What do you think?
Rate this book
Caesar
Veni, vidi, vici. – Ich kam, ich sah, ich siegte. Diesen wohl berühmtesten Ausspruch Caesars überliefert kein geringerer als Plutarch (45-120 n. Chr.), allerdings auf Griechisch. Er vergleicht den Feldherrn in seinem Werk mit Alexander dem Großen: Beide waren sie unersättlich in ihrem ehrgeizigen Streben, ja in ihrer Sucht nach Macht und Ruhm. »Alexander hat in meinem Alter schon über so viele Völker geherrscht, aber ich habe noch keine Heldentaten vollbracht.« – so Caesar zu Beginn seiner Karriere, als Statthalter in Spanien: Er verfügte über keine Königsmacht, doch sollte er schließlich als Herr über das Römische Reich mit dem Makedonen gleichziehen. Dieser Band umfasst den zweiten Teil von Plutarchs Parallelbiographie, den Text über Caesar.
108 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 120
12 people are currently reading
279 people want to read
About the author
Plutarch
4,290 books931 followersPlutarch (later named, upon becoming a Roman citizen, Lucius Mestrius Plutarchus; AD 46–AD 120) was a Greek historian, biographer, and essayist, known primarily for his Parallel Lives and Moralia. He is classified as a Middle Platonist. Plutarch's surviving works were written in Greek, but intended for both Greek and Roman readers.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews
May 9, 2025
CAESAR:
WHO IS IT IN THE PRESS WHO CALLS ON ME? I HEAR A VOICE SHRILLER THAN ALL THE MUSIC CRY "CAESAR!" SPEAK...
SOOTHSAYER:
BEWARE THE IDES OF MARCH.
CAESAR:
WHAT MAN IS THAT?
BRUTUS:
SIRE, IT IS A SOOTHSAYER BIDDING YOU BEWARE THE IDES OF MARCH.
Shakespeare, Julius Caesar.
And just like Brutus turned out that day, guys, the Ides (the Equinox) turns many men into beasts.
The Roman government was quite aware of that, though, and Roman senators sought to sublimate folks' rampant desires at the four equinoxes by turning those weeks into holidays - dedicated to the various gods and goddesses of fertility.
The brute that sprang, like a god fully armed in chain mail from out of the mercenary brain of once-noble Brutus, was symptomatic of the change of season. Chthonic fun and frenzy breed feckless violence, given world enough and time.
Well, all's not fun and games at such times, though, for folks who have a history of mental illness. The equinox, as J.D. Salinger might put it, is A Perfect Day for Banana Fish, in postmodern as in ancient days.
Blech. It can be a devastatingly brutal thing.
Plutarch, though, wants mainly to inspire us with tales of heroism and political wisdom - albeit leaving us with warnings of sudden reversals, as here - and which I take to heart very seriously…
So his Parallel Lives of great Greeks and Romans always puts me on an even keel.
And I need him around me now more than ever.
I'm writing this near the end of February, and no crackpot sorceror has to tell me to beware of what's coming in a month.
I've already folded my losing cards in anticipation of the ghastly Ides, this year on March 19, guys -
By fortifying my supply of meds!
WHO IS IT IN THE PRESS WHO CALLS ON ME? I HEAR A VOICE SHRILLER THAN ALL THE MUSIC CRY "CAESAR!" SPEAK...
SOOTHSAYER:
BEWARE THE IDES OF MARCH.
CAESAR:
WHAT MAN IS THAT?
BRUTUS:
SIRE, IT IS A SOOTHSAYER BIDDING YOU BEWARE THE IDES OF MARCH.
Shakespeare, Julius Caesar.
And just like Brutus turned out that day, guys, the Ides (the Equinox) turns many men into beasts.
The Roman government was quite aware of that, though, and Roman senators sought to sublimate folks' rampant desires at the four equinoxes by turning those weeks into holidays - dedicated to the various gods and goddesses of fertility.
