In this detail-oriented, textually grounded reading of Julius Caesar, Blits looks at the play in the context of classical Roman politics and history, in doing so extending his earlier work on Shakespeare’s Roman plays . . . Taking issue with contemporary applications of literary and social theory to the play and with New Historicist approaches that read Shakespeare’s version of Rome through early modern English contexts, Blits argues for Shakespeare’s careful handling of Roman history as tempered by poetic demands. In his introduction, the author frames the play as attending to the historical, philosophical, and political nuances of the transition from republican to imperial Rome. The remainder of the book is structured to walk a reader sequentially through the play and illuminate Shakespeare’s engagement with classical sources. The book is careful and well argued, and it provides a coherent, thorough reading of the play. That said, it seems in many ways like a return to a much earlier critical tradition; readers’ responses are likely to be influenced by their own sensibilities about the critical trends Blits rejects. Summing Up: Recommended. Upper-division undergraduates and above.

Choice Reviews

This is a valuable . . . contribution to the critical history of Julius Caesar. Its value lies principally in copious references to classical sources, which will prove to be useful to future editors of the play.

The Review of Politics

In this his second book on Julius Caesar(his first, in 1993, The End of the Ancient Republic: Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar") Jan Blits confutes long held assumptions that Shakespeare's Romans are merely Elizabethans dressed in togas. Blits illuminates the political significance of the play by exploiting his familiarity with scores of classical Greek and Latin authors, drawing upon a learning unmatched in Shakespearean scholarship for its comprehensiveness as well as for its discernment.

John Alvis, University of Dallas

By the end of Jan Blits’s book on Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, the Roman Republic has, so to speak, committed suicide in the persons of its leaders, Brutus and Cassius, “who killed themselves in excessive haste.”
So culminates Blits’s series of studies, in which he examines Shakespeare’s presentation, in a poem and three dramas, of the institution and the demise of the Roman Republic. Blits offers an act-by-act, scene-by-scene, sometimes even line-by-line interpretation of the play. It is informed by an unusual view, in opposition to much current scholarship, of Shakespeare as a superb rather than a flawed historian. Blits shows that the poet is accurate in historical detail and acute in political insight—that poetry has the power to penetrate historical persons and events.
In staying clear of theoretical impositions and in attempting to understand the poet in his own terms, Blits succeeds in bringing out the play’s subtlety and depth.

Eva T.H. Brann, St. John's College