How Julius Ceasar's Assassination was Justified

The Death of Julius Caesar is a key moment in our shared history around the world. The man's life undoubtedly caused incredible change in the way the Roman world and to a greater extent, the world itself moved forward. His murderers though, have been thoroughly vilified by history and we often forget that in their own way, they did have a justification for their actions rooted in history.
I recorded this two days after the 24 hour live stream so I am a little slower. But I hope you enjoy something a bit different, I am the History of Everything Channel afterall.
Discord: / discord
Reference List:
Ancient Sources:
Cicero, Marcus Tullius. Cicero: Letters to Atticus: Volume 1, Books 1-2. Vol. 1. Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Appianus, B. C. McGing, Appianus, and Appianus. “Book II.”. In Roman History, 415-33. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2019.
Holden, Hubert Ashton. Plutarch's Life of Lucius Cornelius Sulla. CUP Archive, 1886.
Sallust, The War with Catiline; the War with Jugurtha, trans. J.C. Rolfe. Loeb Classical Library 116. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA & London 2013.
Modern Sources:
Cornell, Tim. “The beginnings of Rome: Italy and Rome from the Bronze Age to the Punic Wars (c. 1000-264 BC)” Routledge, 2012. 215-240
Duncan, Mike. The storm before the storm: The beginning of the end of the Roman Republic. Hachette UK, 2017. 41-92
Flower, Harriet I. "Rome's First Civil War and the Fragility of Republican Political Culture." In Citizens of Discord: Rome and its Civil Wars. Oxford University Press, 2010.
Goldsworthy, Adrian. "“Instinctive genius”: The depiction of Caesar the general." Julius Caesar as Artful Reporter: The War Commentaries as Political Instruments (1998): 193-220.
Lintott, Andrew William. Judicial Reform and Land Reform in the Roman Republic: A new edition, with translation and commentary, of the laws from Urbino. Cambridge University Press, 1992.
McDermott, William C. "Caesar's projected Dacian-Parthian expedition." Ancient Society 13 (1982): 223-231.
Ridley, Ronald T. "The origin of the Roman dictatorship: An overlooked opinion." Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 122, no. H. 3/4 (1979): 303-309.
Wiseman, T. P., and M. Citroni. "The Legend of Lucius Brutus." (2003): 21-38.

[@userofthetube2701]

A crucial factor in all this were the Marian reforms. Before, the legions were a militia made up of property owning citizens, who had a stake in the stability of the state. These legions marching on Rome to topple the Republic would have been unthinkable. But as land, wealth and power concentrated into the hands of fewer and fewer individuals, the number of men who qualified to be in the legions dwindled, threatening the ability of Rome to raise sufficient troops to fight its wars. This was the actual problem that the land reform of the Grachi brothers was trying to resolve. But that solution went out the window with their assassination. Instead Marius opened up the ranks of the legions to the poor, turning them into professional soldiers. This opened up a huge new reservoir of manpower, but the new issue was that the Senate didn't usually care to pay them very much or to look after them in retirement. This meant that the loyalty of the legions very quickly came to lie, not with the state, but with those generals who, through their victories, had the means to pay their soldiers well. In essence the legions became private armies that belonged to men like Sulla, Pompey, Crassus, Caesar and ultimately Augustus. Who used them to solve their political disputes. As it no longer really controlled any troops, the Senate became increasingly irrelevant. The murder of Caesar was a final desperate attempt to change this trend. But the conspirators offered no solution to the fundamental problem of controlling the army. And so they were quickly swept away by Caesar's former supporters, setting the stage for more civil war and finally the Empire.

[@Dylan-hy2zj]

Based

[@CommieGobeldygook]

Both based AND red 💊 pilled.

[@cdcdrr]

Tl;dr: don't squeeze the middle class into the lower class, and always pay the soldiers what they are owed. You can get away with pissing off one group sometimes, but never both.

[@Krysnha]

indeed, the republic kill itself, because honestly the senate didnt want to compromise the wealth of its memeber

[@Krysnha]

Also do not forget the conspirators wanted to get rid of everithing cesar created, yes Cesar was a tirant but was loved by the army and the people as he actualy improve the situation for the legions and the people of rome, what the senators did, nothing, so in the end by killing him, wiouth any plan to actualy address the issues the legions and the poor parts of society have they were literaly killing themself

[@harrisonross7280]

"If you make peaceful change impossible, you make violent change inevitable." Best distillation of this period i can think of, heard it on the Hardcore History podcast.

