Prince Vs Caesar

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,’

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

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