Shakespeare’s 1599 tragic play of Julius Caesar showcases the historical event that marked the stabbing of the Roman emperor Julius Caesar by Roman conspirators and the events that lead to his assassination. Julius Caesar, similar to many other plays created by Shakespeare, features a tragic death that dramatically affects the lives of other characters. While the play may be a fictional interpretation of history, it can connect to real historical events such as the assassination of Lincoln during the 1860s. In Harold Holzer’s Smithsonian article, “What the Newspapers Said When Lincoln was Killed,” the author explains the actions and words of the American people after John Wilkes Booth assassinated Lincoln in the Ford Theatre. Although both …show more content…
leaders are greatly loved by their citizens, many other people are against them, thus creating an assassination plot as a way to “free a nation from tyranny.” The assassination of Lincoln and Caesar exhibits a nation’s divisive beliefs, where others may rejoice or mourn, yet both show a crowd’s sense of mob mentality throughout the ages that would eventually rise to violence.
In Julius Caesar, after the assassination of Caesar, the portrayal of the crowd shows a divided nation where those who loved the Roman emperor grew into a mob mentality because they were viewed as a very indecisive and close-minded group. Following the speeches made by Brutus and Antony, the citizens listening to their speeches finally proclaim, “ We’ll burn the house of Brutus. Away then. Come, seek the conspirators” (III.II. 245-246). Shakespeare conveys an indecisive society during Caesar’s reign since they carelessly switched their opinions from favoring Brutus to Antony. This also shows a divided empire as a few conspirators despised the power of Caesar, while the majority of Roman citizens loved and praised him. As a result, the crowd vows to take revenge on Brutus and the conspirators and avenge the death of their leader. While the conspirators attempted to justify the death by claiming that it was for the good of Rome and that they …show more content…
would be better rulers than Caesar, the majority of the Romans went against them. Following the citizens’ vow to avenge the Roman emperor’s death, a mob of plebeians come upon Cinna the poet. As they begin to ask the poet questions, they find out that his name is Cinna; realizing that he shares the same name as Cinna the conspirator, they viciously attack him. Although they eventually realize that he is not Cinna the conspirator, a plebeian proclaims, “ It is no matter. His name’s Cinna. Pluck but his name out of his heart, and turn him going” (III.III.43-36). Shakespeare explicitly shows the psychological thinking of a mob that does actions before it thinks. Although the crowd promised to avenge for what is considered right, they show a similarity to the conspirators themselves as they brutally killed a man due to fear, thus showing mob mentality in society. This also shows a sense of division in society where people cannot communicate with each other without ending with violence. Although the sense of mob mentality and nation division occurred during Caesar’s reign, the issues still continue throughout history. After the assassination of Abraham Lincoln by John Wilkes Booth on April 14, 1865, the United States of America reacted with a violent division between the North and the South. Responding to a newspaper that called him a savage for killing Lincoln, Booth claims, “ I am here in despair [...] And why? For doing what Brutus was honored for, what made [William] Tell a hero. And yet I for striking down a greater tyrant than they ever knew am looked upon as a common cutthroat.” Although John Wilkes Booth expected to be praised for his action, many people in the United States criticized him for assassinating a great leader; he believed that he eradicated a tyrant that gained too much power, and thus believed that a better president could take his place. In the Smithsonian article, the author claims, “ For 12 chaotic days—even as hundreds of thousands of heartbroken admirers massed in Northern cities for elaborate funerals for the slain president—the assassin remained terrifyingly at large, with Federal forces in pursuit. Americans followed the story of the manhunt for John Wilkes Booth as avidly as the troops chased him.” Since many people admired Lincoln, they began a plot to find the assassin and avenge their president’s death. While a few people hated Lincoln, the majority of the United States mourned for his death, despite the division of the North and South. Later, the author describes James Walker, a soldier for the 8th California Industry, who believes Lincoln, was a “Yankee son of a bitch” who “ought to have been killed long ago.” While many anti-Lincoln supporters feared to talk against Lincoln after his death, James Walker explicitly shows his hatred for their president, which only lead to his sentencing of death by the firing squad. This exhibits a divided country since people feared to speak against Lincoln, and anybody who speaks against him publicly would be punished severely, showing a sense of discrimination towards anti-Lincoln supporters and a favoring towards those who love Lincoln. Although the time span between the assassinations of Lincoln and Caesar is quite massive, the portrayal of the crowd share similarities as both show a division in viewpoints, causing even more conflict within the crowds.
