For my capstone project I decided to write on The Lord of the Rings and how it is not an allegory, instead the series applies history, religion and Tolkien’s other influences to make the series more relatable to people. This topic had its challenges that I had to overcome, namely reaserch. While there is a lot of reaserch on Tolkien finding scholarly sources on this specific topic, specificly Tolkien’s view on Allegory and applicability was difficult. Hopefully, this paper will add to the scholarly material on Tolkien and The Lord of the Rings.

ERH 481
John Stann
HR: Works Cited

A Journey in the Dark: Allegory v Applicability in The Lord of the Rings

The Lord of the Rings was a groundbreaking piece of literature written by J.R.R Tolkien and first published in 1954 that brought the epic fantasy genre into the spotlight. The series has sold over 150 million copies, and it has been translated into more than 50 languages (Tolkiensociety.org.). Since its publication, many who have read The Lord of the Rings believe it to be an allegorical narrative. These readers and critics make claims that aspects, such as the war of the Ring, represent World War Two or that certain characters represent Jesus due to Tolkien’s Catholic beliefs and his friendship with C.S. Lewis. These comments have been refuted by Tolkien himself countless times. In the second edition of The Lord of the Rings, the author wrote the forward specifically to show how the series was not an allegory: “I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations, and always have done so since I grew old and wary enough to detect its presence.” (Tolkien,” Fellowship,”x) Instead of wanting to create an allegory, which Tolkien believed was too limiting, instead, he wanted to apply what he experienced and his religious attributes to his work because they carried greater meaning to the story as a whole.” (Tolkien,”Fellowship,” x). While literary criticism is an important aspect of the genre of fiction, it is also necessary to remember what the author meant for their novel while reading a piece of fiction. This is especially true if the author has stated the intended purpose of his work of fiction. As I have been reading and researching Tolkien criticism, it appears that many literary critics have forgotten what Tolkien initially intended the Lord of the Rings to be: not an allegory, but the application of history and religion within his fictional world.
Tolkien believed that there is a difference between applicability and allegory. According to A New Handbook of Literary Terms, “Allegories turn abstract concepts or features into characters. The formula could be reversed: allegories just as easily transform people and places into conceptual entities.” (Mikics 8) Therefore an allegory is a representation of an idea, moral, or event that an author wants to correlate literally into his or her story. For example, in The Chronicles of Narnia, by C.S. Lewis, Aslan is an allegory to Jesus. He is betrayed by one of the children that he helps to save. Then he is killed and lays dead for three days before he rises again to bring the White Witch to justice. These events are allegorical and are meant to teach the readers something about Christianity. The handbook also quotes James Wood, who stated: “Allegory wants us to know that it is being allegorical. It is always saying: watch me, I mean something.” (Wood 8). Another aspect of an allegory is that it is supposed to be blatantly obvious to the reader; without this aspect, allegory doesn’t work. Readers need to know that a story is allegorical so that they can look for the meaning of the story and focus on the why, not the who, what, or where. This is not The Lord of the Rings. Tolkien created a rich and detailed world that spans books, short stories, and other unfinished works that Tolkien had not completed before he died. Tolkien’s characters have depth that C.S Lewis’ Narnia characters do not. While Tolkien’s life and religion may have influenced The Lord of the Rings they are not why he created the world and wrote the series.
Some of the debate over the allegorical nature of The Lord of the Rings is brought on by Tolkien himself, who seemingly contradicts his own dislike of allegory by admitting in one of his letters that: “My Samwise is indeed (as you note) largely a reflection of the English soldier- grafted on the village-boys of early days.” (Carpenter 247). Tolkien, however, argued that allegory is not the proper term for his work. Instead, he prefers the term applicability: “Many confuse applicability with allegory but the one resides in the freedom of the reader and the other in the purposed domination of the author.” (Upstone 55) Tolkien thought that applicability allows the reader to decide how they want to read the novel while an allegory forces the reader to stick to the authors original intention. An allegory can only be read in one specific way and that way only, while applicability gives the reader the freedom to read the novel how they choose. Despite the intense focus on the allegorical aspects of The Lord of the Rings, many literary critics have either ignored or only loosely discussed the term applicability and author intent while reading The Lord of the Rings. In this paper, I will show why applicability and author intent is important when looking at the content of a work of fiction, specifically at Tolkien’s major influences, how they are not allegories and why it is important that they are not labeled as allegorical.
There are many literary critics of The Lord of the Rings who seem to have forgotten that Tolkien did not intend his series to be read allegorically. Michael Maher states: “When reading the trilogy who could not think of Gandalf’s descent into the pits of Moria and his return clothed in white as a death-resurrection motif? The Hobbits, particularly Sam and Frodo, representing the little people, the smallest of all the sapient creatures of Middle-Earth, are the instrumental cause of saving Middle-earth- recalling a central theme of Christian Scriptures.” (Chance 225). There is no doubt or question that Tolkien’s Catholic faith played an impact on his writing. However, if these aspects of the story were allegorical, they could not influence the story in any other way. If Gandalf’s resurrection was synonymous with Jesus’ resurrection the War of the Ring would have been won, because just as Jesus defeated death, slavery and sin with his resurrection, so Gandalf would have defeated Sauron. This is not the case, though. Instead, Gandalf was forbidden to fight Sauron:

