do u know anything about julius caesar?
436868
yea alittle, hes considered one of the best tactitioners of all time. this is what made him GAYUS (emperor) when he came back to rome after conquering a war; his time as emperor (in those REPUBLIC days think of it like a presidential term) his term was about to be up. he didnt concede. so there was a civil war  , one side wanted to keep it as a REPUBLIC (meaning senators, emperor,emperor time length) which was mediated by pompeii a friend of julius caesar and julius caesor and the senator on his side/and the bought ones who wanted him to be DICTATOR for life and turn rome in2 an empire (dictator in that era was not looked as something denigrating.) but before this pompei was murdered in what now is Egypt trying to gather support there to defeat julius's army, he was double crossed by the very young king, pompei was decapitated. after this event a few people in the senate who wanted julius dead, and thought pompei could deliver on squashing julius's army with his own, planned his murder; he was murdered in march by casius and brutus, the latter being a son of one of his many mistresss'. his nephew octavius gathered enough political strength a few years after his uncles death, to become ruler. although he used another term and not EMPEROR.
1170129
See if this site is of use to you, as you can see it covers a lot of subjects and might help you in the future.\n\nGood Luck.\n\n\nhttp://sparknotes.com/chemistry\n\nFree online study guides\n\nSparkNotes\n\nNo Fear Shakespeare\n\nTest Prep\n\nLiterature\nShakespeare\nPoetry\nHistory\nPsychology\nEconomics\nMath \nFilm\nDrama\nWriting\nPhilosophy\nChemistry\nBiology\nPhysics \n\nRomeo and Juliet\nHamlet\nMacbeth\nJulius Caesar\nThe Tempest\nMore...\n\nThis should help, navigate around until you find what you need.\n\nGood luck and chill.\n\nKevin, Liverpool, UK
437036
Emperor Augustus.\n\nThe link below has plenty of interesting information on the Emperor.
155734
The Ides of March (15th) is the day Ceasar was killed. \n\nThe others are right about the saying.\n\nMarch goes in like a lion and out like a lamb.\n(cold harsh weather to mild weather)
645868
Similarities:\n\nBrutus's purpose was to control the crowd as was Anthony's. Brutus began his speach with a hostile crowd against him as a murderer of the popular Julius Caesar.  When Anthony spoke the crowd had already been swayed by Brutus' words to a point of view opposite Anthony's and were now openly hostile to him.  Both men spoke eloquently and effectively and their moment before the crowd was the key moment in their political lives.\n\nDifferences:\n\nBrutus spoke first, Anthony had the last word.  Brutus spoke directly in abstract terms about an unproven and unprovable shortcoming in Caesar's character and the threat it posed to the future of Rome.  Anthony spoke ironically and sarcastically about the recent murder of the butchered man lain out before them:  as concrete a subject matter imaginable.  \n\nBrutus, as one of the senate assassins, had a lot more to lose: his reputation and life.  Anthony had a lot less personally at stake.   Brutus concentrated on one theme and directly spoke it:  "Caesar was ambitious" and somehow that ambition was bad for Rome.  By stopping over-ambitious Caesar, the assassins carried out a great and noble service for Rome and the people at the funeral.  Anthony facing a hostile crowd that now considered Caesar the great tyrant as propagandized by Brutus had to pick his words carefully and hide his true purpose.  "I've come to bury Caesar not to praise him."\n\nUltimately both men swayed the crowd but Anthony's speech carried the day.  When he was done, no one could 'unsway' them from their hate for the assassin's rekindled inside them by Anthony's speech.  Brutus lost because he had only the crowd's imagination to work with.  Anthony won because logic and pathos and ethos and the 'eloquence' of dead Caesar's wounds were all on his side.
194473
PA: What were Caesar’s policies? \n\nMP: Caesar is described by all of these historians as driven by ambition and love for power. But he was born of a family that had a reformist genealogy. His father-in-law Cinna was a reformist. His uncle by marriage, the great Marius, was another reformer. When the conservative dictatorship took over in 80 BC, Sulla offered him a place in his government which would have catapulted him up to the top at a young age. Instead, he ran the risk of turning down Sulla, knowing that it meant the end of his patrimony. He lost his wife’s dowry. He almost lost his life. So he already had views that were not just for opportunism and power, he had views about which side he was going to be on in the great class divide. \n\nLater on when he did acquire power, he did things like land redistribution, rent cancellation – he cancelled all rents for low and middle income dwellings for a year. Rents were atrociously high. Families were doubled and tripled up in these big tenement houses in Rome. Debt easement: he must have cancelled about 25 percent of the debt. No interest payments were to be paid that exceeded the amount of the original debt; that excess amount was cancelled. He imposed luxury taxes on the rich. He passed requirements that one-third of the workforce on the plantations had to be free labor, rather than slave labor. In other words, he started limiting slave labor and increased the opportunities for free labor. He started work projects for jobs, what we would call "jobs programs" today. These things are what made the Senate aristocrats hate him. Not his ambition. Not his supposed arrogance. In fact, he wasn’t arrogant. He reached out to these senators. He tried to get them to come in on his side. And as for his ambition and power, they all understood and lived by ambition and power. It was their common currency. It was not Caesar’s power they disliked, it was the way he was using it.
