', who performed Caesar's post-mortem, as well asa biographer, 'Suetonius'. Are these the same person? intheeventofstructuralfailure —Preceding undated comment added 04:54, 19 March 2011 (UTC).

Put new remarks on the end. There is no reference in Wiki (or anywhere else as far as I know) to a Seutonius other than the Roman Historian who lived at a time when Caesar had already been history for a good while, and can't have had anything to do with Caesar's post-mortem (assuming he had one). --Soundofmusicals (talk) 22:34, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I apologise for my lack of respect for conventional formatting techniques. Also, I misread the section of The Assassination of Julius and Caesar which read: "According to Suetonius, a physician later established that only one wound, the second one to his chest, had been lethal." This lanquage was a little confusing, and could perhaps be changed? Thankyou. Intheeventofstructuralfailure (talk) 04:14, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

No worries - just if people go putting new topics up the top it gets confusing - I'm sorry I couldn't work out where you got the Seutonius being a doctor bit. I will rephrase this slightly - although I personally think that reading this as ambiguous is pretty far-fetched. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 06:10, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Vincenzo Camuccini painting

Better version at:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/yourpaintings/paintings/the-death-of-julius-caesar-83483

Says Octavian went by Caesar August, which is not true.

Trying to fix it and change it to Caesar Augustus, but can't find where Caesar August is written on the edit page... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.177.131.103 (talk) 23:44, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Incorrect Citation

Citation for Lepidus being the Master of the Horse when Julius Caesar was dictator is incorrect. The citation refers to Suetonius, Augustus13.1; Florus, Epitome2.6, both of which do not deal with the topic at hand. The main article for the 'Master of the Horse' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_of_the_horse) refers to Mark Antony as Caesar's Magister Equitum. Can we find a better source for Caesar's Magister Equitum? Bilbo elffriend | Talk 21:13, 8 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bilbo elffriend (talk • contribs)

Lepidus was master of horse in 44. MRR 2.318–19. See eg Suet. Iul., 82.4 The conspirators had intended after slaying him to drag his body to the Tiber, confiscate his property, and revoke his decrees; but they forebore through fear of Marcus Antonius the consul, and Lepidus, the master of horse. Ifly6 (talk) 06:07, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Exact location?

There is no need to begin adding these claims from the Spanish "researchers". First, the source makes it clear this is not confirmed at all. Second, there is no mention how this was discovered and no excavations have occured here that I can find. The site is currently covered by a roadway and the last known excavations took place at the theatre not at the Largo di Torre Argentina. This may be news but it is not fact.--Amadscientist (talk) 08:18, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

As more information becomes available we may be able to add this to this and other articles but right now seems to be unconstructive.--Amadscientist (talk) 21:00, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

There was a recent addition to the article on Julius Caesar which involved an article in the Daily Mail about some Spanish researchers which I reverted for poor sourcing. Was this the same one about the curia of Pompey? Ifly6 (talk) 06:09, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Confused

"While minting the title of dictator was significant, Caesar's image was not, as it was unusual to feature living consuls and other public officials on coins during the Republic"

OK so my understanding of the above is, miniting the title of a dictator was significant at the time but minting his image wasn't... becuase it was unusual to feature living consels or public officals on coins. Correct me if I've misunderstood but surely that's a contradiction? Doesn't the fact that it was unusual to feature living consels or public officials during the Republic not, in itself, make it significant that this was done in this case? But if that's not the intent of the sentence, I suggest revising it as it's pretty confusing as to what it's trying to point out 212.250.138.33 (talk) 02:07, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

I believe that Caesar was the first living Roman to have his portrait on Republican coinage. The Senate conferred the right to Caesar in 44BC. The moneyers L. AEMILIUS BUCA IIIVIR, M. METTIUS, P. SEPVLLIVS MACER and C. COSSVTIVUS MARIDIANVS AAAFF struck denarii with Caesar's portrait and a variety of legends including DICT. PERPETVO early in 44. <ref> Michael H Crawford Roman Republican Coinage CUP London 1974 pp. 94; 487-495 for descriptions and discussion of the types; 734-735. Dimadick (talk) 00:10, 25 June 2017 (UTC) feriundo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Feriundo (talk • contribs) 09:11, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

It was important that Caesar appeared on Roman coinage. This did not happen in the republic, when the only people who appeared on coins were dead, mythological, or so vaguely portrayed it was generic. Monarchs in the Hellenistic period appeared on coins all the time, on the other hand... and so did some Romans appear on coins minted in the East for circulation there. Ifly6 (talk) 06:11, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Background, first line broken - restore to what?

The second half of the sentence is missing - probably from when someone removed the tag. I'm not sure how to act - re-insert the sentece with tag, or just the sentence?--Cyberman TM (talk) 10:32, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

I noticed that too, I'd guess to just put in "assassination," the context hints at that but I don't want to mess with the page. 96.245.22.229 (talk) 21:59, 28 November 2012 (UTC)