This serial adultery does not actually appear to have seriously impaired his relationship with his third wife, Calpurnia, who remained affectionate and fond of him. What a silver-tongued devil Caesar must have been!
Men were afforded much more leeway in adultery, but during the Late Republic, adultery amongst married men and married women alike was rampant. It appears to have been, at least partially, a matter of discretion and respect - a woman who carried on an affair or even several affairs could maintain both marriage and social position, so long as the affair was not an offense to her husband’s dignity (ie by carrying on with someone filthy and low, like a BARBARIAN or a POOR) or too in-the-public-eye. There were not strong religious norms of sexual chastity in Roman society, which helped considerably.
That being said, Caesar did divorce his second wife over accusations of adultery, saying “Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion.” This was literal months after the ‘suspicious’ incident, though, and only after it turned into a massive political scandal, so there is certainly the urge to see it as a cynical move rather than genuine offense. That and Caesar was not close to his second wife, unlike his first wife (whom he defied a dictator’s order to divorce, almost getting himself killed in the process) or his third wife.
This aspect of Roman society cracks me up. You could do whatever and it was fine, as long as you did a decent enough attempt to hide it, even if everyone knew and you knew that they knew.
Just like emperors not calling themselves “king” even though they were kings in pretty much all things that mattered. But let’s just dance around the word, nobody will notice!
It’s funny but as an American yeah that’s how it works here too. It culturally clicks. You just need to respect people enough to lie to their faces and tell them what you’re supposed to say.
Polyamorous Ceasar and Calpurnia confirmed?
Open relationship hours!
Men were afforded much more leeway in adultery, but during the Late Republic, adultery amongst married men and married women alike was rampant. It appears to have been, at least partially, a matter of discretion and respect - a woman who carried on an affair or even several affairs could maintain both marriage and social position, so long as the affair was not an offense to her husband’s dignity (ie by carrying on with someone filthy and low, like a BARBARIAN or a POOR) or too in-the-public-eye. There were not strong religious norms of sexual chastity in Roman society, which helped considerably.
That being said, Caesar did divorce his second wife over accusations of adultery, saying “Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion.” This was literal months after the ‘suspicious’ incident, though, and only after it turned into a massive political scandal, so there is certainly the urge to see it as a cynical move rather than genuine offense. That and Caesar was not close to his second wife, unlike his first wife (whom he defied a dictator’s order to divorce, almost getting himself killed in the process) or his third wife.
This aspect of Roman society cracks me up. You could do whatever and it was fine, as long as you did a decent enough attempt to hide it, even if everyone knew and you knew that they knew.
Just like emperors not calling themselves “king” even though they were kings in pretty much all things that mattered. But let’s just dance around the word, nobody will notice!
Dignitas and gravitas obsession means that saving face and performative behavior is more important than strict adherence to rules.
As long as your potential accusers look more unreasonable than you do, you win!
Huh, that sounds a lot like ancient China.
It’s funny but as an American yeah that’s how it works here too. It culturally clicks. You just need to respect people enough to lie to their faces and tell them what you’re supposed to say.