“When maybe a thousand years had passed, and the first shadow had fallen on Greenwood the Great, the Istari or Wizards appeared in Middle Earth. It was afterwards said that they came out of the Far West and were messengers sent to contest the power of Sauron, and to unite all those who had the will to resist him; but they were forbidden to match his power with power, or to seek to dominate Elves or Men by force and fear.” (Tolkien, “Return,” 403)

Since Gandalf is a wizard, or Istari he is not allowed to confront Sauron, If Gandalf was meant to be an allegory for Jesus, this would differ because of Christian beliefs. In Christianity Jesus, defeated sin and Satan and has power over Satan through his resurrection. Allegory limits everything in the story and Tolkien’s world is far too complex to be labeled as a simple allegory like Narnia. Another critic, Robert Plank describes the chapter “The Scourging of the Shire” as a “Realistic parable of reality” (Lobdell 107). In this specific chapter, the beauty of The Shire is destroyed by industry and technology. While it may appear to be an allegory of the industrialization of England, if Tolkien had written The Lord of the Rings as an allegory, this scene could only have been read in relationship to England and only England. Instead, readers can read this chapter and apply it to any aspect of their life that they feel was destroyed in a way similar to The Shire. This according to Tolkien wouldn’t be an allegory but instead an application of history and events that he witnessed.
Tolkien was inspired by a multitude of experiences and in his literary creations. He came from a devout Catholic family and lived most of his childhood in the Birmingham area in England, (Duriez 1) He studied at Oxford and while there he met fellow students Christopher Wiseman, Rob Gilson and Geoffrey Smith. The four friends formed the T.C.B.S or the Barovian Society Tea Club and together pursued whatever interested them, especially literature, music, debate and the sciences. (Duriez, The Making of a Legend, 1) Tolkien was also great friends with C.S Lewis, who wrote the Christian allegorical series The Chronicles of Narnia. Tolkien himself has admitted that: “The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work, unconsciously at first, but consciously in the revision.” (Tolkien, Letters, #142, 171). Frodo in particular is seen as an allegory to Jesus’ journey, passion and eventual triumph. In The Fellowship of the Ring, readers are introduced to Hobbits, a race of “little people” who are small and unadventurous that love the little things in life, drinking and smoking and gardening. (Tolkien, “Fellowship,”2) Yet it is Frodo, one of these hobbits, who is given the task of taking the perilous journey to Mordor to destroy the One Ring and thus saving the Free People of Middle Earth. Many who argue that The Lord of the Rings is an allegory believe that Frodo’s journey is allegorical of Jesus’ life on earth, death, resurrection and his destruction of death and sin. (Dickerson 212). They argue that parts of Frodo’s journey represent Jesus’ well. For example, Samwise Gamgee left him as he climbed the passage into Mordor only to be betrayed by Gollum in the passage of Cirith Ungul where Frodo is left for dead. This scene is similar to Jesus’ betrayal in the garden of Gethsemane and his abandonment by his disciples after the betrayal of Judas. “He walked a lonely road, betrayed by one he trusted and abandoned by others, cut off from the land of the living.” (Dickerson, 211). At the end of The Return of the King Frodo, after suffering from unhealable wounds goes to the undying lands, like Jesus who after his time on earth ascends into Heaven. While these may seem like they are allegorical to Jesus Tolkien argues that what he is doing is simply applying historical and religious aspects to his story. There are many errors in Frodo’s narrative if his story was simply a retelling of Jesus’ life. Frodo doesn’t have disciples while he is a member of a fellowship, he is not the leader; he doesn’t make miracles occur and he doesn’t take three days to rise from the dead. Another reason for The Lord of the Rings not being an allegory is that Frodo is not the main protagonist of the story, instead it’s Sam, his trusted friend and servant who is considered to be the true hero of The Lord of the Rings. If this is the case, then the Lord of the Rings would not be an allegory at all, because Sam does not follow Jesus’ journey.
