#julius caesar wasn't emperor

[readrantannotate]

Happy assassination of Caligula day <3

[chaberkowepole]

My hand slipped

Bonus:

[katakaluptastrophy]

So you know how the River Beyond seemed to grant Dulcie knowledge of Hamlet?

Anyway, if other aspects of pre-res culture are available, just imagine the surprise that wreath-wearing space emperor John Gaius could have in ATN...

[xkcdbracket]

Literal March Madness FINAL ROUND

Ides of March. Assassination of Julius Caesar

March of the Penguins. Nature documentary about Emperor penguins

[how-what-why-huh]

Brutus:

Get you to bed again. It is not day. Is not tomorrow, boy, the [ides] of March?

Lucius:

I know not, sir.

Brutus:

Look in the calendar, and bring me word.

Lucius:

I will, sir.

He exits.

—————————————————————————————————————

Lucius:

Sir, March is wasted fifteen days.

Brutus:

‘Tis good.

[giantkillerjack]

I HAVE BEEN LEARNING ABOUT MISTER AUGUSTUS OCTAVIAN/OCTAVIUS GAIUS CAESAR SINCE 8TH GRADE. HOW AM I STILL LEARNING MORE THINGS ABOUT HIM THAT MAKE ME GO "octavius babe holy shit what the fuck what the FUCK dude"

[memories-of-ancients]

Just curious, why do you think Rome fell?

OMG do you really have to ask such a big question right before I was going to bed anon? Well, here are the primary reasons IMO as a Roman history buff.

Lots of Civil Wars --- The Romans going way back to the days of the Republic were constantly fighting over who was going to be boss. Sulla fought a civil war and took over Rome and declared himself dictator, ditto Julius Caesar, and of course Octavian did the same and became the first emperor. During the empire there were many civil wars over who would be emperor as the Imperial system often lacked rules for succession resulting in dynastic struggles and civil wars. Not that it would have mattered if they did, as they probably would have just ignored the rules. In the 3rd century the empire underwent a 50 year period of near constant civil war known as the Crises of the Third Century. Constantine became emperor after killing all his opponents in a civil war. The later half of the 4th century had more civil wars. Even in the 5th century factions were fighting each for control of an empire that was collapsing all around them. No side wins a civil war because they are bloody, destructive, there are no spoils of war. There is only self destruction, they are about as helpful to a country as would a person shooting himself in the foot. All the money and resources that went into fighting civil wars and rebuilding after the war was money and resources not being used to maintain infrastructure, maintain public works, regulate the economy, defend from outside threats, and maintain the government.

2. Political Instability --- Most emperors did not die of natural causes, most emperors were murdered, or committed suicide, or died in battle, or died in a prison cell. Roman government was chalk full of power hungry psychopaths who were willing to murder their way to the top. Sometimes emperors could come and go quickly, with reigns lasting 2-3 years or less in the 3rd century.

Roman political history was rife with intrigue, assassinations, and coups occurring all the time. It was like Game of Thrones except instead of lasting 8 seasons it lasted 500 years.

3. The Army Became a Powerful Interest Group --- If you were a Roman emperor the army was a double edged sword. They were good in that they maintained peace and order in the empire and protected it from invaders. They were bad for you in that they could revolt and murder you, replacing you with someone they liked more. Even your own guard, the Praetorian Guards, couldn't be trusted as they could easily slit your throat in your sleep and declare someone else as emperor. To make sure the army was happy, you gave them big pay bonuses called donatives. Basically official bribes paid to keep the soldiers of the army loyal and happy. With each successive emperor the annual donative became bigger and bigger and thus a greater strain on the Imperial Treasury. If an emperor didn't pay up, he could be murdered by his own soldiers. Thus a lot of public money was paid just to keep the army happy so they didn't end up starting another civil war.

4. A Fucked up Economy --- Maintaining a large standing army to defend a large empire is expensive. Fighting civil wars is expensive. Rebuilding after civil wars is expensive. Constant regime change is expensive. Political intrigue is expensive. Eventually it got to the point where there just wasn't enough money to pay for all that. So emperors just minted more money, decreasing the silver content and minting more copper coins until eventually Roman money became worthless.

Today Roman money is still worthless. Go on ebay and find the cheapest Roman coins you can buy. Except for rarer collectibles Roman coins are still very plentiful and thus very cheap to collect. Worthless money made trade and commerce difficult, and thus the economy suffered. Not to mention constant bloody and destructive civil wars were damaging the economy. Political instability also damaged the economy.

