Brutus's Innocense from Treason

Brutus’s Innocence from Treason
By: Angel Zhang
Julius Caesar’s murder has often been argued to be either Brutus breaking the law due to treason or the murder was for the greater good of Rome. Brutus’s action should not be considered treason for three reasons: the murder of Julius Caesar was for the greater good of Rome as Caesar would’ve been an unstable ruler, Caesar also defied the true meaning of the Roman Republic by becoming a dictator during a time of war, and the fact that Brutus’s actions was out of nothing but the strong bond and the love he had for his country. In the play, Julius Caesar, William Shakespeare, the author wanted to convey that “the evil that men do lives on after them; the good oft interred with their bones” (3. 2. 84-85). Yes, the murder of some one as great as Caesar is a tragic event but desperate time’s calls for desperate measures; Caesar’s actions drove Brutus to his tragic but necessary action.
The assassination of Julius Caesar was for the greater good of Rome. If Caesar was to be made ruler the results would’ve been devastating towards Rome; His brief unofficial reign of power has damaged Rome to a certain extent and, as actions speak louder than words, Caesar’s actions pointed towards nothing but weaknesses as a ruler that would’ve led to Rome’s corruption. During his brief rule two plebeians were silenced because they spoke and acted out against Caesar. Flavius and Marullus disliked Caesar and as they were free men of the Republic, they should’ve been allowed to speak their minds; however instead of that being the case, they were silenced for speaking their minds. Caesar claims that he wants to and is equal of equal status to any other Roman but as said before, actions speak louder than words; in Caesar’s situation his actions were exactly the opposite of his words. Caesar claimed to be of equal status to all, but treated each of his friends as “wretched creature[s] and must bend his body” (1. 2. 124), while “Caesar...