The beginning of the second act opens with
Brutus calling for his servant; but, after the servant exits, Brutus then has a soliloquy (beginning in line 10). The soliloquy begins with the following:
It must be by his death. And for my part
I know no personal cause to spurn at him,
But for the general. (10-12)
The pronouns his and him indicate Julius Caesar. Like all soliloquies, this speech represents the thoughts of the speaker, not realistic speech. In the first line, Brutus is already declaring his decision. Brutus realizes that only by Caesar’s death can Rome be free. And so Brutus has already decided to join in the plot to assassinate Caesar. But he does not like that decision. The remainder of the speech explains why Brutus believes his decision is the right one.
Brutus is not joining the conspiracy for personal reasons (line 11). He is very much unlike Cassius then. Cassius is jealous of Caesar and also worries about what his enemy (Caesar) will do to him once he becomes a supreme ruler of Rome. Brutus, on the other hand, is joining the conspiracy for the general good of Rome (line 12). Brutus is acting out of public zeal. He truly wants what is best for Rome. Where Cassius is selfish in his reasons, Brutus is selfless (noble and unselfish).
Brutus knows Caesar extremely well, and he understands how Caesar will change once Caesar is given unlimited power. Brutus explains his reasoning with the metaphor of the adder (a poisonous snake – line 14). At nighttime the adder is asleep and therefore not dangerous. But during the daytime, the adder comes out and is dangerous. Caesar is like the adder at nighttime. He is not an immediate danger. But once Caesar is crowned as king of Rome, he will be like the adder in daytime. He will be dangerous. Brutus perceives the potential danger in Caesar,
Brutus describes the change that will occur in Caesar with another notable line:
Th’abuse of greatness is when it disjoins
Remorse from power. (18-19)
The Norton editors suggest that remorse means conscience. It can also mean compassion or regret. Brutus worries that once Caesar has become crowned as king, once he has power, he will no longer feel compassion toward others.
Brutus emphasizes the potential danger in Caesar and asserts that Caesar has not yet been dangerous to Rome. Brutus comments, “I have not known when his affections swayed more than his reason” (20-21). In essence, Brutus is saying that Caesar has always been able to maintain his reason over his emotions (affections). In the conflict of Reason vs. Emotion, the reason in Caesar has always controlled his passion. But, as Shakespeare clearly reveals throughout many of his works, no man is capable of always keeping his emotions in control. Note, for example, the situation in Othello! The noble Othello was a cool, level-headed, and reasonable individual until the emotion of jealousy took over.
Brutus, however, believes that Caesar will
lose the control over his reason once he gains power. Brutus then uses another metaphor, that of the ladder, to explain his opinion: “lowliness is young ambition’s ladder” (22). The word lowliness here stands for humility or even possibly meekness. Brutus explains that a young person, as he attempts to climb the ladder of success, acts humbly (acts with humility). He is gentle and obedient to those who are in power over him. But after that person finally gets to the top of the ladder, once he obtains success and greatness and no longer has people who are in power over him, then he changes. He then “looks in the clouds” (26). In other words, he no longer cares for those who are beneath him. He is like a god with his head in the heavens. He is without humility.
A famous quote from the late nineteenth century echoes Brutus’ belief: “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” This line was written by a man named Lord Acton in 1887; and the idea became a central theme in many twentieth-century works of fiction, notably George Orwell’s fable Animal Farm (published in 1945). Shakespeare was essentially expressing the same idea back in 1599. Brutus recognizes that Caesar will become corrupted absolutely once he is crowned as emperor of Rome.
Brutus uses one additional snake metaphor to explain the necessity of assassinating Caesar: Caesar is “a serpent’s egg” (32). A serpent or poisonous snake, while it is still in the egg, is harmless. But once that egg hatches, then the serpent becomes dangerous. Brutus is asserting that Caesar will be a danger to Rome just as surely as a poisonous snake is dangerous to man. There is no doubt in Brutus’ mind that Caesar will be dangerous.
Two words that literature students should be familiar with are microcosm and macrocosm. A microcosm is a smaller system that is similar to or a comparative to a larger system. For example, a town meeting of the small town’s leaders may be viewed as a microcosm of a large nation’s legislative (or government) meeting. The legislative meeting would be the macrocosm. In early Christian belief, events on earth were sometimes viewed as the microcosm of events in Heaven (the macrocosm). A political rebellion on earth, for example, would be a microcosm of the rebellion of Lucifer against God. Brutus expresses a similar idea to describe his own feelings about joining the conspiracy. He describes the time between thinking about action and actually doing that action like a nightmare (line 65), and then adds the following:
The genius and the mortal instruments
Are then in counsel, and the state of man,
Like to a little kingdom, suffers then
The nature of an insurrection. (66-69)
By genius, Brutus means soul or immortal spirit; and mortal instruments refer to the body. The word counsel actually means debate here. Brutus is thus declaring that his body and soul are in conflict (body vs. soul). He is saying that his body is about to participate in an action that his soul disagrees with. Brutus is describing the discomfort and grief that he is feeling within his own conscience, within his own heart.
