PREFATORY NOTE. THIS edition of "Julius Cæsar," like that of "The Merchant of Venice" in this series, is meant rather for elementary students than for such as have already had training in Shakespearean study. For this reason the introduction deals only with such matters as seem to be of importance to students whose first aim is to get the spirit and general meaning of the play. The notes also are kept under restriction: they aim chiefly to explain matters which might otherwise be passed over with a false comprehension, or which do not seem to suggest the direction in which explanation should be sought. Since it is practically impossible to be complete in such matters, it seems better to err on the side of too little apparatus than to burden its pages with what often looks like offensive learning. EDWARD E. HALE, JR. INTRODUCTION. Main Points of Importance. IN the introduction to "The Merchant of Venice" in this series, six points were specified as being of interest in any Shakespearean play-the Date, the Text, the Sources, the Language, the Action, the Characters; and some account was there given of the matters commonly understood to come under each head. The date of a play is of importance in gaining a correct idea of the development of Shakespeare's powers and a true appreciation of the especial character of each play. The text is important, because we wish to be sure that we have the very words of Shakespeare, and not the substitutions of somebody else. The sources are important, because only by knowing what was the material on which Shakespeare worked can we know what was the peculiar power which he himself had. The language calls for study, because the English language has changed much since Shakespeare's day, and if we understood Shakespeare's words in the sense we are accustomed to, we should often lose his meaning. All these matters, however, are but preliminary and accessory. The true study of Shakespeare is the study of the plays. It may be helped forward by many subsidiary studies, but it is itself the main point. If it is well understood, the main point is gained. If it is neglected, nothing else is of value so far as literature is concerned. If one knew ten thousand facts about Shakespeare's life and language and could not appreciate his people and his poetry, one might just as well know about somebody else anybody else of Shakespeare's day-so far as literature is concerned. Hence in this introduction we deal only with the action and the characters. The other matters are important; we cannot get on without them. But as we have room only for a little, we must take only the most important things. The Action of the Play. The material for his play Shakespeare found in Plutarch's 66 'Lives of Illustrious Greeks and Romans," a storehouse of classical history and anecdote highly esteemed by the men of the Renaissance. The book had been translated into French by Amyot, and from Amyot's version Sir Thomas North had put it into good, nervous English. In this form Shakespeare read the book, and it stirred his imagination. It gave him a whole panorama of great men doing great things-Cæsar, the conqueror of the world; Cleopatra, of the baneful fascination; Coriolanus, the uncurbed aristocrat; Mark Antony, Pompey, and many others. Whatever else he may have known of the classics, he read over North's "Plutarch" in his masterful way, and, as he read, the figures took life in his imagination and became a part of his intellectual life. Then, when occasion served, he made plays of the material. The first of the Roman plays is "Julius Cæsar.' There is in the subject-matter of this play almost nothing that does not come from Plutarch; life of Cæsar, life of Brutus, life of Antony, he read them, and they filled his mind for the time, and moulded themselves together in company with Shakespeare's own ideas. Then he made a play of them. How did he do it? Our study of the action tries to discover, not precisely how he did it, but rather what are the characteristics of the completed work. The most casual reading shows us that the play is not made upon the fortunes of Julius Cæsar, in spite of its name. A tragedy on Julius Cæsar, which should show us his rise and his sudden taking off, would be something very different. In this |