Character

There is no reason to doubt Caesar’s personal bravery, or his ability to command the respect of both officers and men in his service and to lead troops in battle. It is true that passages such as Plutarch Caes. 15-18 and Suetonius lul. 57-70 are derived almost certainly from favorable sources, such as G. Oppius (Townend 1987), and to a great extent they conform, as do the Commentaries, to the presentation of Caesar as the standard model general. But there is enough incidental detail to back up the claims. His bravery and willingness to lead from the front in the most hazardous of circumstances were shown by the early award of the corona civica (Suet. lul. 2), and by the battle on the Sambre against the Nervii, where at a critical point Caesar seized a shield and pushed himself into the front line, cheering his men on (Caes. BG 2.25). (Compare also later in the Africa campaign his seizing of a fleeing standard bearer and turning him round with the words, ‘‘The enemy is over there!’’ (Plut. Caes. 52).) His presence inspired sometimes foolhardy acts of daring in others (Plut. Caes. 16).

Pliny (HN. 7.91) praises Caesar’s remarkable vigor and swiftness of thought. Suetonius (lul. 60) notes Caesar’s ability to think on the move and to react instantaneously to changing circumstances, and his readiness to commit forces to take advantage of any opportunity without long planning. There can be no doubt about Caesar’s restless energy. He was a serious multi-tasker. Pliny notes that he could read, write, and dictate simultaneously - not just that, he could dictate four letters at once to his secretaries! (Pliny’s source was certainly C. Oppius again (Plut. Caes. 17.4).) This outdid the achievement of the orator Servius Sulpicius Galba, who in preparing a case used to dictate to two secretaries turn and turn about (Cic. Brut. 87). He frequently dictated on the move, invariably having a secretary seated next to him in his carriage, or sometimes he dictated on horseback (Plut. Caes. 17.3). All public figures in Rome relied on dictation to secretaries, but Caesar’s practice was exceptional (Horsfall 1995). Even back in Rome, Caesar used to communicate with colleagues by notes, because he had no time to see them personally (Plut. Caes.

17.4). At the shows Caesar used to sit in his box reading and answering letters and petitions; but this led to abuse from the crowd who felt he should be joining in their enjoyment of the spectacle. It was a public relations mistake, which Augustus was subsequently careful to avoid (Suet. Aug. 45). At the dinner party on the last night of his life, he reclined at table signing letters while the conversation flowed around him (Plut. Caes. 63.4). All this required the prodigious memory for which he was famed. ‘‘I know what a memory that man has,’’ remarked Cicero to a correspondent (Fam. 13.29.6), and, appearing in a case before Caesar, he used that reputation to flattering effect: ‘‘Your usual practice is to forget nothing except slights’’ (Lig. 35).

Caesar was charismatic, charming, and witty. Plutarch ( Caes. 4) remarks on his bonhomie and cheerful character. This is confirmed by the way Caesar spiced up his formal correspondence with Cicero. In Gaul Caesar must have been inundated with tiresome formal letters of commendation which recommended young men for his staff. Cicero (Fam. 7.5.2) quotes Caesar’s response to one of his requests, ‘‘You have recommended the son of M. Curtius to me. I will make him king of Gaul, or, if you like, dispatch him to Quintus Lepta. Send me someone else I can honor.’’ Cicero replied by recommending Trebatius, a young lawyer. Back came another witty and affable thank-you note (persalse et humaniter):. ‘‘Just what I need. Among the vast number of people out here there is no one who is competent to draw up a bail-bond (vadimonium)" (Cic. QFr. 2.14.3).

There was, inevitably, a hard side to Caesar. Cicero records the visit at the beginning of the civil war of the younger Curio, who told Cicero frankly that Caesar was out for Pompey’s blood and that ‘‘it was not by desire or nature that Caesar was not cruel but because he thought clemency was a popular policy. If he lost popularity, then he would be cruel’’ (Att. 10.4.8). The crucified pirates and a million dead Gauls testified to Caesar’s toughness.

Caesar faced the possibility of death on numerous occasions throughout his life. At the dinner party given by M. Lepidus for Caesar on the night before he was murdered, a philosophical topic would be proposed for discussion after dinner. Someone (it would be fascinating to know who) proposed the subject of death and Caesar was asked what sort of death he would prefer. ‘‘An unexpected one,’’ was his response (Plut. Caes. 63.4). What it seems he hoped to avoid was the slow lingering death from old age which he had read about in Xenophon’s Cyropaedia (Suet. Caes. 87). Fear of debilitating disease was considered a possible justification of suicide (Pliny Ep. 1.12). But there may also have been the recognition that great men frequently met violent ends. Alexander the Great, Demosthenes, Pompey, Cicero, and Caesar himself made up the list which a later emperor, Alexander Severus, cited in explaining his happiness at hearing a prophecy that he would meet a violent end (SHA Alex. Sev. 62). Alexander Severus was also showing that he set death at naught (contempsisse... mortem), which was in line with a tradition which went back to Plato’s Phaedo and was endorsed in various ways by Cynics, Stoics, and Epicureans.

There are bound to be many different Caesars. Perhaps every generation has to create its own. We can at least seek to attempt to rescue him from the fog of innuendo, distortion, and salacious gossip which enveloped him in his own day.