... I believe it ...
In Response To: charles said it ()

Of course this topic has long been passionately tossed about. I can't pretend to compete with those master debaters that have gone before me. But we now have new insight and our own rubric to redress it. When in Rome, I suppose Caesar, as much as possible, did as the macho, homophobic Romans. And when in Hellenistic hot spots, he did as his namesake Alexander! The trouble was that he couldn't necessarily keep his parallel lives totally separate, especially from the ancient "Plutarchs" and the "Paparazzi".

If Caesar was a Roman only, then his behavior in Bithynia would have been truly scandalous. Yet, both he and the Roman noblesse oblige knew better. His relations with Nicomedes, whatever they may have been, obviously had no negative effect on his political fortunes. And certainly the rank and file military men could not throw their rocks at him. Unlike modern military, homosexuality was apparently tolerated, if not completely accepted among the Roman legions.

Concerning Casesar's womanizing, that also was part and parcel of his Greco-Roman kingly persona. He was expected to make as many babies as possible. As his royal status increased, so did his desirability in the eyes of royal females. And upon becoming "Godfather", he could dictate almost all reproduction.