Niccolo Machiavellis The Prince and Shakespeares Julius...

The Bible teaches love, compassion and generosity. Niccolo Machiavelli found the Bible’s lessons idealistic and unrealistic for leaders. Machiavelli wrote his book, The Prince, to show the ruling Meddici family that the world is not a fairy tale. Prior to Machiavelli writing The Prince, the majority of books depicted people as virtuous and ethical. However, The Prince is not the only work of literature that manifests Machiavellian techniques. William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar utilizes similar methods. As shown in Julius Caesar and The Prince, a leader who follows Machiavelli’s advice will accomplish their goals; if the leader does not adhere to Machiavelli’s recommendations, then the leader will not fulfill his aspiration. A†¦show more content†¦In Julius Caesar, Cassius achieved his goal of executing Caesar by applying Machiavellian approaches. Machiavelli wrote, â€Å"One can make this generalization about men: they are ungrateful, fickle, l iars and deceivers† (Prince 3). The description Machiavelli gives of men is equivalent to Cassius’ actions. Antony, another Julius Caesar character, employs three Machiavellian skills: using fickleness to his advantage,â€Å"...while you treat them well, they are yours† (Prince 3), and ruling by fear. Antony’s objective was revenge toward the conspirators for killing Caesar. Antony also successfully used the fickleness of the Roman people to his advantage. After Brutus explained why the conspirators had killed Caesar, the crowd was understanding and agreed with the conspirator’s actions. The Roman peasants are convinced; they even want Brutus as their new emperor, with better qualities than Caesar. The plebians say, â€Å"Caesar’s better parts / Shall be crowned in Brutus† (3.2.54-55). But the level of the masses’ support for Brutus did not deter Antony’s opinion of the wrongdoing of the conspirators. In Antony’s s peech, he spoke both confidently and assertively, which led to Antony convincing the crowd to support his cause and fight against the conspirators. Additionally, in Machiavellian style, Antony understands the crowd’s perspective; they need praise to believe in Antony’s cause. Antony appeased the Roman masses when AntonyShow MoreRelatedWilliam Shakespeare s The Prince And Julius Caesar1317 Words   |  6 Pagesirrespective of context. Texts ruminative of this include Tim Parks’ translation of Niccolo Machiavelli’s ‘The Prince’ (1532) and William Shakespeare’s historical tragedy ‘Julius Caesar’ (1599). The values and attitudes of these two texts anticipated responders and influenced purpose, form and content such as the darker aspects of humanism, the changeless nature of man, and the fickle nature of people. Machiavelli’s text ‘The Prince’ mirrors the darker aspects of humanism – man is essentially corrupt, self-servingRead MoreWilliam Shakespeare s Julius Caesar Essay1609 Words   |  7 PagesThe topic of leadership in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar has been discussed and argued ever since the play was written. The most prevalent discussion of leadership in the play revolves around Shakespeare’s tragic hero, Marcus Brutus, and the cause of his downfall. According to Shakespeare critic James Bundy, â€Å"Brutus... is a man whose affections sway more than his reason, in whom there is this tragic confederacy of passion and imagination against reason† (qtd. in Palmer 402). Ernest Shanzer, howeverRead MoreMachiavelli And Shakespeare Essay1097 Words   |  5 Pagesdifferent perspectives due to their form, context and purpose. Niccolo Machiavelli’s laudatory treatise The Prince (1515) was written in a turbulent Renaissance Italy after th e return of the De’ Medici’s as an attempt to regain political power. Machiavelli reveals his perspective on authority and leadership by advocating the appearance of virtue and necessary cruelty as a means of maintaining power. William Shakespeare’s tragedy Julius Caesar (1599) differs his perspective on authority and leadership