We all know that, in life, one tiny misconception can deliver catastrophic results. That is especially true in the works of Shakespeare (except, in Shakespeare, everyone ends up dead). Cassius’s forged letters, Decius’s conversation with Caesar, and Pindarus’s misreading of Titinius’ battle against Antony are all prime examples of the fallacies in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar and their outcomes.
First and foremost is Cassuis’s forged letters. In a desperate scramble to secure Brutus as an ally, Cassius makes the bold decision to fabricate documents and plant them in Brutus’s house. Said documents are the very reason that Brutus is pushed into the role of a conspirator. If Cassius hadn’t initiated such an audacious maneuver, the entire plotline of Julius Caesar would have shifted. Brutus most likely would have not joined the conspirators because of his tranquil, trusting nature. However, it is the very same trusting nature that is being played upon with the implementation of the letters.
Second, and arguably most important, is Decius’s conversation with Caesar that convinced him to attend the senate meeting. Calpurnia, Caesar’s wife, had envisioned her husband bleeding from all sides, and begged him to stay home. Eventually, he agrees to stay with his wife – but only until Decius uses some clever wordplay to alter his decision once more. He says that the dream Calpurnia is having has absolutely nothing to do with death, pleading that a statue was built for him, and Romans were dousing their hands in his “blood” for good fortune. Caesar accepts this as a valid explanation, and dismisses his wife’s concerns in favor of Decius.
Lastly, Pindarus, Cassius’s scout, misread Titinius’s battle outcome and caused the death of Cassius, and consequently, Brutus. Pindarus was scouting the area, trying to get an idea of whether or not Cassius and the conspirators had the upper hand, when he say Titinius and his troops...