Talk:Julius Caesar

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured articleJulius Caesar is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on February 24, 2004.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 2, 2004Featured article candidatePromoted
November 17, 2005Featured article reviewDemoted
June 25, 2006Good article nomineeListed
June 9, 2007Good article reassessmentDelisted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on March 15, 2004, July 13, 2004, March 15, 2005, March 17, 2006, March 17, 2007, and March 15, 2008.
Current status: Former featured article

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).

Terribly written article[edit]

Of the thousands of articles I've read on Wikipedia, this is the worst written by such a large margin that no other article comes close. Alas, I cannot edit it. Is it coincidence that it is a "protected" article? Ymisyd (talk) 16:41, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ymisyd: Cheer up mate. It's only semi-protected. If you make 10 edits elsewhere then the joys of editing this article will become available to you. This level of protection is only to stop passing vandalism. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:23, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Care to elaborate on where or how this article can be improved in your opinion? UnbearableIsBad (talk) 20:13, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've corrected numerous grammatical and spelling errors. It reads a lot better now. Ymisyd (talk) 09:28, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! LegalSmeagolian (talk) 23:24, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Caesar's Comet[edit]

I'm unsure whether it's been mentioned in this article before, but there should be _some_ mention of Caesar's_Comet. Having the possibly brightest comet event in recorded history widely linked to you is notable. --31.111.54.229 (talk) 10:12, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

done. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 23:29, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Gaius Julius Caesar others has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 31 § Gaius Julius Caesar others until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 21:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This might be seen as OR but… (Julius Caesars birth/death)[edit]

I checked solar eclipse dates and they appear on 45bc (Plutarch mentions one at Ceasars death) and not in 44bc (atleast not during daylight)… I honestly think he was born 102bc and died 45bc. (Aged 56 as Plutarch writes).

https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEcat5/SE-0099-0000.html

^ this has the dates of solar eclipses… most bc historians also agree Caesar was 56 when he died than 55.

