Virtue’s significance in society has changed over time and its relevance can be used to contrast differing social and cultural contexts. The prescribed non-fiction text, “The Prince,” written by Niccolo Machiavelli in 1532, is a didactic explanation of the political struggles of Renaissance Italy. Similarly, William Shakespeare’s play, “Julius Caesar,” composed in 1599, depicts the historical events surrounding Julius Caesar’s assassination. The ideas of manipulation and fate versus free will are presented through literary devices in “The Prince” and dramatised staging features in Shakespeare’s play.
While virtue is presented as a key theme in both texts, its portrayal differs due to the context in which it was set or written. While manipulation is not customarily regarded as a righteous act, both texts describe how it may be successfully utilised by any person in their respective social contexts. After Machiavelli’s position as a political advisor was compromised, he realised he must abandon righteousness and use “The Prince” as an act to manipulate an increased supremacy from the ruling power.
This is most explicitly demonstrated in the line, “You can see the country is praying God to send someone to save her from the cruelty and barbarity of these foreigners,” where Machiavelli personifies Italy to persuade Lorenzo de Medici that he has the potential to assist him in uniting his nation, increasing Machiavelli’s social standing in the process. This idea of manipulation is exemplified where Machiavelli writes, “The crowd is won over by appearances and final results.
And the world is all crowd. By establishing a metaphor comparing the world to a crowd, Machiavelli conveys the idea that if a ruler can maintain an upright image, obscuring his true intent, he will be able to hold power over any people in the world. Similarly, at the time when “Julius Caesar” was set, Rome was a highly individualistic society. As a result of this, the characters in the play use manipulation for similar reasons as those expressed by Machiavelli in “The Prince. ” That is to maintain an appearance of righteousness while increasing their personal power.
This is clearly depicted in a duologue between Marc Antony and Octavius where the former speaks of Lepidus saying, “Do not speak of him but as a property. ” This simile encapsulates how Antony dehumanises Lepidus by considering him to be an instrument which he can manipulate to heighten his own power within the empire. While Brutus’ actions in the play are motivated by virtuous reasons, he also speaks of how he plans to use manipulation as a means to maintain his status within Rome in a soliloquy where he states, “It is the bright day that brings forth the adder and that craves wary walking.
This metaphor comparing Caesar’s crowning to a bright day awakening an adder demonstrates how Brutus’ negative premonitions have caused him to abandon his ethos, acting warily around Caesar to give the impression of allegiance while actually plotting against him, for what he perceives as the common good. A person’s social context will affect their ethical response toward using manipulation as a tool to increase their political dominion.
The attitude towards the conflicting ideas of fate and free will within a person’s cultural context will determine whether they should act in a virtuous manner or not since, in a fatalistic society, there is no eventual gain from being virtuous. In his role as political advisor, Niccolo Machiavelli observed and studied the actions of many leaders and analysed the outcomes of these deeds. This analysis led him to conclude that, even if a ruler took all the correct actions, they could still be overthrown as a result of either luck or fate.
Machiavelli’s personal perspective on fate is best depicted when he describes it through a sexual allusion, saying, “Fortune is female and if you want to stay on top of her you’ll have to slap and thrust. ” This metaphor indicates that although it is difficult to protect a ruler’s dominion from the power of fate, a person may be successful in doing so through the use of force and strength of will. Although this may infringe upon a person’s moral compass, Machiavelli writes that it is necessary to do so in the aim of holding power.
Conversely, in ancient Rome, the majority of people believed that their destinies had already been determined by the gods and that, through dreams and the interpretation of omens, they could acquire knowledge of the future and be warned of forthcoming events. Cicero, however, has an abnormal, cynical outlook on the reading of omens saying, “Men may construe things after their fashion, clean from the purpose of the things themselves. ” Here Cicero contrasts people’s cultural interpretations of signs and omens to their true purpose, declaring that people are too reliant on what their fortune may lie that they do not shape it themselves.
Later, in a soliloquy, Brutus imparts to the audience his reasoning behind killing Caesar where he proclaims, “Think him as a serpent’s egg … and kill him in the shell. ” This simile describes how, while Brutus believes Caesar is fated to be crowned, he is prepared to disregard his virtue by taking fate into his own hands by killing Caesar and, hence, preventing the destruction he believed a crowned Caesar would bring to Rome. Depending on a person’s cultural context, they will have different views on the idea of a predetermined life and will make varying ethical decisions as a result of this.
A person’s decisions will be interpreted as either virtuous or immoral depending on the social and cultural context of the responder. Niccolo Machiavelli’s non-fiction text, “The Prince,” and William Shakespeare’s play, “Julius Caesar,” effectively present their course of action through literary devices and dramatised staging features respectively. The ideas of manipulation and fate opposing free will are successfully portrayed to fully communicate the morality of the characters described in both texts.
