SOURCES: The Tragedy of Julius Caesar
Plutarch was a Greek biographer and philosopher who lived, approximately, from 46 AD to 120 AD. This source was extremely popular in
Shakespeare’s time, and Shakespeare relied upon it extensively for several of his plays. The source is often referred to simply as Plutarch’s Lives.
Shakespeare may possibly have seen it.
Shakespeare would definitely have known about this play since he was already in London at that time.
Caesar was portrayed as an “arrogant, self-assured boaster” in two French versions: a) Marc-Antoine Muret 1544
b) Jacques Grevin 1559
The character of Brutus is one of Shakespeare’s most sympathetic heroes. This exceptionally noble protagonist is trapped in a moral dilemma: he wishes to rid one evil (the tyranny posed by Caesar) by committing an act of evil (assassinating Caesar). Several qualities factor in motivating Brutus:
And Brutus’ own goodness, coupled with a firm belief in the goodness of those Romans with whom he is associated, lead to his several fatal flaws or fatal decisions (as noted in the discussion of Act II above):
1: to join the plot (and to assume that all of the conspirators have noble intentions)
2: to allow Mark Antony to live
3: to allow Anthony to speak at Caesar’s funeral
Brutus makes all three of these decisions because of his belief in the rationality and goodness of mankind. But men are essentially irrational creatures who may act selfishly, foolishly, or immorally.
An intriguing aspect of the real Brutus’ character was his personal regard for the philosophy of stoicism. Shakespeare skillfully makes dramatic use of this quality in the creation of his character, and this aspect of Brutus is especially noticeable in the second half of the play (in Act IV, 2) where Brutus appears to accept Portia’s death in a stoic or calm manner, but his argument with Cassius indicates that even he – the most noble and stoical Roman of all – cannot remain rational on an occasion of overpowering emotion. Shakespeare thus reveals once again that in regards to the conflict of reason vs. emotion, there are times in every man’s life when reason will abandon him and emotion will take over. Later, with the vision of Caesar’s ghost, Shakespeare also reveals the emotional quality of Brutus. The audience could interpret the ghost both symbolically and literally. As a symbol, the ghost indicates Brutus’ guilt. His conscience is bothering him. His mind no longer functions rationally, and his surrender to his emotions indicates or hints at the tragic fall occurring within himself.
Although the character of Cassius is not a villain or an antagonist, he shares a number of qualities that are evident in other great Shakespearean villains or anti-heroes (such as Iago or Richard III). Cassius also serves to function as a literary foil or contrast to Brutus. Both Cassius and Brutus are leaders of the conspiracy, both are intelligent men well read in philosophy, and both of them recognize the threat to Rome once Caesar becomes supreme ruler of the empire. Yet, where Brutus is motivated by his own sense of honor, nobility, and public zeal, Cassius is motivated by envy and pride. Where Brutus is selfless, Cassius is selfish. However, with the frequent references to one another as friend and brother, Shakespeare indicates that Cassius and Brutus complement each other. Each possesses qualities that the other lacks.
Cassius’ best lines come in the second scene of Act I. He is well aware of the significance of honor in Brutus, and Cassius is able to play upon Brutus’ sense of honor and desire above all costs to promote the public welfare. Cassius is extremely clever, and he knows how to see into the thoughts of men and manipulate them. In this respect, he is not unlike the figure of Iago in Othello. But despite all his cleverness, he cannot hide his jealousy. Shakespeare carefully fashions Cassius’ speech so that his words both deeply affect Brutus (an aspect of plot) to join the conspiracy yet, at the same time, reveal to the reader Cassius’ own faults and desires (an aspect of characterization).
The student should also note how
Shakespeare provides rich and poetic language for this character. For example, Cassius often employs synecdoche and simile. A fine example of a synecdoche occurs when Cassius uses the word eyes for way of thinking (in Act I, 2: 64). Another notable example of Cassius’ poetic phrasing occurs when he uses the Colossus simile (I, 2: 137). Cassius is a rhetorician, and coupled with his intelligence, he is able to convince Brutus quite easily about the necessity for assassinating Caesar. Cassius’ reference to Brutus’ ancestor (I, 2: 160 and footnote 3) marks the final touch necessary for pushing Brutus to his way of thinking. Brutus’ sense of honor is mingled with a sense of family pride as well. Brutus does not wish to be ignoble in the eyes of Rome or in the eyes of his family. Of course, Brutus is an intelligent man who is not persuaded easily to engage in an act that he finds vile. Part of Brutus, even before he converses with Cassius, knows that some action should be taken to prevent Caesar from becoming a tyrant. Yet Cassius is crafty enough to know how to take that hidden fear deep within Brutus’ own bosom and bring it out in the open.
The careful reader should also note how Cassius follows the philosophy of Epicurus in regards to having no belief in the forces of fate or destiny (Act V, 1: 76). Yet, he changes his mind at the plays conclusion. Shakespeare may be indicating that Cassius is a victim of foolhardy or wrong-headed thinking.