William Shakespeare's Julius Caesar is a tragic historical play that has enduring lessons on power, loyalty, betrayal, and political manipulation. Whether you believe in history repeating itself or that words have meaning, the pronouncements by Casca and Brutus shortly after the assassination of Caesar (particularly their reflections on the future and the dramatic significance of their actions) have had profound implications on the trajectory of politics in not only ancient Rome but also the world over. In the play, Cassius remarks, "How many ages hence /Shall this our lofty scene be acted over / In states unborn and accents yet unknown!" (Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, 3.1). In a similar vein, Brutus contemplates in response, "How many times shall Caesar bleed in sport, / That now on Pompey's basis lies along / No worthier than the dust!" (Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, 3.1). These reflections are an immortalized prophesy that has had a lasting impact across the world and most especially in Kenya.
This essay analyzes the striking parallels between Julius Caesar the play and the contemporary political landscape in Kenya. With an intriguing lens, it identifies key characters from the play and draws fascinating comparisons to influential figures on Kenya's political stage. Through this analysis, the essay reveals how an exaggerated self-obsession, an ignorant citizenry, the love for sweet lies and hatred for bitter truth, betrayal, and ambition ruin a nation. Therefore, this essay, while demonstrating that the complexities of political maneuvering and the human dynamics at play are timeless, is preoccupied with answering the question: Will Kenya fall like ancient Rome?
Overview
Julius Caesar is a play about degeneration; a nation in the verge of collapsing (Johnathan Bi, 2024). It is about a state that has over time weakened its institutions and lost its values. The decadence portrayed in Act I may appear as mere background but within it we see the maniac love that Romans have for Caesar that speaks into the actual problem with Rome at that time. To demonstrate the manic love, as Casca states, "If Caesar had stabbed their mothers, they would have done no less." He was loved to an extent that even if he murdered Roman mothers, nothing would stop the Romans from loving him.
Secondly, the triumph that starts the play was one over Pompey's blood. Pompey the Great was once an ally of Caesar, however, they became rivals and their conflict culminated in the civil war, where Caesar ultimately defeated Pompey. Pompey was murdered in Egypt, and Caesar's victory over Pompey's sons (who were part of the faction that opposed Caesar) marked the final defeat of his former ally. Ironically, the Romans were celebrating the death of their own people while disregarding the past loyalty and admiration Pompey once commanded.
What is even more astounding about the Caesar's triumph is that unlike traditional Roman celebrations, it was profoundly out of place because it marked a victory not over a foreign enemy, but over fellow Romans—his former allies, the sons of Pompey. In Roman tradition, a triumph was a sacred event to celebrate victories in war against external foes, reinforcing Roman unity and strength. Caesar's triumph, however, was a celebration of internal division and civil strife, for he had defeated a faction of his own people. This shift from a unifying victory to a personal celebration of power symbolized the erosion of the Roman Republic and the rise of Caesar's autocracy. The willingness of the public to celebrate Caesar, despite the bloodshed among Romans, exposed the political manipulation of public opinion, turning this triumph into not just an aberration in Roman tradition but a presage of the fall of republican ideals.
Julius Caesar, therefore, is a must-read for the Kenyan fascinated by politics — not necessarily because of the greatness of the playwright, the deep history it captures, its powerful performances and heavyweight speeches but mainly due to observed commonalities in Roman and Kenyan political foundations. Both are animated by a love of liberty and an abiding antipathy toward royalty, or colonial oppression. Just as the Romans were against aristocracy, Kenyans love for self-rule and democracy is demonstrated throughout its historical journey right from the fight against colonialism, the promulgation of the Constitution 2010, the expectations of the people from government and the jurisprudence from the courts.
This essay essentially evokes a timeless resonance of Julius Caesar as it parallels with the Kenyan politics by exploring how a play like this one relate to power and leadership. Given the theatricality of so many political figures in Kenya, moving through life as if they were onstage playing a character to further somewhat personal or public narrative, Shakespeare's play is a powerful lens through which to understand the complexities of modern governance. For that reason, this essay examines key characters such as Brutus, Caesar and Mark Antony.
Marcus Brutus
He has been said to actually be the main character in the play. It is actually said that he is the true protagonist of the play and not Caesar for the reasons that he has the greatest number of lines and it is him who actually determines the trajectory of the whole plot. In Act I, Brutus is trying to find reasons to kill Caesar, in Act II, Brutus decides he needs to kill Caesar and gathers the conspirators, Act III Brutus kills Caesar and the funeral orations and finally in Act IV, Brutus disagrees with Cassius, Cassius wins and Brutus commits suicide.
What truly stands out about Brutus is that, despite numerous reasons demonstrating Caesar's tyranny, he lacked concrete justification for his actions and based the assassination entirely on assumptions. He ignored Caesar's visible arrogance and disregard for warnings, such as the soothsayer's ominous "Beware the Ides of March" and Calpurnia's troubling dream. He overlooked Caesar's dismissal of the Senate's authority, his repeated flirtation with the crown, his bold claim, "I am constant as the northern star," and his manipulation of public opinion and silencing of dissent. Instead, Brutus fixated on abstract fears of what Caesar might become. As he reasoned, "lowliness is young ambition's ladder," suggesting that Caesar, once crowned, would forget those who helped him rise and scorn the "base degrees" by which he ascended. Brutus compared Caesar to "a serpent's egg, which, hatch'd, would, as his kind, grow mischievous," justifying the act as a preventive strike against potential tyranny. Yet, this reasoning was rooted in speculation rather than Caesar's actual deeds, revealing the fragile foundation upon which the conspiracy rested.
Much more can be said about Brutus, including his obsession with the idea of being seen as a fighter for liberty – acting the role of Lucius Brutus the legendary founder of the Roman Republic—rather than genuinely prioritizing liberty itself as well as his betrayal for Caesar who was his godfather. But who embodies Brutus in the Kenyan context? In my opinion, many Gen Z protestors fit this role. Before fingers are pointed, let us acknowledge an undeniable truth: while many youths vehemently oppose the current government, few are well-versed in the specific issues they are protesting. For example, their demand that the Finance Bill 2024 was to be "rejected not amended" or the whole cabinet be disbanded had merit but this was almost impracticable.
It must be noted that what relates the protestors more to Brutus is jealousy. Cassius suggests including Cicero because of his wisdom and influence, but Brutus immediately rejects the idea, saying: "O, name him not: let us not break with him; /For he will never follow anything /That other men begin." This was an absurd reason for not bringing Cicero on board yet Cicero was known for his belief in the importance of service to the Republic and his intellectual pursuit of truth. Once again, it was all based on speculations. He wanted to be in charge of the assassination and not necessarily promote liberty or seek advice from a man of high standing like Cicero.
Just as Brutus rejected the suggestion that Cicero should be involved in the conspiracy, jealousy made the Gen Z protestors leaderless and sporadic rather than organized and systematic. They were united by slogans but this unity stood at the edge of jealousy which consequently led to their collapse. Very few knew all the contents of the Finance Bill or even the roles of all the Cabinet Secretaries. They acted as novices in their protests and their revolution was aborted and taken advantage of. Instead of them benefiting, the fruits of their revolutions were diluted by acts such as Raila joining the Ruto and most recently, Uhuru. The Gen Z protestors are obsessed with their self-image as revolutionaries and care more about it than the revolution itself.
Julius Caesar
Caesar is a spirit and not an individual. In fact, the spirit of the dramatis personae in the play long lives after them. Him too, Caesar was a man whose mind was so preoccupied with a certain self-perception and Shakespeare refers to it as "constancy". He wants to appear as constant as the northern star and this made him miss chances of knowing that there was something wrong in Rome. Think about the very warning by a soothsayer in Act I where his warned against the aides of March. We may agree that soothsaying is superstitious but omens at the very least reveal what is in the hearts and the minds of men. Because of his constancy, Caesar dismissed the soothsayer as "a dreamer; let us leave him: pass." This was not the only sign that Caesar dismissed. Think about instances as bizarre as the dead climbing up from their graves, lionesses roaming in the city, warriors are fighting in the clouds, owls hooting in broad daylight, ghosts are appearing in the streets, a sacrificial animal is found without a heart and his wife literally dreams about him being killed (Bi 2024). Caesar thought of himself not as a human but a force that transcended over human nature – like a god.
Nothing tells us more of the big ego that Caesar had than his own response to the augury after the warning of the heartless beast. he interprets it as a challenge to his courage, proclaiming himself more dangerous than danger itself thus revealing his arrogance and dismissal of caution. His inflated sense of invincibility blinds him to real threats, as his hubris leaves no room for prudence, sealing his tragic fate.
Further, a remarkable part that must form the basis of the trajectory of this essay is his love for praises rather than the truth. Calpurnia (Caesar's wife) dreams of Caesar's statue spurting blood and the same is interpreted in multiple ways. Notably, each interpretation is a reflection of the character's motivations and perspectives towards Caesar and not necessarily what the dream means to Caesar. Calpurnia views the dream as an ominous warning, pleading with Caesar, out of her love for him to stay home to avoid imminent danger. She sees the blood as a harbinger of violence and tragedy. However, Decius Brutus offers a more absurd yet flattering reinterpretation, suggesting the blood signifies Caesar's greatness, nourishing Rome as its citizens joyfully bathe in his vitality.
Though it is obvious that the dream offers a clear warning, Decius presents this preposterous interpretation to Caesar fueling his ego further and defining death as glorified status amongst all. It is this manipulation, which plays on the pride of Caesar and not what should be his proper reasoning that eventually leads to him dismissing Calpurnia's dream by going with them into the Senate House — leading ultimately up towards his tragedy. Caesar's susceptibility to such a vain and illogical argument underscores his tragic flaw—his inability to see beyond his grandiose self-image. The same also speaks to the kind of advice that Caesar is willing to take. He is not ready to take bitter truths, he wants to be endeared despite the fact that all seems to be going wrong.
