noblest man that ever lived in the tide of times; and Brutus, as the foremost man of all this world. The solution of this is found in the fact that Shakespeare is but following the traditional representation of Cæsar as manifested in the writings of his predecessors. The gradual evolution of the braggart Cæsar from its direct prototypes— the Hercules of Seneca, and the Ajax of Sophocles-is the subject of a careful study by H. M. AYRES, the main points of which, so far as they relate to the Character of Cæsar, will be found in the Appendix. Although Julius Cæsar apparently held a prominent place as an historic character in Shakespeare's regard, as such he occupies but comparatively a small part in the tragedy which bears his name. The themes of the action are the conflict in the mind of Brutus between two opposing interests-love of country and love of Cæsar as friend and benefactor; his decision to sacrifice that friend upon the altar of his country; and his tragic suicide in ignorance of his complete failure as a patriot. It would almost seem as though Brutus were rightly the titular hero. The bodily presence of Cæsar, it is true, disappears from the scene at the beginning of the third Act, yet thereafter his spiritual presence is omnipresent and brings about the final catastrophe. Antony's prophecy, that Cæsar's spirit shall come forth ranging for revenge, is fulfilled. Brutus recognizes its power at the death of Cassius, and his last words bear witness to his belief that by his death alone will that perturbed spirit find rest. This is but the carrying out of the classic idea of tragedy: mortals striving impotently against fate; and Shakespeare, according to his invariable custom, has chosen the most dramatically effective treatment of his material. If any tragedy is to be named from that character which is its dominant force, then this can be called by no name other than Julius Cæsar. The incidents connected with the career of Cæsar, especially his rivalry with Pompey, have been made the subject of dramas by other authors. As early as 1561 there was performed at Whitehall a play entitled Julius Caesar, which is mentioned by COLLIER* as the earliest instance of a subject from Roman History being brought upon the English stage. Not all of these dramas are extant; such of them as have survived are now known in only their printed form; some never even gained a hearing in the theatre; but they one and all bear witness within themselves to the cause of their early deaths: they are unrelievedly tedious. That one which is perhaps the best known, chiefly on account of MALONE'S references in his notes on the present play,

* 1 History of Dramatic Literature, i, 180.

is The Tragedy of Julius Cæsar, by Sir William Alexander, Earl of Stirling (or Sterline, as he himself prints in his title-pages). His tragedy is based upon Plutarch's Life of Cæsar, and was composed probably in 1604 or 1606, though not published until 1607. It has been lately shown that, in large part, Alexander's work is a translation of a tragedy by Jules Grévin, which, in turn, is based on one in Latin by Muret.* The one or two points wherein Alexander's tragedy coincides with Shakespeare's may be ascribed to the fact that their source of information was identical, namely, Plutarch. Alexander's final and authorised edition of his Tragedy was published, with his other works, in a volume entitled Recreations with the Muses, in 1637. A reprint of this is included in the Appendix to the present volume. A work on somewhat the same theme, by an author now unknown, entitled The Tragedy of Cæsar and Pompey, or Cæsar's Revenge, was performed at Trinity College, Cambridge, in 1605, and published in 1607. Its chief claim to notoriety now is that it was the first drama in English, on a classic theme, performed at either of the Universities. It is thoroughly academic in treatment; at no point does it rise above a uniform level of dulness, and one is divided in opinion as to which deserves the more commiseration-the unhappy performers on that occasion or their patient auditors.

George Chapman's Tragedy, of the same title as this Trinity College play, was probably composed some years before its publication in 1631. Like its predecessor, it is academic in form, and is based upon the lives of Cæsar, Pompey, and Marcus Cato as related by Plutarch; but neither in point of poetic style nor in dramatic construction is it worthy of comparison to Chapman's later works.

While, as has been said, the story of Cæsar's life was the first subject from Roman history to be cast in dramatic form for the English stage, Shakespeare's tragedy was the first of all his works to be translated into German, and through which he became first known in Germany. This translation was by Caspar Wilhelm von Borck, who was Prussian envoy in London from 1735 to 1738, its title-page is as follows: Versuch einer gebundenen Uebersetzung des Trauer-Spiels von dem Tode Julius Cæsar. Aus dem Englischen Werke des Shakespeare. Berlin, bey Ambrosius Hande-1741.† Ten years before this date Voltaire had composed his tragedy, La Mort de César, which he did not hesitate

* H. M. AYRES: Shakespeare's Jul. Cæs. in the Light of Some Other Versions,

p. 220.

