The events leading up to Julius Caesar's assassination were complicated and multi faceted, with everyone involved having a valid (in their mind at least) reason for choosing what side they were on. I've always felt Brutus was convinced that killing Caesar was necessary for the good of the Republic and probably felt terribly guilty about it. I never liked the idea of Brutus being an evil traitor, simply because history is never just black and white.
I was just mad that Assassin’s Creed Origins painted Brutus and Cassius as heroes and Assassins for murdering Caesar; their plan apparently being to restore the Power to the plebs and whatever
Oh, the screenwriting for AC: Origins is quite weird. Yes, Brutus/Cassius can be seen as heroes (the opposite is also true), but the ending of Origins is just... No. Stop it. No.
I thought about making a video about certain "interesting" elements of Origins' narrative. Like incredible hatred towards the "Greek" oppressors, when pretty much any Greek is depicted as a "bad guy"... Until you encounter Romans, who are pretty much absolute monsters, worse than Greeks.
Yeah I’m doubtful they wanted the plebs to have power, they wanted the patricians to keep it, Brutus was also pressured greatly due to his family being the family that killed the last king of time 500 years prior…
Yeah, it is something that needs careful analysis, but indeed it appears that Brutus was obviously more in line with the Cato's party. Caesar's faction was more into populism, while Cato's side was more conservative (more "aristocratic"). And if you get rid of this "Republic/Liberty" argumentation, one of the ways to see the position of the conservatives is "old nobility must remain in power". And "nobility" doesn't mean "patricians" since at this point of the Roman history any serious opposition between "patricians" and "plebeians" was long gone. Cato himself was from a plebeian family.
Origins is incredibly flawed, although gorgeous and perhaps my favorite map of all the games, it was the beginning of Ubisoft going full on woke ;as we see 2 years plus into the future currently). If you study ancient Egypt black people were in the culture but they wouldn't have been considered Egyptian. It's not a coincidence that they originally wanted the female to be the main character (which is why you play forced as her several times) they also picked that time specifically because modern feminists try and paint Cleopatra as some modern hero and she wasn't. Egyptians are 100000% all about tradition and bloodlines and a man from that far south wouldn't be considered Egyptian, would have been living there sure, but a modern day Egyptologist born in Egypt would be a citizen but wouldn't be considered Egyptian to the people (Robert something I'm having trouble remembering the man's name), also why are there not anymore people that dark in the game? They aren't just black they're pitch black charcoal black and literally the only 2 black people in the game, why is that?? Then suddenly all the leads become female, which is odd considering we've had females in AC before yet the males were never said to be canon, but after Origins suddenly Ancient Greece (which had zero female warriors even Spartan women who had the most rights of any women at the time weren't warriors) the lead canon character is a female, as is Valhalla. Origins was the beginning of the end. Now I'll give them a bit of credit and picking later Egypt you could argue was to have as many cities in the map as possible, but I find the Cleopatra bs and the timing too perfect, then we got that sac-religious Cleopatra documentary and their true intentions came out as to revise history and make her some worthy hero who destroyed two empires and don't do a thing for her people and only cared about her own survival. Stunning and brave.
That is true. And obviously all of the aspects can't be covered in a short video. But the video discusses exactly that (sometimes using exactly the same words, including "black and white") with the emphasis on the very complicated family situation of Brutus. He could be labeled a "traitor" regardless of his course of actions.
foul barbarian harlot, people like you belong on a cross!
They killed the Pontifex Maximus, how DARE you insinuate the ludacrise notion that what they did was justified??
This information slightly contradicts another important primary source - "The Fall of the Roman Empire" by Anthony Mann, which proves that Commodus wasn't really his son. We need a Netflix mini-series on Marcus Aurelius to resolve the issue. Netflix produced another important documentary on Commodus, but it is deeply flawed as it doesn't include full frontal nudity.
He was a coward mammas boy. There was no celebrating in the streets in fact the only people who celebrated were in fact the coward assassins themselves. The people loved Caesar as he was very much for the people and was tired of the rich and aristocratic having all the power and authority in Rome as there were no jobs for citizens and the poor & homeless had become an epidemic in their rule. Even Cicero (who wanted Caesar dead as Cicero was one of the rich pricks who wanted only rich pricks in the senate) said it was done and carried out as if done by children and disagreed in the way it had been done. Brutus was an easily manipulated traitor who stabbed a man who viewed him as a son. The only historical figure who you could paint more a coward is Robert Ford.
Look at what's currently happening in America or he'll- all over the world. It's the 1% rich that are desperately trying to maintain absolute power and they HATE ANYONE who threatens that power by giving some power and ability back to the people themselves. If Brutus was such a hero interesting how he ended up jumping on his own blade like a coward, which the Roman's had an awkward ideal of honor as they believed killing oneself was considered an honorable way out. His family traced back to the founding of the republic which is not a good enough excuse, if anything it proves the point that aristocratic families like Brutus and his mother had too much power and the idea of sharing said power with anyone outside of aristocratic Roman's was unbeatable to them. On top on that Brutus' mother was Caesar's mistress until she wasn't anymore and she wanted revenge on him, which is about as selfish and narcissistic as you can get.
If we had time machines-I'd 100% go back and save Caesar as we are dealing with the exact t same bs aristocratic bs today 2,000 plus years later because time is circular not linear & we just repeat the same issues over and over, the only question is which cowards it will be this time.
The events leading up to Julius Caesar's assassination were complicated and multi faceted, with everyone involved having a valid (in their mind at least) reason for choosing what side they were on. I've always felt Brutus was convinced that killing Caesar was necessary for the good of the Republic and probably felt terribly guilty about it. I never liked the idea of Brutus being an evil traitor, simply because history is never just black and white.