The brute that sprang, like a god fully armed in chain mail from out of the mercenary brain of once-noble Brutus, was symptomatic of the change of season. Chthonic fun and frenzy breed feckless violence, given world enough and time.
Well, all's not fun and games at such times, though, for folks who have a history of mental illness. The equinox, as J.D. Salinger might put it, is A Perfect Day for Banana Fish, in postmodern as in ancient days.
Blech. It can be a devastatingly brutal thing.
Plutarch, though, wants mainly to inspire us with tales of heroism and political wisdom - albeit leaving us with warnings of sudden reversals, as here - and which I take to heart very seriously…
So his Parallel Lives of great Greeks and Romans always puts me on an even keel.
And I need him around me now more than ever.
I'm writing this near the end of February, and no crackpot sorceror has to tell me to beware of what's coming in a month.
I've already folded my losing cards in anticipation of the ghastly Ides, this year on March 19, guys -
By fortifying my supply of meds!
June 5, 2019
Conqueror of Gaul
5 July 2019
I would say that the books all seem to come down to this one life, but the problem is that there is more to Plutarch’s lives and this one particular character. Still, as Shakespeare says, Julius Caeser certainly is a colossus that bestrides the world, and his legacy affects even us today. Yeah, maybe Shakespeare had something to do with it, and I suspect his play is probably one of the main reasons we still talk about him, but in a way there is more to it than that.
First, it is probably appropriate that Plutarch paired Alexander and Caeser because they were both famous conquers, both of their conquests shaped the world for centuries to come, both of them pushed the edges of what was known of the world at the time, both of them punched very much above their weight, and both of them were struck down not so much in their youth, but certainly before they had lived a full life. Mind you, I also find it interesting that Plutarch doesn’t actually write a comparison piece for the two, but maybe this is a pairing where similarities, and differences, don’t need to be spelled out.
Let us consider Caeser’s conquest, namely that of Gaul, which is by far his most famous. Not only did his conquest pretty much raise his status among the people of Rome, pretty much making him a hero, as well as earning the loyalty of many in the army, but as I mentioned it also reshaped the world that we know. Up until that time Gaul was basically a collection of warring tribes, but after Caeser’s conquests Gaul become a part of the Roman empire, and remained a part until the collapse in the West. This is why the people today in that region speak French, and not some Celtic dialect.
Then there is Britain – before Julius Caeser conquered Gaul, people has heard rumours of there being an island lying off the northern coasts, but nobody had actually seen it. In fact nobody had even brought ships around into the Atlantic – they just didn’t think it was at all feasible, or worth while – there weren’t any seafaring people around at the time. However, not only did Caeser prove that it could be done, he actually managed to move an army across the English Channel, something that only one other person has managed to do – William the Conqueror (though since England was basically a collection of warring tribes, it was nowhere near as hard as other would be conquerors have discovered).
Then there is the civil war, which was probably a long time coming anyway. Sure, there was this issue that the alliance between Caeser and Pompey had degenerated considerably, but there was also this issue that Caeser was a man of the people. Oh, and that he also had designs on becoming king, not that he actually outwardly said that he would (and even went as far as staging this event where he was offered the crown three times, and he refused it three times). Mind you, bringing an army across the Rubicon was pretty much a no no either – it would be similar to deploying the army in the United States to basically police the people. There would certainly be a reaction if this were to happen – in fact it would pretty much reek of martial law.
Yeah, and then there was his death, a death that has pretty much echoed throughout the ages. One could almost say that Caeser’s assassination is one of the most well known in history, and the events that it unleashed would literally bring it to the level of the assassination of Arch Duke Ferdinand. Yeah, his death pretty much not only plunged the Republic back into civil war, but it also signalled the end of the Republic, because once Rome had managed to emerge from that second round of bloodshed, there was only one person left in charge – Ausgustus.