If Frodo’s journey with the Ring was intended allegorically, readers could only read the narrative in that form. Instead, because this is applicable, they may use the story in a manner that they see fit. They are allowed to read the story allegorically or they can take a completely different approach. One of the main themes of Frodo’s journey in the series is hope, and while the reader could take this and allegorically apply it to Jesus and the hope of salvation, readers could also use the message of hope and apply it to their own lives, if they are struggling or depressed and use that message in their own lives wherever they are struggling.
Tolkien’s influence in World War One and Two is important and can be found throughout the series. Even though he was influenced by this period, this does not mean that the series should be read as an allegory. In The Two Towers, Frodo and Sam are traveling with Gollum through the Dead Marshes, a swampy land that guards the entrance to the Black Gate of Mordor:

“Presently it grew altogether dark: the air itself seemed black and heavy to breathe. When lights appeared, Sam rubbed his eyes: he thought his head was going queer. He first saw one with the corner of his left eye, a wisp of pale sheen that faded away; but others appeared soon after: some like dimly shining smoke, some like misty flames flickering slowly above unseen candles; here and there they twisted like ghostly sheets unfurled by hidden hands.” (Tolkien, “Two Towers,” 260).

Scenes like these, according to critics, are allegories to Tolkien’s experience in the Great War. After World War One broke out in Europe, Tolkien joined the British army as a 2nd Lieutenant where he served as a signaling officer in the 11th Lancashire Fusiliers. He fought in numerous engagements including the battle of the Somme. Shortly after this engagement, he contracted trench fever and had to sit the rest of the war out in a hospital back in England. It was in this war where there (Kambury, worldwar1centennial.org). Tolkien admitted that the looming darkness of the state of the world in 1938 “[h]as had some effect on it. Though it is not an allegory” (Tolkien, Letters, 41) “The general horror of war was applicable but not as a specific war.” (Tolkien encyclopedia, 7). Tolkien was influenced by what he experienced in the world wars, but that does not mean that the wars in The Lord of the Rings are direct copies of the world wars.
Tolkien lived through the myriad of cataclysmic events that occurred in the 20th century, the Great War, World War Two and the rise of Communism. References to these events can be found throughout his work and many critics believe that The Lord of the Rings is an allegory to these 20th century events. The Rings of Power and in particular the One Ring are items that are of a particular interest to readers. The Rings of Power were created by Sauron to corrupt their owners. Specifically, the One Ring was filled with Sauron’s own essence, this gives the Ring the ability to corrupt people over time. In The Fellowship of the Ring, Gandalf explains the nature of The Ring to Frodo:
“A mortal, Frodo, who keeps one of the Great Rings, does not die, but he does not grow or obtain more life, he merely continues until at last every minute is a weariness… sooner or later- later, if he is strong or well-meaning to begin with, but neither strength nor good purpose will last- sooner or later the Dark Power will devour him.” (Tolkien, “Fellowship,” 15)