Brutus then proceeds to his microcosmic metaphor. He states that the state or condition of man is like the condition of a “little kingdom” that is experiencing “an insurrection” or rebellion (lines 6769). During a rebellion, the people of a kingdom or nation are fighting among themselves. Similarly, Brutus is fighting himself. His public zeal is in conflict with his conscience (public zeal vs. conscience). It is a conflict that Brutus cannot win. The use of personification a few lines later emphasizes the trouble stirring in Brutus’ conscience. Brutus personifies Conspiracy (line 77), who, Brutus declares, is ashamed to show his face even in the darkest night. The face of Conspiracy is indicated by the words brow (line 78) and visage (line 81). Actually, brow is another example of synecdoche (a kind of metaphor in which a part signifies the whole). But the important idea here is that Conspiracy represents Brutus. Conspiracy is ashamed or embarrassed to show his face, and he hides his shame with smiles and pretended friendliness (line 82: in this case, the fake friendliness is what the conspirators will show to Caesar). In other words, Conspiracy is a hypocrite. And, thus, Brutus, too, is a hypocrite. It is a role that he does not enjoy.
Rather, Brutus feels disgraced.
When the conspirators arrive at Brutus’ home, Cassius suggests that they swear an oath to their enterprise, to their plot to assassinate Caesar (line 112). But Brutus responds with a lengthy speech that no oath is necessary. He explains that oaths are only necessary when men have little or no motive to act in a certain manner. For Brutus, the desire to defeat tyranny is the only motive they need. He adds that this single motive is strong enough “to kindle cowards” (120: to encourage cowardly men to act bravely) and “to steel with valour the melting hearts of women” (120-21: to make weak women strong and courageous). Brutus then asks the following:
And what other oath
Than honesty to honesty engaged
That this shall be or we will fall for it?
(125-27)
By the word honesty, Brutus means integrity, honor, and truth. Brutus is stating that they are acting out of honor, with honorable intentions, to perform an honorable act and that they are willing to die (fall) to accomplish this honorable act. Brutus is assuming that all of the conspirators are acting for the same noble or honorable reasons as he. Of course, that is not entirely true.
The conspirators then proceed to discuss the details of their plot. Cassius suggests that perhaps the conspirators should ask Cicero to join the group (line 140). Cicero is an old and wise Roman senator, and his presence, like that of Brutus, would make the conspiracy appear to be a noble one. However, Brutus contradicts Cassius. Brutus explains that Cicero is a leader, not a follower, and that he would not be a good addition to the group. He would possibly try to upset their plans. Brutus is wiser than Cassius on this point, and Cassius then agrees that Cicero should not join the conspiracy.
But then Cassius brings up another issue or point where Brutus is not so wise. Cassius suggests that the conspirators should kill not only Julius Caesar, but they should kill Mark Antony as well (lines 155-57). Cassius explains his reasons:
We shall find of him
A shrewd contriver. And you know his means,
If he improve them, may well stretch so far
As to annoy us all. (157-60)
Cassius wisely and correctly evaluates the danger that Antony is capable of. Moreover, these lines foreshadow the events to follow. Earlier Cassius had correctly analyzed the thoughts of Brutus and was able to convince him to join the conspiracy. Cassius “looks quite through the deeds of men” (I, 2: 203-04) as Caesar had said of him earlier. Cassius understands the psychology of men, where Brutus does not. Cassius is correct: Antony is a shrewd contriver. He is extremely clever and resourceful and can create successful plots and strategies. And Antony also has vast means. He has numerous resources, men and money, which will make him a powerful enemy. And, later in the play, Antony will “annoy” Brutus and Cassius. Antony will lead a war against them.
