Hacker News Reader

Comment by Koshkin | Hacker News Reader

Was G. J. Caesar beautiful? Was he also strong, smart, cunning, wise, etc.?

There's statues of him for you to judge for yourself. He looked alright in my opinion. Notably, however, he was self-conscious about his baldness. According to Suetonius, combed his remaining hair all the way forwards sometimes, perhaps the original "combover."

He also wrote a book called "The Conquest of Gaul" which should give a good idea about his character.

I think the OPs implication is "why do we care about if Cleopatra was beautiful, do we likewise care if a male emperor was attractive?"

If OP is genuinely wondering that, I guess OP didn't read the article. I'd also point OP towards all the (no pun intended) snake oil beauty products and techniques that bear Cleopatra's name, e.g.: http://www.stylecraze.com/articles/cleopatra-beauty-secrets/

Because we never signed any contract that said that in society both sexes will be interested in the same things, including being interested in the same attributes of the other sex.

I'm not implying that we did, I was just clarifying after seeing two responses to the OP that seemingly missed the point they were trying to make.

so, sexism is still a thing

So, "sexism" is meaningless as a catch-all accusation. It's a throught stopper.

Viewing others as sexual objects, for example, is fine when looking for a sexual encounter (whether you're a man or a woman or non-binary or whatever). Not every relation has to be "meaningful" or a long-term commitment. This is something young people revolted to earn in the 50s and 60s, and apparently our neo-puritan 80s and onwards breathen forgot.

On the other hand, viewing others as sexual objects, is not fine on e.g. a job interview -- but that's another case altogether.

People of different sexes having different preferences is also a statistical reality (statistical meaning it's not some property that holds for absolutely every member of a respective set). We can say they shouldn't, but we can't finger point and accuse a girl because she reads Cosmopolitan, or to a boy because he reads some bodybuilding website. Their tastes might be cliche, but they are what they are. And nobody can objectively measure what's a legitimate preference and what's not, except by having some non-verified prior that men and women should absolutely have the same tastes in aggregate, and if they're not, that's some social distortion right there.

Well attributing Roman statues is hard, in particular because every single collector, antiques dealer and museum curator in the last 2000 years had a strong incentive to identify his statue as one of the big guys. [0]

And additionally, they come from a tradition of visual representation, where the easiest attribution is always Alexander, when he was depicted with rams horns. [1]

[0] Except if there is an antique inscription, which there isn't if the statues is supposed to depict Caesar. Mary Beard has an entire, and quite entertaining lecture on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-JelaK-bAA

[1] For example: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alexander_coin,_Brit...

He would have access to food and nutrition many others didn't , he and Cleopatra probably looked healthier than most..

well maybe not her if the stuff about ancient Egyptian lineages is true..

What ancient Egyptian lineages - she was Greek.

Maybe referring to the fact of the intermarriage practiced by the Ptolomeic dynasty. (Brother and sister marriage)

I was, i didn't know she was Greek.

Apparently he was also self-conscious about his other hair.

> In Suetonius' Life of Julius Caesar. 119 CE.

> "XLV. He [Caesar] was so nice in the care of his person, that he not only kept the hair of his head closely cut and had his face smoothly shaved, but (31) even caused the hair on other parts of the body to be plucked out by the roots, a practice for which some persons rallied him."

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1ffj0w/what_...

The conquest of Gaul is one of the best history books I've ever read, even with it's inherent bias and self promotion.

Well... I'm not sure that counts, since court sculptors are going to make him look as good as possible, even at the expense of realism. Remember how Oliver Cromwell had to insist on being portrayed "warts and all"?

(Yes, the quote itself is probably apocryphal, but his painting did show blemishes in a way that wasn't typical for VIP portraiture.)

In the republican era realism was prized. Politicians wanted their portraits more warts and all to make them seem like one of the people.

In the Imperial era propaganda changed and sculpture started becoming more abstract to make politicians seem more perfect and indestructible.

Cleopatras portraits are probably idealized. Caesar’s are probably fairly accurate.

My roomie once told he applied snake venom to his hair on Cleopatra's suggestion.

You know what they say about desperate times!

cunning surely

Reply on news.ycombinator.com