It's important that the Caesars did not attain the consulship until the beginning of the 2nd Century, which considering that they were among the oldest clans (the second enrollment of patricians was not much inferior to the first and only really mattered to anyone in one of those two groups) in the patrician order is very odd. The Caesars were nobiles, though recent ones and not especially important ones. It seekers clear that this is what was going on-Livy expresses scorn at the Julian claim to ancestry from Venus, and a number of other authors either go suspiciously far out of their ways to point out the connection.ĮDIT: I checked through my material and realized I made a slight error. There were a few other clans we know about who claimed similar ancestry, and it seems quite clear that at the very least Caesar, and particularly Octavian, who was an absolute nobody, milked it for all it was worth, presumably with the intention of increasing the status of the family name. The point of this is that the Julian connection to Aeneas and Venus is complicated. Much of Caesar's early career must be viewed with that in mind-he was, very really, something of an upstart. Indeed, having never attained a consulship they were not among the roll of nobiles, an important group to be tied to politically. The Julii were one of these families, and it's important to note that they did very little of particular note until soon before Caesar's lifetime. These families, throughout the Republic, held inferior social status, although it might not always be immediately obvious and it was certainly better than being from one of the plebeian families enrolled into the senatorial order later still. But there was a second "wave," if you will, of patrician enrollment early in the Republic, when the senatorial class was greatly expanded by the addition of a large number of families, some from Rome but many from colonies in Italy or allied cities. Some gentes, such as the Cornelii, were descended from the original handful of senators under the kings, and they were considered the "original" patrician families. It's worth noting that Caesar's family was not an "original" patrician gens. In short, the name Julius was an ancient and powerful name, but Caesar is what made the name Caesar great. They tended not to have the same auctoritas or gravitas as a Scipio may have. Like many patrician families, the Caesar's had dealings in nearly every great event that took place after that, but playing a more subsidiary role. The earliest record we have for a Caesar was Sextus Julius Caesar, who was praetor in 208 BC. You don't see the name Caesar held in very high regard until Caesar himself comes along. It tended to hold less gravitas than the house name. The name Caesar, on the other hand, was a family name. This would make the name very ancient and noble, even without the legends surrounding the founding of Rome. In all likelihood, amidst the legend, it seems that the family came to Rome during the reign of Tullus Hostilius, the third of the seven Roman kings. Let them know, and teach their children, that no power on earth can stand against Roman arms." "Go, he said, and tell the Romans that by heaven's will my Rome shall be capital of the world. Livy also tells a story that Julius Proculus, who informs the Romans that Romulus had ascended to heaven, and had given him a divine message. He claimed he and his family descended from Venus, whose son Anchises fled from Troy after the Trojan war. This is because at funerals, people played up the noble lineage of their family. This was actually important in the life of the great Caesar himself. This was one of the most ancient houses in Rome. His middle name, Julius, means that he was from the House of Julia. I can't speak for his parents, but his ancestry was one of the oldest in Rome.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |