Author Barry Strauss wrote the similarities between Brutus from William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar and the assassin of Abraham Lincoln, John Wilkes Booth in “The Death of Caesar: The Story of History’s Most Famous Assassination”. Booth had an obsession for the character of Brutus, and his assassination of Lincoln was connected to this. Even though the two assassinations are immensely different, the reasons behind them are alike. Strauss states that Booth had a great obsession with Brutus. Booth had performed in Shakespeare’s plays, his father and brother had Brutus in their name, and specifically loved the play Julius Caesar. While Booth was knowledgeable of Shakespeare, he did not acknowledge the poor effects of the assassination of Caesar. Strauss states, “Everything that Booth thought about Brutus, Caesar and political assassination was wrong. Yet if Booth was a lousy historian, he was a faithful student of Shakespeare” (1). Booth forgot about the war Brutus put against himself and the evil of the conspirators in the play. Even though both murders were different, Lincoln and Caesar were alike as well. …show more content…
Lincoln thought of himself as a peacemaker though, while Caesar knew he was to be an emperor. Both their love for the people created jealousy and spite in people like the conspirators or Booth. Their loyalty and trust played in role in their deaths as well. Lincoln did not think heavily of safety and wanted to be with the people. Because of this, Lincoln went to the theater with little protection. Caesar put the business of Rome for the people in front of personal matters. Caesar was killed when he prioritized Rome over personal business. The reasons for their deaths
“Many Joked that Brutus was like Caesar’s son” “How was he to kill a man he loved? A man who had loved him like a son and may even be his own true
On the other hand Julius Caesar's assassins motives were power. Some members of the Roman Senate believed that Caesar had too much power and would eventually take over the Roman Senate. These motives differ because the Roman Senate was trying to be helpful while Booth had a racist, unlawful motive.
Caesar would have stayed home but then Decius convinced to go to work of the pride he should have. Then Caesar goes to work where there he would be stabbed 23 times by Casca, Cassius, and Brutus. He was assassinated of pure jealousy. The senators were afraid of what might become of Rome if Caesar was king.
Julius Caesar and Abraham Lincoln are unquestionably two of the great men that made significant history via their exemplary leadership expeditions in their respective countries. In comparing the two, one of the remarkable similar aspect of the history that came up between them was their assassination. Caesar is recalled as one of the history strongest general and an exemplary leader of the great roman republic. Many referred him as a demagogue and a dictator due to his act of abuse of power and disregard of the Roman laws that existed (Griffin, 2009).. He led his army in multiple battles against their enemies in 15 years during the civil war.
Brutus, the mastermind behind Caesar’s assassination, did not believe Caesar has the right ambition. Although he respected and loved Caesar, he questioned Caesar’s intentions. Brutus, a well-known Roman, assassinated Caesar out of the good of Rome. Lincoln's assassin, John Wilkes Booth, murdered Lincoln to relieve America of the best chance for social equality. Booth, like Brutus, was also well known in his community.
Brutus and Booth-Noble Purgers Throughout history, people have sacrificed their lives, reputations, and honor to do what they believe is just, regardless of what others think. John Wilkes Booth, the assassin that killed President Abraham Lincoln in 1865 has been viewed as a traitor throughout American history; however, in Booth’s eyes, he was saving a nation from the injustices of an unfit leader. Similarly, the fictional character Brutus in the Shakespeare's tragedy Julius Caesar murdered his close friend, the Roman emperor Caesar, to uphold the Roman Republic. Brutus and Booth may be murderers, but they show their honorable intentions and selfless character traits through their effective use of logos and ethos.
But when a President gets killed, when Julius Caesar got killed… he was assassinated. And the man who did it…” says Booth. Oswald then replied, “Brutus.” Booth continued, “Ah! You know his name.
Booth felt pressure from the South, being that he was a confederate sympathizer. “Beneath the facade, Booth, a fervent supporter of the Southern cause, was seething. As the confederate fortunes waned, he concocted the grandest role of all for himself- as a larger-than-life character who would bring down a tyrannical Caesar.” (‘American Brutus: The Lone Gunmen’, 7) Booth’s ideology from his past growing up in the South led to him making the decision to kill Lincoln. Equally, Brutus was motivated by one of his ancestors, who was also named Brutus, to kill Caesar.
When Brutus was talking to the conspirators Brutus was going back and forth think if he should help the conspirators kill Julius Caesar. He was going back and forth because he was thinking of the power he could have and could rule Rome. The reason behind Brutus killing Caesar was for the better of Rome. If Brutus would not have killed Caesar, Rome would have turned into a dictatorship, and in turn it would have ruined Rome and all of its people. Brutus did not kill Julius just for the power to rule Rome, he killed Julius to save Rome from Caesar’s dictatorship.
In this scene Caesar has been murdered by the conspirators including Brutus. Brutus is one of Caesar's good friends who is driven by honor; who thought Caesar’s ambition was going to be the end of Rome. Antony is a very loyal friend of Caesar’s who does not agree with the conspirators. Brutus and Antony are both smart well thought out characters. They desire to persuade the commoners to their side of the situation.
Brutus, According to Shakespeare The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, a Shakespearean play and representation of the assassination of Caesar, is a well written and developed story in which the build up of the characters is very well done. As a matter of fact, the developing of Brutus, the tragic hero on the play, is one of the most important characters and therefore one of the better explained and exposed. Brutus is a character that is marked with three traits that allow him to be the one responsible for Caesar's assassination. Indeed, Brutus is naive, well-intended and hypocrite, as seen when the conspirators convince him to be part of it, and be one of the most important figures in it.
Lucius Junius Brutus one of Brutus’ ancestor that turned Rome into a republic. Brutus loves caesar but doesn't want him to become king. Brutus doesn't have a personal reason to kill Caesar but for the good of Rome he has to. The country of rome would fall to Caesar if he became king because he is corrupt.
Brutus was a lifetime friend of Caesar 's that was deceived by a man that feared tyranny to betray Caesars trust and become an accomplice to his murder. “Not that I loved Caesar less, but I loved Rome more.” (III, II, 21-22). Brutus loved Rome more than Caesar and he
So that he kills Caesar for the good of Rome, not to deceive Caesar, and everything he does is for the benefit of someone else, not for personal gain. “Not because I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more”(3.2.23-24). About Caesar, he always acts like he is nice, but he is not. Caesar is actually not a hero, because he just thinks for himself, he never cares about the happiness of Romans. He is intelligent, clearly ,but ambitious, and prone to arrogance.
In public, Caesar was the leader Rome had always wished for, a strong, valliant man that would let nothing in his way. Consequently, Caesar had a more vulnerable side to him where the reader would be able to see glimpses of throughout the play. Still, Caesar allowed his public self image to take priority in which would eventually lead to his death. Speaking historically, the great Julius Caesar was a people’s leader with a deep hunger for power in which he would do anything to