Roman Conception of Republicanism

[Agelastus]

It would seem extremely appropriate. I find it interesting that the name most associated with the birth of the Principate-Caesar-is consciously of Spanish origin. Caesar abandoned his old-Roman Patrician roots for a non-Latin name. Surely related? I think men like Cassius and Brutus, Xenophobia and hostility to subjected peoples was a healthy Roman attitude.

The first attested member of the gens of the Julii cognominated "Caesar" was a praetor from 208BC IIRC. Not necessarily from the Dictator's branch of the family, admittedly, as "Sextus" seems to have been a praenomen used by both branches (plus the "extra" Sextus who might have been Caesar's father's elder brother - or who might be the only recorded member of a third branch of the Julii Caesares.)

That's hardly Caesar "abandoning his name", is it? Although the Spanish origin of the cognomen is one of the theories I've seen and would fit with the sudden emergence/re-emergence of this branch of the gens in 208BC (it's one of the periods where a decent military reputation plus pedigree could make up for a lack of money in Roman Electoral politics; that the Julii Caesares were relatively poor as patrician families went is probably best demonstrated by the fact that only one member of either branch of the family reached the Consulship in the Second Century BC.

There are other possible origins of the cognomen though, including some of purely Italian origin. There's no evidence, after all, that the Praetor of 208 was the first of the Julii to use that cognomen, just that he was the first to rise sufficiently high on the cursus honorum to be recorded..

As for xenophobia in Roman society...well, it certainly existed but even back in the days of the Republic the citizenship was achievable by non-Romans; in this respect Rome certainly compares favourably with Periclean and post-Periclean Athens. There's no real record of ongoing hostility towards most subject peoples, not even the descendants of Punic settlements outside of the immediate vicinity of Carthage in Africa.

Of course, there always has to be one exception to this. There was one particular group of people that Republican Romans did seem to have a special hatred for - Gauls. All the way back to the wars of the Third Century BC there seems to have been an especial degree of brutality involved in Roman wars against the Gauls, whether of Northern Italy, Gaul proper or the Celtic and Celtiberian regions of Spain. The Senones were expelled from their lands in Umbria for example, not conquered and taxed.

Caesar's overblown claims for how many Gauls he defeated in battle in the Commentaries are in many ways simply a reflection of the special piece of both hatred and fear that Romans held for Gauls/Celts.

And yet even despite there were Gauls achieving the citizenship in Cisalpine Gaul long before Caesar himself legislated citizenship for the region. It seems that only "free" Celts were the problem.

[Queequeg]

Hmm. I might have drawn too much from a simple cognomen. It is likely Spanish though.

[fhdz]

I might have drawn too much from a [fill in the blank]

Here we have the essential Psellus experience.

[Razgovory]

Where are you guys getting this Spanish thing?

[Valmy]

Hmm. I might have drawn too much from a simple cognomen. It is likely Spanish though.

I thought it just meant 'hairy' (which I thought was sorta funny considering Julius Caesar went bald at such a young age...only in history would a bald man named 'hairy' come to power, in fiction it would just be too cheesy) and looking around it looks like it was of Itaian origin.

[Ed Anger]

I might have drawn too much from a [fill in the blank]

Here we have the essential Psellus experience.

[Agelastus]

Where are you guys getting this Spanish thing?

I think it's from the meaning that Caesar allegedly favoured - that it came from one of his ancestors killing an elephant, Caesar being a derivation of the Punic word for elephant. Since the first attested member of the Julii Caesares was a Praetor in 208 the probabilities favour this derivation having come via the Punic settlements in Spain possibly transmitted via Iberian or Celtiberian intermediaries.

Other possibilites include -

from "caesaries", Latin "hairy" or "a full head of hair"
from "caesius" a latin word describing "blue" or "blue-gray" eyes
from "caesum" a Latin word meaning "cut out" (presumed to indicate that an ancestor was born via what would today be termed Caesarian section)
from the Etruscan "Aisar" corrupted to "caisar" or "caesar" in Latin with the meaning of "deities" or "divine" (apparently favoured by moder Italian scholars and it does fit with the claimed divine lineage of the Julii, something Caesar himself was proud of.)

[Queequeg]

I might have drawn too much from a [fill in the blank]

Here we have the essential Psellus experience.

I think my overall point still stands.  Caesar was a friend to people who had no rights in the traditional Roman political framework. 

[Agelastus]

I think my overall point still stands.  Caesar was a friend to people who had no rights in the traditional Roman political framework.

That's not exactly the case though. Yes, Caesar legislated citizenship for the people of Cisalpine Gaul thus being a "friend to people who had no rights etc."; however said new Citizens would all be his clients or the clients of his favoured subordinates. Power was always as important as the Cause for Roman Reformers - and with Caesar much more so than with either of the Gracchi or Drusus it's seems clear that the Power was far more important than the cause with any of his Populares policies.

[Valmy]

I think my overall point still stands.  Caesar was a friend to people who had no rights in the traditional Roman political framework. 

The only people who had no rights in the traditional Roman political framework were slaves and I do not recall him being a friend to the slave.  The Roman Empire was pretty different than the xenophobic oppressor you seem to be picturing.  If that was really who they were their empire would not have endured.  In fact their big source of strength, and their inability to do this with the Germans was a contributing factor to their fall in the west, was the fact they were not this way compared to say...the Greeks.

[Valmy]

I think my overall point still stands.  Caesar was a friend to people who had no rights in the traditional Roman political framework.

That's not exactly the case though. Yes, Caesar legislated citizenship for the people of Cisalpine Gaul thus being a "friend to people who had no rights etc."; however said new Citizens would all be his clients or the clients of his favoured subordinates. Power was always as important as the Cause for Roman Reformers - and with Caesar much more so than with either of the Gracchi or Drusus it's seems clear that the Power was far more important than the cause with any of his Populares policies.

I think Tiberius Gracchus was really the only guy with idealistic motives here, well at least at first.  After that his career became a blueprint.