In Rome around the time of 44 B.C., there was a conspiracy whose only goal and purpose was to commit the murder of Julius Caesar (Shakespeare 15). A conspiracy is an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act (Conspiracy). Cassius, the leader of the group, convinced Brutus to join him and the other members of the conspiracy. Everyone can agree that the conspiracy, which Brutus joined, killed Caesar. However some believe Brutus should have joined the conspiracy while other believe Brutus should not have joined the conspiracy. Brutus should not have …show more content…
Brutus could have been caught conspiring against Caesar. He could have also been accused of treason, this leading to him suffering a heartless punishment. Some of the punishments used in Rome around this time include the following; torture, beheading, crucifixion, and burning alive (Crime and Punishment). Some people say the Brutus should have joined the conspiracy. They argue that Brutus saved Rome by joining the conspiracy. Some believe without the murder of Caesar, Caesar could have destroyed Rome. This argument is invalid though because again no sound proof was presented to prove that Caesar was capable of this. In addition people argue that Brutus would have benefitted from joining the conspiracy. They state that by joining the conspiracy Brutus would be honored by the people of Rome and that he would be remembered in history. This argument is again invalid because honor and remembrance can not and should not be valued over a man’s life. Neither of these arguments - that Brutus saved Rome, and that Brutus benefitted from joining the conspiracy - would give Brutus any reason to join the conspiracy. Brutus should not have joined the conspiracy because he could not have known Caesar was ambitious, he was going against to many people, and he could have suffered a