How does a comparison of Machiavelli’s The Prince and Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar reflect the way their particular social, cultural and historical context can influence their choice of language, forms and features and the ideas, values and attitudes?
Through a comparison, the historical, cultural and social context of literature are reflected through a writer’s language forms and features, highlighting the relevance of the ideas, values and attitudes of their time. As made evident throughout the Renaissance with Niccolo Machiavelli’s ‘The Prince,” which reveals itself to be a political guide on gaining and ruling a kingdom for Lorenzo De Medici, a potential candidate for leadership of Italy. Similarly, in William Shakespeare’s ‘Julius Caesar,’
…show more content…
Through Machiavelli’s ‘The Prince,’ he comes under scrutiny for promoting immorality as a necessary trait for a prince to have if he is to maintain his kingdom successfully. A prince must stop being good when the situation demands it as shown when he states “Since a ruler has to be able to act the beast, he should take on the traits of the fox and the lion.” The zoomorphism emphasises how the lion is used to crush prey while the fox is used to sniff out the prey and traps. To achieve this the prince must be willing to be cruel and to do what is necessary. As made evident through Shakespeare’s ‘Julius Caesar,’ where Brutus, a man said to be “the noblest Roman of them all,” committed an immoral act when he murdered Caesar for the sake of Rome, or so he believed. It is demonstrated when Brutus states “think him as a serpent's egg/ Which, hatch'd, would, as his kind, grow mischievous, / And kill him in the shell.” The similar zoomorphism to Machiavelli’s work emphasises the reason that Brutus murdered Caesar because he would become a snake that must be killed before it can grow and wreak havoc upon Rome. The cruelty and immorality shown is present in ‘The Prince,’ where it was against the times of the Renaissance as Christianity was the major wielder of power. With Machiavelli going against Christianity by promoting immoral acts, he was deemed a heretic and caused his …show more content…
Through Machiavelli’s ‘The Prince’ it is made evident that a prince must act nice even if they aren’t, to keep up a positive public perception of themselves. It is highlighted when Machiavelli states “The ruler who projects this impression of himself will be highly thought of and it's hard to conspire against a man who is well thought of.” The cunning nature a prince must have is shown in Shakespeare’s ‘Julius Caesar,’ through the character Mark Antony during the speech at Caesar’s funeral. Here he uses the Aristotelian appeals, ethos, logos, and pathos to win over the crowd as demonstrated when he states “When that the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept, Ambition should be made of sterner stuff, yet Brutus says he was ambitious and Brutus is an honourable man.” The sibilance of “sterner stuff,” emphasises and compares how Brutus was an “honourable man” to the suspicious deed of murdering Caesar. Antony’s use of rhetoric and appeal to the emotion allowed him to sway the crowd to his side and to begin the manhunt for Brutus and Cassius. Subsequently it acts as a political message from Shakespeare to the people watching the play. The people that watched his plays ranged from all social classes, where many of the higher classes were the subject of the message. as they were more likely
“Revisiting Agathocles” by Victoria Kahn reevaluates Machiavelli’s use of Agathocles in The Prince, attempting to read between the lines in order to differentiate between Machiavellian virtu and true glory. Despite the extensiveness of the argument, the entire article circulates around a single statement on page 35 of The Prince, “Yet one cannot call it virtue to kill one’s citizens, betray one’s friends, to be without faith, without mercy, without religion; these modes can enable one to acquire empire, but not glory.” Kahn uses this brief mention of glory, and Agathocles’ apparent lack thereof, to justify her thesis that Machiavelli distinctly and purposefully separated the meanings of virtu and virtue, virtu and success, and success and glory
REAL-POLITIK: THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS “Let a prince therefore aim at conquering and maintaining the state, and the means will always be judged honourable and praised by everyone.” “For where the very safety of the country depends upon the resolution to be taken, no consideration of justice or injustice, humanity or cruelty, of glory or of shame, should be allowed to prevail. But putting all other considerations aside, the only question should be; what course will save the life and liberty of the country?” Machiavelli emphasized that being a good politician doesn’t always necessarily equate to being a good person. However, Machiavelli never praised immorality.
In Niccolo Machiavelli's book, The Prince (1513), he evaluates on how a prince can be a successful leader. Machiavelli’s purpose of this guidebook was to construct his argument to the rising ruler Giuliano de Medici for when he comes to power in Florence. He adopts a casual but authoritative tone in order to convince the prince that Machiavelli’s evaluation on how to be the best prince, is the right thing for the prince to do without coming off as he knows more than the prince or is trying to intimidate him.. Machiavelli’s reference to previous rulers and whether their tactics failed or succeeded helps to benefit his credibility along with his allusion to historic text. He appeals to our logic by simply stating a prince can only do what is within his power to control, and his use of an analogy furthers his argument.
Then for Machiavelli he talks about how a prince should show no fear instead for him to show that he is the one with power. That a prince's people should fear him. Both authors go on to talk on how their people react based on the prince and princesse act. The authors then go on to explain how they should view and run their people. Both authors also reflect the fact that the way their people are going to act towards them is mainly based off of how they treat them.