In Julius Caesar, after Antony gives his speech to the citizens, one of the plebeians claims, “We’ll burn [Caesar’s] body in the holy place and with the brands fire the traitors’ houses” (III.II.268-269). Meanwhile, in the Smithsonian article, a Massachusetts Copperhead proclaims, “ They’ve shot Abe Lincoln. He’s dead and I’m glad he’s dead.” Both Shakespeare and Holzer show the division of the Roman Empire and the United States of America as their opinions of the death of their ruler differ. While many Roman citizens mourn for Caesar’s assassination, they also develop a hatred towards the conspirators who went against Caesar and plan to avenge his death. This can be similar to the crowd portrayal of the United States after the assassination of Lincoln in 1865 where the majority of American citizens, specifically in the North, wanted to avenge the president’s death by plotting a manhunt for John Wilkes Booth.The portrayal of the crowds also exhibits mob mentality since many people began to riot against the assassins. In Julius Caesar, Antony gives a speech to the Roman citizens after Caesar’s death, while Frederick Douglass, a famous African-American social reformer during the 1800s, also delivers a eulogy “at the Great Hall of Cooper Union, site of the
1860 speech that had helped make Lincoln president.” Both Antony and Frederick Douglass are very similar as both share a special relationship to their nation’s leader and admire their works. The portrayal of the assassins also share a similarity since both assassins believed that they are eradicating a tyrant from power and will be better for their own nation. In Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, the author shows the crowd as being very indecisive, close-minded, and hateful towards Caesar’s assassins after their emperor’s death. Meanwhile in Holzer’s article on the reaction of the United States, he describes that many people mourned for the death of Lincoln and others, mostly in the South, believed that the president deserved to be killed, showing a divided nation with different desires and opinions. Both, however, exhibit a divided nation with a sense of mob mentality as both crowds’ hatred eventually lead to more violence towards each other. The numerous similarities between the assassinations of Lincoln and Caesar and the portrayal of crowds displays that many events in history are bound to repeat themselves.
“ Manhunt: The 12-Day Chase for Lincoln’s Killer”, was written by James L. Swanson, a dedicated Lincoln scholar and attorney. He details in his book the incredible escape of John Wilkes Booth’s from authorities, with immaculate descriptions of little-known facts in the case of Lincoln’s Killer. Swanson’s nonfiction book dives into actual pieces of literature written at the time of Lincoln’s assassination by individuals who actually took part in the real-life drama, including John Wilkes Booth himself.April 14, 1865 is a day of infamy in United States history,it is the day that John Wilkes Booth assassinated Abraham Lincoln. Swanson delves deep into the minds of Booth and his accomplices , analyzing their every move. Booth flees the scene of the crime with Davey Herold, who has been a willing participant in Booth's secret plots to kill Secretary of State William Seward, Abraham Lincoln, and Vice President Andrew Johnson.
The book Julius Caesar is full of happiness, conspiracy, power, and betrayal. The people of Rome deeply loved julius Caesar and wished to make him their king. A group of senators however were not so fond of this idea and formed a conspiracy. The leader of this group was a man by the name of Cassius. In order to make sure that his scheme of killing Caesar would work and would look honorable he had to convince a senator by the name of Brutus to help. After being convinced that they had to kill Caesar to protect Rome from a tyrant Brutus joined the conspiracy and soon became the principal conspirator.On the day in which Caesar was to be crowned king he was on the way to the senate when he was stabbed by all the conspirators panic ensued and to convince Rome of their honorable intentions Brutus gave a funeral speech. Mark Antony, a very close friend of Caesar, gave his speech after Brutus had given his. Mark Antony’s speech is more persuasive to the Roman people because of his outstanding use of pathos, sarcasm, and logos.
Throughout the play The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, the audience constantly sees Brutus, an honorable man, go against his own beliefs because of men filled with hatred and jealousy. Brutus
Without any question, most people have a very clear and distinct picture of John Wilkes Booth a in their minds. It is April 1865, the night president Lincoln decides to take a much-needed night off, to attend a stage play. Before anyone knows it a lunatic third-rate actor creeps into Lincoln's box at Ford's theater and kills the president. Leaping to the stage, he runs past a confused audience and flees into the night, only to suffer a coward’s death Selma asset some two weeks later. From the very moment that Booth pulled the trigger, the victors of the Civil War had a new enemy on their hands, and a good concept of whom they were dealing with. A close examination of the facts, however, paint a different view of Booth, a picture that is far less black and white, but a picture with many shades of gray.
The attitude of people towards Lincoln changed radically after his murder. It was an occasion when the whole nation was perhaps for the first time facing such a calamity where everyone had been forced to think about the changing political situation of the country. At the same time, Lincoln’s funeral rites and processions were done on such a large and grand scale that people starting to look at him in a different light. It was because of the symbolism that these funeral rites projected that the people started to raise Lincoln to a higher level. Even though people did not like him and his policies, there was an element of sympathy and people automatically started to show their affection for their President who was murdered so brutally and so publically. Plus, when Lincoln was killed, the nation was already in a state of sharp emotions, and this allowed for an even increased impact of his death upon the
John Wilkes Booth was a prominent Shakespearean actor with militant Confederate sympathies and an abhorrence for President Lincoln. Booth believed that the south’s institution of slavery was sacred and this country “was formed for the white man and not the black,” therefore anyone who challenged this belief was a tyrant that needed to be exterminated. In Booth’s hometown of Baltimore he would find a great deal of bitter opponents to share his views and it would be here where groundwork of assassination threats would take their preliminary form. Late autumn of 1864 Lincoln would be reelected and Booth’s anti-Lincoln obsession and hatred would increase. Motivated by guilt, rage and malignant narcissism, Booth would resolve to put a plan into
In Shakespeare’s play Julius Caesar, the character Brutus, was portrayed as a malevolent and hateful person. Although he is forced to betray his best friend and suffer through the bitter passing of his wife, he never lets that distort the goal that he has set, which is to better his country. Throughout the play, Brutus shows very knowledgeable, perceptive, and noble qualities toward the Roman Democracy.