[@HistoryofEverythingChannel]

I like that

[@TiesOfZip]

I wish our politicians here in America remembered this exact point.

[@mikoto7693]

@@TiesOfZipEspecially a certain 45th, now former president should have known. Yes, it’s a big blow to the ego to abuse the electoral college to steal a win from your rival who actually won more votes to become president and then still lose four years later but the democratic voting process and the peaceful transfer of power is important. It was a remarkable thing to observe from afar really. No matter how much the two different sides hated each other they still honoured the System. 44 presidents accepted the rules and when they lost an election or ended their term, they and their staff cooperated with the president elect and assisted in the peaceful and smooth transfer of power. Until the American people made the grevious mistake of bringing No45 into power. He became addicted to it and pretty blatantly admired the North Korean system with the Kim dynasty having absolute power as dictator for life and passing it on to his offspring. You know, the way we Brits used to with royalty and Kings and stuff. After doing everything he possibly could to win re election legitimately and still lost, No45 decided to make his own bid to destroy the democratic system and try to install himself Dictator For Life and pass it to his kids. I don’t understand how many Americans DON’T seem to recognise this. No45 did everything he could. He tried to bribe, threaten or blackmail the politicians in charge declaring state votes. He tried a similar trick with the courts and judges to try and block the process in individual states. He used his staff to harass and delay the official cooperation with the incoming president elect’s administration and staff. He even tried to get the US military leaders to be loyal to him personally instead of the office of the president. And while all that was being tried and failed, No45 did the most egregious damage in my opinion. He attacked the voting process itself. From trying to edge out certain voters by changing local laws, to accusing the company that provided electronic voting machines of corruption and bias, to attacking the postal ballot system and perpetuating the huge lie that the voting system as a whole was corrupt, unreliable and rigged. That he’d actually won but the voting system had been rigged. That selfish, stupid man damaged the faith of the American people in one of the biggest things that makes them proud. Their democracy and the robustness of the voting process. I don’t know if the damage is permanent. I hope not. Despite being British myself, I still think that as a whole the US should be proud of its democracy. But on with the subject. No45 culminated his attempt to destroy the USA’s democracy with violence. He incited his loyal followers to storm the Capitol building in a failed attempt at a revolution on January 6th. Don’t be fooled, it was nothing less than a violent coup attempt. They violently broke in and built gallows with which to hang Mike Pence for carrying out what was basically just a ceremonial process that he had no real power to refuse. And it’s not unreasonable to think they would have done the same to Pelosi if they could have. They certainly intended to take hostages in the very least. Remember that guy who had a load of zip ties? Fortunately the democratic system withstood the brutal assault on it by No45 and the US stood firm against the attack from within. If the Founders intended this and the processes they left in place actually worked against a would be tyrant then I sincerely applaud them from here in the future. However, it would be remiss of me not to conclude this comment with a warning for any American who happens to wander across this comment and actually read it. Just a friendly warning from your ally across the pond. 🇬🇧 The danger has not passed. No45 is coming back to make a second attempt to win power and try again to make himself Dictator for Life and make it an inherited position. Your ancestors fought mine and won to escape a monarchy. Don’t let it happen to you. You have the power to help avert it, or help usher it in. Vote accordingly. 🇺🇸

[@collinhicks37]

