Page:The Tragedy of Julius Caesar (The Warwick Shakespeare).djvu/27

 (i. 2. 185), and the sententious manner of one who esteems himself a philosopher (i. 3). We observe also that his adherence to any cause would give it an air of respectability (ii. 1. 141), but that Brutus objects to him on the ground of his dislike to regarding anyone else as his leader. It is in this last point that the divergence from Plutarch appears; as the conspirators are described as rejecting him on the ground that he was too timid to commit himself loyally to so dangerous a scheme. Shakespeare's outline is in fact thoroughly consistent with all we know of the man; but on the particular point it is pretty certain that Plutarch was right. Shakespeare's conception of him was probably derived from casual impressions picked up from incidental allusions to the great orator which he had come across in his miscellaneous reading.

Although there is abundance of action in the play, the whole drama is one of character rather than action. This is the justification of the fourth act, which somewhat impedes the action, but strengthens the feeling of reality in the whole: because it explains how Brutus and Cassius managed to work together; how, with tempers so opposite and with such different conceptions of the task before them, they were not sundered as Antony and Octavius were subsequently sundered; while it affords an admirable opportunity of drawing out the most fundamental characteristics of the two men.

For purposes of reference, the Globe text is now recognized generally as the standard. That text and numbering of lines have therefore been adhered to with scarcely any change, and such changes are mentioned in the notes. As a rule, even where the present editor thinks that some alteration might be preferable, he has only called attention in the notes to his reasons instead of actually changing the text.