See:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_reforms_of_Augustus

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4743148&forum_id=2#41796301)

RATE HBO ROME's characterization of Mark Antony as the frat boy and Brutus as the nebbish boarding school aristocrat who got bullied by the athletic CHADs

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4743148&forum_id=2#41785601)

Fuck. Sounds like 2021

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4743148&forum_id=2#41795927)

https://youtu.be/8rt67AqrR74

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4743148&forum_id=2#41795615)

Caesar's decision to announce a Parthian campaign was very calculated and very much based on his read of the situation in Rome rather than being dictated by any external conditions out east. Caesar knew that his most effective playbook was to go out and wage war, further his treasury and the loyalty of his veteran legions, and then come back enriched and further empowered as the conquering hero. This had worked effectively for him time and again and he was seeking to replay this to further cement his leadership when he would return to Rome in response to the slipping political situation. (Caesar had shown repeatedly that he was able to return to Rome and re-insert himself into politics effectively, in part because of his practice of inserting his "men" into the governance structures while he was away, so he would have likely been unconcerned about being away from the City for a time.)

Authorizing the war would have also have had the benefit of giving Caesar an always-on bodyguard as a general in the field that would have rendered him essentially impervious to attack versus the situation in Rome where he was essentially wandering around unguarded in deference to the deep republican antipathy to any sign of militarizing the city.

The assassins were stupid as we've discussed up-thread, but they weren't *that* stupid--they'd seen Caesar do this numerous times before by this point and they presumably perceived this as a possible last moment to intervene before he left the City for a year or more and came back stronger and more popular still on his return. In other words, they presumably saw this as their last chance to act.

(How successful Caesar actually would have been against the Parthians is the subject of endless counterfactual history debate. I tend to fall on the side that he would have rocked them badly and that his being able to wage that campaign would have been a major historical hinge point.)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4743148&forum_id=2#41783826)

And a victory there would've really cemented Caesar's status, even if his jockeys would backstab him in Rome while he's in the Middle East- had he won, w/ the loyalty of the legions there would be no more political willpower to really remove Caesar

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4743148&forum_id=2#41783853)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4743148&forum_id=2#41785594)

"returned" his powers to the Senate, and instead of installing himself as "dictator perpetuo" - "dictator in perpetuity" like Caesar, Octavian/Augustus took the meticulous steps to make it seem like he's voluntarily letting go of his powers.

Augustus just slyly said, "alright, I'll give you guys back the office of Consulship but no worries I'll just stay as commander-in-chief, and hold legislative powers via the Tribunus plebis potestas"

Basically Caesar was less subtle - he made himself an open target by declaring himself dictator for life - Dictator Perpetuo unlike Octavian/Augustus.

Caesar's equivalent would be if someone declared themselves as to be President for Life, whereas Augustus laid down his office of the presidency, but kept his command of the military, also was the chief justice, and had Veto powers thanks to him getting the rights of the Tribune of the Plebs which was a regular office that was closed to the Patricians in the Republic.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4743148&forum_id=2#41783723)

Octavian was an entirely different and scarier breed (while simultaneously being a much lesser figure as far as military ability and his gens). He had the sort of mind that made him desire to do as you reference in your comment, i.e., totally usurp the extant power structure while maintaining the façade of its existence--it reminds me of those insects which parasitically take over the brains of wasps and then keep them alive and direct their movements. From the perspective of political conservatism, he was much more dangerous than Caesar had ever been as we see ex post facto from the centuries of imperial rule that came out of his tenure.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4743148&forum_id=2#41783969)

The seeds were already there when the new legionaries were loyal to their leader and had a patrones-clientes relationship w/ the commander, creating a personal army for ambitious men.

Did Caesar have a master plan to overturn/greatly reform the Republic? Or was Caesar as Dictator Perpetuo just the place he ended up in as he maneuvered various political shit thrown at him?

Octavian was honestly a better *politician* imo than Caesar for precisely the reasons why you seem to be disparaging him. He was able to maneuver through these longstanding ideals of Republicanism and the allergic reaction the public had with the idea of a monarch (Rex) and create a rather long-lasting political tradition from scratch.

(Though there's PLENTY to criticize about how he also added to future instability by creating such an ad-hoc thatchwork of political offices that there was no clear line of succession)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4743148&forum_id=2#41785504)

Augustus: His political system (and its instability) lasted for at least 300 years until Diocletian reforms, and even then the elements of Republicanism in the Roman state that created a much different character in Roman/Byzantine Emperors compared the post-Roman monarchies in medieval Europe lasted until the fall of Constantinople in 1453

And the best part is that Octavian/Augustus was thrown onto the political arena at the age of 18 as Caesar was assassinated, and played the big names of the era, much older and experienced than him like a fiddle.

The way he used Cicero was just ridiculous. The way he postured himself politically despite his lacking military prowess vs. Mark Antony was masterful

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4743148&forum_id=2#41799511)