Depending upon who you ask, both of past and present, one might say that it was either regrettable or fortuitous that Julius Caesar did not have better personal security the day that he was assassinated. As for me, I have an affinity for Julius Caesar—his rise and claim to power, his Crossing of the Rubicon, as well as his willingness to actually wield power. However, when observing his death, a stabbing at the hands of betrayers—though not surprising ones—and what came out of the death, one wonders not only if the lack of personal security was not merely an oversight but also about what might motivate Caesar’s openness to death.
Here he was the most powerful man in Rome, making him also the most powerful man in the world. He could have done more to prevent a potential assassination. But he didn’t. Why?
One theory I read about in John William’s book Augustus (though I’m sure it’s posited elsewhere) is that he was bored. That his pursuit towards becoming the most powerful man in the world brought him the most satisfaction, if he was at all a person who could be satisfied. And that once the achievement was confirmed, he purposefully became reckless, almost daring the gods—as how the Romans would have put it—to relieve him of his duties to Rome. Did Julius want to rule the world, or did he simply want to become its ruler?
Perhaps there are some who would like to believe that the sanctity of the Senate and of the Republic of Rome was most responsible for Caesar’s death. That this was one last attempt at preventing the Republic from succumbing to dictatorship. This would obviously stem from a belief that the Senate was not more corrupt than Caesar, and it is perhaps the closest to what one may gather from simply perusing a basic history book. And while it is true that the Senate wanted to maintain hold of their power as well as their corruption, I don’t believe it’s likely their conspiracy to betray was greater than Caesar’s ability to stop it had he wanted to.
Augustus has been mentioned. Julius’s adopted nephew and heir, known as Octavian at the time of the assassination. Caesar Augustus possessed a more calculating persona and nor was he as trusting—whether feigned or not—of the Senate as his uncle. Augustus could not have achieved the rise that Julius did; conversely Julius would not have maintained the rulership that Augustus did. Julius laid the groundwork; Augustus provided the marble: “I found Rome a city of bricks and left it a city of marble.” Perhaps Julius saw this early on in his nephew’s life, leading to a belief that while it was his legacy to achieve the seat, to remain in it was to pass it forward. Establishing a Caesarian stranglehold required the seeming reckless allowance for Octavian to claim it. And since a death of betrayal, it would provide Caesar Augustus the motivation to carry out his and his uncle’s legacy.
The Roman Empire began when Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon. It was confirmed when he walked in the line of assassination.