5 July 2019
I would say that the books all seem to come down to this one life, but the problem is that there is more to Plutarch’s lives and this one particular character. Still, as Shakespeare says, Julius Caeser certainly is a colossus that bestrides the world, and his legacy affects even us today. Yeah, maybe Shakespeare had something to do with it, and I suspect his play is probably one of the main reasons we still talk about him, but in a way there is more to it than that.
First, it is probably appropriate that Plutarch paired Alexander and Caeser because they were both famous conquers, both of their conquests shaped the world for centuries to come, both of them pushed the edges of what was known of the world at the time, both of them punched very much above their weight, and both of them were struck down not so much in their youth, but certainly before they had lived a full life. Mind you, I also find it interesting that Plutarch doesn’t actually write a comparison piece for the two, but maybe this is a pairing where similarities, and differences, don’t need to be spelled out.
Let us consider Caeser’s conquest, namely that of Gaul, which is by far his most famous. Not only did his conquest pretty much raise his status among the people of Rome, pretty much making him a hero, as well as earning the loyalty of many in the army, but as I mentioned it also reshaped the world that we know. Up until that time Gaul was basically a collection of warring tribes, but after Caeser’s conquests Gaul become a part of the Roman empire, and remained a part until the collapse in the West. This is why the people today in that region speak French, and not some Celtic dialect.
Then there is Britain – before Julius Caeser conquered Gaul, people has heard rumours of there being an island lying off the northern coasts, but nobody had actually seen it. In fact nobody had even brought ships around into the Atlantic – they just didn’t think it was at all feasible, or worth while – there weren’t any seafaring people around at the time. However, not only did Caeser prove that it could be done, he actually managed to move an army across the English Channel, something that only one other person has managed to do – William the Conqueror (though since England was basically a collection of warring tribes, it was nowhere near as hard as other would be conquerors have discovered).
Then there is the civil war, which was probably a long time coming anyway. Sure, there was this issue that the alliance between Caeser and Pompey had degenerated considerably, but there was also this issue that Caeser was a man of the people. Oh, and that he also had designs on becoming king, not that he actually outwardly said that he would (and even went as far as staging this event where he was offered the crown three times, and he refused it three times). Mind you, bringing an army across the Rubicon was pretty much a no no either – it would be similar to deploying the army in the United States to basically police the people. There would certainly be a reaction if this were to happen – in fact it would pretty much reek of martial law.
Yeah, and then there was his death, a death that has pretty much echoed throughout the ages. One could almost say that Caeser’s assassination is one of the most well known in history, and the events that it unleashed would literally bring it to the level of the assassination of Arch Duke Ferdinand. Yeah, his death pretty much not only plunged the Republic back into civil war, but it also signalled the end of the Republic, because once Rome had managed to emerge from that second round of bloodshed, there was only one person left in charge – Ausgustus.
December 26, 2024
“He was the first to show that to be loved by the people was more to be valued than to be feared by them.”
It offers an insightful look into one of the most significant leaders of ancient Greece. As with many of Plutarch's biographical works, it blends historical events with moral lessons, making it as much about the character of Pericles as it is about his political and military accomplishments. While it provides an interesting portrait of Pericles' leadership and his contributions to Athens, I found myself somewhat disconnected from the narrative at times.
Pericles is portrayed as a visionary leader who transformed Athens into a dominant force in the ancient world. His dedication to his city and his belief in the importance of civic participation are well-highlighted in Plutarch's account. For example, the quote, "Pericles was the first to introduce the idea that a man who had no share in public affairs was useless and unfit for the state," showcases his commitment to democratic ideals, making him a progressive leader in the context of ancient Greece.
The writing style, while informative, occasionally felt dry and repetitive. The structure of the biography also felt fragmented at times, with Plutarch jumping between various episodes in Pericles' life. While this approach offers a broader scope of his leadership, it can make it harder to follow the narrative thread or deeply engage with Pericles as a person. The account is rich with historical events, but I sometimes found the moralizing tone of Plutarch to be a bit much, especially when compared to the complexity of Pericles' actions.