Machiavelli argues the perfect prince will be both feared and loved by his people, and if unable to be both he will make himself feared and not hated. Machiavelli believes it is much safer to be feared than to be loved because people are less likely to offend and stand up against strong characters, also people are less concerned in offending a prince who has made himself loved. Accordingly, Machiavelli believes generosity is harmful to your reputation and the choice between being generous or stingy, merciful or cruel, honest or deceitful, should only be important if it aids the prince in political power. All in all, Machiavelli believes the ruler must be a great deceiver and do what is essential to uphold power over the
Julius Caesar Essay Words are more powerful than weapons. Throughout the play of Julius Caesar the idea of powerful words is a key theme. Through speeches lies and cunning plans the characters in this play are able to convince people to join conspiracies and move people to action. This play reflects on the need for excellent speaking skills and its importance in ancient Rome, Elizabethan, and modern times.
Niccolo Machiavelli was an Italian Renaissance writer and diplomat. He wrote “The Prince”, and he expresses several characteristics which he believes are important to be a successful leader. Such as, being feared rather than loved, not revealing the entire and/or real reason they’re doing something unless it’s somehow advantageous to them, being duplicitous, and being narcissistic. I disagree with these opinions. First of all, Machiavelli claims it is better to be feared rather than loved.
Some playwrights choose to write plays about historical events, among them there is The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, a play that describes the downfall of the rule of Julius Caesar, but is also a play that is not as truthful as it first impressionably is, a complete truthful account of Julius Caesar’s assassination and the events leading up to it. In order to greater attract the audience, Shakespeare, along with other playwrights, relied on adding historical inaccuracies to add the necessary suspense. Thus, Shakespeare strayed away from historical events occurring during Caesar’s lifetime, implementing inaccuracy into the story. Shakespeare based one of his most well-known plays, The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, on historical events that includes
One’s reputation is gathered by the honor bestowed on them. Throughout the ancient and modern world honor is envied by many. During the study and read of Julius Caesar, a Shakespearian play following the death of Pompey and Caesar’s downfall, many characters are tested to being honorable. The merit of having honor and being honorable are central themes within the play. Characters are affected by their decisions because of their lust for reputation.
Brutus refers to Caesar as a serpent’s egg, noting that when the serpent is still in the shell it poses no threat, but when hatched it is very dangerous (II, i, 33-35). Eliciting emotion with the negative connotation associated with a dangerous serpent, Brutus convincingly utilizes pathos. He also uses ethics by knowing how Caesar will react when he becomes a serpent. Caesar is the same as a serpent, vulnerable while in the shell, but invincible when full grown and powerful. Brutus, however, is not seeking power for
In William Shakespeare’s play Julius Caesar, Marc Antony appears to be a strong advocate for Julius Caesar’s triumphs and increasing power. However, like Caesar, Antony is extremely manipulative and powerful. After Caesar’s death, Antony manipulated the conspirators into believing he was on their side before requesting to speak at Caesar’s funeral. While Brutus and the conspirators remained fooled by Antony’s innocence, Antony took the initiative to inform the Roman citizens of the conspirator’s horrendous actions towards their beloved leader, Julius Caesar. Caesar’s funeral was a time of reflection for the citizens of Rome, as Marc Antony caused them to question their allegiance to Brutus.
One aspect of Machiavelli’s theory which significantly contributes to his reputation as the “philosopher of evil,” is his advice to the prince on keeping their word to the public. In chapter eighteen, Machiavelli states, “a wise ruler cannot, and should not, keep his word when doing so is to his disadvantage, and when the reasons that led him to promise to do so no longer apply” (pg. 37). To simplify, Machiavelli says princes are obligated to lie in certain circumstances. He also states that while it is unnecessary for the prince to have positive qualities, such as honesty, trustworthiness, sympathy, compassion, or be religious, it is essential for the prince to be viewed so by the public (pg. 37). While many people argue that Machiavelli’s legitimization of lying and deception in politics is immoral, I argue the opposite.
Machiavelli has the most correct ideas on both controlling the people as a ruler and on being remembered as a great one. These two viewpoints had great influence during their time and for centuries to come, both with modern ideas and correct ideas even though they had a lot of contrast. Machiavelli’s The Prince may be thought of the more recognizable of the two in the present, but people in the present day have many of the same ideas that
When Machiavelli says he wants a prince to be fierce he isn 't talking about killing people, he is more so talking about having the courage to make a risky law change or do something people may not like, but will help them in the long run. He was not smart in any way like a fox is. Throwing people into
According to him, rulers should know their respective limits when it comes to the force and violence they inflict. Machiavelli believes that maximizing betrayal, deception and other cruel acts aren’t considered talents. Although these methods are effective in gaining empire, these don’t help in getting glory. Therefore, using violence and cruelty may be necessary but should have limits. The prince must know up to what extent his violence should be inflicted upon and he must do it all at once to avoid the hatred and resentment from his