Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

longer, but went straight and lift her up, crying out, 'Oh, mother, what have you done to me?' And, holding her hard by the right hand, 'Oh, mother,' said he, 'you have won a happy victory for your country, but mortal and unhappy for your son; for I see myself vanquished by you alone.' These words being spoken openly, he spake a little apart with his mother and wife, and then let them return again to Rome, for so they did request him; and so, remaining in camp that night, the next morning he dislodged, and marched homeward into the Volces' country again."

15 SCENE V.

"Hail, lords! I am return'd your soldier." "Now, when Martius was returned again into the city of Antium from his voyage, Tullus, that hated and could no longer abide him for the fear he had of his authority, sought divers means to make him away, thinking that, if he let slip that present time, he should never recover the like and fit occasion again. Where fore Tullus, having procured many other of his confederacy, required Martius might be deposed from his estate, to render up account to the Volces of his charge and government. Martius, fearing to become a private man again, under Tullus, being general (whose authority was greater, otherwise, than any other among all the Volces), answered-he was willing to give up his charge, and would resign it into the hands of the lords of the Volces if they did all command him, as by all their commandment he received it; and, moreover, that he would not refuse even at that present to give up an account unto the people, if they would tarry the hearing of it. The people hereupon called a common council, in which assembly

there were certain orators appointed, that stirred up the common people against him: and when they had told their tales, Martius rose up to make them answer. Now, notwithstanding the mutinous people made a marvellous great noise, yet, when they saw him, for the reverence they bare unto his valiantness, they quieted themselves, and gave him audience to allege with leisure what he could for his purgation. Moreover, the honestest men of the Antiates, and who most rejoiced in peace, showed by their countenance that they would hear him willingly, and judge also according to their conscience. Whereupon Tullus, fearing that if he did let him speak he would prove his innocency to the people, because, amongst other things, he had an eloquent tongue; besides that, the first good service he had done to the people of the Volces, did win him more favour than these last accusations could purchase him displeasure; and furthermore, the offence they laid to his charge was a testimony of the good will they ought him; for they would never have thought he had done them wrong for that he took not the city of Rome, if they had not been very near taking of it by means of his approach and conduction;-for these causes, Tullus thought he might no longer delay his pretence and enterprise, neither to tarry for the mutining and rising of the common people against him: wherefore those that were of the conspiracy began to cry out that he was not to be heard, and that they would not suffer a traitor to usurp tyrannical power over the tribe of the Volces, who would not yield up his state and authority. And in saying these words they all fell upon him, and killed him in the market-place, none of the people once offering to rescue him."

[graphic][subsumed]

'THE Tragedy of Julius Cæsar' was first printed in the folio collection of 1623. The text is divided into acts; and the stage directions are full and precise. Taken altogether, we know no play of Shakspere's that presents so few difficulties arising out of inaccuracies in the original edition.

Years, perhaps centuries, have rolled on since the æra of 'Coriolanus.' Rome had seen a constitution which had reconciled the differences of the patricians and the plebeians. The two orders had built a temple to Concord. Her power had increased; her territory had extended. In compounding their differences the patricians and the plebeians had appropriated to themselves all the wealth and honours of the state. There was a neglected class that the social system appeared to reject, as well as to despise. The aristocratic party was again brought into a more terrible conflict with the impoverished and the destitute. Civil war was the natural result. Sulla established a short-lived constitution. The dissolution of the Republic was at hand: the struggle was henceforth to be not between classes, but individuals. The death of Julius Cæsar was soon followed by the final termination of the contest between the republican and the monarchical principle. Shakspere saw the grandeur of the crisis: and he seized upon it for one of his lofty expositions of political philosophy. He has treated it as no other poet would have treated it, because he saw the exact relations of the contending principle to the future great history of mankind. The death of Cæsar was not his catastrophe: it was the death of the Roman Republic at Philippi.

Of all Shakspere's characters none require to be studied with more patient attention than those of Brutus and Cassius, that we may understand the resemblances and the differences of each. The leading distinctions between these two remarkable men, as

Bru

drawn by Shakspere, appear to us to be these: Brutus acts wholly upon principle; Cassius partly upon impulse. Brutus acts only when he has reconciled the contemplation of action with his speculative opinions; Cassius allows the necessity of some action to run before and govern his opinions. tus is a philosopher; Cassius is a partisan. Brutus therefore deliberates and spares; Cassius precipitates and denounces. Brutus is the nobler instructor; Cassius the better politician. Shakspere, in the first great scene between them, brings out these distinctions of character upon which future events so mainly depend.

Nothing can be more interesting than to follow Shakspere with Plutarch in hand. The poet adheres to the facts of history with a remarkable fidelity. A few hard figures are painted upon a canvas; the outlines are distinct, the colours are strong; but there is no art in the composition, no grouping, no light and shadow. This is the historian's picture. We turn to the poet. We recognise the same figures, but they appear to live; they are in harmony with the entire scene in which they move: we have at once the reality of nature, and the ideal of art, which is a higher nature. Yet the art of the poet is so subtle that many have fancied that they could detect a want of art; and the character of Cæsar, as drawn by Shakspere, has been held not only to be tame, and below the historical conception of the great dictator, but as representing him in a false light. We believe that Shakspere was wholly right. At the exact period of the action of this drama, Cæsar, possessing the reality of power, was haunted by the weakness of passionately desiring the title of king. Plutarch says "The chiefest cause that made him mortally hated was the covetous desire he had to be called king." This is the pivot upon which the whole action of Shakspere's tragedy turns. There