A few notes from somebody who has studied this period fairly extensively: It's important to remember that these groups, Optimates and Populares, weren't true political parties like one would see today. Instead, they are terms popularized in the 1800's and sometimes use to refer to the political positions of various Roman politicians. The ones who generally wished to maintain the current political order or even empower the patricians more were seen as the Optimates. Those who wished to empower the plebians or at the very least depended heavily upon the plebians for their political career were seen as the Populares. However, scholarship has since had to do a bit of a reevalution of these terms, since politicians almost never fit into one specific category and often acted in ways uncharacteristic of whatever group previous historians had lumped them into. Again, these were not solid political parties, but more generalized strategies. People within the same "group" would frequently butt heads because they had different approaches towards the types of laws they wanted to pass (or block). Secondly, the optimates, the "group" most likely to be considered reactionary, did *not* follow Caesar, and in many cases detested him. When it came to his political approach, Caesar was for the most part a Populare, and as such, his career was very much based off of promising both economic and political empowerment for the plebians, and funding flashy entertainment for them. This drew the ire of the conservatives and reactionaries, who felt that these reforms could threaten the current, patrician controlled political order. Because of this, many would end up supporting Pompey *against* Caesar in their civil war, with Cicero, a fairly staunch conservative, seeing Pompey as the lesser of two evils. I also think it would be useful to give some more context to the self-fashioned "Liberatores" who were involved in the assassination of Caesar. While they may have claimed to have done so out of selflessness and a desire to save the republic, I wouldn't recommend taking them at their word. For example, towards the end of his life, Caesar had coins minted which bore his face on one side of them. This was a stark break from Roman tradition as, up until this point, coins generally only depicted gods, legendary heroes, or popular ancestors. To have one's own face on the coin was seen by some as evidence that Caesar was seeking to become king. The fact that Brutus does the same thing only a few years later seems out of character for someone who wishes to maintain Roman tradition and the republican political system. By the time of Caesar, the old Roman form of government was likely near unsalvageable. Every act of violence, every break with precedent sent the system closer and closer to the brink. But when the status quo is throwing people into severe poverty at an exponential rate, and the system is making peaceful reform impossible, what else is there to do? As you said, the same methods used by the system to defend itself also came to be used to ultimately overthrow it. From what I can tell, Caesar was a political opportunist who wished to profit off of the sentiments of an increasingly desperate population, while his assassination was the last breaths of a system that had been corrupted to its core and was ridden with its own wannabe tyrants.

[@avnostlga]

Thank you for sharing this. It's always refreshing to be exposed to knowledge gained by thoughtful study. This period of history I know not enough about to have an educated opinion. It certainly adds to the enjoyment of the presenters narrative.

[@Kaiserboo1871]

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Slavery killed the Roman Republic.

[@rustomkanishka]

Thanks for sharing this. I studied political science in college, and this period- the fall of the republic always stood out to me. I did my own reading, of course, but your opinion here puts things into perspective. For one thing it would seem that the senate could get little done, and the system needed epic plebians -on - strike levels of reform. However, they really didn't get anything done. Ceaser apologists claim that he could have fixed everything with time, but then with what time he had, he did nothing. I don't think there would be any point in trying to keep the system powerful by the time Augustus came around. No one needs the challenge to one's authority, the empire is prospering, and what it does need- administrators - can be found by keeping the institutions alive but weak.

[@mikoto7693]

Adding my thanks for sharing this. It’s usually a mistake to view ancient cultures through an exclusively modern perspective. Sometimes it’s necessary to do additional learning to understand the thinking and how things worked at the time or even now in certain cultures. Take the Palestinian narrative that they are pure, innocent civilians utterly separate from Hamas, being oppressed by Hamas and bullied by big bad Israel who stole their country of Palestine. Utter nonsense. Absolute BS of the highest calibre and I’m frankly ashamed so many fellow westerners have fallen for the deception. In actuality Palestine has never, ever existed as a sovereign state. The closest it came was between 1917 and 1948 when we Brits owned the region after taking it from the Turkish Ottoman Empire. During that time it was named Mandatory Palestine and we very much owned it. It was not sovereign. It’s during this time most of the ancestors of both modern Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs/Muslims came to live there. When we wanted to leave we split the land and offered half each to both groups. The Jews agreed and founded Israel on the land they inherited. The Arab/Muslims refused and immediately declared war on Israel the day it was founded when we turned over control in 1948. This included both the neighbouring Islamic states and the Muslims living in what’s now Israel. So they were kicked out for their violence. The minority that didn’t resort to violence were allowed to stay which is probably why like 20% of Israelis today are Muslim. As for the land intended for the Arab/Muslims who refused statehood because they wanted 100% of old Mandatory Palestine instead of 50%, including Gaza was handed over to Egypt to occupy with one minor interruption until 1968 when Israel took it during another war its neighbours started. And instead of resisting by actually targeting the military forces occupying Gaza or political targets like Ukraine is doing in Russia, well… The Palestinians pretty much stuck with the tactics of targeting ordinary Israeli civilians just going about their ordinary lives in Israel by sending men wearing vests that go boom into crowded places. And this was in addition to creating Hamas in 1987 and plenty of different Palestinians did it as well as Hamas. Taking hostages is nothing new for them either. Until the aftermath of 9/11 made it almost impossible they were very fond of hijacking civilian airliners and threatening the helpless crew and passengers to get what they wanted politically. They also resorted to taking Israeli Olympic athletes hostage once though that turned out poorly for both sides. The other pieces of context required are the 1964 National Palestinian Charter and 1988 Hamas Charter. Both blatantly state the intention to make every Jewish Israeli go the way of the Dinosaurs. The very big G word they accuse Israel of wanting and doing. Go figure. Finally after Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip entirely in 2006, the Palestinians freely voted Hamas into office as their legitimate government. And as of December 2023, 72% of all Palestinians think that the decision to go to war with Israel was the correct choice. Yes, context is important.

