There are not many lines spoken by Julius Caesar in the play. Scene one of Act III stands out to me as his big scene, and it is the scene where he ends up getting killed. It is here where we get the most direct characterization of him. I found many parallels between this scene and the circumstances leading up to Jesus Christ’s death as told in the Christian New Testament.
Passion narratives say that Jesus was taken back and forth between Pontius Pilate and Herod Antipas for conviction but there was anxiety by the rulers to pass judgment on an innocent man. Only when the argument was adjusted from an accusation of blasphemy to say Jesus was guilty of treason did condemnation come. State sovereignty was also used to justify Caesar’s assassination as a “sacrifice” and not “butchery” (2.1.166). Interestingly, in Christianity Jesus’ death is sacrificial. The validated reason for killing Caesar is that he threatens the Republic of Rome. Brutus’s idealistic understanding for why Caesar has to die was upheld even by Antony in the end. Antony says: “[Brutus] was the noblest Roman of them all,” demonstrating their value in “honest thought and common good to all” (5.5.68-72).
The betrayal by Brutus was similar to Judas’ betrayal of Jesus. He kisses Caesar just like Judas does before killing his leader (3.1.53). There is a similar relationship between Judas as a disciple of Jesus and Brutus as a politician in Caesar’s party. Though The Bible characterizes Judas more like the greedy and jealous patricians who join with Brutus against Caesar, these similarities led me to the parallel between the beginning of Act III and the passion of Jesus Christ.
The first thing that got me relating Caesar to Jesus was Caesar’s celestial metaphors. He claims himself to have God-like power, and says he is as “constant as the Northern Star” (3.1.61). This reminded me of astronomical events prophesying the birth of Christ. Caesar also sets himself apart from his followers in a similar way that Jesus did and made many people resent him. The Sanhedrin saw Jesus as presumptuous and blasphemous, and Roman officials saw Caesar as presumptuous and expecting more power than he deserved. Also, the thoughtlessness of the crowd reminds me of the way the “crowd” is characterized in The Bible. On Palm Sunday the people of Jerusalem welcome Jesus as a symbol of hope for freedom from the Romans, and less than a week later they shout crucify him. The mob in Julius Caesar is swayed within minutes between the oration of Brutus and the eulogy of Antony.
Julius Caesar dies less than halfway through the play. Similarly, the physical presence of Jesus is gone only by the fifth book of the New Testament. After the climax of the heroes’ deaths, the remainder of both the texts shows the series of events that follow and include non-physical representations of both heroes. Caesar’s ghost appears to Brutus, while Jesus appears to Saul of Tarsus (Acts 9). These general similarities added up to create a correlation in my mind. I do not really have a “so what?” for this blog post. It is just my thought process, but I would love to hear if you find significance in this correlation.
Meg, I really enjoyed your post. The relationship of Julius Caesar with Jesus Christ seems very clear after you pointed it out with the textual evidence and claim. Your point on the celestial metaphor of Caesar comparing himself to the North Star is also very great. As a result of him being this “constant being” as a star, especially such a significant one definitely gives him this “god-like power.” The timing of both of the deaths was also a good comparison. They had both died about halfway through their lives as you stated. But I do believe that this is a good claim it just seems relatable to every significant character in a novel. If they seem to have higher authority and power then naturally we relate that to Jesus Christ because of the significant role he has played in the history of the role. It is natural instinct to make that comparison.
I like your comparison to Christ and Caesar, especially if we take into account the turmoil that follows the death of Caesar is much like the spreading of Christianity after Jesus’ death. Both incited violence after their deaths as well, if we think about the hundreds of years that followed the death of Christ, there have been many wars because of the sacrifice of one man, much as there were many emperors following the death of Caesar and no longer would their be a republic. When considering a monarchy one has to consider the moral compass of a leader with total power, if you have a leader who is compassionate and conquers land for their nation, why should he deserve to be murdered. The people of Rome didn’t realize how happy they were under Caesar.
William— Thank you for your response! You raise a great point about the morality of leaders with total power. Perhaps Shakespeare’s play is meant to be didactic. Maybe, like you said, he is pointing out “how good they have it” and warning against the strife that follows monarch overthrow. I think the parallel of Julius Caesar’s god-like status to Jesus could be seen as an example of Shakespeare glorifying the monarchy of his time. By further linking monarchs with Christ he reaffirms their authority as chosen by God and not chosen by the easily swayed people. Thank you, I think your comment adds an insightful “so what” to my original blog post!
I always new that the Bible, and religion in general, played a huge role in literature, but I didn’t even notice your points about Caesar and Jesus Christ as I was reading the play the first time. It’s interesting how in your case, Julius Caesar represented the “Jesus” figure, while Brutus also represented characteristics of him as well. For example, when Antony said that Brutus was the “noblest Roman of them all”, he was alluding to the fact that Brutus “sacrificed” Caesar for the good of his people. Although his actions were misguided, his motive for doing it was just. In the Bible, Jesus sacrificed himself for the well-being of humanity, while Julius Caesar didn’t necessarily sacrifice himself (Willingly at least), when he found out that Brutus had betrayed him, he gave up the will to resist death (In his case getting stabbed). I also believe your point about Caesar being “constant as the Northern Star” was definitely a biblical reference.
Meg, this was such an interesting, thought-provoking post! I really liked how you took the discussion we had in class–Brutus’ similarity to Judas in the betrayal with a kiss–and expanded on it! You also brought up so many other uncanny similarities: the idea of a sacrificial death, the corrupt politicians, and both of their deaths halfway through the timeline. I think it was a really interesting relation that both men were slow-to-be-condemned; the government officials did not want to kill an “innocent” man, but in both cases, excuses were made to murder for the ‘greater good’. I would also like to add the aftermath of both men’s deaths. After Caesar’s death, the Romans hear Brutus’ speech and are happy to have the ambitious Caesar dead. Then, just as quickly, the Romans (after Marc Antony’s speech) are quick to seek revenge in Caesar’s name, a way to preserve his honor. They change their mind like the wind. They kill the conspirators and Caesar’s most loved men come into power. For Christ, before He was risen, the apostles had to go into hiding; this is why Peter denies knowing Jesus three times. People were first ashamed to have known Jesus. Then, after Christ is resurrected, the word of the Lord is spread and many people believe the word. What the government officials wanted, in both cases, was to lessen both men’s power and, in the end, the opposite happened.
Ariana— Thank you for your positive feedback! I did not even remember about the spreading of the gospel after the crucifixion, but you’re so right. There is certainly a parallel between the rise in influence of Jesus’s disciples and the rise of Caesar’s followers. Also I would never have thought to make the correlation that the government official’s plans were so badly foiled that in the end “the opposite happened.” I think this relates back to the insight I found in William’s post that Shakespeare uses his play to glorify the monarchy of his time and warn against insurrection. The message in this interpretation of the play is that uprising against god-like monarchs will be foiled.