There’s only 1 Caesar, or Slim Shady, or Charlemagne or Attila.
“Alexander” was an incredibly common name in the Greek world. Even within his own family tree, he was technically Alexander III of Macedon. Using “The Great” was a practical necessity for historians to distinguish him from his father’s predecessors and the dozens of other Alexanders running around the Mediterranean. Plus his scale of impact was absurd! Charlemagne literally means “Charles the Great” because there were many Charleses. Finally, while we usually think of Julius Caesar, “Caesar” became a title used by every Roman Emperor for centuries. It eventually evolved into “Kaiser” and “Tsar”. If you just say “Caesar” in a room full of Roman history buffs they actually will ask you to disambiguate which one you mean
Does this technically mean the the little orange freakshow is also a ‘Donald the Great’? He’s technically the most succesful ‘Donald’, as the only one why made it to leader of a country and the only one with diapers and a nussy.
Names only stick if history validates you. Plenty of other rulers ended up getting remembered through the lens of discontent, bad press by who came later, and sometimes mistranslation. Ivan IV Grozny was a ruthless dude, but “Grozny” meant awe-provoking or imposing, whereas in English “Terrible” tends to imply evil. Æthelred II Unræd meant “good counsel”, but as that word fell out of use in English he got stuck with “Unready” because it just happens to be similar in form but not meaning.
Donnie probably wishes he’ll be remembered as something special, but informally Diaper Don will outlive him and I don’t foresee history being gentle with its performance review.
Generally speaking, they got those titles because they were beloved by the people and did great things on behalf of their country. Things no other countryman before or after has done.
Not because they’re literal pieces of shit shoved into a fat suit that are causing untold death, destruction, chaos, and reputational harm to their country of origin.
There’s a reason why there’s no historical monikers for Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Putin, etc.
It’s because they’re pieces of shit that fuck everything up in the world and nobody likes them now.
Guess which category “Orange Mussolini” is in? I’ll give you a hint. The hint is in the phrase “Orange Mussolini”.
There’s only 1 Caesar
Not necessarily. I originally thought the phrase “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s” from the Bible referred to Julius Caesar, but apparently it refers to Tiberius.
Though in modern times “Caesar” almost ubiquitously is referencing Julius
I’m pretty sure it almost always references the salad.
His family name became a title for future Emperors.
Honestly might be an even harder flex than just being the only Caesar
And the title of Caesar more rightfully translated would be “God King”. It implied divinity and super human levels of being.
God being a roman god, not the christian god. So not omnipotent, omnipresent, or omniscient. But still divine.
While it actually means “born through C-section”
Not many people know this, but Pontius Pilate, inventor of Pilates, also had another lesser known historical role
Charlemagne is in the same boat, it means Charles the Great
I did not know that, and now I feel foolish
The name Charlemagne annoys me because in most other languages it’s Charles (or Karl) the Great, but in English and apparently French it’s shortened to Charlemagne though he was originally Charles Le Magne in French?
Among Greeks, if you say Alexandros (or Philip for that matter) then people will know who you are talking about. But basically, those names are still in use. Caesar became the word for leaders rather than a name, and it’s relatively rare as a first name.
Charlemagne is actually Charles le magne which means Charles the Great. If you called him “King Charles” you’d need to be much more specific.
I can’t speak for Attila, because I don’t know if the name is popular in any particular cultures. Certainly in the USA, the Hun king is the most famous Attila.
Slim Shady is an interesting example, because its’s basically branding for Marshall Mathers aka Eminem. One of his first widespread hits was a song essentially saying that he’s the only real Slim Shady, and anyone else using that nickname is a copycat poser.
If you talk about Philip the Greek in the UK on the other hand, it absolutely does not refer to Alexander the Great.
Alexander is a common name, but it depends on context, if you say “at the time Alexander conquered X” most people would understand, but if you say “Alexander was here” you might be talking about a work college.
There’s not only one Caesar, while you probably beat Julius Caesar, Augustus, Tiberius and others were also “Caesar”, and you might referring to any of them. For example, “give to Caesar what is Caesar’s” does not refer to the same Caesar you probably meant.
Slim shady is a made up name and it’s way more specific than <common name> the <common adjective>.
Charlemagne is short for Charles Magnus, or in English Charles the great, so that’s exactly the same.
Attila is a very unique name, I’ve never met nor heard about any other Attila so the name is disambiguation enough, but it’s likely that if that is a common name in some country they have an extra qualifier to it, I’ve heard Attila the Hun, but there might be others.
There’s nothing special, if a name is common you need disambiguation, if a name is overly specific you don’t, same reason why we have last names, “I met with John the other day”, “which John?”, “The Smith”, “Ah yeah, John Smith, not John the son of Richard”, “No, I haven’t seen John Richardson in a few weeks”.
