Historical Background

In 1599, when Julius Caesar was first performed, Queen Elizabeth I, the Tudor Queen, was in the final years of her 45-year reign (1558–1603). It was a period of history called the “Age of Discovery,” a time of scientific growth, a rebirth of the arts, and exploration of the recently discovered continents of North and South America. Historical plays were popular during Shakespeare’s lifetime and people were eager to learn about worlds other than their own. A play like Julius Caesar taught them about Roman history, and at the same time, provided them with a mirror of their own society—a peacetime monarchy after a hundred years of warfare and before the Civil War that began in 1642.

Elizabeth’s reign was one of the most secure known by the English in hundreds of years. But her throne came under attack from Roman Catholic plots to replace the Protestant monarch with a Catholic. While Shakespeare was writing Julius Caesar, Elizabeth’s own favorite, the Earl of Essex rebelled in 1601, intending to replace the Queen’s Secretary of State, Sir Robert Cecil, with a group of young aristocrats. His plan failed. But even more damaging attacks on the idea of monarchy came from loyal Puritans. Radicals like Peter Wentworth and John Field wanted democracy and called for “liberty, freedom and enfranchisement,” words echoed in Shakespeare’s play.

Like Julius Caesar, Queen Elizabeth had no heirs to follow her on the throne. In 1599, when she was ill, people feared that civil war and religious struggle would be the only way the question of her succession could be answered.

Although Shakespeare was writing about Rome, he was also posing questions about his own times. Who is fit to have authority? Who is fit to take this authority away? Is authority justified by legal or divine right? Can rebellion against authority ever be justified? All of these concerns can be found in Julius Caesar.

Performance of the Play

In September of 1599, a Swiss doctor visiting London wrote in his journal that he crossed the Thames and “there in the thatched roof witnessed an excellent performance of the tragedy of the first emperor Julius.” This entry is one of the few surviving pieces of information about the production in the original Globe Theater.

We know that a performance of Julius Caesar included realistic sound effects for thunder and battle scenes. The actor playing Caesar probably had a pig’s bladder filled with blood under his costume, and when he was stabbed, he and the conspirators were covered with blood. About 15 men played all the parts in the play, memorizing several parts each. The two female roles were played by boy apprentices. There were no woman actors in the theater at this time.

Today critics are divided over Julius Caesar. Some consider it flawed because it is the only Shakespearean tragedy where the title character is killed halfway through the play. Also, the focus of the action is never clear. Who is the hero of the play? Is it Caesar or Brutus? What is the message Shakespeare intends? Certainly, they agree, the play is not as powerful as Hamlet or King Lear.

In reading the play today, we tend to judge it by our modern standards and concepts of democracy and freedom. When you read the play, try to see it through the eyes of one who lived in England at the beginning of the 17th Century. It was a time of change and discovery, yet it was a time of divine right, monarchy, order and obligation. Without these things the world would be in chaos. What destroys the harmony in Caesar’s Rome—Caesar’s ambition for power? Cassius’ jealousy? Brutus’ naivete? Or the fickleness of its citizens?

One of the central themes in Julius Caesar is the overthrow of a ruler. Shakespeare explores whether such an act can ever be justified and, if so, under what conditions. During Shakespeare's era, a prevalent belief was that overthrowing any ruler—whether good or bad—was morally wrong. This perspective is evident in Dante's The Inferno, part of a larger work completed between 1308 and 1321. In this poem, Dante, an Italian poet, places Brutus and Cassius in the lowest level of Hell as punishment for their rebellion. This idea was well-known in Shakespeare's time through literature like The Inferno and the views of England's rulers. Both Queen Elizabeth and King James I, the monarchs during Shakespeare's life, believed that attacking a ruler was deeply immoral and dangerous for the kingdom. James I even argued that a bad ruler was sent by God to test and develop the character of Christian subjects, suggesting that rebellion was never justified. Both Elizabeth and James survived various plots against them.

Contrary to the medieval perspective of Dante, some Renaissance thinkers argued in favor of overthrowing a tyrant. Two notable Renaissance writers who supported this idea were the Italian political writer Niccolò Machiavelli (1469-1527) and the French essayist Michel Eyquem Montaigne (1533-92). They discussed the reasons why people might seek to overthrow a ruler. Additionally, some Catholic and Protestant polemicists advocated for the overthrow and assassination of an unjust ruler, especially when there was a lack of religious tolerance in the kingdom.

In Julius Caesar, Brutus contends that Caesar was killed because of his ambition. He fears the changes Caesar might undergo if he gained more power. Historically, Julius Caesar attained a level of personal power that exceeded what the ancient Roman political system was designed to permit. The main governing body in Rome during Caesar's time was the Senate. In the play, key characters such as Caesar, Brutus, and Mark Antony are all members of the Senate. The principal officials in the Senate were known as consuls. Two consuls were elected from the Senate by the general public and served alternate months during the same year. The power of a consul was meant to be balanced by the presence of the second consul and the short term of office. However, during periods of civil war, many exceptions were made for victorious military leaders like Caesar. The Senate granted Caesar additional honors and powers beyond those of a consul due to his military successes. Eventually, Caesar claimed even more power for himself.

Much like the ancient Roman legal system, the contemporary democratic framework involves officials being elected by the public, with checks and balances embedded in the governance process. In a democracy, citizens possess the power to remove leaders who fail to represent their views in lawmaking. The U.S. government exemplifies this system with its division into three branches: legislative, judicial, and executive. Additionally, informal checks help prevent any individual from accumulating excessive power. These checks include regular elections, campaign regulations, independent media, public education, skilled lawyers, a jury system, the separation of church and state, and lobbyists representing various groups.

Another topic of interest for today's audience is the contrast between historical records, primarily those by Greek biographer Plutarch (died c. 120 A.D.), and Shakespeare's adaptation of those records. Much of Shakespeare's Julius Caesar is based on Plutarch's writings. However, Shakespeare omits several details: 1) Portia's previous marriage and her children from that marriage 2) Caesar saving Brutus's life after the battle of Pharsalus 3) Brutus stabbing Caesar in the "privities." Suetonius, a Roman biographer/historian contemporary to Plutarch, mentioned a tradition that Brutus was Caesar's illegitimate son, another element absent in the play. It is suggested that Shakespeare may have left out such details to portray Brutus more sympathetically. There are also other differences between Plutarch's historical account and Shakespeare's play, including time compressions. Similarly, modern artists often draw inspiration from historical or official records. Whether a poet, author, playwright, or director, the artist may interpret or embellish aspects of these documents for various reasons, including theatrical or political purposes. A modern example of this variation is the difference between the Warren Commission Report on President John F. Kennedy's assassination and its depiction in Oliver Stone's film.