ar Essays
A Question of Loyalty in Julius Caesar
Loyalty defined means faithfulness to one’s friends, country,
ideals, etc. What should one do when these loyalties conflict with one
another? One would have to choose. A choice that can
make or break a man, which I believe broke many men in the play Julius
Caesar. One did not know who was friend or foe. One’s dearest friends
actually your foes? Not possible, is it? Yes, it is.
That is the story
of Julius Caesar. Julius Caesar, a great, noble man. A man for his
country. A man loved by many and respected by all. Even respected by the
men that cursed him with death. Why would men that loved and respected one
kill them? Loyalty is the answer.
A feeling of loyalty for your country
that surpassed the loyalty of righteous virtues. Perhaps if loyalty had
not been involved, the country of Rome would not have been torn apart. Or
perhaps if loyalty to all and everything had been involved a great ruler
named Caesar would have reigned for years. If the people of Rome would
have remained loyal to Caesar perhaps a war would not have occurred, in
fact, it most certainly would not have. After the death, the angry mob
should have put the conspirators to death, not let them toy with their
minds as they would a five year old. The mob, like a great many people,
believe what is easiest to hear.
In the mob of people did loyalty exist?
Doubtful, little if any. What coexisted in the crowd with that little
loyalty was ignorance, and much of it.
I believe that Brutus showed the greatest amount of loyalty to his
country. He just went about showing it in a corrupt manner. He sacrificed
a great friend for what he thought would better Rome. Perhaps Brutus was
one of the most noble in the play, but he was also the most misled.
He was
noble for assassinating not for selfish needs, but for the needs of the
country. However, I believe he was weak. Weak for believing that Caesar
was “ambitious”. Brutus believed the one side of things that he heard, and
that was from Cassius. Brutus is a prime example of people believing what
is easiest heard. If someone would have mentioned Cassius’ attitude and
actions I am most certain that Brutus would have seen a sign of tyranny.
Brutus was a man that held loyalty to his country close to his heart.
Perhaps this blinded him. It made him oblivious to the idea of Caesar
being a good man with innocent motives.
Mark Antony, another man who possessed loyalty. However, with
Antony, loyalty to friends and to that of his country did not conflict. He
saw Caesar for what, I think, he truly was, a noble Roman.
Antony was a
wise man. Not being sure of the conspirators plot, he gave them a fair
chance to justify their unjustifiable assassination. When wise Antony saw
no reason for the death of Caesar he played smart. He did not verbally
attack the conspirators, he waited. Because Antony was noble and wise, he
waited. He gave citizens of Rome something to think about.
He turned the
mob, who had turned against Caesar, for Caesar, against the conspirators.
Noble Antony was willing to go to war to claim vindicate Caesar’s death.
He was going to get revenge on the murderers of “the noblest man that ever
lived in the tide of times.”
Julius Caesar, the man that deserved to be dead the least, was
deceased. He was loyal to his friends, the country, even the strangers of
Rome. He showed it to.
I believe that being loyal to a country means also
being loyal to the citizens of it, and that he was. Antony painted the
perfect picture of how much Caesar cared when he pointed out in his
soliloquy that “when the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept.” Being caring
is indeed a good part of being loyal. Caesar, a man who gave to his
country, even after death. Is this .