† W. PAETOW: Die Erste metrische Deutsche Uebersetzung, passim.

to say was inspired by his having seen Shakespeare's work on the same subject when in London; and his wonder at the deep emotion and interest which it ever excited. Voltaire's work was, however, not produced on the stage until 1735. It was never received with quite the amount of applause which its author thought that it deserved. Thirty years later, while at work on his Commentaires sur Corneille, Voltaire appended to that writer's Cinna a literal translation (as he persisted in calling it) of those parts of Shakespeare's Julius Cæsar which dealt also with a conspiracy against a Roman chief-magistrate, in order that his countrymen might comprehend how vastly superior was the work of the nobleman (Corneille) to that of the commoner (Shakespeare). 'If this translation,' says FrançoisVictor Hugo, 'had only been unfaithful it still might have passed muster; but it is disloyal. That Voltaire did not always understand the text of Shakespeare is excusable, but not his absolute falsification of it.'-(Shakespeare, x, 463). The whirligig of time has brought in its revenges. Voltaire's Tragedies, dealing with the lives and acts of Julius Cæsar and Brutus-written, be it remembered, to show Shakespeare's inferiority-belong to the past, but the spirit of Shakespeare's Cæsar is mighty yet, and still walks abroad.

Be my thanks here given to Dr. Morris Jastrow, Jr., Librarian of the University of Pennsylvania; to Dr. William J. Taylor and Mr. Charles P. Fisher, Librarian of the College of Physicians; to Mr. George M. Abbot, and his efficient assistants, Mr. D. C. Knoblauch and Mr. John E. Govan, of the Philadelphia Library, one and all, for their unfailing courtesy and attention to many demands.

My most just and severe-albeit, my most tender-critic has passed beyond my inadequate words of gratitude. He to whom I owe the deepest obligations, the inspiration of all my work, is no longer by my side with ever-ready help and never-failing and invaluable counsel. The rest is silence.

H. H. F., JR.

Dramatis Perfonæ

JULIUS CÆSAR.

Octavius Cæsar, Triumvirs, after the death of Julius

M. Antony,

M. Æmil. Lepidus,
Cicero.

Cæsar.

1. As in Dyce. Om. Ff. First given imperfectly by Rowe.

5

5, 6. M. Æmil. Lepidus...Cicero] Added by Theob.

3. Octavius Cæsar] NIEBUHR (iii, 87): Cæsar in his will had appointed C. Octavius, the grandson of his sister Julia, heir ex dodrante, that is, of three-fourths of his property, after the deduction of all legacies, and his other relatives were to have the remaining fourth. . . . Young C. Octavius was in his nineteenth year when Cæsar was murdered, having been born on the 23d of September, 689. Cæsar had taken an interest in him ever since his return from Spain; whereas before that time he does not appear to have taken any particular notice of him. . . . [He] had been adopted by Cæsar, which is the first instance of an adoption by will that I know in Roman history; afterwards such adoptions are very frequent. . . . If we compare Antony with Octavian, we must admit that Antony was open-hearted; whereas Octavian was made up of hypocrisy: his whole life was a farce. It is well known that on his death-bed at Nola he asked his friends whether he had not played the comedy of his life well? He was an actor throughout; everything he did was a farce, well devised and skilfully executed. The most profound hypocrisy was his greatest talent. In the vicious and profligate life of Antony, on the other hand, there occur some actions which shew good nature, generosity, and even greatness.—TOLMAN (Introd., p. xxxviii): Probably, upon the Elizabethan stage, the same actor took the parts of Cæsar and Octavius, and thus gave outward expression to the spiritual connection of the two rôles.

4. M. Antony] HORN (i, 112): Antony is one of the most perfect portraits that the poet has drawn. His overflowing nature delights in combining the extremes of thought and action with dangerous abilities. He is rash and prudent, brave and sensual, he fears not death, but, a wastrel, seeks every sort of pleasure from quickly flying life. So long as Cæsar lived Antony is but seldom to be blamed-he feels towards Cæsar an absolute love; prefers to be subordinate to him, and is therewith become, so to speak, dependent upon him, a dependence which, however, causes him enjoyment; is it not the mighty Julius who loves him in return? He desires the crown for Cæsar that thus all friction may be avoided, and that, after Cæsar, he can have the highest position, he who seems rather to desire more of the pleasures of life than the highest place. Yet all these particulars are moved to the background as soon as Cæsar is no more. He has lost his only love, and is now in the highest degree dangerous. It is impossible for him to

I