The Machiavellian Element in Shakespeare's Julius Caesar

2859 Words6 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Machiavelli and morality

Machiavelli's Moral and social philosophy, as expressed in the prince, and the way this is related to in the political philosophy, style, and actions of Julius Caesar of Shakespeare's play For the reason that philosophy including all other branches of knowledge, from head to toe, is meant for the welfare and wellbeing of mankind thus the sacred branch of knowledge such as philosophy is all about discovering and investigating the hidden for the further wellbeing of mankind instead of putting the same human beings into the hands of totally inhuman structure based on Machiavelli's moral and social philosophy. I would rather call Machiavelli's moral and social philosophy as mere tactics of treating human being worse than live-stock. If people are still firm on calling Machiavelli’s recommended tactics as philosophy then, better to say, at the end of the day we will end up with egg on our face.

Frankly speaking, a rather illogical viewpoint as given by Machiavelli can not be called as philosophy at any cost. Historically, Machiavelli was an Italian political theorist whose book The Prince (1513) describes the achievement and maintenance of power by a determined ruler indifferent to moral considerations. Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527), Italian author and statesman, is one of the outstanding figures of the Renaissance, b. Florence. Machiavelli's best-known work, Il principe [the prince] (1532), describes the means by which a prince may gain and maintain his power. His “ideal” prince (seemingly modeled on Cesare Borgia) is an amoral and calculating tyrant who would be able to establish a unified Italian state. The last chapter of the work pleads for the eventual liberation of Italy from foreign rule. Interpretations of The Prince...

... middle of paper ...

...

Machiavelli, Niccoló. 1560; facs. 1969. The Arte of Warre. Trans. Peter Whitehorne. Amsterdam and New York: Da Capo. Shakespeare's Machiavelli, August 5, 2003, http://web.uvic.ca/shakespeare/Library/SLT/ideas/machiavelli2.html

"About Machiavelli" Section, August 5, 2003, http://www.niccolo-machiavelli.com/about.html

Machiavels, August 5, 2003 http://www.shakespeare.com/queries/display.php?id=3355

"The Qualities of the Prince" by Ron King, August 5, 2003, http://www.geometry.net/detail/philosophers/machiavelli_nicolo.html

Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare, Review by Edward Tanguay November 15, 1996 http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~tanguay/book50.htm

Niccolo Machiavelli, August 5, 2003, http://www.smuc.ac.uk/English/en251/en251_5.htm

Concerning Liberality And Meanness, August 5, 2003, http://www.geocities.com/vitomonti2002/juliuscaesar4.html

Show More
Related

  • The Common Man's Role In Shakespeare's Julius Caesar

    1176 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Common Man's Role In Shakespeare's Julius Caesar In this essay, I will discuss who the common man is, his involvement. in the governing of the city and its effect on the success of the higher figures. Shakespeare is renowned for setting a sturdy background to his plays. in their opening scenes as he does most famously in Macbeth where he introduces the idea of the world being upside down.

    Read More

  • Machiavelli's Reputation in the Modern World

    2975 Words  | 6 Pages

    Niccolò Machiavelli was known during much his life as a part of the republican government in Florence until 1512. At that time, the Medici family took over the city and ruled under a more monarchical system. From that point until his death in 1527, Machiavelli was always just on the outside of Florentine politics. He would occasionally get work from the Medici but his tasks were never as important as they had been under the republican government of the past. As he was trying to find his way back into a major role in Florentine government, Machiavelli wrote The Prince, a manual of sorts that explained how a monarch should rule his state and why. While Machiavelli had been a strong proponent of republican ideals in the past, in The Prince, his ideas are far from adhering to republicanism. The book seems to promote the ideal monarch as a cold, heartless person whose only goal in life should be to retain power, regardless of who or what he destroys. This includes killing enemies of the state, personal enemies of the Prince, and even, in some cases, friends or family. While The Prince was not the first book of this kind, it was the first to suggest a government that rules with no regard for religion or morality. Machiavelli did not particularly pay heed to religious law in the way he lived his life, but he also did not particularly care for the Catholic Church of the time because of the lack of morality demonstrated by the Pope's and other supposedly "religious men's" actions at the time. There are other works that Machiavelli wrote both before and after The Prince that survive today, as well as letters he wrote to his friends that demonstrate a different set of ideals than th...

    Read More

  • Isolation and Victimization in Henry1V

    2590 Words  | 6 Pages

    Machiavelli, Niccolo. "From The Prince." The Bedford Companion to Shakespeare. Russ McDonald. New York: Bedford/St. Martin's. 2001. 334-336.

    Read More

  • Nicolas Maduro's Machiavellian Struggle

    1502 Words  | 4 Pages

    First, Machiavelli’s method attempts to discard discussion of the “imaginary” political world and instead focuses on “real life” (Machiavelli 48). His end goal is to construct rubric for leaders to follow either to rule and unite (in this case Italy) in the Prince or create a powerful republic in the Discourses. His method is derived from comparing contemporary and historical events to illustrate and substantiate his argument. He is critical of how people interpret history (Machiavelli 83). He still believes that his ability to interpret and compare history is superior. Arguing that his methodological approach doesn’t just “chew” on history but actually “tastes” it (Machiavelli 83). Therefore we can understand that he justifies his method approach as not being akin to most because he possesses a much deeper understanding of history. Throughout his two books using ...