So, who bears the spirit of Caesar in Kenya? It seems to be a spirit entrenched in high offices most especially in the Presidency. Various instances such as pushing for taxes, coming up with unpopular laws, investing in unnecessary projects, breaching the principle of separation of powers, obvious tyranny and so on despite clear warnings demonstrate how the President is similar to Caesar. Nothing is as pragmatic a rendition of omens as ridiculous as lionesses roaming the streets than the June 2024 protests that led to the evasion of parliament. What lesson did the President draw from the same? He became much more tough, youths are continuously being arrested and abducted every day, more unpopular agendas are being pushed and to sum it all, the protests catalyzed the reunion of President Dr. William Ruto, former Prime Minister Raila Odinga and former President Uhuru Kenyatta. The spirit of Caesar lives on, many years after his assassination.
Mark Antony
Mark Antony's funeral oration is by far the most remarkable and rememberable of all speeches in the play. At that time, he was walking on a tightrope for being a great ally of Caesar and having been given a chance by Brutus to speak (on condition that he would not speak ill of the conspirators), he still wanted to express his displeasure for the assassination without offending the conspirators but still appealing to the conscience of the people.
So, what did he do? He employed the best oratory techniques and here is an excerpt of the speech:
Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears;
I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.
The evil that men do lives after them;
The good is oft interred with their bones;
So let it be with Caesar. The noble Brutus
Hath told you Caesar was ambitious:
If it were so, it was a grievous fault,
And grievously hath Caesar answer'd it.
Here, under leave of Brutus and the rest—
For Brutus is an honourable man;
So are they all, all honourable men—
Come I to speak in Caesar's funeral.
He was my friend, faithful and just to me:
But Brutus says he was ambitious;
And Brutus is an honourable man.
He hath brought many captives home to Rome
Whose ransoms did the general coffers fill:
Did this in Caesar seem ambitious?
When that the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept:
Ambition should be made of sterner stuff:
Yet Brutus says he was ambitious;
And Brutus is an honourable man.
You all did see that on the Lupercal
I thrice presented him a kingly crown,
Which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition?
Yet Brutus says he was ambitious;
And, sure, he is an honourable man.
I speak not to disprove what Brutus spoke,
But here I am to speak what I do know.
You all did love him once, not without cause:
What cause withholds you then, to mourn for him?
O judgment! thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason. Bear with me;
My heart is in the coffin there with Caesar,
And I must pause till it come back to me.
Antony, unlike Brutus spoke to the people's emotions and he cleverly achieves this by displaying his own. That his heart is in the coffin with Caesar and he could not continue until it came back to him. He applies sarcasm in a way that nobody could then question him by first appearing to praise Brutus as an honourable man, reaffirming Brutus' saying that Caesar was ambitious but repeats the same so many times until it all loses meaning. He then fishes out will Caesar's (something that the conspirators would frown upon) and makes it appear as though it was the mob that compelled him to read it. This way, he creates the illusion of agency and shows himself as a man of the people (Bii 2024).
But he is not any of those things. He is just but a people's manipulator, he lies about so many things across the play including on his knowledge on whose stab went where on Caesar's body. His main aim was to appeal to the people's emotions.
So who is Mark Antony in the Kenyan context? Of course, the former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua has the tendencies of Antony. The relationship between him and the President may not be exactly the same as that of the Caesar and Antony but his relationship with the Presidency as a concept is. Furthermore, his rhetoric and actions towards the people from Mount Kenya is exactly the same as that of Antony and the Romans. First, he attempts to establish himself as a friend of the people, a truthful man and a hero. Secondly, his speeches appeal to the emotions of the people by expressing himself as a good man who happened to be a victim of evil men who ended up impeaching him. He then plays the role of a hero who is here to save the people with his plans this year, just as Antony appeared to the people when he read Caesar's will promising each Roman citizen 75 drachmas and also giving his gardens and parks to the people, which will be converted into public spaces for the citizens of Rome to enjoy. When Mark Antony reads the will aloud to the crowd, it further inflames their emotions and turns them against the conspirators, fueling the chaos that follows Caesar's assassination. At that point he was not really speaking as a friend of Caesar but he did it for his own benefit.
Will Kenya then fall like ancient Rome?
The answer to this question is both a "yes" and a "no". Yes because of the significant degeneration, loss of the sovereign power of the people and violations of the fundamental principles of the Constitution on account of politicians who are increasingly accumulating power and using the same power to weaken the Constitution. It is a "yes" on account of a naïve revolutionary youth, an egoistic Presidency and a manipulative political class.
It is a "no" because, although institutions are weakened, Kenya is a democratic state and the people over the years have realized that a referendum is better than a revolution. 2027 shall present us with a clean slate once again and a mark of the ballot paper shall determine the rise or the fall of our nation.
Yours,
Mungai K
Comments
Post a Comment