In one sense, Julius Caesar is a meditation on the idea of power. In the play’s universe, even when radiating from a single person or ruler, power manifests itself through the people. The political structures in the play have vestiges of democracy, and democratic power is what the play’s highest ideas try to defend. However, does the mantle of democracy immunize power against corruption? What is unique about Julius Caesar’s treatment of power is that the play does not offer conclusive answers to these thorny questions, leaving them open-ended.

The theater of power in the play always includes the masses as a participating audience. Tellingly, the play opens in a public setting, where commoners are celebrating Caesar’s homecoming on the street. The opinion of the masses is always filtered and censored by their leaders, as in the case of Marullus and Flavius, the tribunes who instruct the masses not to celebrate Caesar. Thus, though the will of the people is important, those in power constantly try to police it. Brutus, who forms the center of ethical politics in the play, is convinced he is acting in the public interest of the Romans, yet he kills Caesar in the enclosed private space of the Senate and not on the street. Thus, he is well aware that he is taking a decision on behalf of Rome, with the vast majority of Romans knowing of the decision only after the fact.

Antony represents another kind of political leader, the charismatic orator who manipulates the public for his own ends. Though he may be popular, his moral authority is ambiguous. In the manner in which Antony whips the masses into bloodlust at Caesar’s funeral, there is a remarkable prescience about twentieth-century dictators like Benito Mussolini. Thus, what moves the masses may not be good for them or others. That which appeals to the reason of the people is infinitely better, to borrow Brutus’s favorite word. Brutus believes that the masses share his love for reason. However, the masses are governed less by reason than by emotion and may not always be ethically sound, as is revealed in their gruesome murder of the poet Cinna.

In Julius Caesar, Caesar’s tendency toward tyranny is not merely a fabrication of his enemies. Caesar’s increasing tendency to refer to himself in the third person, describe himself in a hyperbolic mode as the “North Star,” and dismiss the concerns of his well-wishers show his ambition is indeed excessive. However, the conspirators who desire to overthrow Caesar are not as noble as they’d like to be considered, not even Brutus. The flaws in their characters and strategy plunge Rome into chaos and unnecessary strife. The answer does not lie in Mark Antony either, whose dynamism is tempered by opportunism, such as when he diverts some of Caesar’s bequests to himself. The play—and history—suggests young Octavius Caesar is the answer. However, this hope is merely hinted at, and power in the universe of Julius Caesar remains a dangerous entity unless handled with a mixture of nobility and pragmatism.