Differences Between The Prince And Julius Caesar

The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli was created as a gift to Lorenzo de ' Medici, this gift was what Machiavelli considered to be most precious, it served as an “opportunity of understanding in the shortest time all that I have learnt in so many years.” Written initially in Italian, Machiavelli used this gift as a chance to teach young Medici to how be a successful prince, but first let us better understand a bit more about Machiavelli’s early life and the events that occurred that lead him to write this primary source. .

Have you ever wondered if anything has stayed the same for over half a century? Look no further; in the drama, The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, by William Shakespeare, an important theme is all power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. This simple statement is true for Ancient Rome and it is also true for North Korea today.

Brutus, Cassius, Caesar, and the other Senators held the power to do things others could not. With this authority came their ability to use poor judgement. In William Shakespeare’s tragic play Julius Caesar the theme Power Corrupts is arrayed thoroughly. Murder, treason, and ethical/moral corruption were three prevalent themes that proved the overall topic of Power Corrupts.

Power is the most important thing a person can have. Power, and even the want for power, motivates people to do things they might not have done otherwise. We can see examples of this in both “Lord of the Flies” and “Julius Caesar” with the characters Cassius and Jack. These characters are similar because they both want to get power. Another thing they also have in common is after they get power they do bad things with the power they have.

Machiavelli concentrated more on the way things should be and how to manipulate them for his own personal gain rather than for the betterment of the state. He was well-known for being a political thinker who believed that outcomes justified why things happened. A key aspect of Machiavelli’s concept of the Prince was that “men must either be caressed or annihilated” (Prince, 9). What Machiavelli meant by

There are things which are inheritley good. Service is looked at fondly as one of these naturally good things. Murder is typically thought of as wrong. We encourage service but condemn murder. Then there are concepts that we can’t quite pin down. They could be thought of as either right or wrong depending on specific circumstances or experiences. Power can go either way. In Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare, power is addictive, it destroys relationships, and induces guilt in the characters.

In Shakespeare’s play, Caesar is a highly respected man that holds great power, and as he gains more power there are men who stand to oppose him. This is how Caesar shows so many good qualities of leadership, like keeping an open ear to the people, being observant and proud, as well as being honest. The attributes that Caesar shows has gained him the trust of all of the people, already proivng just how worthy he is to be called the greatest authority figure in Shakespeare’s drama The Tradgedy of Julius Caesar.

Niccolo Machiavelli, a Florence native, presented revolutionary ideas about leadership in his famous work “The Prince.” This sort of “how-to” handbook for rulers was written in a time when power was frequently changing hands, leaving nations in constant confusion (The Prince, 443). Machiavelli presented a way for these new leaders to maintain their power, encouraging such things as cruelty and fear as a means of governing the common people. This new concept was drastically opposed to the Christian ideals which had been taught for centuries. Despite its harshness, Machiavelli’s doctrine was accepted by many and has influenced some very popular men throughout history. One such person is none other than William Shakespeare. Multiple plays written by Shakespeare are stories of men in government who are either attempting to maintain their power or regain it. It is no wonder, then, why Shakespeare would refer to “The Prince” as a resource when writing these plays. One play in particular, “King Lear,” is evidence of Shakespeare’s acknowledgement of Machiavellian beliefs. Throughout this paly it may be witnessed how Machiavelli’s ideas on what a ruler should be were taken into account by the famous playwright, leading either to his characters’ success or downfall.

Desire for power is a fundamental human concern that connects Niccolo Machiavelli’s 16th century speculum principum The Prince, and Shakespeare’s 1599 historical tragedy Julius Caesar, through the contextual barrier.(respond to question) Machiavelli’s Italy has become “beaten, despoiled” by constant infighting whereas Shakespeare’s Elizabethan England is fear ridden with rife possibility of aristocratic war to acquire the throne of heirless Queen Elizabeth I when her reign ends. These contexts of different time period, but filled with the same political tension, shape their criticism of Renaissance humanism’s hubristic depiction of man created “in the image of god” especially through utilisation of historical antiquity, a Renaissance technique, to explore the compromising influence of human desire for power on their moral integrity and state’s stability and glory. Therefore, the comparison of both texts (incl. their given extracts) with different contexts but similar treatment of key human and state values, reveals the impossibility of a perfect human governed state. (respond to question)

Power is a gift given to people out of either desperation or admiration. When an individual is given power out of desperation, he or she often becomes corrupted by power because the people are vulnerable. However, when the gift of power is given in admiration, the recipient keeps from becoming corrupted because they do not want their followers to turn on them. In William Shakespeare’s play Julius Caesar, one character, Marc Antony, becomes corrupted by power after receiving power through desperation, and another character, Caesar, does not become corrupted by power because he received power through admiration.

“Veni, vidi, vici” (I came, I saw, I conquered) (Source1). This Julius Caesar quote can be used to describe his rise to power in the Roman Republic and destruction of it in the process. Caesar was an extremely influential, yet controversial figure in Rome’s history. He had all the power any Roman could dream of but he abused it. Julius Caesar was a destroyer of the Roman Republic because his arrogance made the government benefit only him, his ruthlessness endangered others, and he undermined the authority of the Roman Senate.

Power is a natural desire for humans. It is what structures society, makes the world turn, and to get more of it, people will do almost anything. Yet society often follows whoever is in power without a second thought. Because the Romans follow whoever is in power without considering that person’s morals and ideals, they are responsible for the anarchy that ensues after Caesar’s death.

There are certain traits that make someone a great leader. Said traits range from valiance or courage, not being easily dissuaded or deterred. These attributes can almost guarantee success in any environment, such as a government or in a military standpoint. Therefore if one lacks in these traits, failure is tantamount for not only themselves, but also the ones under their leadership. In Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, the character Brutus portrays this situation almost perfectly. In the tragedy, it plays out the events leading to Julius’ death, the assassination itself, and the following turmoil. In the beginning, the original leader of the assassination, Cassius, tries tirelessly to persuade Brutus to understand the misdeeds and shortcomings

This semester in Mr. Sellers’ History class, we were asked to read a history novel and write a book review on it. I chose to read The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli, and it sure did not disappoint. For a book on history, it was not so bad. The two parts to this review include a summary and a critical analysis. This paper will discuss the major points Machiavelli made in his book and analyze his tone and writing style, with an overall critique.

In the book, The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli thoroughly explains the lifestyle a proper prince should uphold and the skills/actions he should keep in his arsenal, if the time ever comes. I’ve chosen chapters 15, 16, and 17 to further my claims on whether or not these ideas should be used in today’s government. Chapter 15 mainly focuses on the things for which men, but mainly princes, are praised or blamed for in an everyday society. Chapter 16 touches on how often one should be generous and liberal. Finally, chapter 17, the most controversial chapter of Machiavelli’s book discussed among many, tells the famous line of whether it is better to be loved