As I begun reading this play for book group, I believed that it was in the best interest of Rome to kill Julius Caesar because he was a corrupt dictator, and that the Senators should not kill Mark Antony because he was a quite side-kick. But as the play progresses, I realized how dangerous Antony actually was. He could pursued the citizens of Rome to follow him by promising them "Bread and Circuses."
The plotting Senators could not bring democracy back to Rome by removing one or two of its corrupt leaders because the citizens of Rome were like "sheep." This was clear in the first act in scene three when Cassius stated:
"And why should Caesar be a tyrant then?
Poor Man! I know he would not be a wolf
But that he sees the Roman are but sheep."
After Caesar was murdered by the Senators, all Mark Antony needed to do to gain the sympathies of the Roman Citizens was to pretend there were promises of free parks, money and goods in Caesar's Will. Antony then riled up the people to burn Rome and turn against the Senators. If the people could be won over so easily by bread and circuses, then any corrupt leader could step forward and obtain power. Even if the Senators had killed both Caesar and Antony, Octavius (Caesar's adopted son) could then have stepped in as the new dictator with such promises of comfort.
The problem lies with the Citizens of Rome themselves. They need to learn to think for themselves, and not just following whomever is currently standing in front of them making promises of safety and comfort. Until each individual stands up and thinks for himself, Rome will continue to follow corrupt dictators that slowly erode their freedoms away.
To kill or not kill Julius Caesar? I vote not kill. Educated the people and they will remove the corrupt leaders themselves. Stop giving them "Bread and Circuses" or they will continue to be "Sheep." Start creating a thinking population.