    Read More

  • Machiavelli and Rousseau's Views on Human Nature and Government

    558 Words  | 2 Pages

    Machiavelli’s views were drastically different from other humanists at his time. He strongly promoted a secular society and felt morality was not necessary but stood in the way of a successfully governed state. He stated that people generally tended to work for their own best interests and gave little thought to the well being of the state. He distrusted citizens saying, “In time of adversity, when a state is in need of its citizens, there are few to be found.” In his writings in The Prince, he constantly questioned the citizens’ loyalty and warned for the leaders to be wary in trusting citizens. His radical and distrusting thoughts on human nature were derived out of concern for Italy’s then unstable government. Machiavelli also had a s...

    Read More

  • Machiavelli vs. Lao-Tzu

    284 Words  | 1 Pages

    Machiavelli believes that a government should be very structured, controlled, and powerful. He makes it known that the only priorities of a prince are war, the institutions, and discipline. His writings describes how it is more important for a prince to be practical than moral. This is shown where he writes, "in order to maintain the state he is often obliged to act against his promise, against charity, against humanity, and against religion" (47). In addition, Machiavelli argues that a prince may have to be cunning and deceitful in order to maintain political power. He takes the stance that it is better for the prince to be feared than loved. His view of how a government should run and his unethical conduct are both early signs of dictatorship.

    Read More

  • Erasmus Vs Machiavelli

    876 Words  | 2 Pages

    In The Prince, Machiavelli separates ethics from politics. His approach to politics, as outlined in The Prince, is strictly practical. Machiavelli is less concerned with what is right and just, and instead with what will lead to the fortification of the government and the sustainment of power. Machiavelli believed that a ruler should use any means necessary to obtain and sustain power. He says, “…people judge by outcome. So if a ruler wins wars and holds onto power, the means he has employed will always be judged honorable, and everyone will praise them” (Machiavelli, 55). According to Machiavelli, the ends of an action justify the means (Machiavelli, 55). His motivation for these views in The Prince was the reunification of the Italian city-states (Machiavelli, 78-79). Machiavelli wanted Italy to return to its glory of the Roman Empire (Machiavelli 78-79). Some of the beliefs of Machiavelli could be perceived as evil and cruel, but he found them necessary. Machiavelli was not concerned with making people happy. His purpose was outcome and success, and in his opinion, the only way to be successful was to be realistic. These views of Machiavelli could classify him as one of the earliest modern

    Read More

  • The Noble Conspirators In Shakespeare's Julius Caesar

    556 Words  | 2 Pages

    “Assumptions are normally the mother of all mistakes,” a quote by the philosopher Eugene Fordsworthe. In 58 B.C., Julius Caesar was a Roman General who ruled Rome along with two other men, Crassus and Pompey. Caesar was renowned for his numerous victories against the Gauls. He even defeated one of his alleged partners Pompey, which ultimately gave Caesar full reign of Rome. Caesar was a brutal leader; he even appointed himself dictator for life. Many feared he would become king, and the Roman Republic would have to resort to the past ways of the Roman Monarchy. A group of ‘nobles’ took it upon themselves to assassinate Caesar. Caesar may have been a brutal ruler, but he was accused and judged for actions that had not taken place yet. Therefore, the ‘nobles’ should not have killed Caesar. The first reason they should not have killed him was the fact that they were basing their decisions and anger off of assumptions made about Caesar. Secondly, the death of Caesar created animosity among the Roman people spurring mobs. Lastly, all of the conspirators ended up on the same road as Caesar, and that road was death.

