This Roman play by Shakespeare is based on Plutarch’s Lives of Caesar and Marcus Brutus. One might call it an adapted stage play, since the majority of the plot and dialogues derive from Plutarch. There is a significant difference between the two renditions. For Shakespeare failed to capture the complexity, magnificence, and more importantly, the moral and political philosophy of the noble Romans.
Depiction of Characters
Julius Caesar, the title character, is killed midway through the play, and we know next to nothing about him. Any self-conceited individual can say those words which Shakespeare put into his mouth. They do not reflect the unique character of the Dictator of Rome, his charisma, magnanimity, industry, calculation and ambition, as attested by Plutarch and Cicero.
In history, Brutus was a man of moral integrity and Stoic virtue, and respected by all; in Shakespeare’s play, he was accused as a traitor by Antony, in the famous speech “I come to bury Caesar”. Antony, according to Cicero and Plutarch, was unrestrained in lust, “the Helen of Troy” who brought destruction upon the Roman Republic, but in the play he came away a manipulative demagogue, nay, a popular hero.
Dante also condemned Brutus as a traitor, and consigned him to the lowest circle of the Inferno. However, Dante was not quite consistent in his judgment, since he brought Caesar and Cicero together in Limbo as virtuous pagans, perhaps not realizing that there was bitter enmity of ideals between the two, and the latter rejoiced at the slaughter of the former.
Shifting Perspectives
From the perspective of the Roman Republic, the assassination of Julius Caesar was not an act of betrayal or murder, but a continuation of the Civil War between the declining Republic and the emerging Empire, a struggle between freedom and tyranny. Brutus fought in the Republic forces against Caesar, and after their defeat, Caesar pardoned him. On the one hand, he was indebted to Caesar for sparing his life. On the other hand, Caesar robbed him of his freedom as a citizen of the Republic. Therefore, the assassination was not a preemptive strike against Caesar’s ambition for tyranny, as Shakespeare depicted it, but a struggle or rebellion against a de facto tyrant.
The nuances of moral and political thought in ancient Rome are absent in Shakespeare’s play. As if to compensate, he expands on the relationship between Brutus and Cassius, whom Plutarch mentioned only in passing. Their relationship occupies the center stage throughout, akin to that between Bassanio and Antonio in The Merchant of Venice. It is not mere coincidence that Brutus’ wife and Bassanio’s fiance share the same name. Shakespeare almost seems to insinuate that Cassius instigated the assassination of Caesar, not because of his hatred of the tyrant and desire for freedom, but because of his jealousy of Brutus’ love for Caesar, the same reason Harmodius and Aristogeiton assassinated the tyrant Hipparchus in ancient Greece, according to some accounts.
Postscript
I still vividly remember my encounter with Brutus three years ago. When I was crossing the street, a black retriever run past me, with a red shopping bag dangling from his jaw. At the same time, a lady behind me called out, “Brutus!” I stared at him in amusement, wondering what had become of the Roman hero-cum-assassin. Antony would have been a more fitting name for the lady’s personal shopping assistant.