The Tragedy Of Julius Caesar As A Tragedy

Julius Caesar, one of Shakespeare’s many plays, is about the death of the famous Roman Emperor, Julius Caesar. The story describes many monumental events before and after Caesar’s death, which are relatively accurate in regards to what historians know about the events of the time period. Because of this, the play is sometimes referred to as a history play. However, the character and plot developments cause many people to believe that the play should be classified as a tragedy instead of a history play. The ancient Greek philosopher, Aristotle, described a tragedy as a story in which a hero posses a tragic flaw, which will bring about their own downfall and death; though the hero dies, order is still restored, and the conflict of the plot is resolved. There is a degree of uncertainty over who the hero is play, and because of this uncertainty it is difficult to discern whether or not it qualifies as a tragedy. Caesar, more than likely, isn’t the hero because he dies very little, and does very little on his own to sway the progression of the plot. Antony could have been there hero, but if he were, the play would not be a tragedy, because he lives. If Brutus were the hero, the story would be a tragedy because he is of noble stature and takes actions, which bring about his own death. I believe that Julius Caesar is a tragedy because Brutus, the tragic hero, is flawed by his ability to be manipulated, which eventually causes conflict that leads to his own death, though order is restored in the end; this is reinforced by events in the plot, by the traits of the characters, and by the use of thought to say what other characters think of themselves and of each other.

The events in the plot of Julius Caesar contain events, which make the p...

... middle of paper ...

...figures. Julius Caesar does follow both of these patterns: Julius Caesar’s rise to power and his murder both really did occur and is well documented and studied by historians, and nearly all of the characters in the play are actual known historical figures that were involved with the events that the play was based off of. However, the characters and events were interpreted very loosely by Shakespeare in order to make an interesting plot, rather than to be historically accurate. Shakespeare took many liberties in personalizing characters and their relationships. Furthermore, he created events that have not historical proof of actually occurring. This makes it much less historically accurate, which in turn makes the play less likely to be categorized as a history play. Because of this, I believe that Julius Caesar was not a historical play, and was indeed a tragedy.