    Read More

  • Comparing The Prince By Machiavelli And Utopia By Thomas More

    1377 Words  | 3 Pages

    It is difficult to determine Niccolo Machiavelli?s and Thomas More?s view on human?s nature. Each took a different approach to the topic. Through Utopia, Thomas More attempted to change man?s thinking by creating an ideological society. Niccolo Machiavelli, through The Prince, attempted to teach man how to deal with human nature. With this in mind, Machiavelli?s concept is much more realistic than More?s; therefore Machiavelli better represents human nature. Machiavelli?s view of human nature in The Prince, presents, on the surface, a view of governing a state drastically different for his time. Machaivelli believed that the ruling Prince should be the sole authority determining every aspect of the state and put into effect a policy which would serve his best interests. With this, Machiavelli uses the prince as man, and the state as the man?s life. These interests were gaining, maintaining, and expanding his political power. Though in some cases Machiavelli may seem harsh and immoral, one must remember that his views were derived from concern of Italy?s unstable political condition in the 1500s. Machiavelli seems to be teaching the common man how to live his life so that their life is good and prosperous. Machiavelli generally distrusted citizens, stating that ??since men are a sorry lot and will not keep their promises to you, you likewise need not keep yours to them? (Machiavelli 651). Furthermore, ? a prince never lacks legitimate reasons to break his promises? when, ?such an observance of faith would be to his disadvantage; and when the reasons which made him promise are removed? (651). Machiavelli did not feel that a Prince should mistreat the citizens. This suggestion once again to serve the Prince?s best interests. If a Prince can not be both feared and loved, Machiavelli suggests, it would be better for him to be feared by the citizens within his own dogma. He makes the generalization that men are, ?? ungrateful, fickle, simulators and deceivers, avoiders of danger, greedy for gain; and while you work for their good they are yours? (649). He characterizes men as being self-centered and not willing to act in the best interest of the state,? and when it (danger) comes nearer to you they turn away? (649). Machiavelli reinforces the Prince?s need to be feared by stating: ??men are less hesitant about harming someone who makes himself loved than one who makes himself feared?

    Read More

  • Character Motives in William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar

    1184 Words  | 3 Pages

    Motivation can cause people to work hard and win a state championship, but it can also cause people to kill. Motivation can be defined as an internal state of a person that drives them to action for the purpose of reaching a target goal. William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar is a tragic drama that shows a huge variety of the different motives that fuel each character. Readers see what motivates each character, and how far that motivation takes them. Whether they are motivated by malice, jealousy, revenge, or loyalty, each character has their own incentives for their actions. Whatever motives they may have, readers see how these motives drive Cassius, Brutus, and Antony to extreme measures, and how this leads to tragic deaths in the end.

    Read More

  • Power In Julius Caesar

    1040 Words  | 3 Pages

    Power is how much control and support one has. Power can be controversial because the people who want it sometimes don't know how to handle it. In Julius Caesar, written by Shakespeare, many different people possess power. They gain the power in varied ways and react to having it differently. Since there are so many situations in Julius Caesar, power shifts are very common because diverse times call for the amounts of power to vary between different people.

    Read More

  • Niccolo Machiavelli's Influence On Popular Culture

    910 Words  | 2 Pages

    Although many philosophers have managed to maintain relevant over the years, very few have managed to have modern implications with their work as well. Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527) is one of those few, with his works, namely The Prince, actively influencing politics, upper management, and even popular culture. The Prince influences politics because it is a work that discusses how to gain and retain power. It influences upper management for similar reasons. And it finally influences popular culture through characters in media and mental health. Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Prince influences politics, upper management, and popular culture.

    Read More

  • Analysis of William Shakespeare's The Tragedy of Julius Caesar

    1357 Words  | 3 Pages

    From the absolute power of ancient kings and medieval monarchs to the tyrannical dictators of today, political corruption has been a persistent aspect of governed societies since their emergence early in human existence. In the quest for power, individuals create furtive conspiracies to overthrow governments and destroy policies. The presence of political corruption and conspiracy in Shakespeare’s The Tragedy of Julius Caesar is prominent, as Brutus and Mark Antony conduct opposing conspiracies in relation to corruption in the Roman government. Shakespeare depicts Antony’s emotional drive, ability to set aside honor, and capacity to use manipulative language as additive to the strength of his conspiracy. These qualities allow his conspiracy to undermine Brutus and, in doing so, emphasize Brutus’ flaws of uncertainty, excessive accentuation of honor, and naïveté.

    Read More

  • Human Nature In Plato's The Prince By Niccolo Machiavelli

    1365 Words  | 3 Pages

    Niccolo Machiavelli was a political philosopher from Florence, Italy. The period that Machiavelli lived in was the "rebirth" of art in Italy and rediscovery of ancient philosophy, literature and science. He wrote The Prince, in which he discusses the proper way of living as a prince. His ideas, which were not viewed as beneficial at the time, were incredibly cynical and took time for the rest of the population to really catch onto the ideas. Machiavelli’s view of human nature was that humans are born evil, and while they can show good traits, and the common man is not to be trusted. Unlike Confucius, Machiavelli believes that human nature cannot be changed, and unlike Plato, where Plato believes in humans as social beings. Each respected view

    Read More

  • Julius Caesar Character Analysis

    1533 Words  | 4 Pages

    A tragic hero is the antithesis for the common protagonist. Most protagonists show how they overcome great obstacles however, the tragic hero shows a more humane character, that stumbles and falls. The tragic hero usually exhibits three specific traits that lead to his or her downfall. In the play, Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare, the characters of Brutus and Caesar both exhibit the three attributes of a tragic character. The first trait of any tragic hero is a high rank and potential for greatness. Both Brutus and Caesar hold his trait, as they are beloved high ranking Romans. The second characteristic a tragic hero must possess; is a fatal flaw that dominates their personality, and Brutus’ sense of justice and Caesar’s ego, fulfill this

    Read More

More about The Machiavellian Element in Shakespeare's Julius Caesar

Open Document