5. Growing Disparity in Wealth --- Over time with civil wars and political instability the rich got richer and the poor got poorer. Eventually wealth became so concentrated in the upper class that the middle class disappeared entirely by the late 4th - 5th century. By then the average Roman was in a bad way. They had no opportunities and most Romans were forced to live as tenant farmers, essentially sharecroppers.

6. A Corrupt Tax System --- Meanwhile the wealthy became so powerful that they were able to wield that power so that they did not have to pay taxes. They could exploit loopholes, manipulate laws in their favor, or bribe their way out of paying. To try to make up the revenue, tax collectors attempted to squeeze the lower classes, which of course, didn't have any money. Thus by the late 4th - 5th century the empire was severely underfunded. This resulted in the degradation of infrastructure, public works, the army, the weakening of the government, and less investment in the economy and commerce.

7. Patronage --- By the 5th century the average Roman was out of opportunities and the middle class was gone entirely. More and more the lower class Roman was being squeezed for tax money, money which they didn't have. So in order to survive, Roman lower classes sold their services to a wealthy patron. The patron would house you and protect you and take care of your tax problems. If you were lucky and had special skills like a craftsman or artist you could make a good living under a patron. If not, you probably ended up a tenant farmer tied to the land of the patron, essentially a sharecropper, a serf, or a peasant. Due to this change in the socio economic system power was drawn away from the Imperial government and was redirected to the wealthy patrons. Thus the empire was becoming decentralized.

This would become the basis for medieval feudalism.

8. No One Wanted to Join the Army --- Why would you? You're dirt poor and have no opportunities. If you joined the army you may not even get the opportunity to defend the empire, as you're gonna get killed in a stupid civil war fighting a fellow Roman who is also dirt poor and has no opportunities. Your government is corrupt, your emperor is a snobbish entitled incompetent dipshit who was out of touch with reality, the tax man is trying to squeeze you for money you don't have, you have no rights, you've been forced to become a peasant to a proto-feudal lord, and it is clear the empire is dying. By the mid 5th century most Romans were like, "let it fucking die". As a result, the army suffered severe manpower shortages. Right at the time when Goths and Franks and Vandals and Huns are going to start swarming into the empire.

These to me are the primary reasons for the fall. Anyone have anything else to add in addition to this?

[barbwritesstuff]

Is Gaius named after emperor Caligula by any chance?

No.

Ancient Roman names are confusing. I'm not going to dive too deeply into it (because I don't fully understand it), but the Romans usually had three names. Eg. Gaius Julius Caesar.

The first name was called a praenomen and was an intimate name usually used only by close friends or family.

Which is why we usually just say: Julius Caesar.

The second name is a nomen which is typically a family name. The third name is a cognomen, which is kinda like a nickname that most people used to get by day to day.

In Blood Moon, when Gaius was first introduced, I wanted Gaius and Lucius to use praenomans when speaking to each other (because brothers), and Gaius gave the wolves permission to use his given name too, which was a) for ease of readership and b) because he's weird and deranged and wanted the wolves to talk to him as if they were close friends.

Now, according to Wikipedia:

By the first century BC, the praenomina remaining in general use at Rome were: Appius, Aulus, Caeso, Decimus, Gaius, Gnaeus, Lucius, Mamercus, Manius, Marcus, Numerius, Publius, Quintus, Servius, Sextus, Spurius, Titus, and Tiberius.

There are only 18 choices.

I couldn't use Marcus (because Marco was already a character in the story and that might be confusing) but I also wanted names that wouldn't throw modern readers too much, which excluded a lot on this list. Remember, I wasn't planning a sequel at this stage. These were originally just going to be characters that appeared once in one playthrough.

Quick, easy to remember names were key, especially as the court was going to be chock full of various new vampire characters.

(This is also why I used the name 'Medici' in this scene. Quick, easy to remember, and some worrying implications for those that might know a bit about history).

So I picked Gaius and Lucius for the vampire brother kings.

Gaius Dominus (no noman because he has no real Roman family) and Lucius Hostus Dentatus.

Cartoon bad guy names, but they're vampires, so they get a pass.

When I started writing Thicker Than I tried REALLY hard to make Gaius go by his other name/title, Dominus. But my brain wasn't doing great when it came to renaming him, so he's still just Gaius.

Eventually I also gave him a second cognomen (Caesar) because that literally just means king and it makes sense he'd have it.

I can't believe I lay in bed for 15 minutes typing this out on my phone. 😅 I hope it's not too long or boring.

[augustus-hater]

An essay on why Octavius from NATM is NOT Augustus

It is evident that I hate Augustus. However, hating Augustus does not mean I should support misinformation about Augustus. There are many characteristics that Octavius from NATM has that do not match up with Augustus, the first Roman emperor. Here's why I believe they are completely different people:

1-Appearance

First of all, let's compare their physical appearances. Augustus has been described by Suetonius as pale, dirty bllonde and blue/grey eyed. He was quite skinny and short, most likely due to his asthma preventing him from going out in his childhood and teenage years. While Octavius from NATM has dark hair, dark eyes and is well built. They don't look alike at all. I see no reason as to why the creators of NATM changed his appearance other than because 1. They are different people. or 2. NATM Octavius is a made-up ancient Roman. Of course, there may be other reasons such as Octavius' appearance not being important enough for them to do research on it but I insist that if he really were Augustus, he would not be a general at all.

2-Personality

Second of all, they have different personalities. NATM Octavius is stubborn, brave, a leader. Just your average roman general. Augustus, on the other hand, is not a man to be put on the battlefield. Augustus is said to have been completely disinterested by all things military and often fled the battlefield due to an affliction (sometimes stomach aches, sometimes asthma attacks). An example of this could be the battle of Philippi, when he fled into the marsh because he was feeling ill. He left his battles for his best friend Marcus Agrippa, who handled them with his outstanding military mind. NATM Octavius seems to have no problem with leading an army and fighting during the first movie. Another distinction between their personalities is their composure. Augustus is said to be strangely calm, no matter how bad the situation is while Octavius seems to get pretty hostile sometimes, like he did with Jedediah in the first movie.

3-Name

Third of all, their names don't exactly match. This is a very important thing, because there are many romans named "Octavius" and NATM Octavius could have been any other Octavius. Augustus' birth name was Gaius Octavius Thurinus, but he eventually changed his name to Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus, after finding out that Julius Caesar had adopted him and named him as hjs heir. Since then, this Roman politician has been referred to as "Julius Caesar". You may think that they called him Octavius to differentiate him with Julius Caesar but that is also wrong, because if they did change his name, they would change it to "Octavian", the name that historians used to call him before he was Augustus. They could've also used Augustus. There is nothing that really indicates that NATM Octavius is Octavian before Actium.

4-Agrippa

Because I love Agrippa, I will give him his own paragraph. NATM Octavius can do what Octavian/Augustus could not do : excel in the military domain. However, that is what Agrippa is for. Let's say Octavian learned strategies and logistics and becomes a good general. What the hell happened to Marcus Agrippa? Did he die from some illness? Perhaps gout? Did he betray Octavian? Where is he then? Is he safe? Is he alright? This paragraph is about Agrippa but Agrippa isn't Octavian's only companion. There is Taurus, another of Octavian generals. Maybe he wasn't important enough to be shown. But what about Livia? Octavian's wife? Where is she? At home? They don't really have one. Does she approve of his affair with Jedediah.? Maybe she listens to the album Be the Cowboy by Mitski because she is so sad that her husband is going on adventures and sleeping with a cowboy. What about Maecenas? What about the poets? What about Octavia? Marcellus?

The fandom doesn't acknowledge those people. However, you know which roman they remembered? Julia the elder. I was so mad when I found out you people draw them together, doing wholesome things. Augustus would never. Your fanfiction is super cute but it doesn't change what happened to Julia (TL ; DR for people who don't want to search it up : she got exiled because of Augustus' misogynistic policies against adultery (cheating)). NATM fans who mention what really happened to Julia, I like you and thank you.

Though this may be subjective, I believe that NATM Octavius is not Augustus because he does not have those essential allies that Augustus had.

Conclusion

NATM Octavius is not Augustus because he does not have the same physical appearance, qualities, names & titles, and friends as him. I don't understand why people believe that Octavius is Augustus when they only share a nationality and birth nomen (not even his real name). I'm not saying this because I want to hate on Augustus without hating on Octavius because I hate Octavius too.

[yz]

The Corinth Canal. April 2024.