Mortals and men in particular are corrupted more quickly than other races because of their moral weaknesses. Hobbits, being especially tough were harder to corrupt, though at the end of The Return of the King Frodo is eventually corrupted and is only saved by Sam. (Tolkien, The Return of the King). The One Ring does not care what the user is trying to do with its power, even if the wielder is attempting to do good, they will eventually become corrupted. This is shown through Boromir’s actions in The Fellowship of the Ring. Boromir, son of the Steward of Gondor, is one of the Nine Companions that make up The Fellowship created to protect Frodo on his journey to Mordor. Throughout the trip, however, Boromir becomes obsessively fascinated with The Ring and he attempts to take it from Frodo multiple times. Boromir does not want to use The Ring for personal reasons, or for the power, or wealth that it could bring to him. Instead, he wants to help his country, Gondor, defeat Sauron. However, because of the corrupt nature of The Ring, it takes hold of Boromir. Eventually he tries to attack and kill Frodo so that he can take The Ring. After being attacked by Orcs, Boromir is killed, not before repenting of his attempted destruction of Frodo. The Ring’s powers come from the allure that it has and the ability to amplify a person’s negative traits over time to tempt them to use the Ring and eventually corrupt them, turning them into slaves of Sauron. Because Boromir is a man, he is able to succumb more quickly to the powers of The Ring, despite having good intentions for its use:
“Ah! the Ring! Said Boromir, his eyes lighting. The Ring! Is it not a strange fate that we should suffer so much fear and doubt for so small a thing? So small a thing! And I have seen it only for an instant in the House of Elrond. Could I not have a sight of it again?
Frodo looked up. His heart went suddenly cold. He caught the strange gleam in Boromir’s eyes, yet his face was still kind and friendly. It is best that it remain hidden, he answered. As you wish, I care not, said Boromir. Yet may I not even speak of it? For you seem ever to think only of its power in the hands of the Enemy: of its evil uses, not of its good. The world is changing, you say. Minas Tirith will fall, if the Ring lasts. But why? Certainly, if the Ring were with the Enemy. But, why, if it were with us?” (Tolkien, “Fellowship”447)

In this passage, Boromir wants to know why the Fellowship cannot use The Ring to help. Frodo watches Boromir as a change comes over him, it is a subtle hint that The Ring is corrupting. If the Ring was an allegory to power or atomic power the events in the series would have taken place differently. While Boromir is “Still kind and friendly,” the Ring is at work tempting and slowly corrupting Boromir. (Tolkien, “Fellowship” 447) He has good intentions, he wants to save his people, and he argues that “True hearted men, they will not be corrupted. . .. We do not desire the power of wizard-lords, only the strength to defend ourselves, strength in a just cause.” (Tolkien 448) Boromir believes that if the Ring is used for a just cause then it will not corrupt its users. However, he misses one important aspect of the nature of the Ring, that it corrupts all those who use it, whether they have good or evil intentions. This may seem like an allegory to power in the real world, and yet, Tolkien believes that it is not. As he states in the forward to The Fellowship of the Ring:

“The real war does not resemble the legendary war in its process or its conclusion. If it had inspired or directed the development of the legend, then certainly the Ring would have been seized and used against Sauron; he would not have been annihilated but enslaved, and Barad-dur would not have been destroyed but occupied.” (Tolkien, “Fellowship” x)