1098427
Although it would be useful to know whether this is help in History or Literature, the traditional view is that Caesar was a man of particular skills in war, in love and in politics. He expanded the territory of the Roman Republic substantially, including conquering Gaul (pretty much equivalent to modern-day France). He advanced on power in a way that was almost expected of a man of his social standing, taking high office several times. The question is whether he envisaged himself becoming Dictator for Life at any point substantially before he became it. The classic point at which he is deemed to have decided his fate was when he crossed the Rubicon river, and essentially invaded his own city of Rome. This is understandably pegged as a key event in the transformation of a man who sought high office into the man who sought Dictatorship for Life.\n\nMy own view, based on essential first principles, is that any man who would have defined a role for himself in his own mind of Dictator for Life substantially before it became an absolute necessity to become one, would have been able easily to outwit and put down the assassination attempt that so rapidly overtook him.\n\nBefore crossing the Rubicon, he was in Gaul, having - and this is crucial - used most of the territory's wealth NOT to swell the Senate's coffers, but to pay off his own debts and establish his own financial independence. As he anticipated it would, this caused severe consternation among the Senate and particularly among his peers, who felt this was taking his power too far. So, being a bold, acquisitive 'rising star', what was he left to? Accept the potential punishment of the Senate, that could see him fall, and even be instructed to commit suicide? Or make another bold move, and push forward into territory that hadn't been seen in some time? Becoming Dictator would theoretically put him beyond that kind of censure, and having achieved it, enraging more nobles in the process, how do you step down and keep you rlife and fortunes intact? Give up the protection of the Dictatorship and you're as good as dead. So I believe he got there because he had the imagination and the  military success to establish himself, and clung on simply because he had no other realistic choice.
603102
And Caesar's spirit, ranging for revenge,\nWith Ate by his side come hot from hell,\nShall in these confines with a monarch's voice\nCry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war;\nThat this foul deed shall smell above the earth\nWith carrion men, groaning for burial.\n\nSo be a man, get your dogs, march back into work, stand up straight and let em wreak all over the place.
268830
"Lord of the" is right, Julies Ceasar was assasinated. Read more here:\n\nhttp://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/caesar2.htm
462267
~~try these links~~\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jainism\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism\n\nhttp://who2.com/ask/juliuscaesar.html\n\nhttp://pictures.ask.com/pictures?q=Julius+Caesar&qsrc=8\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Caesar\n\nhttp://www.livius.org/caa-can/caesar/caesar01.html
664183
so what do u want to know? Be specific pls
307271
Augustus Caesar.  He ruled as part of the Triumvarate (3 leaders) of Rome after Julius Caesar's death in 44 BC as Octavian until he declared himself Rome's first Emperor 17 years later in 27 BC. As Augustus Caesar he would rule from 27 BC until his death in 14 AD.  He was a respected and loved leader despite the brutality of the times.  For 58 years he ruled Rome and defeated another member of the Triumvarate (Marc Antony) at the Battle of Actium in 31 BC. Cleopatra would commit suicide in 30 BC when she couldn't seduce and win over Augustus.
517028
How About a Project on Roman History.. I can help you with it. :)\n\nHenry (nukeishere@yahoo.com)
676652
Caesar took horrible risk in his attempt to gain power.  When the high priest (pontifex maximus) died, Caesar stood for election to the post. He borrowed huge sums to bribe the voters. In 65 bc, he took his next step in the cursus honorum. He became aedile, he continued to run up his debts, putting on shows of unheard-of splendor. These included plays, public feasts, processions, and single combats between 320 pairs of gladiators. This made Caesar extremely popular with the masses, and at the height of his popularity he had the old statues of marius and the trophies of his victories gilded and set up again at the capitol, from which sulla had removed them. The large faction of marius, which had been dejected and leaderless without him, now began to see Caesar as their savior.\nCaesar became praetor in 62 bc, and shortly afterward he went out to govern the province of spain, where he fought a war against the native people. This war gave him his first experience of being a commander-in-chief, and a captured booty allowed him to path up his shattered finances. He returned to rome with only the highest office yet to win the consulship.\nCaesar served in spain during both his quaestorship and praetorship, but spain was just one of many roman provinces. in caesar’s lifetime, most of the lands surrounding the Mediterranean had been conquered, and by the time he died, this conquest was almost entirely completed.
850307
Julius Caesar - both of them being gay or bisexual.
767008
I'm sorry all i know about Rome is that it is really beatiful!SorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorrySorry
722545
That his family was once the ruler of Rome, but Julius had taken away his throne.  Also he believes more strongly in rights than in freedome.  \n\nHow valid?  up to you I guess.  I would say that it wasn't that valid in that he betrayed a friend that trusted him and he destroyed the meaning of friendship. Yet he still did it for the people so that all would have the natural rights demanded of them.