The Autopsy Of Julius Caesar Explained

The story of Julius Caesar is a strange thing, as the version that many people are familiar with was written centuries after his actual reign and assassination. When Shakespeare wrote the play that's been performed countless times and read in countless schools, he was writing against the backdrop of potential political upheaval: Queen Elizabeth I didn't have an heir, and the potential of another devastating civil war was looming.

It was an all-too-familiar scenario that had played out before, with disastrous consequences. Michigan State University English professor Jyotsna G. Singh says (via The Conversation) that even by the time Shakespeare was writing, there was no general consensus on whether or not Caesar's assassination could be justified in any way. Was he a tyrant who needed to be removed from power? Or were his assassins simply that — assassins looking to increase their own power and clout?

There are a lot of myths about Julius Caesar, including the one about him being born by cesarean section, but there is one seemingly bizarre story that's true — he was the subject of the first recorded autopsy in history. Let's take a look at this story, along with what it might tell us about whether or not Shakespeare got it right and what really happened on those ill-fated Ides of March. Can it tell us something new, more than 2,000 years later? Maybe!

Sure, Julius Caesar was stabbed a whole bunch of times on March 15, 44 B.C., but what really happened that day?

Cornell history professor Barry Strauss says (via Vox) that it really started not with Brutus — that's an idea we get from Shakespeare — but with a man who had his name misspelled by the Bard: Decimus Junius Brutus Albinus. It was actually Decimus who was a trusted companion and friend to Caesar, who had dinner with him the night before his assassination, and who helped convince him that everything was absolutely fine and he should definitely just go about his business like normal.

So, Caesar did. He went into the Portico of Pompey — a Senate house dominated by the statue of his frenemy, Pompey the Great — and took his usual seat on his throne. It wasn't long before one conspirator — named Cimber — approached, then grabbed Caesar's toga. World History says that it was Casca who struck the first blow, and Strauss says the assassins were likely carrying daggers. The history professor also claims that some were tasked with preventing escape or interference from outside the group while others did the actual killing. In front of about 200 senators and countless aides, slaves, and secretaries, Caesar was killed in what was less of a "noble" fight and more of a bloody, dirty struggle. He did fight back, stabbing at least one of his attackers in return — but ultimately pulled his toga over his face and succumbed to the multiple stab wounds.

Julius Caesar's body was only examined by a doctor once he was returned to his home — and according to History Collection, this is where things get a little confusing. The physician's name was recorded as Antistius, and it's unclear whether or not he was Caesar's personal doctor. He did, however, document all 23 stab wounds and concluded that only one of the wounds had been fatal.

Interestingly, the Institute of Forensic Medicine says that the idea of mortal wounds was already one that was incredibly familiar to the era's doctors. It wasn't entirely surprising, then, that Antistius' findings were reported in Suetonius De Vita Caesarum's biography of Caesar: "Of so many wounds, none turned out to be mortal, in the opinion of the physician Antistius, except the second one in the breast."

The wound in question was one that entered below his left shoulder blade, and there are a few ways it could have killed him. The angle of the stab wound described by Antistius could have punctured his heart, but it's also possible that it perforated his lung instead. In that case, his lungs would have collapsed, and his chest cavity would have filled with blood, killing him. There's also a third option: it may have severed an artery.

Ultimately, the cause of death was extreme blood loss. Interestingly, that also means Caesar had time for last words: Not "Et tu, Brute," as Shakespeare recorded, but (via World History), "You, too, my child?"

When forensic investigator Luciano Garofano took another look at the original autopsy in 2003, he made some pretty wild observations (via Forensic-Psych). As one of the top criminal investigators and lecturers of his own era, he had plenty of experience to draw from, and for him, the assassination reminded him of something much more modern.

Antistius' original autopsy noted that most of the wounds were concentrated in two areas: Caesar's face and groin (via History Collection). The message of emasculation is pretty clear, but it was the wounds to the face that Garofano was particularly interested in — especially considering that at least one of the slashes came after Caesar had already fallen and was clearly dying.

"That's a favorite Sicilian trick, disfiguring a man's looks," Garofano explained. The multiple assassins each taking a turn had parallels in the modern mafia, too: "Psychologically, it's important for all the conspirators to bloody their hands." Garofano's work draws other comparisons between modern mafia families and the high-ranking, powerful senators of Rome's past. He stresses that they share an unflinching loyalty to the heads of their families, despise weakness, constantly strive for more power, and take the uncompromising view that violence is a completely legitimate option for reaching their end goals.

Along with Luciano Garofano's second look at Antistius's autopsy notes, History Collection says that he conducted a more modern investigation. Using the ancient physician's observations, Garofano used 3D imaging software to recreate the 23 wounds and get an actual picture of what Caesar's body would have looked like. Then, he staged a few recreations of the murder scene.

Exactly how many senators were involved in the conspiracy and the eventual assassination has always been a little unclear and ranges from National Geographic's 40 to History's 60. But how many actually got blood on their hands? According to Garofano, fewer than centuries of historians and criminologists have thought (via Forensic-Psych). He ran the scenario three times: First, he had 23 "attackers" stabbing their Caesar once each, then that was lowered to 11 attackers, then five. He quickly came to the conclusion that there was no way 23 men would be able to get a single stab thrust (short of some well-organized fight choreography and a victim that didn't mind being stabbed). It was even tough to juggle 11 attackers, and it ultimately led him to the conclusion that Caesar had only been stabbed by somewhere between five and 10 people.

History Collection says there's a fascinating bit of history that can be extrapolated from Antistuis' autopsy. The conclusion that only one of the 23 wounds was serious enough to kill him and that he ultimately bled to death makes it likely that yes, he definitely did have time for some final words — and the parting words of the real Caesar might be way more interesting than what Shakespeare's fictional version had to say.

Roman historians say (via Forensic-Psych) that his last words were actually, "Kai su, technon?" That's Greek for "You too, my child?", and here's what some historians think was going on. Cornell University's Barry Strauss believes that Caesar's last words were rehearsed and that he knew Brutus was going to be one of the assassins. He also argues that his last words were meant to be taken literally, as Brutus really was Caesar's biological child.

It's a theory that's not without merits. ThoughtCo. says that Caesar's long-running affair with Brutus's mother, Servilia, was widely known, and even though Caesar was only 15 years old when Brutus was born, the possibility was hinted at in the writing of ancient historians like Plutarch. That would make Caesar's last words mean something completely different: Not only was Brutus an assassin, but he had assassinated his own father. That was a whole other level of murder, and it would absolutely warrant his own special place in hell.