Roxane Buss
Editor’s note: The history plays and classical tragedies of William Shakespeare are of such unsurpassed insight that for at least a century prominent people like Sigmund Freud have argued that Shakespeare could not have written them at all. The “evidence” cited is that William Shakespeare came from a middle class home located in a relatively small town outside London and received no advanced education. The argument then runs that since Shakespeare must have been a parochial and unlettered bumpkin, and since only a highly educated man or well placed member of the English Court , would have had the knowledge or direct experience to observe the mighty and write plays about power politics, Shakespeare probably agreed to put his name on plays actually written by someone like the Earl of Essex who preferred anonymity to avoid legal persecution.
The “problem” of who wrote Shakespeare’s plays has been a source of contention. However, it can be largely solved by simply considering William Shakespeare’s home life. Undoubtedly, Shakespeare had abundant opportunities to learn how politicians thought and how power politics worked on a smaller scale by observing and experiencing his father’s failed political career.
Shakespeare’s father, John, was an ambitious man who became actively involved in local government. He was not content to remain a mere whittawer (a producer and merchant of leather goods). Terry Gray states that John Shakespeare “was a solid, middle class citizen at the time of William’s birth [in 1564], and a man on the rise.” During this time, it was customary for sons to carry on the family business. Because William was the eldest son of John Shakespeare and Mary Arden, it was likely that William served as his father’s apprentice. While working together, William would have certainly been privy to the details of his father’s rise to local power in Stratford, England.
In 1557, John started his political career by serving as a member of Council. He held the offices of constable, chamberlain, and alderman, before being appointed high bailiff in 1568. Although these were not high posts, they still left an impression on the young William Shakespeare who listened to and observed his father’s experiences. Shakespeare was about thirteen years old when his father’s decline from Stratford’s political arena became public knowledge. Gray indicates: “about 1577, John Shakespeare’s fortunes began to decline for unknown reasons.” However, they were obviously not unknown to John or his family. The kinds of forces that underlie the tragic experience of a Julius Caesar, then, were familiar to Shakespeare. The same events that led to the demise of Caesar may also have led to the end of his father’s political career. It may explain why William Shakespeare portrayed Caesar not as an ambitious man, but an honorable one; this may well have mirrored Shakespeare’s view of his father.
Shakespeare presented three dark characteristics of human behavior in Julius Caesar to illustrate man’s ambitious nature: deception, jealousy, and manipulation through demagoguery. The first characteristic, deception, played a key role in Julius Caesar. Cassius claimed to be Caesar’s ally so he could remain close to him. His display of reverence allowed Cassius, as well as the other conspirators, to have access to Caesar in order to murder him.
In John Shakespeare’s political circle, the men who were thought to be his friends may have betrayed him. If William worked with his father or listened to conversations, he would have been exposed to the different forms of political interaction which his father maintained with his colleagues. These various relationships would have caused William to gain knowledge of politics in general.
The next characteristic, jealousy, also played an important role in Julius Caesar. It was apparent that many of the conspirators resented Caesar’s rise to power. Shakespeare illustrated this point when Cassius stated “Ye gods! it doth amaze me a man of such a feeble temper should get the start of the majestic world and bear the palm alone” (1.2.137).5 Cassius considered Caesar an ordinary man, like himself, who did not deserve such accolades from the Romans. He feared Caesar would become dictator and eliminate the Roman Republic. Similarly, given human nature, there were likely political opponents or allies who felt John Shakespeare was also not worthy of his political status. Shakespeare portrayed Cassius as jealous and vindictive. Growing up in the shadows of his father’s political power, William Shakespeare was undoubtedly aware of the motives of his father’s associates—if only through his father’s conversations with colleagues and discussions with his son.
John Shakespeare may have also shared his mistrust of his colleagues with William or others, as Julius Caesar shared with Mark Antony. Shakespeare demonstrated Caesar’s concerns when he confided in Antony, “Yon Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous” (1.2.137). Since William was a boy during his father’s appointment as high bailiff, he may likely have overheard his father entrust a friend with his suspicions. Shakespeare revealed the close relationship between Caesar and Antony in Julius Caesar, when Cassius recounted Decius’ insightful words: “I think it is not meet Mark Antony, so well beloved of Caesar, Should outlive Caesar: we shall find of him a shrewd contriver” (2.1.163).
Julius Caesar’s rise to power caused much concern among the Roman Republic’s supporters who were against a dictatorship. John Shakespeare’s rise to power also could have caused concern among his adversaries and competitors. Jealousy from a fellow politician, who claimed to be his ally, could have been a contributing factor to John Shakespeare’s failing political career. Moreover, his family might have endured public ridicule for John Shakespeare’s perceived inappropriate actions. William may have suffered some of the shame and torment his father did, which would have enabled him to write Julius Caesar with such authenticity.
The third element, manipulation through demagoguery, was also an underlying theme in Julius Caesar. Shakespeare used this technique when Mark Antony gave the funeral speech for Julius Caesar on the steps of the senate house. Antony gave his speech after Brutus proclaimed that he killed his best friend so that Rome could remain free. Brutus told the Roman crowd, “I slew my best lover for the good of Rome, I have the same dagger for myself, when it shall please my country to need my death” (3.2.48). Brutus convinced the masses that an honorable deed had been done.
Antony knew he was at the mercy of Brutus, his fellow conspirators, and the supporters of the Roman Republic. He had to prove that Caesar was benevolent. Antony, therefore, used Caesar’s death and seized the opportunity to put himself into power. He proceeded to persuade the masses that a great injustice had been committed. Antony manipulated the masses by using irony to discuss the actions of Cassius, Brutus and the other conspirators. He spoke of Brutus and the others as honorable men, who had done an honorable deed to save Rome. Caesar was accused of being ambitious, but Antony pointed out several examples where Caesar was a kind and generous friend. Antony stated, for instance, that “when the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept: Ambition should be made of sterner stuff” (3.2.101). Antony convinced the Roman people to avenge Caesar’s death. In turn, the Romans looked to Antony for his leadership. Antony used the death of his close friend to further his political career. He saw an opportunity to rise to power and took full advantage of it. Shakespeare showed that man will often use whatever means necessary to achieve power and success.
It is quite conceivable that William Shakespeare compared his father’s failed political career with Julius Caesar’s. He portrayed Julius Caesar as a compassionate man and noble leader, while his colleagues were self-serving and dishonorable. Doubtlessly, given what political activity is inevitably involved at every level, Shakespeare had intimate knowledge of deception, jealousy and manipulation in the Stratford political arena, and therefore was able to write Julius Caesar with such profound accuracy.
Works Cited
“Caesar.” In Biography Online Database. Edited by J. S. Bowmen. Cambridge, University Press, 1995.
Gray, Terry. “1564 Birth & Early Years.” In A Shakespeare Timeline.https://www.shakespeare.palomar.edu/timeline/timeline.htm. Last accessed September 2006.
Shakespeare, William. Julius Caesar. Edited by Shane Weller. New York: Dover, 1991.