A lot of things are named after him. Jersey, England and Jerez, Spain are named after him. And so is Caesar Salad, for some reason.
But more too the point, political leaders, especially of the past, have been named after him. The Kaiser of Germany and other places is derived from the proper name Caesar, as is the old Tsar of Russia. (Kaiser is actually an interesting word, because it is how Caesar was originally pronounced. I digress.) And of course every Roman emperor after Caesar took his clan name. (Julius is actually what we would call surname. Gaius was his first.)
Why?
It seems for some time people must’ve thought he was some kind of ideal ruler. Why, again?
Julius was a remarkable guy - a conqueror who became the most prominent person in his nation, and whose successor (also using the family name Caesar) ruled an enormous Empire for decades.
“Caesar” became a name of power not just because of Julius, but because of Augustus, and the other guys who found it useful to adopt his name as a title - so that by the time the Kaisers and Czars came along, they were adopting and adapting the word Caesar because it meant “Awesomely powerful ruler” more than because it meant “guy who reminds us of Julius”
Basically he succeeded in toppling the Roman Republic and ending what was the largest (and one of the most long-lived) examples of representative government in human history, in the process writing some excellent PR for himself along the way, and pulling off some pretty decent feats of generalship and conquest (even taking into account the fact the aforementioned PR pieces are some of the only accounts of it that survive).
He then had the “good luck” to be assassinated at the height of his power, before he had to deal with the messy business of running an empire as an autocrat, and being succeeded (after a bout of civil war) by an extremely capable adopted son who then setup the Roman empire for centuries of (fairly successful) autocratic rule and had every reason to posthumously hype his reputation, as so much of his prestige was linked to it.
BTW during the Roman empire itself “Caesar” meant basically heir-apparent or “junior co-emperor” the title given the actual emperor was “Augustus” (the title first taken aforementioned adoptive son, Octavian)
The Germanic Holy Roman Empire considered itself to be the legitimate successor-state of the “Roman” Roman Empire. Its emperors used “Kaiser” precisely because it was the Roman title.
Is joke, yes? Caesar salad AFAICT is named after its inventor, 20th-c. restaurateur Caesar Cardini.
Yes, the fact that a 20th-century Italian guy is named “Caesar” is in itself a testament to the prestige of the title, but it’s not quite the same as actually naming a 20th-century dish for Julius directly.
Actually it does say in my dictionary (Webster’s New World) that the creator was actually thinking more along the lines of Mr. Julius.
Plus I was trying to be more like a trivia book. Have you ever read a trivia book? They include little snippets here and there, to entertain the reader. It all adds to the whole.
And let’s bear in mind that for a lifetime pre-Julius, while Rome had become the Hegemon of the Mediterranean Basin, the Republic itself had become a sociopolitical dumpster fire, so the Romans sort of accepted it getting put out of its misery.
He was extremely intelligent. (Read the story about how pirates kept him captive, and how he took revenge. Gruesomely.) He was an above average military commander, and if he wasn’t coming up with all those strategic ideas himself he made sure to follow good advice. His political strategy was also very good, but my knowledge of Roman politics is poor so all I can say is “he seemed smart”.
He was extremely charismatic. He gave speeches so good that Cicero (another extremely charismatic person) was considered his rival in the speech department (in addition to being political rivals). He was so good at seducing women that he weaponized it. During his career, he got favors out of the King of Bithynia, a much older gentleman who openly liked young men. People accused Caesar of being gay and being the “junior” in a suspected relationship. (We have no real way of knowing if the rumors were true or not.) So Caesar proved he liked women by seducing the wives of his political rivals. Then he would deliberately break their hearts (to ensure their husbands knew about it). Making matters more awkward, if a senator’s wife cheated on him and he forgave her, the senator still lost his position, due to some odd moral rules.
He was a vain self-promoter. His writings on his war in Gaul were about improving his political status. He got a lot of votes, driving his political opponents up the wall. His vanity probably drove him to be ambitious. It was said he was upset that he had reached the age Alexander the Great died at, yet had not accomplished nearly as much. He filled Rome with buildings, statues, art, etc, and made sure people would never forget his name. More than 2,000 years later he is still getting his wish.
Huh. I can’t find any confirmation of that. The first written reference to Caesar Salad is by a columnist talking about Caesar (or Cesar or Cesare) Cardini’s famous salad at the Hotel Caesar. Trivia books are 90% wrong most of the time. And I had a cow, or at least a very tiny piece of one, for dinner.
One other reason Caesar is so remembered is that, like Churchill, he wrote his history. His own war commentaries survived, so all his feats are told in glorious detail by himself, the best way to ensure that no opposing viewpoints creep in.
Also i don’t think anyone has ever considered him an example of “perfect leader”, a great general, and statesman perhaps, not a ruler. His immediate successors were trying to maintain the illusion that the Roman Republic had not collapsed, and that neither Ceasar or Augustus had in fact seized power and made themselves a “ruler” was part of that.
Later commentators could appreciate his skills as a general and orator but his position as de-facto ruler (and person that collapsed the roman republic, however rickety it may have been at that point) was almost always a black mark not something to be celebrated, whichever era they were writing in.
I’d probably amend that to well above average. World-class, really. It would be one thing to dismiss his victories against the Celts/Germans, but it should be noted he was consistently and occasionally spectacularly effective against the best army of the day - his own . It’s a lot harder to ignore his record against his Roman opponents, in which he appears to have very often been mildly to severely outnumbered. And while you can say he had the benefit of a quality general staff, he fought against them as well. Like his highly regarded former lieutenant in Gaul, Titus Labienus.
Really Pharsalus was the Agincourt of its day - Caesar had his ass in a crack and he took full advantage of Pompey’s mistake in attacking to pull off a clever and truly stunning reverse.
As I recall, Augustus/Octavian took the name Caesar to give himself more credibility and to show he was Caesar’s heir. Perhaps he started the naming trend?
As for Julius Caesar’s large place jn history, I would consider these factors:
He was a winning general who brought plunder and treasure back to Rome.
He was a populist fighting against an entrenched, decadent and corrupt elite.
He was assassinated at the height of his popularity
Marc Antony gave a stemwinder of a speech after his death which galvanized the people.
Caesar was the last leader of the Republic, amd his death marks the turning point from Republic to Empire.
Lots of historians around to document his life and death.
Webster’s New World College Dictionary, Third Edition (c) 1996, 1994, 1991, 1988 by Simon &Schuster, Inc. ☆Caesar salad [so named in honor of (Gaius) Julius CAESAR by Giacomo Junia, Italian-American chef in Chicago, who invented it c. 1903] a salad of greens, grated cheese, croutons, anchovies, etc. with a dressing of olive oil, lemon juice, garlic, and raw or coddled eggs
(Star indicates an Americanism in this dictionary.)
The History of Salads and Salad Dressings mentions both Giacamo and Caesar but says that most historians credit the invention to Caesar. Not that it matters for the name. It does not seem to appear in print before Dorothy Kilgallen’s Aug. 2, 1946 column and she was certainly talking about Caesar.
A Google search gives a few earlier hits but none with a proper preview for the whole and Google dates are notoriously unreliable. (One credits to it Alex Cardini of Spain in 1924 but the original publication date is uncertain)
My opinion is that’s why I don’t have a Webster’s dictionary.
. It’s a lot harder to ignore his record against his Roman opponents, in which he appears to have very often been mildly to severely outnumbered. And while you can say he had the benefit of a quality general staff, he fought against them as well. Like his highly regarded former lieutenant in Gaul, Titus Labienus.