Tolkien shows in this forward that while he was influenced by events that took place in the real world he deviated from real events. While he was influenced by The World Wars and The Cold War, his own imagination and ingenuity took hold and led him towards a different direction for his series.
One of the major themes in The Lord of the Rings is power. One reader, Joanna de Bortadano, asked Tolkien if The Lord of the Rings was an allegory of Atomic Power. In letter 186, Tolkien responded: “Of course, my story is not an allegory of Atomic Power, but of Power. I do not think that even Power or Domination is the real centre of my story. It provides the theme of a War, about something dark and threatening but that is mainly a setting for characters to show themselves.” (Carpenter 246) Critics use the first part of this letter as more proof that The Lord of the Rings is indeed an allegory. However, later in the letter Tolkien states that it is not an allegory. Instead, it is merely a setting for the characters, a place where they can show their personality, attributes and morals. This is especially true for the men in the series, chiefly Boromir and Faramir who are both tempted by the Ring. The Ring corrupts men, who are a weaker race, easier than others because of their nature. Instead of being an allegory, the Ring is used to show how these different characters react to temptations of power. In The Fellowship of the Ring, both Gandalf and Galadriel, an elven queen, are tempted by the Ring and succeed in overcoming the temptations to more power. Boromir fails when he is tempted but is redeemed in the end by ultimately sacrificing his life to save the hobbits from being captured by orcs. In this instance, the Ring is power, but not an allegory. Instead, power is a tool in the story that is used to show how people react to power.
Power, war and religion are ways that The Lord of the Rings can be seen as allegorical. This series is an immense piece of literature and a classic epic fantasy series that has sparked countless debates amongst its fans and critics. In the forefront of this literary discussion comes the debate on if these books are allegorical. If they are, what does the allegory represent, and if they are not, how should they be read? Tolkien personally believed that The Lord of the Rings was not an allegory. Allegories were too narrow and can only be read in a specific way. There is no question that Tolkien was influenced by his childhood, Catholic Faith, and experiences in both World Wars and the Cold War. However, Tolkien believed that his works used the applicability of historical and religious influences instead of creating a direct allegory to a certain event or theology. The Lord of the Rings is not an allegory due to the evidence that I showed in this paper. This understanding of The Lord of the Rings is important, because it allows readers to read the series in a deeper, more full way. If the series is only read as an allegory, it loses some of its value. Tolkien wrote The Lord of the Rings and the world of Middle Earth with the intention of creating a mythology for England (Carpenter 143). The richness of this mythology will be lost on a reader if one only reads it as an allegorical interpretation of something. If the series is read with the understanding that it is not an allegory but an application of history and religion, we get a much richer experience. We come to the realization that Middle Earth is another world with its own values, morals, and beliefs. Its people are real and not the manifestation of a virtue or vice. This is where the true joy of reading fiction comes from, being able to read a work of fiction and create your own meaning, not being forced into a specific style of fiction and reading the story in one way. Fiction should be fluid and able to change its meaning as its audience changes.
Works Cited

Carpenter, Humphrey. et al. The Letters of J.r.r. Tolkien. Houghton Mifflin, 1981.

Chance, Jane. Tolkien the Medievalist. Routledge, 2003.

Dickerson, Matthew. “Frodo and the Passion in J. R. R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings.” Engaging the Passion: Perspectives on the Death of Jesus, edited by Oliver Larry Yarbrough, 1517 Media, Minneapolis, 2015, pp. 211–224. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt13wwwjn.17. Accessed 3 Nov. 2020.

Drout, Michael D. C. J.r.r. Tolkien Encyclopedia: Scholarship and Critical Assessment. Routledge, 2007.

Duriez, Colin. J.r.r. Tolkien: The Making of a Legend. Lion Books, 2012.

Kambury, Rachel, worldwar1centennial.org, “War Without Allegory: WWI, Tolkien and the Lord of the Rings.”

Lobdell, Jared. A Tolkien Compass: Including J.R.R. Tolkien’s Guide to the Names in The Lord of the Rings. Ballantine Books, 1980.

Mikics, David. A New Handbook of Literary Terms. Yale University Press, 2007.

