Most viewers of William Shakespeare’s play, Julius Caesar, will argue that the climax of the play is the assassination of Caesar. It is true that the rising action element of Freytag’s Pyramid levels off after the death of Caesar, yet the action rises again during Marc Antony’s speech. I argue that Caesars death and Marc Antony’s reading of the will are both climactic. There can be only one “true” climax, and if one must pick one of these two scenes to call “the climax”, it is surely the assassination scene (or is it?). What is interesting is that the play’s direction takes a more sudden turn after Antony’s speech than it does after the assassination. I may be a man on an island here, but am I crazy to think that Antony’s speech and subsequent turn towards mutiny by the commoners could be seen as the climax?

Marc Antony’s Asiatic speech style (full of repetition) works as a form of reverse psychology on the commoners of Rome. Most famous in his speech is the repetition of “And Brutus is an honorable man” (III. ii. 89). Near the end of Antony’s speech to the commoners, he uses the same tactic with the intent of creating a mutiny. In a crowd frenzying call for an uprising against the conspirators, Antony declares “let me not stir you up To such a sudden flood of mutiny” (III. ii. 211-213). A few lines later, Antony, referring to the commoners as stones, states that his actions “should move The stones of Rome to rise and mutiny” (III.II. 231-232). This short section of Antony’s speech (III. ii. 211-232) serves as an excellent example of how he uses the Asiatic speech style to manipulate the commoners and turn them against the conspirators. He brilliantly starts this section of the speech telling the commoners he doesn’t want a mutiny and ends it by creating a mutiny. The short mention of Caesar’s will after this is Antony’s final step in the process. The mention of the will successfully creates the anger and chaos Antony desires. The action rises after Caesar’s death, throwing a slight wrench into the Freytag Pyramid. The crowd’s fury after Antony’s mention of the will seems climactic; as does the assassination of Julius Caesar. The falling action described in Freytag’s Pyramid does not take place take place until the end of Act 3 and the murder of unfortunately named Cinna the poet. The legendary story follows the pyramid, yet the falling action portion is only apparent in Act 4. The argument between Brutus and Cassius in the second half of Act 4 is in itself a scene of action. The scene that starts Act 4 with the second triumvirate is the only calm scene in the second half of the play. As Act 5 is all action, the Freytag Pyramid is unbalanced. The definition of Freytag’s Pyramid is to some scholars flexible and subjective. An unbalanced pyramid with the right side (falling action) having a shorter leg than the left side (rising action) is not common, but it certainly exists. Act 1 is full of exposition and foreshadowing (Flavius and Marullus, soothsayer), Act 3 contains the climax (es?) (Caesar’s death, Antony’s call to mutiny), and Act 5 closes with the death of the remaining conspirators, Brutus and Cassius (denouement).

Works cited

Shakespeare, William, William Rosen, and Barbara Rosen. The Tragedy of Julius Caesar: With New and Updated Critical Essays and a Revised Bibliography. New York: Signet Classic, 1998.

The thematic question raised in the first act of William Shakespeare’s play Julius Caesar is hard to answer without a further study of the first triumvirate. Was Caesar a great man or a tyrant? Flavius and Marullus serve a noteworthy purpose in their brief roles. Marullus asks the commoners “Knew you not Pompey?” (I. I. 40). In doing so, he points out that the commoner’s perception of Caesar as a great leader does not take into consideration what happened prior to Caesar’s triumphant return to Rome. People reading or watching the play for the first time are not told much about Pompey. Shakespeare scholars are almost certain to know about the first triumvirate; yet people new to the play may wonder who the heck Pompey was. Flavius and Marullus question whether Caesar deserves any of this praise the commoners heap upon him. They both then make a very early exit from the play. Their disappearance foreshadows what will happen to the conspirators, led by Caius Cassius, who assassinate Caesar. When everyone who betrays or questions Caesar disappears or dies, it paints Caesar as a tyrant. Having said that, the character of Caesar does not commit a single visible act of cruelty in this play.

The character of Julius Caesar from the time the play starts is not one of a tyrannical dictator. If Caesar’s defeat of Pompey is taken into consideration, then Caesar appears tyrannical. We must remember that it is very unclear to the average observer, and even to someone studying Shakespeare as I am, what the battle between Pompey and Caesar looked like. Caesar could have been defending himself against Pompey. The great sin Julius Caesar is guilty of is hubris. While his excessive ego results in his eventual assassination, nothing within the play shows Caesar to be the tyrant he is accused of being. Caesar’s ghost appears to exert control late in the play by ordering Brutus to Philippi where Brutus loses his life. This scene is not a case of Caesar’s ghost controlling Brutus; it is a case of Brutus’ guilt haunting him right up to his death. The story at a glance suggests that Caesar is a Machiavellian character. Further analysis reveals that Cassius and Marc Antony were the Machiavellian characters. Brutus was an honorable man who was manipulated by Cassius and spends the second half of the play regretting it, living with the insufferable guilt of murdering his friend, Julius Caesar.

Shakespeare, William, William Rosen, and Barbara Rosen.
The Tragedy of Julius Caesar: With new and Updated Critical Essays and a revised bibliography. New York: Signet Classic, 1998.

Thanks for joining me!

Good company in a journey makes the way seem shorter. — Izaak Walton