ChatGPT says this about the canal:

The Corinth Canal is an iconic engineering feat in Greece that connects the Gulf of Corinth with the Saronic Gulf, slicing through the narrow Isthmus of Corinth. This canal significantly shortened the maritime route by eliminating the need for ships to navigate around the Peloponnese peninsula. The canal is about 6.4 kilometers long, 24.6 meters wide at sea level, and 8 meters deep, with steep limestone walls that occasionally cause landslides.The history of the canal is rich and dates back to ancient times. The concept was first envisioned by the tyrant Periander in the 7th century BC, but due to technical challenges, he opted instead for a simpler solution called the Diolkos—a roadway that allowed ships to be transported overland across the isthmus. Several attempts were made by various rulers, including Roman emperors like Nero and Julius Caesar, but they all failed to complete the canal due to various reasons, including political turmoil and engineering challenges.It wasn't until 1882 that the construction of the modern Corinth Canal began, driven by the Greek statesman Ioannis Kapodistrias and later completed under the oversight of French engineers. The canal was finally inaugurated in 1893 but faced numerous issues over the years, including being blocked during World War II. It was eventually cleared by the US Army Corps of Engineers in 1947. Today, the canal is mostly used by tourist cruise ships, yachts, and small recreational boats due to its narrowness, which prevents larger modern ships from passing through.For a more detailed exploration of the Corinth Canal's history and significance, you might find this comprehensive look interesting from sources like WorldAtlas and GreekReporter.

[xtruss]

The Bloody End of Julius Caesar Forever Darkened the Ides of March. Photograph By James L. Stanfield, National Geographic

Ides of March: What Is It? Why Do We Still Observe It?

Once Simply a Time to Settle Accounts, March 15—the Ides of March—is Linked to Prophecies of Misfortune, Thanks to Caesar and Shakespeare.

— By Brian Handwerk | Published: March 15, 2011 | Thursday March 14, 2024

Caesar: The Ides of March Are Come.

Soothsayer: Aye, Caesar, But Not Gone.

—Julius Caesar, Act III, Scene 1

Thanks to Shakespeare's indelible dramatization, March 15—also called the Ides of March—is forever linked with the 44 B.C. assassination of Julius Caesar, and with prophecies of doom.

"That line of the soothsayer, 'Beware the ides of March,' is a pithy line, and people remember it, even if they don't know why," said Georgianna Ziegler, head of reference at Washington, D.C.'s Folger Shakespeare Library.

Until that day Julius Caesar ruled Rome. The traditional Republican government had been supplanted by a temporary dictatorship, one that Caesar very much wished to make permanent.

But Caesar's quest for power spawned a conspiracy to have him killed, and on the Ides of March, a group of prominent Romans brought him to an untimely end in the Senate House.

It Wasn't Just Caesar Who Paid the Price on Ides of March

Aside from its historical connection, the concept of the Ides of March would have resonated with English citizens in 1599, the year Shakespeare's play Julius Caesar was probably performed, Ziegler said.

"This whole business of the Ides of March and timekeeping in the play would have had a strong impact on audiences," she said.

"They were really struck by the differences between their Julian calendar [a revision of the Roman calendar created by Caesar] and the Gregorian calendar kept in Catholic countries on the continent."

Because the two calendars featured years of slightly different lengths, they had diverged significantly by the late 16th century and were several days apart.

In Roman times the Ides of March was mostly notable as a deadline for settling debts.

That calendar featured ides on the 15th in March, May, July, and October or on the 13th in the other months. The word's Latin roots mean "divide," and the date sought to split the month, originally at the rise of the full moon.

But because calendar months and the lunar cycle are slightly out of sync, this connection was soon lost.

A later artist's conception of the funeral of Julius Caesar, who was killed on the Ides of March in 44 B.C. Illustration By C. Vottrier, Mary EvansPicture Library/Alamy

Ides of March Assassins: Heroes or Murderers?

The Ides of March took on special significance after Caesar's assassination—but observance of the anniversary at the time varied among Roman citizens.

"How they felt depended on their political position," said Philip Freeman, a classicist at Luther College in Decorah, Iowa, and the author of Julius Caesar.

"Some were thrilled that Caesar had died, and some were horrified," he said.

The debate about Caesar's fate has extended through the ages and was taken up by some major literary figures. In Dante's Inferno, for example, Caesar is in Limbo, a relatively pleasant place in hell reserved for virtuous non-Christians.

"But Brutus [one of the leaders of the assassination] is down in the very center of hell with Judas, being munched on by Satan—it's about as bad as you can get," Freeman said.

The Folger library's Ziegler thinks the Bard had a more balanced view.

"I think Shakespeare shows both of them as being humans with their own weaknesses and strong points," she said.

Whether they were heroes or murderers, the real-life Ides of March assassins were subjected to less than pleasant outcomes.

"Within a couple of years Brutus and [fellow assassin] Cassius were dead," Freeman noted.

"They were not able to bring back the Republic, and really what they did was usher in more of a permanent dictatorship under the future Roman emperors—the opposite of what they intended."

[spider-xan]

'Caesar didn't build the Colosseum, workers did!'

Yeah, well, Caesar had already been dead for over a hundred years by the time it was built, like, you know Julius Caesar wasn't the only Roman leader, right? And I know from context you don't mean Caesar as a general title for the emperor bc it's rarely used that way in English, like, please, don't boost shitty tweets just bc they sound good at first glance.

This is the same guy upholding Mount Rushmore as a shining example of what the labour movement can achieve btw lol

[jojo-chan]

Hello!

I know I've always been an anime-oriented blog, but I wanna change that and make this a personal blog! So, my name is Mery and I love history!

I wanna talk about Andrea Frediani, an Italian author whom I read two books from.

The First book I read is "Dinasty: the romance of the five emperors" (I read it in Italian so I just translated the Italian title, I don't know if the English one is different since his writings have been translated into five languages) it's about the Julio-Claudian dynasty which is my fav dinasty of the Roman empire btw and I really enjoyed it, but there are a few things I disliked:

Livia Drusilla was only pictured as a ruthless murderer and a manipulator, one who just craved power for her family and didn't have any genuine affection for the emperor. I personally stand by the thesis that she really loved Augustus (or at least cared for him) and the two got very well along (it is said Augustus would ask her for political opinions and take notes of what she said) and besides she was much more than that: she was an icon for women's rights and was able to influence her husband's decisions (which no one was ever able to do) so I would've liked for her intellect to be showed more.

The way Julia the eldest is painted: another woman who was only showed for her mistakes. Yes, Julia was one who went to bed with many and broke Augustus's infedelity laws for women, and that she was exiled for. But was she really just that? I love how Frediani showed what she went through and really emphasized the fact that all those marriages (with Marcellus, Agrippa and Tiberius) were forced, but she wasn't just that, she was actually a very kind and smart woman (after her dad).

From the same author I am finishing a book called "The battle of the winner" and it's about Octavian who wants to avenge Julius Caesar.

Anyway, let me know if you want to hear my thoughts on Octavian and his childhood, I've been studying psychology for more than a year so if you want a post about that you'll definetly recognize some pieces of Freud and Jung, also McLallad with his need for power (was it McLallad? I've studied that a few months ago so I'll edit this post if it isn't him.)

[foodandfolklore]

Happy New Year! Rambles

Happy Solar New Year, and welcome to 2024! We're a few days in and I hope everyone is having a good year so far. I hosted a small, overnight mingle with some friends so I thought I'd share a recipe I found that absolutely slapped.

It's weird to think about, but New Years is one of those holidays that everyone in just about every culture celebrated in some way, but how and when varied wildly. This is because, until recently, different areas and cultures had different calendars. Ancient Egypt were the first to figure out the year should have 365 days, but they had three seasons, and a kind of limbo month of 5 days in case they need to extend the year (Leap year) The Start of their year was on our July 19th, when Sirius returned and the Nile flooded. This is good for crop growing.

Many people think the Ancient Romans were the ones to make our Modern calendar, mainly because the months are named in honor of Roman Gods. Plus there's the story of Julius Caesar creating an entire month and naming it after himself (July) is so well known. But, another Emperor, Augustus Caesar, also named a month after himself. Though to his credit, he just renamed an already existing month 'Sextillia' (Meaning Sixth). People think it's crazy to just add another month like that, but the last month for the Romans basically lasted for as long as they needed it to.

The new year for the Ancient Romans was on March 1st, where they honored Mars, God of War. Then Julius changed it to January 1st, Honoring Janus the God of Time. Eventually, Rome converts to Christianity, and the new year is now about Fasting and Prayer and fun stuff like that. It remains on Jan 1st and Honored Mary, until a while later it's decided that date is too pagan and they move it to December 25th. Celebrating the New Year with the Birth of Christ makes much more sense. Except, they run into a little problem where either the year runs short, as December doesn't have enough days, or we confusedly end the year AND start it....in December. Plus not many people knew of the change and didn't celebrate the new year. So after a while, they switched it back to January 1st.

Finally, in 1582, the Gregorian calendar was released. This is the Calendar we still use today, and despite your feelings on the religion that made it, it is the most accurate Calendar we humans have ever made. The year officially started January 1st. But a lot of people across Europe didn't adopt this calendar. Most people stuck to when spring time happened, around late March Early April, to celebrate the new year. It wasn't until the mid 1700s when Britain started expanding colonies into the new world that the push for everyone to adopt the Gregorian Calendar was made. This shift is why we have April Fools as people still celebrating the new year in April were called Silly or Foolish.

But people still celebrate OTHER new years. People in Mexico will still celebrate the Aztec New Year on March 12th. In Many Hindu communities, Diwali is considered the New Year. It date changes each year, but tends to happen in October. And then there's the Widely know Lunar New year. Celebrated across many Asian cultures and can be a massive celebration. More so than the Solar New year in some cases. The date also changes, but happens some time between end of January to start of February. Fun fact, if you are checking out your Chinese Zodiac and are born in January or Early February, you should check when the Lunar New year started the year you were born. So if you were born in the year of the Rabbit but your birthday is January 3rd; that means the new year of the Rabbit hasn't started yet and you should reference the Previous year, year of the Tiger, for your Horoscope.

Wow that turned into a weird ramble. Long story short; These crock pot noodles were good!

[princesssarisa]

Since I've been re-listening to the classic fairy tale radio show Let's Pretend, I've been thinking of Arthur Anderson. He was a mainstay character actor on Let's Pretend throughout most of its long run, from age 14 until age 32. But he was probably the cast member with the most notable career beyond radio.

Most famously, he was the original voice of the Lucky Charms cereal mascot Lucky the Leprechaun. He voiced Lucky in commercials from the 1960s through the early '90s, and to the end of his life, people would ask him to sing his musical catchphrase, "They're magically delicious!" I'm sure he was still the voice actor in the very first Lucky Charms commercials I vaguely remember seeing as a toddler. But that wasn't sum total of his non-radio career.

As a teenager, he played the slave boy Lucius in Orson Welles' famous 1937 production of Julius Caesar. He was the real-life equivalent of Zac Efron's character Richard Samuels in Me and Orson Welles, although that movie is heavily fictionalized. He was already a regular on Let's Pretend when that production took place – I don't suppose Me and Orson Welles shows Zac Efron performing in a fairy tale radio show, but if not, it should have.

Later, he played small roles in films like Midnight Cowboy, Green Card, and I'm Not Rappaport, and on various TV shows too.

In his old age, he was the second voice actor for Eustace Bagge in Courage the Cowardly Dog.

He also wrote two non-fiction books: Let's Pretend and the Golden Age of Radio, and his autobiography, An Actor's Odyssey: Orson Welles to Lucky the Leprechaun.

He lived a good long life, eventually dying in 2016 at age 93.

While I don't have a complete list of his Let's Pretend roles, these are all his roles in the episodes I've heard:

*The title character, Bud, in The Youth Who Learned to Shiver and Shake (the only episode I know of where he played the lead)

*The Giant in Jack and the Beanstalk

*The Witch Doctor in The Little Mermaid (they gender-bent the Sea Witch to add another male role to the story)

*Falada the horse in The Goose Girl

*Alan-a-Dale in Robin Hood

*The Bumblebee King in Thumbelina

*The Crow in The Snow Queen

*The Blacksmith Elf in The Night Before Christmas

*The greedy man George Brown in the show's other Christmas special, The House of the World

*The Prime Minister in The Brave Little Tailor

*The Chamberlain in The Chinese Nightingale

*The King's Counselor in Drakestail

*Sir Ector in King Arthur

*The Emperor in Princess Moonbeam (the show's adaptation of the Japanese story The Tale of the Bamboo Cutter)

*The Witch's servant Jacques in Jorinda and Joringel

*The mean innkeeper Mr. Schwarz in The Elves and the Shoemaker

*The mean innkeeper Mr. Crafty in The Donkey, the Table, and the Stick

*Thomas, one of the two heroic brothers, in Bluebeard

*The rat-turned-coachman in Cinderella

*The wise old man (and a talking parrot) in Why the Sea is Salt

*The father kings in Sleeping Beauty and The Six Swans

*The Witch's guard dog in Hansel & Gretel (just barking)

The next time I want to listen to a marathon of Let's Pretend episodes – as I sometimes do – I just might have to make some Lucky Charms ice cream or Lucky Charms marshmallow treats to go with it, in honor of Arthur Anderson.

@ariel-seagull-wings

[booty-uprooter]

why are people in my notes trying to claim Julius Caesar wasn't an imperialist. he was a fucking emperor