Based on a television documentary, Lincoln, A&E Networks provides readers with an in-depth summary of the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. This online article goes along with the documentary to give details as to what happened the night of Lincoln's assassination. Although this article is not based on a conspiracy theory, it was a good starting point to find out more about the assassination. I began my research by analyzing the proven facts that pertain to the assassination plot. These facts provided me with a general knowledge of dates, times and important figures that were involved with this historic assassination. I then was able to create a timeline by analyzing the chronological order of this article. This article provided me with clean-cut facts such as that Lincoln was assassinated by John Wilkes Booth on April 16, 1865. I was able to use the information gathered from this site to eventually support conspiracy theories with proven information. The validity of this source could be proven through its publisher, a major television network, whose main focus is producing historical shows and documentaries. Knowing that the facts on this website were proven, I was able to begin my research based on confirmed facts.
Matthews, Lloyd J.. 1978. "Patrick Henry's "Liberty or Death" Speech and Cassius's Speech in Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar."" The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 86 (3). Virginia Historical Society: 299–305. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4248229.
Julius Caesar and Abraham Lincoln are undeniably two men who made history through their leadership expeditions on their respective nations. When comparing the two, one key aspect of how they made history comes into mind: their assassination. Hence, comparing the assassination of an American president to that of Julius Caesar reveals both similarities and differences. Ultimately, the major of comparing the two is through the similarity between the two assassinations. In this case, they were carried out by people who disagreed with Lincoln and Caesar’s authority and power, and how they used this power and authority.
In the play Julius Caesar, written and preformed by William Shakespeare, there are many characters, but two, Brutus and Cassius, stood out. The play begins in Rome where a celebration of Julius Caesar's victory over the former ruler of Rome, Pompeii. The victory leads to Caesar's betrayal by his jealous companions. Senators and other high status figures are jealous of Caesar's new and growing power, while others, like Brutus, fear the tyrannical rule Caesar could enforce. The conspirators, Brutus and Cassius being the most important, assassinate Julius Caesar and Marcus Antonius, better known as Antony, and Octavius Caesar, Caesar's heir to the thrown, revenge Caesar's death. Antony convinces the Roman populous to destroy the conspirators and eventually begins a war with Cassius and Brutus' armies. Both Cassius and Brutus commit suicide to save their honor and Antony and Octavius win the war. The characterizations of Brutus and Cassius show a distinct contrast in their character traits and motives for the assassination of Julius Caesar.
In William Shakespeare's play The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, two speeches are given to the people of Rome about Caesar's death. In Act 3, Scene 2 of this play Brutus and Antony both try to sway the minds of the Romans toward their views. Brutus tried to make the people believe he killed Caesar for a noble cause. Antony tried to persuade the people that the conspirators committed an act of brutality toward Caesar and were traitors. The effectiveness and ineffectiveness of both Antony's and Brutus's speech to the people are conveyed through tone and rhetorical devices.
Furtwangler, Albert. Assassin on Stage: Brutus, Hamlet, and the Death of Lincoln. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2007. Print.
In The Tragedy of Julius Caesar , he reveals his historical influences by incorporating aspects of Roman Society, such as the plebeians struggle against Roman hierarchy. Additionally, Shakespeare formulated the play’s main conflict around Caesar and his ambition, which can be attributed to the cause of man’s demise, and he based Caesar’s character after the actual Caesar motivations and conquests. He also reflects English society by including parallels between Queen Elizabeth I and Julius Caesar. Lastly, through the play’s conflict, he conveys his political views on civil war and expresses his concern for the fate of England’s government. Most importantly, Shakespeare demonstrates how age-old stories, such as the betrayal of Julius Caesar, can be applied to current society. By understanding Shakespeare's motivations and influences, readers are not only able to glimpse into the age of Roman Empire, but also, they are able to understand the political turmoil in England during Shakespeare's
A later example occurs during the funeral oration by Mark Antony. Brutus logically gives his reasons that necessitated Caesar’s death. He informs them that he acted out of love of Rome and his desire to prevent tyrants from controlling her. The citizens embrace his words with cheers and understanding. However, their mood alters when Antony offers his interpretation of the situation. He passionately described the deeds Caesar performed in behalf of the citizens of Rome, which clearly contradict the opinion of the conspirators that Caesar was too ambitious. Antony carefully uses irony in referring to Cassius and Brutus as honorable men; the strategy wins over the citizens and they listen with growing anger to his words. He leads the citizens to the body and begins to show the brutal results of the murder while simultaneously influencing them to believe that the conspirators are murderers and traitors. Ultimately, Antony reads Caesar’s will, which leaves his parks, private estates, and newly planted gardens to the citizens of Rome.