The Tolkien Society, 10 Oct. 2020, www.tolkiensociety.org/.

Tolkien J.R.R. The Lord of the Rings, the Fellowship of the Ring. Del Rey. 2018.

Tolkien J.R.R. The Lord of the Rings, The Two Towers. Del Rey. 2018.

Tolkien J.R.R. The Lord of the Rings, The Return of the King. Del Rey. 2018.

Upstone, Sara. “Applicability and Truth in ‘The Hobbit,’ ‘The Lord of the Rings,’ and ‘The Silmarillion’: Readers, Fantasy, and Canonicity.” Mythlore, vol. 23, no. 4 (90), 2002, pp. 50–66. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/26814266. Accessed 3 Nov. 2020.

Reflective Tag

When I researched this paper I focused on the use of the heavens and stars, the symbolism of the play and honor and sacrifice. The Code of Honor in Christian Europe was changing during the Early Modern Period to focus more on the self and decisions that need to be made individually instead of as a collective whole. The heavens were used as symbols of guidance and the supernatural occurrences where warnings to the conspirators.

ERH 321WX
John Stann
Help Received: works cited
Words: 2,112
Julius Caesar: Honor, patriotism and Early Modern English values

“Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more.” (III.II 23-34). With these words, Decimus Junius Brutus, the infamous Roman politician and orator clears himself of any wrongdoing after he and his fellow conspirators murdered Julius Caesar in Shakespeare’s now immortalized play. The play, Julius Caesar, is one of Shakespeare’s most politicized and has been shown countless times since it was first produced in 1599. Unlike many of his other plays, Julius Caesar, was a dramatic political tale about honor, rebellion, death, patriotism and sacrifice. In Elizabethan England this play would have been relevant because of the conflict between absolute monarchy and Republicanism and how political turmoil brings with it uncertainty and destroys stability. Many English would have recognized themselves in similar situations as the characters in the play were. Not only was England going through a religious crisis, but there was also a threat of war and rebellion. The 9 years war was occurring and another rebellion in Ireland was brewing. (totallytimes.com). All of these political crises would have caused a great deal of uncertainty to England and the English people. The Roman virtues of sacrifice and patriotism and the heavens and stars being important symbols would have been recognizable to the Early Modern Englishman. This essay will discuss sacrifice and patriotism and how those Romans virtues were important to the English and how symbolism such as the stars and the heavens were also important in both Roman and Early Modern English culture and how they were important in the play Julius Caesar.
One of the key focuses of Julius Caesar is the idea of sacrifice. The Conspirators were not concerned with committing murder because they believed that it was in the best interest of the Republic Caesar be killed. It is not just Ceaasr that they want to kill, however. Cassius argues for the death of Mark Antony as well for he would carry on Caesar’s dream.
“I think it is not meet Mark Antony, so well beloved of Caesar; Should outlive Caesar: We shall find of him a shrewd contriver; and you know his means, if he improve them, may well stretch so far as to annoy us all;” (II.I 169-173)
Brutus, however, does not want the murder to turn into a bloodbath. More death would make the murders seem personal and not about the greater glory of Rome. This would enrage the plebeians and turn the city against them, which is the opposite of what the conspirators wanted. Instead, Brutus tries to spin the murder of Caesar into a sacrifice. If the murder was a sacrifice, the people would understand that Caesar was killed for them to remain free. Just like the Romans sacrificed an animal before a battle or an election to gain the favor of the gods, Julius Caesar would be sacrificed so that the Republic could remain free.
“Our course will seem too bloody, Caius Cassius, to cut the head off and then hack the limbs, like wrath in death and envy afterwards; For Antony is but a limb of Caesar. Let’s be sacrificers, not butchers, Caius.” (II.I 175-179 ).
