![ceasar play by shakespeer ceasar play by shakespeer](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/k8BcxD5B5jw/maxresdefault.jpg)
This conflict between Caesar’s metaphorical body and the laws of Roman democracy is reinforced by imagery juxtaposing Caesar’s animalistic `feathers’ with the `view of men,’ that he `soar above’. The `trophies’ and `images’ signifying his reverence are related to his `growing feathers’, an indication of his increasing power. 31) (Strong writes that Accession Day, `became a feast day of the established Church.’ ) Flavius’ language produces Caesar as a bird of prey who would `keep us all in servile fearfulness’, and thus undermine the manly virtues of Roman democracy that rely on equal representation for men. 67) is appropriated by Caesar’s followers, `to rejoice in his triumph.’(I. In Flavius’ case, the religious `feast of Lupercal’ (I. Shakespeare’s construction of the body, soul and law as competitive components of the self is mirrored by critic Mark Rose’s claim about sources of religious authority įlavius expresses an anxiety, similar to Wright’s, about the growing influence of a ruler by objecting to their religious idolisation. The nature of this relationship in the text exposes Elizabethan concerns about sources of political and religious authority and relates it to the concept, of the body politic. By interpreting the role of Brutus within the text and relating it to Elizabethan political discourse, it is the purpose of this response to argue that Shakespeare constructs a competitive relationship between the body, soul and law as components of Roman identity. The potential threat Caesar’s increasing political power and ambition poses to the laws and values of Roman democracy constitutes an ideological conflict without an objective solution.
![ceasar play by shakespeer ceasar play by shakespeer](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-0RvGwz4NlfY/UXaz016BOuI/AAAAAAAAC6U/AECz4WzhJto/s1600/slide_293062_2359584_free.jpg)
Shakespeare’s historical tragedy Julius Caesar differentiates itself from his other tragedies by its adherence to the Hegelian concept of tragedy as comprising of contradictory yet justifiable truths (see note 1).