12857 réponses à ce sujet

[Persephone]

I very much doubt that historians like MG or Mommsen (To cite two "dry" biographers who stayed away from the bombastic stuff in their accounts) were swept away by fame or glory. XD 

To me both were brilliant men in their own right.

And I blame Shakespeare for the Caesar glorification. His drama did the man no favors.

[tklivory]

Richard III would like to point out that glorification beats defamation by the Bard any day.  and i wish i could contribute more, but i am on my phone and it is clunky.  loving the discussion, tho.

Modifié par tklivory, 07 décembre 2011 - 10:33 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

They might not have, but that's not my point. My point is, Caesar is a lot more bombastic than Augustus. Many would find Augustus' political brilliance boring. They didn't involve super sieges and impossible battles. Heck, he was sick in almost every battle he was in. Caesar on the otherhand is more obvious for the lack of a better word.

A more relevant point of reference would be how Romans perceived both. Seeing how Augustus was always a higher ranking title than Caesar, I think it's pretty apparent who Rome admired more.

And yes, I hate the Shakespearean drama (which honestly, I think is one of the reasons why Caesar is so popular).

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 07 décembre 2011 - 10:34 .

[Persephone]

Shakespeare and depictions like this:

www.youtube.com/watch

[KnightofPhoenix]

tklivory wrote...

Richard III would like to point out that glorification beats defamation by the Bard any day.  and i wish i could contribute more, but i am on my phone and it is clunky.  loving the discussion, tho.

We've had it several times

It always ends up revolving around Rome. Or Islamic history because I always tend to go back there (my area of interest).

[Persephone]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

tklivory wrote...

Richard III would like to point out that glorification beats defamation by the Bard any day.  and i wish i could contribute more, but i am on my phone and it is clunky.  loving the discussion, tho.

We've had it several times

It always ends up revolving around Rome. Or Islamic history because I always tend to go back there (my area of interest).

I missed this, I admit it.

By the way, KOP, I saw that Augustus movie you linked to a while back. While woefully inaccurate as well, I prefer it to "Rome". A great deal.

And being in the bible sure did for Augustus what Shakespeare did for Caesar, no?

[KnightofPhoenix]

Persephone wrote...

Shakespeare and depictions like this:

www.youtube.com/watch

I can already tell that would be my least favorite Caesar. Won't watch it

[KnightofPhoenix]

Persephone wrote...

And being in the bible sure did for Augustus what Shakespeare did for Caesar, no?

He was mentionned in only one sentence. And let's face it, how many read the bible? lol

Shakespeare made a story out of him. But I admit, Caesar's life is much more story material than the constantly ill Augustus who died peacefully in bed.

[Persephone]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Shakespeare and depictions like this:

www.youtube.com/watch

I can already tell that would be my least favorite Caesar. Won't watch it

It has its moments. Sadly an entirely miscast Caesar ruins it. (But Richard Harris....)

[Persephone]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Persephone wrote...

And being in the bible sure did for Augustus what Shakespeare did for Caesar, no?

He was mentionned in only one sentence. And let's face it, how many read the bible? lol

Shakespeare made a story out of him. But I admit, Caesar's life is much more story material than the constantly ill Augustus who died peacefully in bed.

I like to read about both, the world is better off having had them both reshaping history.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Addai would disagree haha
For me there is no doubt who reshaped history more, but they were both brilliant.

[tklivory]

I thought it was Pilate that got the unfortunate eeeebul man syndrome from the bible, unless one is rendering

[Persephone]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Addai would disagree haha
For me there is no doubt who reshaped history more, but they were both brilliant.

Hehehehe.

And here's a guilty pleasure of mine, my fave Cleo:

www.youtube.com/watch

Timothy Dalton as Caesar, heh. And a very...unusual Octavian. But it's a guilty pleasure, I admit it.

Must go to bed now. Good to see this thread thriving.:happy:

[KnightofPhoenix]

That screech-er is Octavian? Blah.
Night!

Yea this discussion reminds me of the good old days. Perhaps at a time when I excepted that Bioware would go on that road, producing well thought out politics. How foolish was I.

[Persephone]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

That screech-er is Octavian? Blah.
Night!

Yea this discussion reminds me of the good old days. Perhaps at a time when I excepted that Bioware would go on that road, producing well thought out politics. How foolish was I.

Nooooooooooo, that's Antony, no worries.

Octavian in this is.....more ruthless than any other depiction of him I've ever seen. (But not in a good way)

[KnightofPhoenix]

Hmmm interesting. In what way ruthless?

[Persephone]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Hmmm interesting. In what way ruthless?

As in: He is approached by Caesar's assassins and says something akin to:

I will not support you but I shall not stop you either.

[KnightofPhoenix]

At 18 years old? Yea no lol

EDIT: he wasn't even in Rome dammit!

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 07 décembre 2011 - 11:06 .

[Costin_Razvan]

Without Caesar there would be no Augustus as we know him. Much as I respect Octavian, were it not for Caesar, the lad would have done what Antony predicted in the old film: Died without ever having lived.

I greatly admire Caesar ( after all I care a hell lot bloody more as a historian about the military then politics ), but saying Augustus would be nothing without Caesar is BULL****.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 07 décembre 2011 - 11:07 .

[Persephone]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

At 18 years old? Yea no lol

EDIT: he wasn't even in Rome dammit!

Oh, I know.

[KnightofPhoenix]

In terms of military, I am inclined to think that Caesar was a very good tactician, but not so much a strategist. And I think without Marius' reforms, he would not have been as successful a general as he ended up being.

But I did not study his military career with as much depth as his political one.

[Costin_Razvan]

I'd argue he was a brilliant strategist for what he achieved at Alesia, not on a tactical level mind you, but on a strategic level. In one single battle he not only took an impregnable fortress but took all of Gaul itself.

There are some who would argue that Caesar's victories during civil war where the height of his career. I firmly believe it was Alesia and Gaul that cemented his reputation in military history.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 07 décembre 2011 - 11:18 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

I'd argue that was more Vercingetorix's fault than Caesar's brilliance. But all brilliance is taking advantage of your opponent's mistakes. I see your point.

[Costin_Razvan]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I'd argue that was more Vercingetorix's fault than Caesar's brilliance. But all brilliance is taking advantage of your opponent's mistakes. I see your point.

To win every battle you must know yourself and your enemy. That's exactly what Caesar did at Alesia. There where no gauls that "escaped" to gather reinforcements. It was a devious plan on his end to allow them to escape. He knew the Gauls, once they heard of the situation, would muster their entire strength to save Alesia. He also knew that he would win even if they did. 

Just like Alexander the Great knew he could win against the Persians when he fought an army six to seven times his size at Gaugamela and just as Napoleon knew at Arcole. Napoleon taking a flag and charging the enemy wasn't an act of madness, it was a perfectly calculated plan on his end.

Caesar was so badass however that he won a battle, where he was greatly outnumbered, without getting out of bed. The battle of Zela.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 07 décembre 2011 - 11:38 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

I stand corrected.
Alesia was certainly an impressive and decisive victory. And very unorthodox.