Later on, when he is talking to the crowd after the death of Caesar Brutus declares that he would be willing to kill himself if Rome needed it. “I have the same dagger for myself when it shall please my country to need my death.” (III.II 48-49). Just as Brutus believed that he killed Caesar for the Republic, Brutus was willing to lay his own life down for Rome if needed. The virtue of sacrifice was important to Romans. From the earliest days of the Republic the idea of country above self was bred into them. Cincinnatus was a hero of Rome who left his fields to become a dictator and save Rome from barbarian invaders. After defeating his enemies, he relinquished his dictatorial powers and returned to being a farmer. (ancientorigins.net) While Cincinnatus was not killed in action, he still sacrificed his life for Rome. It was men like Cincinnatus that Brutus and others looked to for inspiration in their own actions.
Stars and the heavens are an important aspect to Shakespearean plays. They are used as symbols of stability, strength and as guides to characters, their morals and the choices that they make. “Such a use of heavenly and mundane portents as symbols of personal and social order is common enough in Shakespeare’s plays. Their use has been considered in Romeo and Juliet. In other works as well, the heavens symbolize the kind of order that is to be desired in civil life.” (Moynihan, 26). In other situations, however, the stars and supernatural phenomenon are used as warnings and signs of danger. Before he is assassinated, Julius Caesar gives a speech in which he declares himself to be “As constant as the Northern Star”. (III.I 66)
“I could be well mov’d, if I were as you;
If I could pray to move, prayers would move me;
But I am constant as the northern star,
Of whose true-fix’d and resting quality
There is no fellow in the firmament.
The skies are painted with unnumb’red sparks.” (III.I 64-69)
Caesar thinks he is as unwavering as the stars and believes himself to be an Emperor, or even a god. These lines are a perfect example of the stars being used as a source of unwavering confidence. Just like in Henry V, in the speech before the battle of Agincourt where Henry walks under the heavens, the stars are a sign of confidence and unwavering spirit.
Another use of heaven’s and the supernatural in Julius Caesar, is as when stars are used as warnings and signs of danger or turmoil. The conspirators believe that the unnatural and supernatural events leading up to the assassination attempt foretell dangerous times and troubles ahead.
“But if you would consider the true cause why all these fires, why all these gliding ghosts, why birds and beasts from quality and kind, why old men, fools and children calculate, why all these things change from their ordinance, their natures, and preformed faculties, to monstrous quality, why you shall find, that heaven hath infused them with these spirits to make them instruments of fear and warning unto some monstrous state. Now could I, Casca, name to thee a man most like this dreadful night, That thunders, lightens, opens graves and roars As doth the lion in the Capitol.” (I.III 62-75)
These lines show the dangers and serve as warnings to the conspirators. Earlier in act I, Casca says,
“When these prodigies do so conjointly meet, let not men say, These are their reasons- they are natural. For I believe they are portentous things unto the climate that they point upon.” (I.III 28-32.)
The conspirators recognize their very fragile position and the stars clarify and emphasize the position to the audience. The stars, heavens and the supernatural all play an important role in Shakespeare’s plays. This roll has two purposes almost opposite in meaning. On one hand, the stars provide comfort, security and show decisiveness and unyielding strength. On the other hand, however, they show a dark future for the protagonists, a future filled with danger and are used to foretell trouble.
The main protagonist of the play is Marcus Brutus, a man ruled by honor and his sense of righteousness. Everything he does, he does for his honor or for the honor of Rome and for the Republic. “What villain touched his body that did stab and not for justice?” (IV.III 21-23). Brutus tries to persuade himself that, despite murder being wrong, the act of killing Caesar is just and a sacrifice for the people of Rome.
“Though now we must appear bloody and cruel, you see do, yet see you but our hands and this the bleeding business they have done. And pity to the general wrong of Rome Hath done this deed on Caesar.”
(III.I 180-188).
The conspirators believed that they were doing the right thing for Rome and Rome’s people. Honor and patriotism were important parts of Roman culture and the character of Brutus easily captures these virtues.
