In Shakespeare's play Julius Caesar,
there are indications of the tyranny of Caesar as well as his epilepsy and compromised
health, two factors which point to his questionable leadership. In real history, too,
of which the Romans would be aware, the Senate of Rome in 49 B.C. had ordered Caesar to
hand over his army to their control, but he refused; instead, he advanced upon Italy,
stopping at the border to Gaul because a Roman governor was not allowed to leave his
province. Nevertheless, he later crossed the Rubicon River to confront his enemies, an
act that the Senate considered as treason. One by one, Caesar brutally killed his
enemies. As mentioned in the play, Caesar killed Pompey. And, for the next three
years, he killed more.
With these facts in mind, the
audience listening to Brutus's declaration that he loved Rome more than he loved Caesar
could easily have been swayed to think that the assassination of such a tyrant was
necessary, especially with his history of arrogance and desire for power and eagerness
to accept the crown when he parades through the streets of
Rome.
Here are some actual statements from Roman statesmen
that may help in deciding how an audience could agree with
Brutus:
readability="13">"Our tyrant deserved to die. Here
was a man who wanted to be king of the Roman people and master of the whole world. Those
who agree with an ambition like this must also accept the destruction of existing laws
and freedoms. It is not right or fair to want to be king in a state that used to be free
and ought to be free today."
Cicero."People blame me for
mourning the death of my friend. They say my country should be preferred to my friends,
as if they had proved that killing him was good for the state. I did not abandon him as
a friend however much I disapproved of what he was doing." Gaius
Matius.
No comments:
Post a Comment