That said, the biography does capture some of Pericles' most important traits—his unwavering commitment to Athens, his ability to shape its military and cultural glory, and his dedication to democracy. The quote, "He was the first who made it seem shameful for any man... to keep silence about the state’s affairs," stands out as a reminder of how Pericles sought to engage all citizens in governance.
Overall, I enjoyed reading about Pericles' contributions to Athens, but the style and structure of the biography didn’t fully captivate me. It’s a solid read for those interested in ancient Greek history and leadership, but I feel like it could have been more engaging if it had delved deeper into Pericles as a person rather than just presenting his deeds.
It offers an insightful look into one of the most significant leaders of ancient Greece. As with many of Plutarch's biographical works, it blends historical events with moral lessons, making it as much about the character of Pericles as it is about his political and military accomplishments. While it provides an interesting portrait of Pericles' leadership and his contributions to Athens, I found myself somewhat disconnected from the narrative at times.
Pericles is portrayed as a visionary leader who transformed Athens into a dominant force in the ancient world. His dedication to his city and his belief in the importance of civic participation are well-highlighted in Plutarch's account. For example, the quote, "Pericles was the first to introduce the idea that a man who had no share in public affairs was useless and unfit for the state," showcases his commitment to democratic ideals, making him a progressive leader in the context of ancient Greece.
The writing style, while informative, occasionally felt dry and repetitive. The structure of the biography also felt fragmented at times, with Plutarch jumping between various episodes in Pericles' life. While this approach offers a broader scope of his leadership, it can make it harder to follow the narrative thread or deeply engage with Pericles as a person. The account is rich with historical events, but I sometimes found the moralizing tone of Plutarch to be a bit much, especially when compared to the complexity of Pericles' actions.
That said, the biography does capture some of Pericles' most important traits—his unwavering commitment to Athens, his ability to shape its military and cultural glory, and his dedication to democracy. The quote, "He was the first who made it seem shameful for any man... to keep silence about the state’s affairs," stands out as a reminder of how Pericles sought to engage all citizens in governance.
Overall, I enjoyed reading about Pericles' contributions to Athens, but the style and structure of the biography didn’t fully captivate me. It’s a solid read for those interested in ancient Greek history and leadership, but I feel like it could have been more engaging if it had delved deeper into Pericles as a person rather than just presenting his deeds.
July 16, 2022
Life of Caesar by Plutarch.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-re...
I read this for the Online Great Books program.
The OGB group I attend voted Caesar the Great Life they would most like to have a beer with. I'm not sure it would be a beer, probably a glass of wine, but the conversation would be phenomenal.
Caesar was descended from a god, but in Rome, at that time, that kind of thing was expected from the great families. Caesar certainly took his divine ancestry to heart and set for himself the goal of being the first man in Rome. Not necessarily the only great man, but certainly the greatest among everyone else. He would be the person whom people would come to if they wanted patronage and positions.
Caesar had grown up endangered during the proscriptions of Sulla. There was a good chance that he would not survive childhood as a relative of Sulla's enemy Marius. It is noteworthy that when he had power, Caesar did not himself put up proscription lists. Perhaps he wanted to be Sulla without the killing.
After surviving Sulla, Caesar's life was the life of a trapeze artist, swinging from one position to another, staying barely ahead of falling to his death. Every step up the ladder of success required money, and Caesar was not one to stint on spending money to keep his name in the minds of Romans. He made enemies, but was fortunate up to the end. At one point, the Senate under Cicero was contemplating killing Caesar for his opposition to the execution of the confederates of Catiline, but because Cato spoke in support of Caesar, Caesar escaped that mortal danger.
Caesar's fortune was a result of preparation, skill, and vigilance. He was all-in for the game of Roman politics. He also turned out to be a brilliant general which put him at the head of an army that owed him exclusive personal allegiance. Caesar's army was better than Pompey's, or maybe, Pompey was getting on in years and did not have the vigor or agility he had in his younger days.