[@mecadragoon]

i appreciate talking about history on different time periods and not just modern

[@hydra7427]

I would argue that modern political assassinations are already normalized, and we're just living with the consequences today. It was only in America's early republic that you could have the President and high ranking individuals interacting freely with the public, but after Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, and JFK we now have a Presidency which is extremely insulated from the public and one that is constantly concerned with security. Most of the ones who actually try to act on the impulse go nowhere because they're nutters without support, but all it takes is someone competent or lucky and there you go. And the same goes for European politicians, who had their own assassination frenzy courtesy of the anarchist and nationalist movements. It's something that's probably only going to be recognized hundreds of years from now looking back how cynical our period is.

[@MattBellzminion]

A solid argument, even considered without listing every serious assassination attempt; a comprehensive listing would have to include: candidate Theodore Roosevelt (shot aimed at his heart, but the bullet was stopped by the thick sheaf of paper his speech was written on), Gerald Ford (the shooter, a woman, missed), Ronald Reagan (critically wounded in his upper chest), and the gunman who took wild pot-shots at the Obama White House (prompting more bullet-proofing of the WH).

[@alexandarvoncarsteinzarovi3723]

His death would be one of the greatest tragedies of the ancient world, but also a key point in European history, Gaius Julius Caesar in life was a hero of Rome, its people and the Republic but in death, he became more, far more, he had become for all intense and purposes, the sainted martyr for the future Roman Empire,

[@concept5631]

In death, he became far more powerful than he could've become in life. His shadow is felt on Europe to this day.

[@Southboundpachyderm]

My allegiance is to the Republic, TO DEMOCRACY!

[@SabreSix1980]

If you're not with me, then you're my enemy.

[@Southboundpachyderm]

@@SabreSix1980 only a sith deals in absolutes.

[@nathanielartosilla9110]

"Greetings Quinctilius Varus, what brings you to our remote village?" "Unfortunately, the local unrest." "They are here. There is a traitor among you. Teutoburg Forest. Thousands of Germans."

[@falconeshield]

*"VARUS!!! GIVE ME BACK MY LEGIONS!!!"* Really guys? You had to wait for me to bring this quote up?

[@solaman095]

So glad i found this channel. Keep it up. Love the snarky yet refreshingly sober tone in the aeroflot videos. Really shows the incompetence

[@KityKatKiller]

Regarding the .... unusual time period of the topic for your channel: I always wondered how history creators could NOT cover any roman topics. The period is a meme for a reason. On a serious note about that: I think the three major axis powers and the last century of the roman empire are the four major ways in which a system can fail. And if we want to continue living in a democracy, these are the well documented processe we need to see the warning signs for.

[@HistoryofEverythingChannel]

Kinda made me wonder too. It's why I picked ancient as my minor

[@anthonyhayes1267]

"What is this, bring your knife to work day?"

[@falconeshield]

"Et tu, Walmart?"

[@Calamity4]

I know that this is different areas of history content, but do whatever you want! I’m sure most of us will watch it regardless. Focus on quality, not quantity or topic, and take time for yourself to prevent burnout.

[@Nmethyltransferase]

You can't put "The Assassination Of Caesar" in the title because it hurts the algorithm's feefees?

[@HistoryofEverythingChannel]

Instant 18 plus

[@sylvainprigent6234]

Historia civilis has a greaaaat series of videos on the subject for anyone interested in going deeper

[@kullervo3477]

Childhood is mourning Ceasars death, growing up is realizing that the republic needed to be defended.

