Julius Caesar was a great leader and didn't deserve to be assassinated. Prove me wrong faggots.
>pro-tip: you can't
Julius Caesar was a great leader and didn't deserve to be assassinated. Prove me wrong faggots.
>pro-tip: you can't
If he was not assassinated, Octavius would not have risen to greatness - and that would've denied Julius' glory by extension.
Julius was predestined to die and it was precisely because he died that he was a great leader.
He and his army murdered and raped millions of whites. He was an honorary nigger. Prove me wrong
Warring against themselves is just what Europeans do.
seconding.
Julius Caesar's death allowed Best Princeps to come into being.
G*ul niggers shouldn't have tried to expand into Italy if they didn't want to face the consequences. They destroyed the Etruscan civilization of Emilia-Romagna. That's unforgivable.
Going to war for a reason is one thing. But invading random communities to steal their shit in order to fund your retard-tier economics of your country, raping and murdering tens of millions of whites along the way is incredibly niggery. The faggot should have been executed as a child.
Might makes right, faggot. Deal with it.
Seems like Caesar is 2kool4u
>whites
Hahahaha. Do you think they gave a shit about that? They saw every non-Mediterranean as a dumb violent barbarian.
Getting assassinated was the best thing that could've happened to him at that point. He didn't live long enough to see himself become the villain, that the conspirators were all patrician senators galvanized his support, and his death paved the way for Augustus to literally deify him.
might made right when he got stabbed like a little bitch in the senate house too.
>implying ancient meds weren't niggerer than niggers
Topkek
THE SENATE WAS IN THE RIGHT
JULIUS CAESAR, THE TRAITOR, DESERVED TO DIE
HE WAS A DICTATOR, AND A MONARCH
ROME WILL NEVER VOW TO KINGS AGAIN
>using social terms in a time before those terms existed
>calculating murder rates from the fucking Middle Ages
There's no way you could do that other than user just wars, revolts and shit as reference.
*use
Various cities such as London and Amsterdam actually counted crimes and crime rates some years, or often as a regular part of local governance, so we actually have data. Kinda like they didn't track blocks when Wilt Chamberlain played but there's complete game data for like 120 of his games, in which he averaged 8.8 blocks a game.
>data lists "Italy" before 1871
>there was no Italy before that time
really made me think
>the cities and people of italy magically appeared in the mid 19th century
Probably used statistics for an urban area like Rome
Did ALL the Italian city-states record their homicide rates? I don't think they did. If there's any real recorded data from them in that study it's simply higher because they were always involved with war.