As he had done earlier, Brutus disagrees with Cassius. Brutus does not want the conspiracy to engage in a terrible slaughter of many men. And Brutus does not think that Antony is a threat:
Our course will seem too bloody, Caius Cassius,
To cut off the head and then hack the limbs,
Like wrath in death and envy afterwards –
For Antony is but a limb of Caesar. (162-65)
Brutus speaks in metaphors. Julius Caesar, the leader of Rome, is the head. The men who serve directly under him (his generals) are his limbs or arms. Brutus argues that if a man cuts off the head of his opponent, then the arms of that opponent are useless. They no longer have any power to strike. Brutus suggests that Antony is just the right arm of Caesar. He is saying that when Caesar is dead, Antony will no longer have any power. Antony will no longer be a threat. Brutus argues that killing Antony or other followers of Caesar will be too violent. Again, Brutus also uses personification. He suggests that too much violence will make them appear like Wrath (or anger) and that killing Antony will make them look like Envy. Both wrath and envy are negative emotions, and they belong among the Seven Deadly Sins (a Christian concept although the play is set in pre-Christian times). What Brutus is arguing is that the conspirators should not appear as if they acted because these negative emotions took control over them. Rather, they should act reasonably and coolly.
Cassius allows Brutus to have his way on this matter too. But Cassius lets Brutus know that he does not like this decision:
Yet I fear him;
For the engrafted love he bears to Caesar.
(183-84)
Cassius is suggesting that Antony has a close emotional connection to Caesar. Antony loves Caesar as a very close friend. And Cassius knows only too well that this emotional connection to Caesar will make Antony their enemy after they have killed the leader. Nothing that Brutus or anyone else can say will be able to stop Antony’s anger and revenge.
This scene is clear example of hamartia or tragic flaw. A hamartia is an error in judgment, according to Aristotle's Poetics. The tragic flaw does not refer to a flaw in character (as some critics mistakenly believe). It basically refers to a bad decision made by the protagonist. Aristotle discusses hamartia in his section on plot (not in his section on character). And, in regard to the plot of this play, Brutus is clearly making a mistake by not accepting the advice offered by Cassius. Brutus is making a mistake in allowing Antony to live, for Antony will cause Brutus to fall.
Actually, Brutus makes three fatal decisions:
1st: to join the plot (and to assume that all of the conspirators have noble intentions)
2nd: to allow Mark Antony to live
3rd: to allow Anthony to speak at Caesar’s funeral
If Brutus had decided differently on any one of these three matters, the plot of the play would have been vastly different. Brutus is responsible for his fall because of the decisions that he makes.
After the conspirators leave, Brutus has a scene with his wife Portia. The scene is important for two reasons: (1) It provides the audience with further insight about the character of Brutus and how deeply troubled he has become for joining the conspiracy. And (2) the relationship with his wife further elaborates upon the concepts of honor and worthiness of character.
Portia mentions to Brutus that he has been acting strangely lately. He has been having trouble sleeping at night (line 237), and he abruptly leaves the dinner table before he finishes eating and takes a walk while lost deep in his thoughts (lines 237-39). Moreover, he refuses to answer his wife when she asks him what is bothering him (lines 240-46). Brutus can neither “eat, nor talk, nor sleep” (251). Brutus tries to avoid the question. He tells his wife that he has just been sick lately, but Portia is wiser than to accept such an answer. She tells him, “You have some sick offence within your mind” (267).
The problem is psychological, not physical.
Brutus and Portia have an extremely close relationship, and they have always shared their innermost thoughts with each other until now. This is a true marriage, as Shakespeare believes. To have a marriage that is anything less would not be a genuine marriage. Portia herself expresses the idea when she states that without such closeness, “Portia is Brutus’ harlot, not his wife” (286). A harlot is a whore or prostitute. Shakespeare is providing social commentary here. In many marriages during the Renaissance and for many years afterwards, the husband treated his wife as property or as something lower than himself. A good marriage, however, is not based on sovereignty (power and control over another); it is based on equality. In this respect, Shakespeare would be in agreement with Geoffrey Chaucer (see his marriage group of tales within the Canterbury Tales: “The Wife of Bath's Tale,” “The Clerk's Tale,” “The Merchant's Tale,” and “The Franklin's Tale”). Portia is suggesting that Brutus is treating her like an inferior when she uses the word harlot.
Brutus realizes that his wife is right, and he expresses regret that he has not been so open and honest with her: “O ye gods, render me worthy of this noble wife!” (301-02). Brutus then immediately promises that he will reveal to Portia all of “the secrets of my heart” (305). This scene takes on even greater significance when it is compared to the scene between Caesar and his wife Calpurnia (in Act II, 2).
The first scene of Act II closes with a brief dialogue between Brutus and a Roman named
Ligarius. The scene reveals how Brutus is the crucial (the decisive or most necessary) element of the conspiracy. Ligarius tells him, “With a heart newfired I follow you to do I know not what; but it sufficeth that Brutus leads me on” (331-33). Ligarius is stating that Brutus makes him feel alive and hopeful and that he will do anything that Brutus commands him to do. Ligarius is