[@FifingFossil]

Getting old is understanding that it only makes power of Augustus stronger while lacking any structure

[@padraig6200]

The Republic was already dead before Caesar, he just helped to put it out of its misery

[@kurnugiakurn3567]

nah the republic was already on its death bed. the only thing the assassination did was turning cesar into a martyr in the eyes of the plebians

[@TinTin77x]

​@@kurnugiakurn3567But he was a Martyr he was one of the few Roman elites to help the common people the rest just used them

[@Thinkingnamesishard]

Yeah, Republic was long gone by the time of Caesar. Aftermath and wealth of Punic wars dissolved the Republic

[@zaco-km3su]

I didn't watch it but I know the justification. The patricians considered Rome "free" when they could do whatever they wanted and the commoners had to be grateful with whatever the patricians wanted to give them. It is worth saying that Caesar DID NOT WANT TO EXECUTE ANYONE....or at least he wanted to execute as few people as possible. He wanted to REINTEGRATE his political opponents, INCLUDING THOSE THAT STARTED A CIVIL WAR AGAINST HIM. He was far less of a tyrant than the patricians would have made you think.

[@amakavelist565]

Great stuff would love to see more from you in this..particularly Clodius..

[@BioluminescentTree]

As for the thumbnail: the quote is "Tu quoque", not "Et tu", which is Shakespeare's version meaning the same thing.

[@OzyTheLast]

We dont mind older history videos, just justfies your name more :D

[@Flum666]

It wasn't, Brutus had a majority in the senate and thought he could get away with it, but people with more power and influence didn't like it, and now we have history

[@FPoP1911]

Happy new year, santa left the script for a future video of you in crimea. Also joke aside, the openning here, is what good stuff are made of.

[@svetiteram737]

Hello, I have a question... In the last video at the end you mentioned some guy working on a huge skript about the russian ariforce, and I know you said his name (anamaki or annamaky or animaky or something like that). I can't find his channel so can you please link it ?

[@HistoryofEverythingChannel]

Animarchy

[@johnburns9634]

What if Pompey was a guest of Egypt, and not murdered? How would that have affected Caesar’s “Tyranny”? Would Pompey have led the Senate? If Caesar hadn’t been assassinated, might Cicero have died in his own bed?

[@jakub_paints6775]

I heard it said he was an ambitious man.

[@avnostlga]

Nice quote.

[@stuffy2757]

I was just doing my daily thinking of the roman empire

[@julianmorrisco]

I’m just glad you said ‘I felt like doing something Roman’. If you’d said ‘I felt like doing something Greek’ I wouldn’t have been best pleased by the mental images…. D’oh. Dammit.

[@RedXlV]

Frankly, Rome's transition from republic to empire was on balance a good thing for the majority of Romans.

[@HistoryofEverythingChannel]

I mean the bar in the late Republic wasn't exactly high but yes

[@Matt_The_Hugenot]

Never understood those who glorify Julius Ceasar and decry his assassination. He seized power in a military coup and the potters stood up to him when no one else would.

[@lkcdarzadix6216]

Cause they didn't have any planned aside from killing Caesar they made him martyr hence mark Anthony and Octavian were able to take Rome

[@isaac6077]

What did amy of the plotters do for rome besides killing one of their more successful generals

[@Matt_The_Hugenot]

@@isaac6077 They were attempting to restore the republic and take it from the hands of of the general that had seized it in a military coup.

[@hyperion3145]

While both points are valid, they aren't responding to the statement. It's not about how well thought out the plotters were, it's about how blatantly corrupt and damaging Caesar was. Personally, I think it's because most people follow Augustus' propaganda which made him out to be more of a hero than he actually was combined with the fact he did have skill and some popular backing. Also, the many politicians that try to imitate him to get to power.

