do you think that Caesar was happy?

I imagine that many of the accomplishors like that do not feel happiness like some, as sharp exhilaration, I imagine Caesar was simply content and satisfied, and probably wasn’t afraid of thing that might occur or the loss of happiness so much…IDK

[quote]
“lizbethrose”]Beyond that, who really cares whether or not a ruler of the Roman Empire was ‘happy?’ Does that have any relevance to how history transpired?

What relevance does how history transpired have to the OP? He didn’t ask how history transpired. He asked if you think Caesar was happy.

That doesn’t answer my question about which Caesar we supposed to be discussing: in Roman history there were many. I asked FC which Caesar he meant–a perfectly legitimate question before any answer to his op can be given. If he meant Julius Caesar, that’s fine. But what’s he trying to ask? Was Julius Caesar ‘happy’ when Cleopatra came to him wrapped in a rug? Was he happy during his affair with her? Was he happy when he was victorious in battle? Was he happy when he was declared “dictator in perpetuity?” Was he happy when Crassus died?

Or does FC want to talk about the ‘feeling’ of happiness, in general?

And, please, let FC answer–it’s his topic, after all.

I don’t know why you posted this at all, this response is just nonsense. I know i didn’t answer your question about which Caesar, I agree that it’s a reasonable question, I never said otherwise and that’s precisely why i didn’t quote that part in my response. It’s fine that you asked that.

By sarcastically saying that it’s my topic, you really only show your own hypocrisy: you’re the only one who came here and tried to change the subject from Caesar’s happiness to some completely random other topic about “how history transpired.” I have no clue why you did that. Nobody is talking about how history transpired here and you come and say that that’s what we should be talking about. Why should we talk about that? Why can’t mrCross talk about Caesar’s happiness?

If you want to come in here and say that OP’s topic is not worth talking about, tell us why. Tell us why we should be talking about how history transpired instead of this.

I suggest you understand the difference between FC (FixedCross) and FJ (Flannel Jesus.) Then go back and re-read. Personal apologies are always accepted; personal checks aren’t.

Don’t derail into religion.

Caesar wasn’t a nickname–it was a family name meaning ‘hairy’, btw. It later became a title. That’s not really important.

“Can a mass murdering tyrant also be seen as a virtuous man?”

Yes, both as he was in time and as he is in history. It depends on your point of view. If he believed in “Veni, Vidi, Vici” as something the Roman populace wanted and needed, it was virtuous. If the Roman populace wasn’t particularly interested in a small war in Turkey, then it becomes a statement of personal aggrandizement which is nothing more than political. Is this ‘happy’ or is it self-promotion in order to achieve a political goal?

Which is it that you want to talk about?

Good to see you are giving orders now.

It is perfectly clear who I mean when I say Caesar. If I had meant Augustus Caesar I would have said Augustus, if I had meant Tiberius Caesar I would have said Tiberius, obviously not Caesar.

Do you mean if he believed that his victory was good for Rome?

Or what else could you mean by “if he believed in 'Veni, Vidi, Vici”… do you question that he believed that he had come, seen and conquered?

I am asking a simple question. Was he happy?

I want to talk about the fact that violence makes people happy, and that by some standards this would mean it is virtuous.

Yeah I think Caesar was happy because he was a very emotional man which is demonstrated by his crying at the statue of Alexander. If it bothered him so much that he didn’t have success and glory, that made him unhappy. So it is natural that he would have been very happy when the success started coming. Like I said Caesar was probably very emotional, some even said in his time that he was gay, because of how he walked and dressed.

Okay, then we agree. But that raises the next question: how did his rationale work?

I agree; the assassination was a short event. It was negligibly short in comparison with the rest of his life. Therefore, I would say that he was mostly happy, as far as we know. To be happy, in this context, means to feel good about what a person is doing. Yes, it is only a guess.
.

What are you talking about?

Julius Caesar was either happy with his decisions or he wasn’t. He was either happy with his wife, Pompeia, or he wasn’t. He was either happy with Cleopatra and their son, or he wasn’t. With respect, Jonquil and FC, I don’t understand what this topic is about; you seem to.