might have been another mode of treating | truth had he said the character is deterthe subject. The death of Julius Cæsar mined by the plot. While Cæsar is upon might have been the catastrophe. The re- the scene, it was for the poet, largely interpublican and the monarchical principles preting the historian, to show the inward might have been exhibited in conflict. The workings of "the covetous desire he had to republican principle would have triumphed be called king;" and most admirably, acin the fall of Cæsar; and the poet would cording to our notions of characterisation, have previously held the balance between has he shown them. Altogether we profess the two principles, or have claimed, indeed, to receive Shakspere's characterisation of our largest sympathies for the principles Cæsar with a perfect confidence that he of Cæsar and his friends, by a true exhi- produced that character upon fixed prinbition of Cæsar's greatness and Cæsar's ciples of art. It is not the prominent chavirtues. The poet chose another course. racter of the play; and it was not meant to And are we then to talk, with ready flip- be so. It is true to the narrative upon pancy, of ignorance and carelessness-that which Shakspere founded it; but, what is of he wanted classical knowledge that he gave more importance, it is true to every natural himself no trouble? "The fault of the conception of what Cæsar must have been character is the fault of the plot," says at the exact moment of his fall. Hazlitt. It would have been nearer the

JULIUS CESAR.

Appears, Act I. sc. 2. Act II. sc. 2. Act III. sc. 1.

OCTAVIUS CESAR, a triumvir after the death of Julius Cæsar.

Appears, Act IV. sc. 1. Act V. sc. 1; sc. 5. MARCUS ANTONIUS, a triumvir after the death of Julius Cæsar.

Appears, Act I. sc. 2. Act II. sc. 2.

Act IV. sc. 1.

Act III. sc. 1; sc. 2. Act V. sc. 1; sc. 4; sc. 5.

M. EMILIUS LEPIDUS, a triumvir after the

death of Julius Cæsar.

Appears, Act III. sc. 1. Act IV. sc. 1.

CICERO, a senator.
Appears, Act I. sc. 2; sc. 3.

PUBLIUS, a senator.

Appears, Act II. sc. 2. Act III. sc. 1.
POPILIUS LENA, a senator.
Appears, Act III. sc. 1.

MARCUS BRUTUS, a conspirator against

Julius Cæsar.

Appears, Act I. sc. 2.

Act III. sc. 1; sc. 2.

Act II. sc. 1; sc. 2.
Act IV. sc. 2; sc. 3.
Act V. sc. 1; sc. 2; sc. 3; sc. 4; sc. 5.

CASSIUS, a conspirator against Julius Cæsar.

Appears, Act I. sc. 2; sc. 3. Act II. sc. 1.
Act III. sc. 1; sc. 2. Act IV. sc. 2; sc. 3.
Act V. sc. 1; sc. 3.

CASCA, a conspirator against Julius Cæsar.

Appears, Act I. sc. 2; sc. 3. Act II. sc. 1; sc. 2.
Act III. sc. 1.

TREBONIUS, a conspirator against Julius
Cæsar.

Appears, Act II. sc. 1; sc. 2. Act III. sc. 1.
LIGARIUS, a conspirator against Julius

Cæsar.

Appears, Act II. sc. 1; sc. 2.

Decius Brutus, a conspirator against Julius

Cæsar.

Appears, Act I. sc. 2. Act II. sc. 1; sc. 2. Act III. sc. 1. METELLUS CIMBER, a conspirator against Julius Cæsar.

Appears, Act II. sc. 1; sc. 2. Act III. sc. 1. CINNA, a conspirator against Julius Cæsar.

Appears, Act 1. sc. 3. Act II. sc. 1; sc. 2. Act III. sc. 1.

FLAVIUS, a tribune.

Appears, Act I. sc. 1. MARULLUS, a tribune.

Appears, Act I. sc. 1.

ARTEMIDORUS, a sophist of Cnidos.
Appears, Act II. sc. 3. Act III. sc. 1.
A Soothsayer.

Appears, Act I. sc. 2. Act II. sc. 4. Act III. sc. 1.

CINNA, a poet.

Appears, Act III. sc. 3.

A Poet.

Appears, Act IV. sc. 3.

LUCILIUS, a friend to Brutus and Cassius. Appears, Act IV. sc. 2; sc. 3.

Act V. sc. 1; sc. 3; sc. 4; sc. 5.

TITINIUS, a friend to Brutus and Cassius.

Appears, Act IV. sc. 2; sc. 3. Act V. sc. 1; sc. 3.

MESSALA, a friend to Brutus and Cassius.

Appears, Act IV. sc. 3.

Act V. sc. 1; sc. 2; sc. 3; sc. 5.

Young CATO, a friend to Brutus and Cassius.
Appears, Act V. sc. 3; sc. 4.

VOLUMNIUS, a friend to Brutus and Cassius.
Appears, Act V. sc. 3; sc. 5.
VARRO, servant to Brutus.

Appears, Act IV. sc. 3.

CLITUS, servant to Brutus.

Appears, Act V. sc. 5.

CLAUDIUS, servant to Brutus.

Appears, Act IV. sc. 3.
STRATO, servant to Brutus.

Appears, Act V. sc. 3; sc. 5.

LUCIUS, servant to Brutus.

Appears, Act II. sc. 1; sc. 4. Act IV. sc. 2; sc. 3. DARDANIUS, servant to Brutus.

Appears, Act V. sc. 5.

PINDARUS, servant to Cassius.
Appears, Act IV. sc. 2. Act V. sc. 3.
CALPHURNIA, wife to Cæsar.
Appears, Act I. sc. 2. Act II. sc. 2.

PORTIA, wife to Brutus.

Appears, Act I. sc. 2. Act II. sc. 1; sc. 4.

Senators, Citizens, Guards, Attendants, &c.

SCENE, DURING A GREAT PART OF THE PLAY AT ROME; AFTERWARDS AT SARDIS; AND NEAR PHILIPPI.

« AnteriorContinua »