Theme Of Absolute Monarchy In Julius Caesar

Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. This illustrates the theme in the historical play Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare. Julius Caesar was a man full of arrogance and he had a sense of being self-absorbed. This kind of personality lead to bad things, it eventually led to death. Caesar was a well-known man in Rome. The people of Rome didn 't care what he did. Everyone thought he was perfect. I ii 273 He was married to a woman named Calpurnia. She lived in Rome. At the beginning of the play, Caesar just had defeated Pompey. I i 53 Some of the people in Rome knew that Caesar was getting into deep trouble. Brutus had to make a big decision towards the end. Everyone wanted Brutus to kill Caesar because he was never going to change his personality. He didn 't know what he should do, he didn 't know what is best for Rome.

Many people have different opinions on Julius Caesar and his death. Some say he died a hero and others say he died a tyrant. The opinion of Caesar dying a tyrant is the correct one. The article “Killing Caesar” by Jon Herman give examples of this opinion. Caesar was a tyrant because he took power away from the senate, started wearing royal clothes, and had a craving for power.

In the prince, Machiavelli explores a world of governments and presents the many different ways in which a ruler must adapt in order to run an efficient government. Machiavelli provides a number of applications in which a ruler can acquire and maintain the leading position of a government. While many of these applications are just and moral, there is no denying that some of the Machiavelli’s tactics are cruel and immoral. However, as we advance deep into the meaning behind Machiavelli’s choice of words, we learn that these unjust ways are meant to advance the power of the prince. We learn that Machiavelli’s goal isn’t to make a good prince, one that is loved by the people and makes everyone happy, but a great prince. Machiavelli begins

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.

There have been many famous leaders in Roman history but none could match Julius Caesar[See Figure 1]. Julius Caesar was born on July 13, 100 BC in Rome and died March 15, 44 BC in Rome. Julius Caesar is best known for his military mind and how he laid the framework for the Roman Republic. One of the quotes he is famous for is "I came, I saw, I conquered." Caesar has not just influenced Rome, he also influenced the world too. The Roman Calendar was rigged to help political purposes. Caesar devised a new Calendar called the Julian Calendar to combat that manipulation[See Figure 2]. The Calendar still has an influence in Eastern Orthodox Christian countries such as Russia, Ukraine, Greece and much more. That is only one out of many

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.

The driving forces in the play Julius Caesar are the characters Marcus Brutus, Julius Caesar, and Marc Antony. Julius Caesar is the center of the ordeal of leadership in Rome when the play begins. When Caesar returns to Rome he is looked upon by the fickle plebeians as a glorious and triumphant hero. The authority of his heroism is questioned when the honorable Marcus Brutus speaks to the townspeople during Caesar’s funeral. Brutus proves to be the better leader for Rome rather than Caesar or Antony. Brutus is wiser and more honorable than the other Romans. He was the only one truly looking out for the good of Rome and not himself.

In order to successfully hold power, Renaissance philosopher Niccolo Machiavelli believed that a ruler during the time of enlightened absolutism in Europe had to possess qualities of both a “lion” and a “fox”. By this, Machiavelli means that in order to succeed, rulers had to be aggressive and firm like a lion, while also sly and sneaky like a fox. These traits can be seen in two different European rulers during this time period, Elizabeth I of England and Catherine the Great of Russia, who both follow Machiavelli’s principles successfully.

The name Julius Caesar makes people think of a lot of things. A kind and honest leader, “the unconquerable god”, leader of Rome, the man who was brutally stabbed and murdered. The name is fairly recognizable; Julius Caesar was one of Rome’s greatest leaders and also one of the world's greatest plays. In the play and in real life, he was great and kind to all citizens of Rome, either poor or rich. When Julius Caesar died, it was one of the most iconic deaths of all time and would be remembered for the ages to come. Though this begs the question, what are the differences from what happened in David White’s article, to the famous Shakespeare play? Is Caesar killed in the same manner, do they follow the same timeline, can we safely call the Shakespeare play creditable?

The ideal ruler according to Machiavelli is one that easily gains and maintains his power and is the undeniable central influence of his realm. Louis XIV, “The Sun King”, is perhaps the greatest personification of a Machiavellian ruler. He was personable enough to usurp all power and become an absolute monarch whose subjects feared him to an extent of reverence. The Prince was written a century before Louis XIV would take power but reads as a checklist of all facets of Louis XIV’s reign. Louis was through and through a Machiavellian leader, exemplifying nearly every chapter within the essays detailing how a great ruler would rule his kingdom.

As you know, Julius Caesar has recently been assassinated. Ever since then our great nation has been spiraling out of control. There is no structure to our government. Our republic is not working. We desperately need something new, a democracy. But in order for this to work, we need principles, we need a format. What we need is a limited government, a rule of law, a due process, majority rule and minority rights, along with civic duties. I will explain each principle. This new government will make sure that every citizen, will have their voice heard.

Abraham Lincoln once stated “Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.” In Lincoln’s statement a key term is power, which means the ability or right to control people or things. Another important term in Lincoln’s statement is adversity, which means a difficult situation or condition. Taken as a whole, Lincoln means that all men can handle a difficult period by themselves easily, but when someone has power and battles a situation it makes a person corrupt and harder to handle situations. This is because when you have power it is easier to do the wrong thing.

10-17 Power; “the ability to do something or act in a particular way, especially as a faculty or quality.” Some use power for good, to help the one’s around them and to support their community, but other use power for their own selfish reasons, to bring themselves to the top by pushing the people around them down. You might believe that Julius Caesar spent his life helping Rome and his people but the truth of the matter is Julius Caesar’s life was based around gaining more and more power, everything he did was to be the most dominant of them all. Because before he became dictator he was crawling his way to the top and looking for more ways to become formidable, secondly because when Caesar was a dictator he was conquering places and people

As society lacks critical thinking, people let those in power manipulate them to get a taste of power. When Caesar returns from the battle with Pompey, the people of Rome are rejoicing in the streets. Yet Marullus accuses that “[the men of Rome] have hard hearts” and “[do not remember] Pompey” (I.i.32-37). The people of Rome abandon Pompey’s side as soon as Caesar wins. If they join Caesar, Caesar will like them more and their fellow citizens will continue to respect them. If they align with Pompey, the masses will attack them because Pompey’s army no longer has all it’s honor and power. Similarly, when Cassius is asking Brutus about his thoughts on Caesar, he philosophizes that “men at some time are masters of their own fates: the fault, [Brutus], is not in our stars, but in ourselves, that we are underlings” (I.ii.139-141). Cassius’ statement explains that the less power someone has, the less control of their fate they have. Because Brutus has a huge amount of power as Caesar’s friend and as a senator, the people of Rome honor and respect him. Brutus aligns himself with Caesar and Cassius

Niccolo Machiavelli’s abstract work of The Prince discusses politics and government and focuses in not only acquiring power, but also how to maintain it. Throughout his work, one of the most prevalent yet disputed themes is between the acquirement of states between principalities and republics. The Prince shows a predominant and constant debate on which group will excel in acquiring power. However, despite Machiavelli’s harsh criticisms on principalities, his work does not solely praise or focus on the excellence of republics. In fact, as Machiavelli continues to speak and provide examples about the successes and failures of both republics and principalities, it becomes clearer that the lone purpose of The Prince is to merely provide tactics in political governance, instruction on how to maintain power once it is acquired, and most importantly, advice on how to become a great leader.