Plutarch could have taken the end of Caesar's life from Shakespeare....which is a joke since it was vice versa.
Caesar's life was a prodigy in a time of prodigies. He expanded the empire, survived a conspiratorial environment, and became the first man of Rome. He did not end the Roman Republic - that honor would go to his nephew, Octavian.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-re...
I read this for the Online Great Books program.
The OGB group I attend voted Caesar the Great Life they would most like to have a beer with. I'm not sure it would be a beer, probably a glass of wine, but the conversation would be phenomenal.
Caesar was descended from a god, but in Rome, at that time, that kind of thing was expected from the great families. Caesar certainly took his divine ancestry to heart and set for himself the goal of being the first man in Rome. Not necessarily the only great man, but certainly the greatest among everyone else. He would be the person whom people would come to if they wanted patronage and positions.
Caesar had grown up endangered during the proscriptions of Sulla. There was a good chance that he would not survive childhood as a relative of Sulla's enemy Marius. It is noteworthy that when he had power, Caesar did not himself put up proscription lists. Perhaps he wanted to be Sulla without the killing.
After surviving Sulla, Caesar's life was the life of a trapeze artist, swinging from one position to another, staying barely ahead of falling to his death. Every step up the ladder of success required money, and Caesar was not one to stint on spending money to keep his name in the minds of Romans. He made enemies, but was fortunate up to the end. At one point, the Senate under Cicero was contemplating killing Caesar for his opposition to the execution of the confederates of Catiline, but because Cato spoke in support of Caesar, Caesar escaped that mortal danger.
Caesar's fortune was a result of preparation, skill, and vigilance. He was all-in for the game of Roman politics. He also turned out to be a brilliant general which put him at the head of an army that owed him exclusive personal allegiance. Caesar's army was better than Pompey's, or maybe, Pompey was getting on in years and did not have the vigor or agility he had in his younger days.
Plutarch could have taken the end of Caesar's life from Shakespeare....which is a joke since it was vice versa.
Caesar's life was a prodigy in a time of prodigies. He expanded the empire, survived a conspiratorial environment, and became the first man of Rome. He did not end the Roman Republic - that honor would go to his nephew, Octavian.
April 19, 2025
Much more entertaining than alexander, this guy was him
October 16, 2021
Not my favorite of the lives. He clearly hates his subject and does everything he can to make him look bad.
July 14, 2024
Perhaps Plutarch's best
December 5, 2021
“What led him to take on the whole world… was an insatiable lust for rule and an insane desire to be first in power and importance—for which the downfall of Pompey was a prerequisite.” Life of Antony
January 14, 2018
"as if the present were all spent." "...how he might out do his past actions by his future."
May 17, 2018
Unlike previous lives, Plutarch was appropriately specific here and his writing slightly felt more energetic. I appreciate his unbiased writing of each persons.
September 7, 2021
the modernity of this book is amazing
September 13, 2022
very short and condensed story
April 18, 2024
mister man was insecure about his height AND IT SHOWED
October 5, 2024
This was a very interesting, very fun read. I thoroughly enjoyed it, and I'm curious to read more of the other lives.
April 16, 2025
Caesar had to be huzz to have that many wife's
July 21, 2019
Compared to many other chapters of Plutarch’s lives (which is available for free in complete digital form), this is surprisingly light, and doesn’t really cover much beyond the core struggle between Caesar’s ambition and patriotism. Still mandatory reading for any fan of JC.
July 17, 2019
Good background for reading Shakespeare's Julius...
December 27, 2019
La traduction n'est pas très bonne.
September 27, 2025
Si te gustan los clásicos es parada obligatoria. El libro es una extracción de las vidas paralelas. Ágil y fácil de leer.
Read
September 26, 2017Read for school, quite interesting to understand the history of Julius Caesar.
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews