[89] The ‘senatus consultum,’ enacted after the victory at Munda, is also referred to by Dio 43, 45. It appears that Caesar permitted the elections by magistrates to proceed nominally as before, by popular vote, but that he was the actual determining factor as to who should be elected (Dio 43, 47). Compare Appian 4, 91, Cassius’ alleged speech to his soldiers. [90] Concerning Caesarion, called ‘Cyrus’ by Nicolaus, the son of Caesar and Cleopatra, see Cic., Att., 14, 20, 2; Dio 47, 31; Suet., Caes., 52; Aug. 17; Plut., Caes., 49; Ant. 54. All but Nicolaus acknowledge that he really was Caesar’s son, and Nicolaus is unable to prove the falsity of the allegation. It would have been extremely difficult for Caesar to have secured the legitimizing of Caesarion because of the universal antipathy in Rome toward Cleopatra and eastern institutions in general; further, much as Caesar may have desired a natural heir, his purpose could not best be served by Caesarion, who was an infant when Caesar’s will was drawn, in comparison with his great-nephew, then 18 years of age. [91] Mention of Caesar’s intention of establishing an empire in the East, with a capital at Alexandria or at Ilium is also made by Suetonius, Caes., 79. Both he and Nicolaus tend toward rejecting the idea as absurd; but the fact is significant that in the summer of 48 B.C. Caesar granted freedom to Ilium (Strabo 13, 1, 27). R. Meyer (Kleine Schr. p. 467; Caesars Monarchie p. 521) thinks the plan entirely logical, and accepts the report as plausible. It would have been far simpler for Caesar to retain and augment his pseudo-divine attributes in the East than could ever have been the case in Rome; at the same time, the rights and privileges historically peculiar to Rome could have been served by an independent city government. The same question arose in Augustus’ time (Horace, Od., 3, 3). [92] Compare Cicero’s remarks to Caesar concerning the statue on the rostra (Cic., pro Deiot. 12, 34). Dio 44, 4 gives a confused account of two statues having been erected on the rostra, one intended to represent Caesar as savior of the citizens, and the other as ‘rescuer of the city from siege;’ the appropriateness of this latter attribute seems somewhat obscure. [93] The full names of the tribunes were L. Caesetius Flavus and C. Epidius Marullus (Suet., Caes., 79; Dio 44, 9). [94] For the precedent of the temple of Concordia as a meeting place for the senate, see Cicero, Cat., 3, 21; Phil. 2, 8, 19; Sallust, Cat., 46; Plutarch, Cic., 19.