Until FC explains his first question, how can he go on to another question. “How did his (Caesar’s) rationale work?”

Does an unexplained and undefined ‘happiness’ lead to a rationale? A rationale for what?

I must be very unlearned, but I really don’t understand what either the subject or the object of the thread is. Mea culpa.

I think the idea is to speculate as to how ceaser thought. Which can be aplicable to many exterior motivations, considerations, or quandaries.

I think you are just here to object to me, not caring if what you write down can be understood by anyone.
In fact you have been behaving like somewhat of a lunatic since I have disagreed with you for the first time.
There is nothing difficult to understand about the question. If I had asked it of Hitler, you would undoubtably have taken issue with the very notion that he could have been happy.

For his actions of course.

Most likely you are, judging by the way you ostentatiously include bits of random trivia in your posts.

Yes but his happiness was cruel and hard on him Methinx.
Harder than the pain of you is on you. Harharharhareth!!

FC–I think you’re placing to much importance on yourself when you say:

I asked you to identify the Caesar about whom you were speaking, since there were more than one and they were all soldiers. I know some things–such as where his name came from and who his wife was, his affair with Cleopatra, etc–because I was in a high school production of Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar and read a lot about him so as to give thought behind my character. And I asked who really cared whether or not he was ‘happy,’

I asked that question in an effort to understand what the intent of the thread was; which is something I still don’t understand! I could have asked, “What do you mean by 'happy?”–I didn’t because I didn’t know where you wanted to go with your thread. Perhaps I should have. I mean, it’s like asking if Genghis Khan, or Saladin, or Constantine, or Alexander, or (yes, even) Hitler was happy! I imagine they all were–I imagine they all had unhappy times, as well.

So, I’ll ask now, what do you mean by ‘happy?’ Do you mean, “Did Caesar have a feeling of pride and accomplishment when he did his job as he thought his job was?” Would he have done his job if he didn’t?

If he had a feeling of pride and accomplishment because he was able to bring more land under Roman control, thereby expanding the Roman Empire, which do you think meant the most to him–his personal feelings, or expanding the Roman Empire?

I also meant to ask you when you disagreed with me the first time.

I think the two were inextricably linked. Because I do not think that humans can experience anything separate from their context. I think that he would have been unhappy if he had continued to fail as a statesman/conquerer.

By the way, I have strong doubts that Hitler was as happy as Caesar (I am talking about Julius, the one who is in the play). I think that a man going out into the field, exploring territory, meeting different cultures and having a healthy sex life, to name some things that distinguish Caesar from Hitler, is more prone to happiness (I think we both understand the meaning of the word) than someone who doesn’t do any of these things.

One of the things I am interested in is the general “climate” of Caesars feelings. Of course there is no real way of finding this out. So for that reason I am interested in what people would think, if anyone has any psychological insights into the man.

Hitler may have had a healthy sex life…not necessarily an acceptable one though…

As for Caesar i would imagine he thought what he was doing was correct and probably his destiny and was likely rather content in so far as he probably thought that what he was doing was fulfilling the desires of the Gods…

Do you mean to say that he may have been gay?
I do not think that this is necessarily unhealthy either. I just think that it is relatively unhealthy to have to sneak around and hide in such matters.

I don’t think that was the case. The Romans were not especially pious. Their sense of honor and duty was very much tied to the Roman state and personal glory. Their main protector Gods as far as I know were Jupiter, Venus and Vesta. All three of them were interpreted as being naturally favorably inclined toward Rome - and unlike the Greeks they did not have very vivid notions of antagonistic and wrathful Gods. From what I have read, anyway.

The “beauty” of the Roman “soul” is in part the great context for individuality and personal will. They were not a passive people tied to the will of the Gods, they just assumed that the greatest Gods were with them.

I do not think that Caesar must have had strong notions of correctness. I think that honor and pride were much stronger motivations than a good/evil morality.

Hiteler may have been, there have been indications though it is hard to say what is or isn’t just fabricated BS…