Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 2

How does the deep exploration of Julius Caesar develop and strengthen our

appreciation of control in The Prince.

Control must be maintained when an individual is able to conquer his ambition.
The dissertation The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli, written in 1513, illustrates
the requirement for control upon a new reign which reflects the instability of the
Italian government due to their lack of control. The playwright, written in 1599,
by William Shakespeare exemplifies the concept of control to highlight the issues
faced in the Elizabethan Era. Through the characters Brutus and Cassius,
Shakespeare explores the usage of control between them and how they are
unable to maintain what they have gain which connects with the idea of a
Machiavellian villain as both characters fail to be characterised to Machiavellis
ideal leader.
An individual must be malicious when they are to achieve what is necessary for
their achievement. The Prince constantly dictates the qualities that a ruler must
have in order to maintain control of what they have gained. Machiavelli
highlights the particular importance of a rulers prowess in deciding the fate of
his new conquest, a ruler mustnt worry about being labelled cruel when its a
question of keeping his subjects loyal and united. By being cruel and inflicting
public punishment, the ruler is able to project his control and restrict chaos from
occurring. Machiavelli insists that rulers must be able to establish their own
abilities which would create a stronger foundation which would provide the
opportunity for them to succeed. Therefore he is stating that cruelty is an act of
compassion whilst being lenient is an act of malice. Similarly this act of control
needed is emulated in Julius Caesar when Cassius manipulates Brutus. Cassius
initially displays the qualities acceptable for Machiavellis prosperous ruler
however further along the play he begins to disintegrate being impulsive and
unscrupulous. Despite his intelligence and knowledge about how politics is
applicable to success, his temper is shown to be his downfall as well as his
greed, I, an itching palm? the tone is interpreted as irritated and defensive
which corresponds to his impetuous actions leading to his death. Whilst Brutus is
a character who remains inflexible to changing and receiving counsel
emphasising him as an ineffectual leader which is why he was incapable to
controlling Rome. Both characters have the qualities to succeed the however
their major flaws drove them to their destruction. Hence one must have a
malicious quality to be able to control what they want.
To be able to control a country, one must gain the respect of the people. The
Prince explains that honour is necessary for a ruler to control of his gain.
Machiavelli states, Nothing wins a ruler respect like great military victories and a
display of remarkable personal qualities which would emphasise the prestige
display of prowess providing the means of securing ones state and winning the
goodwill of the people. A modern example use is the Spanish King, Ferdinand
who uses his prowess to conquer and control his reign. Machiavellis historical
references substantiate his argument about how a prince should rule hence
throughout his dissertation his belief that control is a necessity shows the
significance of it. Whilst in Julius Caesar, Cassius mocks Caesars physical being

due to his jealously which is evident in his anecdote, this weakling Caesar, who I
had to rescuer. He underlines the difference between Caesar as a great man
compared to the petty man which rouses Brutus to fear that Caesar is not fit to
have victory. Therefore the broadcast of Caesar as weak had indoctrinated
Brutus to abandon the great leader which reinforces Machiavellis argument that
respect is needed for absolute control otherwise there is a risk of deviation.
Caesars admirable qualities are offset by his depiction of his public and private
persona. Whilst to the public he is modest and a great leader; he is depicted with
paradoxical traits which are embedded into his language and action. His refusal
of the crown three times was truthfully detected by the nobles motivating them
to deceive him. Consequently rulers must be able to strongly gain the respect of
their subjects to control them.
To sustain control a leader must always keep his people in contempt and not be
hated. The Prince stresses the importance of avoiding the hatred and scorn of
the subjects. Machiavelli instructs A ruler must avoid any behaviour that will
lead to his being hated or held in contempt which exude that a ruler must be
shrewd of his efforts to temper the hatred of people and the goodwill of
influential classes. Machiavelli references an example of this principle, when the
people of the Annibale Bentivoglio rose up against the Canneschi due to the
goodwill that existed for the House of Bentivoglio at that period. This proves that
satisfying the subjects would enable the ruler to have control over them even
whilst he is being overruled. Concurrently, Julius Caesar displays a tension
between Caesar and the nobles which led to a group of conspirators created.
Whilst Caesar could have had the support of his people, the plebeians, the
rejection of the crown had confused the plebeians as recalls, He would not take
the crown. Therefore tis certain he was not ambitious. By not satisfying their
hopes Caesar had lost their support and they had happily accepted Brutus as
their new leader. As a result if a leader does not satisfy their people then they
would lose their control.
Ultimately, the power of control has been proven to be very importance in
achieving ones goal of ruling. Machiavelli argues the reason why control is a
necessity and through Julius Caesar audiences are able to see the justification of
how the lack of control can lead to a tragedy. Therefore Julius Caesar delves
deeper into the need of control and through the characters and plot readers are
able to understand and appreciate why Machiavelli believes control is important.