Setting aside the glaring conflict between Republicanism and Imperialism, Brutus killing Caesar was an act of patriotism and nationalism. To save ones’ country from a tyrant was seen an act of patriotism. This sense of honor and patriotism would have been another characteristic that would have been easily recognizable to the British people. The British were a fiercely independent and proud people and patriotism was an incredibly important virtue to have in the middle ages and the early modern period. Chivalry was the equivalent sense of honor to the early modern English. During the renaissance when the play was written there was a period of revival of earlier traditions and virtues. Chivalry and the Code of Honor was the equivalent to Roman honor of the time. “Honor was becoming, by the seventeenth century, a matter of conscience; honorable men needed to seek, in every situation, to behave in such a way as to please both their state and their God.” (Terry, 1071). Just as Brutus wrestled with joining the conspirators, an Englishman during this time period would have had to struggle with what his own code of honor was.
Another interesting aspect of Julius Caesar is the use of parallels in the play which is filled with symbolism. The biblical quote “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” is extremely obvious throughout the play. One parallel, for example, is that while The Conspirators killed Caesar they themselves were killed at the end of the play. “As Caesar had paid with his blood for shedding Pompey’s, so the conspirators pay with their blood for shedding Caesar’s.” (Foakes, An approach to Caeasar). Another parallel in Julius Caesar is a parallel to England at the time that the play was being written. The Earl of Essex, at the time, was seen suspiciously by Queen Elizabeth and her court and there were fears that he would turn on the court and usurp the throne “Julius Caesar was written and preformed while Essex was In Ireland. As his campaigns there fell apart, the earl himself fell under suspicion and disrepute at court with the queen. Rumors spread that the defensive measures taken to resist what would turn out to be a phantom Spanish Armada were in fact intended by the Council as a show of strength to an increasingly erratic and desperate Essex, who, it was feared, might be tempted to turn his forces in Ireland back on his enemies in England.” (Lake, How Shakespeare put politics on the stage: Power and Succession in the History Plays.).
The material shown in Julius Caesar, would certainly have struck home to many of its viewers in Early Modern England. The political situation at the time was similar to that of Brutus’ and the conspirators during the Republic. The sacrificial spirit and the virtues of patriotism would have been easily recognizable to the Englishmen and the message of the play would not have been lost. Serve your country and put England above yourself, the message seems to say. Beneath this patriotic tone lies a darker meaning that says that traitors will be punished. Julius Caesar stays with us today and can be seen not only as a play about republicanism and monarchism, but it is also about heroism, sacrifice and patriotism. The final warning of Mark Antony still carry with us today as it did when Shakespeare first showed the play.
“This was the noblest Roman of them all. All the conspirators save only he did that they did in envy of great Caesar. He only in a general honest thought and common good to man made one of them. His life was gentle and the elements so mixed in him that nature might stand up and say to all the world, this was a man.” (V.V 74-81).

Works Cited
Moynihan, Robert D. “Stars, Portents, and Order in ‘Julius Caesar.’” Modern Language Studies, vol. 7, no. 2, 1977, pp. 26–31. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/3194362.

Foakes, R. A. “An Approach to Julius Caesar.” Shakespeare Quarterly, vol. 5, no. 3, 1954, pp. 259–270. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/2866331.

Welcome to Totally Timelines

Shakespeare, William, Julius Caesar, Folger Shakespeare Library, 2011.
https://www.ancient-origins.net/history-famous-people/model-civic-virtue-dictator-lucius-quinctius-cincinnatus-005326

“The State We’Re In.” How Shakespeare Put Politics on the Stage: Power and Succession in the History Plays, by PETER LAKE, Yale University Press, NEW HAVEN; LONDON, 2016, pp. 437–441. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1gxxpsd.22.

Terry, Reta A. “‘Vows to the Blackest Devil’: Hamlet and the Evolving Code of Honor in Early Modern England.” Renaissance Quarterly, vol. 52, no. 4, 1999, pp. 1070–1086. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/2901836.