Attila is a pretty common name in Hungary and Türkiye.
Caesar, or Charlemagne or Attila.
Well, those are fairly uniquely-identifiable names in the scheme of things. “Caesar” isn’t just the guy at your local pizzeria, but THE Caesar of Caesars. “Charlemagne” is a combination of the common name “Charles” and <“great”> as with Alexander. “Attila” is a rarer name, already with a certain stigma, so quite unique in that sense.
“Alex” / “Alexander” is still a pretty common name today, so it makes some sense that there’d be a qualifier. Not unlike with Peter the Great , Catherine the Great, etc…
Caesar (Cesar or Cesare) is still a pretty common name today though.
That’s what I’m saying, above.
Hm. Guess I didn’t interpret you the right way then, sorry. Bed time for me then, enough Internet
You don’t want to get him mixed up with Alexander the Just Kind of OK at Things, do you?
I count see getting a beer with Alex the Just Kind of OK at Things.
Plus I could probably beat him at Catan
“The Great” is a moniker given to certain rulers. England has only one. List of people known as the Great - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_known_as_the_Great
Is anyone else mad that Alexander the first the Great came after Alexander the third the Great?
All the other Alexanders are just imitating
!look, there were already great answers, so there was room for a joke one!<
I’d say it’s because Alexander is still such a very common name.
In my experience, in context people often do drop the “the Great” and just say Alexander.
“Charlemagne” literally means “Charles the Great”.
Didn’t know that until this thread
The Great is a shortened euphemism for The Great Asshole.
Prior to Alexander, simple city-state like entities were dominant and the norm. No one had to bear the tax of some professional army or deal with the federations of disparate polities. Shit gets real bad, everyone goanna die this winter from starvation, worst case is city vs city raids. Lots to try to trade across cities where many skilled trades and goods are unique but quality varied. Getting raided? NP, retreat to the walls with your belongings and defend with your neighbors. You know nearly everyone on the walls beside you. Wives and daughters worry, but the idle times and company are more jubilant than not. The differential in forces is negligible. Defending is a massive advantage. There are very few creative innovators around that are focused on attacking. Raiding is about poor management, resource scarcity, and minor thievery. Where the former are larger parties and latter are smaller.
Along comes The Great Asshole, and here come the pro bro brutes. They are the first regional sized force. The whole group of them are totally desensitized to morality. This is not some parity or simple innovation of technology. This is - it does not matter that a coalition of cities are banded for defense. No one has ever seen a force so large and so murderous. These are the military engineers.
Brutishness is so very limited in real value. It only matters in one on one engagements with limited constraints. Humans are not predators of strength, but of endurance.
The real strength to fear are the engineers. The creative innovators are scary as fuck. When a group of them are focused on the innovations of murder orgies, common folks are a thrashing harvest.
After The Great Asshole, you no longer have some negligible tax to help pay for the walls. Now you pay a much larger sum. The city is dotted with these new professional murder chaps that work for this raider fuckwit asshat that killed Gerry, the guy at the forum market everyone liked. You know, the one with the two gorgeous daughters everyone loved. You would not believe the terrible things the guy in the tower did to them. The whole city heard it, every night for weeks.
Now here you are on a wall next to a bunch of guys you do not know. They seem halfway alright most of the time, but you just know they are not leaving until all your reserves for the winter are gone. Half of your neighbors are dead or left the countryside. Your shack of a home, it is the third time you had to toss something together. The old raiders are looking for food and goods, but these new sadistic fucks burn your shit down for kicks and giggles. Now, uncle dude is not just enslaved in yondertown. He is literally abducted by aliens. People just disappear and no one knows what happened. The party is over, decency is dead, tyranny of the foreigner reigns supreme, hailing from a place you never knew existed. You never imagined humans could be so vile, so cruel, so terrifying. You never felt so violated, so traumatized, so helpless, so lonely. That was the real change.
The population reached a size and wealth that made a test of true human nature possible. Alex was simply at the right time and place to manage an engineering core of mass murder orgies profession that was at the transition point of local to regional wealth management. It was a giant regression and depression of progress that ground everywhere Alex touched to a crawl by the force of attenuation; the way things recovered were a shell of what could have been achieved without attenuation and the same resources and effort gone into amplification. That is always the case, as proven by tit for tat plus ten percent forgiveness solution to the Prisoner’s Dilemma problem within Statistics. One of the most persistent primitive stupidities present across time and human culture thus far is the failure to understand how attenuation cannot amplify. Shame does not produce positive change. Alex was the great monster. A serial killer in parallel port operation. •»ÀĪÙ¬§¬¶¬×
there’s several caesars, slim shady nobody else has that name, Charlemagne is French for Charles the Great, and Attila was antiwestern so they wouldn’t name him “great”