Notice this 45BC time; -0044 Apr 29 08:38:41 is very close to the ides of march. 94.198.175.173 (talk) 01:02, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Synchronism of important events with astronomical phenomena is a common literary trope in ancient sources. Their presence or absence does not override the considered judgement of generations of classical scholars. The best modern sources place his birth on 100 BC, consistent with all ancient accounts; he died on 15 March 44, consistent with all ancient accounts. Ifly6 (talk) 02:15, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You should also be aware that the Roman calendar is not the same as the proleptic Julian calendar which is used for astronomical observations. Dates need first to be converted from proleptic Julian to correspond to the dates commonly used. The value –44 (Julian) corresponds to 45 BC because there is no Year zero. The two eclipses that occurred in April –44 and –43 were observed ... in the south Pacific ocean and Argentina, respectively. They were partial and annular as well. Ifly6 (talk) 02:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would not associate differences in era notation (−44 is equivalent to 45 BC) is not associated with observed vs. proleptic Julian calendar; either notation can be used with either calendar. I believe 94.198.175.173 has correctly allowed for the various notations. What is at issue is that the date stated in contemporaneous accounts, 15 March 44, cannot be reliably converted to the proleptic Julian date; the proleptic Julian date could be a few days earlier or later. This is because of mistakes made by the Romans in the 1st century BC in the implementation of the Julian calendar, and insufficient historical records to precisely undo the mistakes. Jc3s5h (talk) 02:36, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That seems correct. I think I skimmed -0044 Apr 29 ... ides of march to refer to 15 March 44 BC rather than as the IP correctly notes, the previous year. These eclipses are regardless not observable from Rome or even much of any part of the known Roman world. Ifly6 (talk) 05:30, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What about Mercury eclipsing the sun? Is there a way to check dates for BC?
To the person who said there was only the comet - what about “obscuration of the suns rays”.
I don’t think the idea I have going is completely dead… I checked for Venus and no luck. Mercury didn’t show BC dates. 94.198.175.173 (talk) 16:20, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I meant transit. 94.198.175.173 (talk) 16:25, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The transit of the Sun by Mercury or Venus would be hard to observe from Earth without special equipment, because the planet would only obscure a small part of the Sun's area. I don't know if there were any observations of these transits before the invention of the telescope. Jc3s5h (talk) 16:42, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough… last thing I found was on stellarium…
-44/03/30 - 17:15:00 - the moon is possibly blocking the suns rays. - Location is Athens too. 94.198.175.173 (talk) 16:52, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Throughout the whole day the moon is blocking the suns rays.
45bc/March/30th that is. - Athens. 94.198.175.173 (talk) 09:40, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's impossible. It's such an outlandish claim that there is no way to know what to look for around that date. Jc3s5h (talk) 16:42, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Ifly6 (talk · contribs). Also, the explanation of the eclipse maps allows one to understand that the eclipse of April 29, 45 BC, was visible in Antarctica, Australia, and the ocean in between. So people in Europe would have been unaware of it. Jc3s5h (talk) 02:29, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is now known almost for certain that Julius Caesar died on 14 March in the Julian calendar. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_calendar#Leap_year_error for why it was uncertain until very recently, and see https://www.ancientsociety.com/rome/when-did-julius-caesar-die-its-wasnt-on-march-15th-after-all/ (perhaps) for a reference to the recent research that established the date precisely. What we call the Julian calendar wasn't correctly implemented until after Julius Caesar's death. Until recently we didn't know precisely how the transition from the incorrect Julian calendar to the correct Julian calendar was managed. But now we do. Lingvano (talk) 13:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The astrological event that accompanied Caesar's death was a comet, not an eclipse. --Nicknack009 (talk) 13:22, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We don't date ancient Roman events under the proleptic Julian calendar. We date them based on the Roman calendar in force at the time. Eg Pharsalus occurring on 9 August 48. This is because sources, such as Livy or Cicero's letters, themselves include day-level precision under their system. The day 15 March also had special significance for the conspirators in symbolising the republic, viz, it was the day prior to the change in 153 BC on which consuls used to be inaugurated. Ifly6 (talk) 14:29, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The ancientsociety.com is not a peer-reviewed scholarly publication, so is not fit to be cited in Wikipedia on a controversial historical topic. See WP:IRS. It also quotes from the late User:Chris Bennett, who contributed to our article on the Julian calendar. Jc3s5h (talk) 16:20, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think this entire discussion is being sidetracked by the factual question of whether any eclipses occurred. On reflection, it doesn't matter. What matters is whether any reliable sources argue Caesar died in some other year or date than is universally recorded. They don't. Even if it did such a WP:EXTRAORDINARY claim would require extraordinary evidence. It shouldn't be included. Fin. Ifly6 (talk) 22:20, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Roman coinage and the Flaminius stater[edit]

@Tallis40: We've been, it seems, in a dispute as to whether the coins minted in 44 are the first time a living Roman showed up on Roman coinage. The consensus in the scholarship is not that this is the first time a Roman minted a coin with his own visage. It is that it is the first time a Roman did so with the intent of circulating that coin in Rome at the mint in Rome: Roman coinage means more than "minted by Romans wherever they are". The context of minting your own face in Rome is clearly political re the fall of the republic and is rightfully emphasised in the reliable sources. Ifly6 (talk) 13:18, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, the coins of Sulla (and Marius too, at right) which depict them as person on chariots don't count. I am aware of both coins' existence. These coins do not really portray anyone. The triumphator on the chariot is an abstraction which is pointed as a person only by the inscription. If the inscription weren't there it would be associated with the triumphator only by the time when it was issued. Ifly6 (talk) 13:25, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Furius: I think you left similar remarks here. Ifly6 (talk) 13:26, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've edited to the following: Similarly extraordinary were a number of symbolic honours which saw Caesar's portrait placed on coins in Rome – the first for a living Roman[1][2] Ifly6 (talk) 13:39, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Titus Quinctius Flamininus was the first Roman to appear on coinage, specifically on a stater minted after the Second Macedonian War. Caesar was the first portrait of a living Roman on coins meant to circulate in Rome. Sellars, Ian J (2013). The monetary system of the Romans. p. 33. Though technically not the first living Roman to appear on coinage... Caesar was the first to appear on the coins of Rome.
  2. ^ West, R (2005). "The chronological development of Roman provincial coin iconography". In Howgego, Christopher; et al. (eds.). Coinage and identity in the Roman provinces. Oxford University Press. p. 44. ISBN 0-19-926526-7. As far as the Roman republican coinage is concerned, a major change occurred when Caesar became the first living Roman to have his portrait depicted on Roman coins.