Julius Caesar is a work rooted in history. Like history, and like many of Shakespeare’s other powerful plays, there’s a great deal of debate centered around it. In this case, whether the tragic hero is Julius Caesar or Marcus Brutus. For my part, I believe Caesar could easily have been the tragic hero. However, as Shakespeare chose to make Brutus the protagonist by focusing on Brutus’s decisions, conflicts, and demise, the role of tragic hero is his.
Allow me to begin with some definitions. A tragic hero is a protagonist who is doomed to fail due to a tragic flaw, and a protagonist is the main character of a story, around whom the narration revolves. Therefore, to prove that Brutus is the tragic hero, I will endeavor to explain why he is the protagonist.
It can be seen throughout the play that the narration is focused on Brutus and his conflicts and decisions. For instance, in Act 1, Scene 2, when Caesar turns down the crown, we instead are focused on Brutus’s conversation. If Caesar were the tragic hero, and thereby the protagonist, we should have seen this from his perspective, just as all of Brutus’s pivotal moments are centered on him. Yet rather, the whole ordeal was recounted second-hand, through Casca.
Furthermore, while it is true that Caesar is faced with a decision in Act 2, Scene 2, on whether or not to go the Senate, conspicuously absent are the stirring soliloquies characteristic of Shakespeare’s work. There was a decision that was made, questioned, and revised, but there was no conflict in Caesar; at least, not that we are privy to. The same is true of the opinions he expressed in Act 1, Scene 2. In contrast, a significant portion of Act 2, Scene 1, is focused on Brutus’s internal conflict and thought process leading to his conclusion that Caesar must die, and further in the determination of how with his co-conspirators.
Another point that suggests Brutus is the protagonist is the focus on his demise. While tragic heroes are defeated by their fatal flaws, and Caesar’s pride certainly was one, the fact that his death was in Act 3, Scene 1 of a five act play suggests that his fatal flaw and his demise were not the center of Shakespeare’s tale, but rather a catalyst for Brutus’s downfall. It was Brutus’s nobility that spurred him to let Mark Antony give a speech in the wake of Caesar’s death, which led the people to turn against him. He only ever wanted what was best for them, and we see that at every step of the way, where Caesar’s intentions largely remain clouded. Again, this focus on the inner workings of Brutus’s mind, but not Caesar’s, suggest that Brutus is the tragic hero. Furthermore, if it had been Caesar’s story, it either would have ended with his assassination or, during the fourth and fifth acts, would have focused on Mark Antony’s and Octavius’s attempts to avenge him, rather than Brutus’s continued fight for the good of Rome. Even in his dying line, he highlights his fatal flaw, his nobility: “Caesar, now be still. I killed not thee with half so good a will.” (SparkNotes translation: “Caesar, you can rest now. I didn’t kill you half as willingly.”) Because Brutus is the tragic hero, the play ends soon after his death, with only a due acknowledgment of his nobility from his enemies between that and the final drawing of the curtains.
As I said before, Caesar could well have been the tragic hero. However, because Shakespeare instead centered the narrative around Brutus’s decisions, conflicts and demise, making him the protagonist, I believe it is clear that though the play is titled Julius Caesar, it is Marcus Brutus who is the tragic hero.
