caesar and cleopatra-第24节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



As　to　Caesar's　sense　of　humor；　there　is　no　more　reason　to　assume
that　he　lacked　it　than　to　assume　that　he　was　deaf　or　blind。　It　is
said　that　on　the　occasion　of　his　assassination　by　a　conspiracy　of
moralists　（it　is　always　your　moralist　who　makes　assassination　a
duty；　on　the　scaffold　or　off　it）；　he　defended　himself　until　the
good　Brutes　struck　him；　when　he　exclaimed　〃What！　you　too；
Brutes！〃　and　disdained　further　fight。　If　this　be　true；　he　must
have　been　an　incorrigible　comedian。　But　even　if　we　waive　this
story；　or　accept　the　traditional　sentimental　interpretation　of
it；　there　is　still　abundant　evidence　of　his　lightheartedness　and
adventurousness。　Indeed　it　is　clear　from　his　whole　history　that
what　has　been　called　his　ambition　was　an　instinct　for
exploration。　He　had　much　more　of　Columbus　and　Franklin　in　him
than　of　Henry　V。

However；　nobody　need　deny　Caesar　a　share；　at　least；　of　the
qualities　I　have　attributed　to　him。　All　men；　much　more　Julius
Caesars；　possess　all　qualities　in　some　degree。　The　really
interesting　question　is　whether　I　am　right　in　assuming　that　the
way　to　produce　an　impression　of　greatness　is　by　exhibiting　a　man；
not　as　mortifying　his　nature　by　doing　his　duty；　in　the　manner
which　our　system　of　putting　little　men　into　great　positions　（not
having　enough　great　men　in　our　influential　families　to　go　round）
forces　us　to　inculcate；　but　by　simply　doing　what　he　naturally
wants　to　do。　For　this　raises　the　question　whether　our　world　has
not　been　wrong　in　its　moral　theory　for　the　last　2；500　years　or
so。　It　must　be　a　constant　puzzle　to　many　of　us　that　the　Christian
era；　so　excellent　in　its　intentions；　should　have　been　practically
such　a　very　discreditable　episode　in　the　history　of　the　race。　I
doubt　if　this　is　altogether　due　to　the　vulgar　and　sanguinary
sensationalism　of　our　religious　legends；　with　their　substitution
of　gross　physical　torments　and　public　executions　for　the　passion
of　humanity。　Islam；　substituting　voluptuousness　for　torment　（a
merely　superficial　difference；　it　is　true）　has　done　no　better。　It
may　have　been　the　failure　of　Christianity　to　emancipate　itself
from　expiatory　theories　of　moral　responsibility；　guilt；
innocence；　reward；　punishment；　and　the　rest　of　it；　that　baffled
its　intention　of　changing　the　world。　But　these　are　bound　up　in
all　philosophies　of　creation　as　opposed　to　cosmism。　They　may
therefore　be　regarded　as　the　price　we　pay　for　popular　religion。








End