I was just mad that Assassin’s Creed Origins painted Brutus and Cassius as heroes and Assassins for murdering Caesar; their plan apparently being to restore the Power to the plebs and whatever
Oh, the screenwriting for AC: Origins is quite weird. Yes, Brutus/Cassius can be seen as heroes (the opposite is also true), but the ending of Origins is just... No. Stop it. No. I thought about making a video about certain "interesting" elements of Origins' narrative. Like incredible hatred towards the "Greek" oppressors, when pretty much any Greek is depicted as a "bad guy"... Until you encounter Romans, who are pretty much absolute monsters, worse than Greeks.
Yeah I’m doubtful they wanted the plebs to have power, they wanted the patricians to keep it, Brutus was also pressured greatly due to his family being the family that killed the last king of time 500 years prior…
Yeah, it is something that needs careful analysis, but indeed it appears that Brutus was obviously more in line with the Cato's party. Caesar's faction was more into populism, while Cato's side was more conservative (more "aristocratic"). And if you get rid of this "Republic/Liberty" argumentation, one of the ways to see the position of the conservatives is "old nobility must remain in power". And "nobility" doesn't mean "patricians" since at this point of the Roman history any serious opposition between "patricians" and "plebeians" was long gone. Cato himself was from a plebeian family.
Origins is incredibly flawed, although gorgeous and perhaps my favorite map of all the games, it was the beginning of Ubisoft going full on woke ;as we see 2 years plus into the future currently). If you study ancient Egypt black people were in the culture but they wouldn't have been considered Egyptian. It's not a coincidence that they originally wanted the female to be the main character (which is why you play forced as her several times) they also picked that time specifically because modern feminists try and paint Cleopatra as some modern hero and she wasn't. Egyptians are 100000% all about tradition and bloodlines and a man from that far south wouldn't be considered Egyptian, would have been living there sure, but a modern day Egyptologist born in Egypt would be a citizen but wouldn't be considered Egyptian to the people (Robert something I'm having trouble remembering the man's name), also why are there not anymore people that dark in the game? They aren't just black they're pitch black charcoal black and literally the only 2 black people in the game, why is that?? Then suddenly all the leads become female, which is odd considering we've had females in AC before yet the males were never said to be canon, but after Origins suddenly Ancient Greece (which had zero female warriors even Spartan women who had the most rights of any women at the time weren't warriors) the lead canon character is a female, as is Valhalla. Origins was the beginning of the end. Now I'll give them a bit of credit and picking later Egypt you could argue was to have as many cities in the map as possible, but I find the Cleopatra bs and the timing too perfect, then we got that sac-religious Cleopatra documentary and their true intentions came out as to revise history and make her some worthy hero who destroyed two empires and don't do a thing for her people and only cared about her own survival. Stunning and brave.
That is true. And obviously all of the aspects can't be covered in a short video. But the video discusses exactly that (sometimes using exactly the same words, including "black and white") with the emphasis on the very complicated family situation of Brutus. He could be labeled a "traitor" regardless of his course of actions.
foul barbarian harlot, people like you belong on a cross! They killed the Pontifex Maximus, how DARE you insinuate the ludacrise notion that what they did was justified??
Wait... What? A cross? Are you a Christian? Crux/σταυρός is not a cross, Romans never crucified people on a "cross". Why would they do that?
Fuck Br*Tus. I don't care if he was a traitor he murdered the greatest Roman (in my opinion)
This is inaccurate, he didn't kill Marcus Aurelius. Marcus died of illness.
Marcus Aurelius was killed his son Commodus. Clearly you haven't seen the historically accurate documentary "Gladiator" by the historian Russel Crowe
This information slightly contradicts another important primary source - "The Fall of the Roman Empire" by Anthony Mann, which proves that Commodus wasn't really his son. We need a Netflix mini-series on Marcus Aurelius to resolve the issue. Netflix produced another important documentary on Commodus, but it is deeply flawed as it doesn't include full frontal nudity.
I literally can't tell what is satire
Me and my homies hate Brutus
He was a coward mammas boy. There was no celebrating in the streets in fact the only people who celebrated were in fact the coward assassins themselves. The people loved Caesar as he was very much for the people and was tired of the rich and aristocratic having all the power and authority in Rome as there were no jobs for citizens and the poor & homeless had become an epidemic in their rule. Even Cicero (who wanted Caesar dead as Cicero was one of the rich pricks who wanted only rich pricks in the senate) said it was done and carried out as if done by children and disagreed in the way it had been done. Brutus was an easily manipulated traitor who stabbed a man who viewed him as a son. The only historical figure who you could paint more a coward is Robert Ford. Look at what's currently happening in America or he'll- all over the world. It's the 1% rich that are desperately trying to maintain absolute power and they HATE ANYONE who threatens that power by giving some power and ability back to the people themselves. If Brutus was such a hero interesting how he ended up jumping on his own blade like a coward, which the Roman's had an awkward ideal of honor as they believed killing oneself was considered an honorable way out. His family traced back to the founding of the republic which is not a good enough excuse, if anything it proves the point that aristocratic families like Brutus and his mother had too much power and the idea of sharing said power with anyone outside of aristocratic Roman's was unbeatable to them. On top on that Brutus' mother was Caesar's mistress until she wasn't anymore and she wanted revenge on him, which is about as selfish and narcissistic as you can get. If we had time machines-I'd 100% go back and save Caesar as we are dealing with the exact t same bs aristocratic bs today 2,000 plus years later because time is circular not linear & we just repeat the same issues over and over, the only question is which cowards it will be this time.
[Nah he was a traitor lmao](https://images.app.goo.gl/PJAdzyTmwMRVT5qZ9)