Comparing Machiavelli's The Prince And Julius Caesar

Texts have been used for thousands of years by composers as a way to express the concerns regarding their time and place in history. Both Niccolo Machiavelli’s political treatise The Prince and William Shakespeare’s historical tragedy Julius Caesar run parallel to the values and contexts seen in their times through differing perspectives. Through exploring and comparing the perspectives, it exposes the ways that the contexts can influence the composer’s ideas, values, and attitudes. Although Machiavelli’s The Prince- composed in 1513, and Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar- composed in 1599, were written almost a century apart, many of the concepts explored are very similar. Both explore the concept of power; whether it is better to be feared or loved,

Machiavelli wrote his political treatise for Lorenzo De ’Medici, in a time where Italy’s five main powers were in fierce competition with each other for territory and power, and Florence was weak and needed a successful ruler. Similarly, Although Shakespeare’s historical tragedy was set in ancient Rome, Shakespeare mirrored the political concerns of his time during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, when England was in similar turmoil due to the lack of an heir, but also when it asserted itself vigorously as a major European power in politics, commerce, and the arts. Both texts explore deeply the importance of whether it is better to be feared or loved, and due to different perspectives brings altered outcomes. In chapter 17 of The Prince, Machiavelli reveals that cruelty is necessary for keeping people loyal and united and he concludes that it is “much safer to be feared than loved”. An example of this was Cesare Borgia who “was thought to be cruel, yet his cruelty restored order…making the region peaceful and loyal”. More importantly, Machiavelli states “A ruler mustn’t worry about being labelled cruel when it’s

Machiavelli’s use of the metaphor “a man who builds his house on the people is building on mud”, illustrates the risk of basing power on public loyalty and support, as “gratitude is forgotten the moment it’s inconvenient”. Both juxtaposing and corresponding perspectives are observed in Julius Caesar, where public opinion had a major influence on the success and failures of leaders. As Caesar and Queen Elizabeth I had similar positions of power, Shakespeare, reflecting the concerns of his time, was conservative in Caesar’s representation, showing instead how he gained power through generosity and public affection. Brutus expresses this affection through the personification of “applauses are… heaped on Caesar”, highlighting the publics overwhelming support. Directly correlating to the reasoning behind Caesar’s great support, Machiavelli states that to gain the support of the people, “nothing wins a ruler respect like great military victories and a display or remarkable personal qualities”, as seen in Caesar’s victory over the sons of Pompey the Great. Shakespeare reinforces Machiavelli’s statements on the ability for the public’s support to convert in an instant through the use of repetition in Antony’s Soliloquy “every Roman citizen… every several man”. The