Marcus Brutus and Caius Cassius: Lovers? (details inside)?

Question

So, after reading the play Julius Caesar, the shakespearian classic, I must wonder, did shakespeare merely depict Marcus Brutus and Caius Cassius as lovers, or were they in fact, lovers in life as well as in the dramatic play written by shakespeare. For I know that in that time period, a form of bisexuality between men and women alike was not an uncommon thing, and I wish to know if there is any evidence that may prove my theory that Brutus and Cassius are lovers.

If anyone has any information on this at all, please, let me know, I am open to opinions, though factual evidence supporting this would be more helpful, and websites would also be much appreciated, for I would like to research this myself.

Answer 1

A public homosexual affair would have killed their political careers. Rome was NOT Greece where homosexuality was not only accepted but exalted as the highest form of love. Romans were very homophobic, especially those of the 1st class, that both men belonged to. Therefore, there wouldn't be any official sources to peruse, only gossip-mongers like Suetonius. On the other hand, these 2 were brothers-in-law. Cassius was married to Brutus's (half)sister who was rumored to be the "natural" offspring of Julius Caesar. My guess is that Shakespeare was trying to introduce some additional tension into his play, since we find these little undercurrents in many of his works.

Answer 2

Caius Cassius Julius Caesar

Answer 3

For a classic on homosexuality in the classics, try Edward Carpenter's Iolaus: http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/iolaus.html

Note that sexuality in Roman times was a bit of a complicated thing; Wikipedia explains it better than I (although it is not a definitive resource, of course): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexuality_in_ancient_Rome - the about.com link from there is also informative. From my (non-expert) understanding, I would think that the social positions between Cassius and Brutus wouldn't be disparate enough for a PUBLIC relationship between the two, but I could be mistaken.

As far as whether Shakespeare intended to make the connection, a good place to start might be Catherine Alexander's 'Shakespeare and Sexuality': http://www.cambridge.org/uk/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=0521800315

Answer 4

Shakespeare also said "brevity is the soul of wit," so I'll give you a brief answer from which you can springboard: Marcus Brutus sincerely wanted to do the right thing, but was duped into doing the spectacularly wrong thing. His idealism blinded him to the fact that not everyone was as well-intentioned as he, and it was this, as well as the ultimate realization of what he had actually done, that led to his tragic end. Caius Cassius wanted power. He wanted to pull the strings. He was extremely ambitious and cunning, and he possessed the guile to convince more inherently honest men to do his work.

Answer 5

To add a little to what has been said. Whilst I agree the Romans were, in public, homophobic, this did not prevent them from practising homosexual acts, often in the bath house, but upon inferiors and slaves. However, it was considered degrading to be the object of penetration, or to perform fellatio (as opposed to having it performed upon one) (and, indeed, cunnilingus). There was a group known as the cinaedi whose deviancy Juvenal (in the 90sAD) described as 'spreading like contagion'. The name was derived from 'those who shake their buttocks' I doubt very much whether M. Brutus and C. Cassius would have been lovers, being equal in status.