The Tragedy Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare

“Does the end ever justify the means?” This question is posed after reading The Tragedy of Julius Caesar. In this play, Brutus and the other conspirators murdered Julius Caesar because they thought he was a corrupt leader for the city of Rome. They thought that they were not doing anything wrong because they were doing it for the good of the people. Were their actions indeed for the good of the people, and if so, did that make the murder okay? The question “does the end ever justify the means?” asks if doing something that is bad or morally wrong is okay if it is done for the greater good.

Loyalty and honor are the only tragic flaws that Brutus has but these are the reason that he has killed Caesar. Brutus had said that he had killed Caesar for the good of Rome and that his ancestors would have wanted this. Which is true that his ancestors had said that if any man were to claim themselves the king of Rome to kill them, but Caesar had never claimed himself king. The conspirators had only assumed that. So in reality by killing Caesar it wasn’t displaying loyalty and honor it was really showing stupidity.

Brutus' tragic flaw was making bad judgments. For example, he let Antony speak at Caesar's funeral, he let Antony live and also he marched to Phillipi. Since the Romans liked Brutus, they thought that if he killed Caesar, then he had a good reason for it. However, if Brutus had not let Antony speak at the funeral, the people would not have turned against him and the other conspirators. Antony was not Caesar's best friend, like Brutus; he just wanted everybody to be against Brutus so they could follow him.

Brutus does not take the passionate road. The road that leads to the murder of Antony, because if it is good for Rome to have Caesar killer, then killing Antony and Caesar will be twice as good for Rome. There are some very obvious effects that this conflict has with Brutus’ life. Of course this conflict makes him part of the conspiracy, because that’s what this whole controversy is all about. This conflict also ultimately ended Brutus’ life.

They gave him the justification he needed to kill Caesar, which was “its Good of Rome.” The assumption was that Caesar would eventually take the crown, which would never less destroyed Rome according to Brutus thoughts. By making this assumption and joining the other conspirators he set him self up for many problems for him and for Rome. This was one of the fatal mistakes made by Brutus. Brutus actually made two mistakes with Mark Antony. The first was letting Mark Antony live and the second was letting him speak alone at the funeral.

He Lacks in integrity but proves to be a somewhat successful person in the fact that he killed Julius Caesar, which is what he set out to do. He wanted to kill Julius Caesar because in Cassius’s mind the Roman Empire did not need Julius Caesar and the Empire, as a whole, would be better off without him as their leader. Another reason Cassius did not want Caesar to be king is because Caesar was becoming godlike in Cassius’s eyes. After the death of King Julius Caesar Cassius... ... middle of paper ... ...annihilated. The reason behind this annihilation was intend in being greedy and wealth.

While Cassius provides many reasons as to why Caesar must be killed, Cassius’s true motive is simply anger and a need for revenge against Caesar. This means that Cassius’s actions cannot be justified in the end, if he was simply doing it for himself the entire time. However, many people think Brutus could be excused, since he thought that by killing Caesar, he would be keeping Rome safe and leaving Caesar uncorrupted. I do not think that even with the ‘noble reasons’ that Cassius gave would excuse Brutus for killing Caesar, simply becaus... ... middle of paper ... ...hods about halfway through the play. However, Brutus was morally sound, and was truly repentant for his actions.

The Tragic Hero in William Shakespeare's Julius Caesar A tragic hero is a literary character who makes an error of judgment or has a fatal flaw that, combined with fate and external forces, brings on a tragedy. Brutus is the tragic hero in the book Julius Caesar. In the play, Julius Caesar became a ruler in the triumphret in Rome, yet there was a group of people who disliked this very much. The group of people came together to become the conspirators and together decided they would rather have Brutus, a friend of Caesars, become the ruler of Rome. So after writing him fake letters from citizens convincing him to be the ruler, he joined in the conspiracy and they decided they had to assassinate Caesar.

The ghost's visit could have represented an evil spirit questioning Brutus's likeness to Caesar. I initially began this opinion having the opposite view. I thought that Brutus was a poor template for the role that Shakespeare put him in. however, I soon realized that Brutus, in fact, was a state of moral fortitude because of the reasons I have previously stated. The plot revolves around Brutus and thus his actions are often scrutinized and are important to understand.

However, Brutus clearly represents Aristotle’s Tragic Hero as his intentions for killing Julius Caesar were to protect the empire he loved. and brought upon him personal destruction. Brutus murdered Caesar with honorable purpose so that the Roman people would not “die all slaves”, but “live [as] freemen” (117). Caesar’s death was believed to be in the best interest of Rome and a necessary loss to the empire. Brutus did not seek glory or power, but stability for Rome (unlike most of the conspirators).