[@Iplaygames12183]

What’s the name of the book we should read

[@terrynewsome6698]

Odd request, can you write the Australian parliament to not cut up and bury the 40+ nh 90s and instead send them to Ukraine

[@HistoryofEverythingChannel]

It honestly wouldn't have any effect. My opinion of our PM and our government is not high. Hasn't been for many years. Inaction is the order of the day in Canberra

[@razgriz9146]

From a purely logical perspective, there absolutely wasn't any justification for the assassination of Gaius Julius Caesar. By murdering the last remaining bulwark of stability, order, security and peace in the Roman Republic, the assassins of Gaius Julius Caesar plunged the Roman Republic into an absolutely apocalyptic existential crisis that could very well have seen the absolute total collapse of Roman civilization. Thankfully, Octavian was able to restore order to his dying civilization and ensure its continued survival for many centuries to come by establishing the Roman Empire. P.S. your channel is called "History of Everything" for a reason. If certain individuals can't accept that you're going to make videos based on your personal preference and desires, then they can kindly take their business elsewhere. Feel free to do as you wish regarding your schedule and your content. Cheers.

[@userofthetube2701]

From the perspective of his assassins, there were very good reasons to want Caesar dead. He was quite obviously a threat to the ancient Roman ideal that no one man should have complete control over the state. And his policies were undoubtedly quite radical in nature, and came at the expense of the old aristocracy. But the conspirators had no plan beyond hoping that things were going to return to normal once the deed was done. They had no way to control the army that was mostly under the command of Caesar's allies. And they were unwilling (and probably unable) to push through the radical reform that could have given them popular support. All that makes their act poorly planned and ultimately self-destructive, but not, at least by their own standards, unjustified.

[@WagesOfDestruction]

​ @userofthetube2701 Why?? The armies controlled by Caesar's assassins were significantly larger than those loyal to his supporters. It is actually surprising that Caesar's faction emerged victorious.

[@Leo-ok3uj]

@@WagesOfDestruction What are you talking about? All of their assassins were senators, and by consequence any of them had an army loyal to them, only dictators can enter Roma and still have military power

[@WagesOfDestruction]

​@Leo-ok3uj well it's a fact. Check the battles fought afterwards

[@Leo-ok3uj]

@@WagesOfDestruction The one that happened months later? After Bruttus was given the position as governor of Macedonia and by consequence the legions of the province? After they left Roma? Or the ones after Marc Anthony was given governorship of cisalpine gaul and the legions there?

[@thejudgmentalcat]

Ignore the Senate at your own peril

[@McNubbys]

...I am understanding the death of a Republic... I wish I didn't...

[@christopher5723]

I'd say both sides were completely justified, the republic was a broken mess by the Triumvrate and Ceaser was put in a position where he had no other choice than to act as he did, but Brutus et al had every right to defend the republic.

[@Wheels-of-terror]

The one dislike is from Caesar.

[@NorthForkFisherman]

Ah, so wonderfully subtle, the criticism of some nation's political troubles today. Making the Avenetine Great Again has a long history. And many modern parallels.

[@falconeshield]

You did not just compare Julius Ceaser with Donald Duck.

[@NorthForkFisherman]

@@falconeshieldIf it walks like a Duck. Do you really think there's anything new under the sun? Politics is only different when you factor in technology. It's always "THAT GUY WANTS TO TAKE AWAY YOUR SHIT. SUPPORT ME AND I'LL STOP HIM".

[@johnsatan117]

Next Russian Navy video?

[@HistoryofEverythingChannel]

There was one two weeks ago

[@anothermike867]

My allegiance is to the REPUBLIC!! TO DEMOCRACY!!!! I see you quoting Star Wars 😅

[@joeclaridy]

But was it though?

[@alexandarvoncarsteinzarovi3723]

No, by that point in time the republic was already dead from the civil wars, either it would become and a united Empire or fractured into petty kingdoms

[@kullervo3477]

​@@alexandarvoncarsteinzarovi3723 Well that happened anyways, the emperors were atleast as or even more fucked than the late republic.

[@alexandarvoncarsteinzarovi3723]

​@@kullervo3477 depends on the Emperors, if we are talking about Caligula, Caracalla, or Commodus, yeah were fucked,

[@kullervo3477]

@@alexandarvoncarsteinzarovi3723 Have you seen spectrums roman emperor tierlists? You get a pretty good sense of the roman empires death spiral from those.

[@alexandarvoncarsteinzarovi3723]

@@kullervo3477 For every Majorian, the 5 good Emperors, Aurelion, Justin, Justinian and Heraclius, that came to save ROME in its dire time of need we have gotten more and more of the worst,

[@Thetiersofmadness]

Second