The paranoia of the ideology that power completely corrupts has existed throughout centuries. This obsession can cause people to act in an irrational way or out of reasonings. So was the case with the senators in The Tragedy of Julius Caesar. William Shakespeare centered his play around the Roman leader, Julius Caesar. Out of fear of his future political activities and his overconfident personality, the senators of Rome, including Caesar's best friend Brutus, created a conspiracy to assassinate him to stop him from obtaining absolute power over the Roman Empire.
Marcus Junius Brutus was a man that could not stay loyal to anyone, especially Julius Caesar. Marcus Junius Brutus had a very sharp demise towards Julius Caesar, Brutus had been sucked into the plot by Cassius and had been an active assassin against Julius. They stabbed him 23 times, and had tried to contradict it, with telling people that he was going to ruin rome, but in the end they had ruined Rome themselves with killing Julius as doing this they started a civil war as a result of Julius´s death. Marcus Junius Brutus was apart of the assassination of Julius Caesar, who had been sucked in by Gaius Cassius Longinus, a man that wanted nothing less than for Julius Caesar to be dead. Julius Caesar had originally declared himself dictator just
As he joins the Conspiracy to kill Caesar, he believes the rest of the Conspirators have the same view as him. However, he does not know that they have only joined for selfish reasons. Brutus is the only Conspirator that is truly justified, because he spent so long trying to find the best solution for everyone, where everyone else just joined out of spite. Once the deed is done, the people of Rome become terrified of the Conspirators, until Brutus proves his own justified reasons for killing Caesar (III, ii, 24-26). Brutus chose his actions in a justified manner, that set him apart from the other characters from this
Consequently, the people because of their beastly minds, after hearing Anthony’s speech will act chaotically. Thus proving Anthony’s use of rhetoric in Julius Caesar will unleash chaos because the common people are killing mercilessly and recklessly because they are incited by the rhetoric used in his speech.Although the people at times may think they are entitled to their own beliefs and individuality in this play,the people of Rome killing Cinna mercilessly supports a theme of “Mob mentality influences actions” because the people of Rome are acting based off of generalized group belief which is to kill in order to gain justice for Caesar.In conclusion, In the play Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare,the use of rhetoric has a greater power than it is in itself,but the use of rhetoric is manipulated by two deceiving men Cassius and
Atreus is so hungry for revenge and power, it defeats his ability to reason. Atreus decides to trick Thyestes into eating his own sons as payback. Atreus is not satisfied with just killing Thyestes, he has to completely destroy him to be satisfied. This parallels with Nero, who killed anyone who threatened his power or plotted against him. Nero has his step brother, Britannicus, killed so that his rule was not opposed.
And do you now put on your best attire? And do you now cull out a holiday?” c. Evidence: Below it shows that Caesar was so power hungry he chased Pompey’s followers and sons out of Rome and to Spain. He then began a battle with them and also defeated them. This doesn’t show an honorable nor noble man, this shows a man who would do anything for power. Why else would he kill Pompey a man who he would have to share power with?
Finally he destroyed himself and all around him trying to keep the power. The result of all his actions is that he destroyed the Great Chain of Being, and triggers the Insomnia that punishes them for their bad actions, the blood of his murders torture him and Unnatural things that happened in the world.
Throughout The Deeds of Louis the Fat, a common attitude of greed and corruption can be seen manipulating men’s desires and intentions to turn violent. For example, Ebles of Roucy led a host of knights that brutally attacked and robbed churches surrounding Reims and “the more he roamed about with his host of knights, the more rabid and greedy he grew as he took his fill of pillage, plunder, and the pursuit of every wickedness” (Suger 34). William of Normandy proves to be another example of greed corrupting a man into brutal violence. Unable to overcome his desire for the fortress La Roche-Guyon, William murdered the innocent Guy, who controlled the castle and happened to be William’s brother-in-law and closest confidant. Fortunately, both acts of greed and maliciousness met justice by the hands of Louis.
These proclaimed monsters are violent, fraudulent, sodomites, or traitors. Seven circles deep, this circle has been divided into three rings. First is occupied by those who were violent towards other people and property as well as murderers. sank into a river of boiling blood and fire. In the Middle Ring, the poets see suicidal sinners who have been turned into trees and bushes which are eaten by the demonic harpies.
The Creature’s feelings of rejection from society and the abandonment from Victor compel him to use violence and seek revenge. In so, the Creature ends up killing a great many of people throughout the story, some of which include: Victor’s younger brother William, Justine Moritz, Victor’s close friend Henry Clerval, and Victor’s soon to be wife Elizabeth Lavenza. Many would say that the story of “Frankenstein” from the start sets out to make the creature seem to be naturally evil and a monstrosity of a thing which is directly the cause of its uncontrollable bloodthirstiness, but I believe this to not be the case. Although the Creature behaves viciously and murders several people, he is not inherently evil or malicious. It is because of the human relationships he endured and the consequences of a neglected psycho-social responsibility that drove him to do such
Charlemagne was known as the zealous defender of Christianity. After Charlemagne conquered the Lombard Kingdom in Italy, the Saxons took revenge of their attacks by ravaging many Christian churches, like the monastery of Fritzlar and the temporary Episcopal seat at Buraburg. Charlemagne defended the Christian churches by sending military troops against the Saxons. Because the Saxons destroyed Christian churches, Charlemagne was challenged namely as the protector of Christianity. He eventually forced all the Saxons to convert to Christianity and said that anyone who did not get baptized and follow all the other Christianity traditions would be put to death.
However, around 1348, Christians started accusing the Jews of bringing and spreading the plague to Europe. The Christians claimed that the Jews were “poisoning food, wells and streams,” as a way to eliminate the Christians and become the dominate religion in Europe (Cohn 3). As a result of this, Jews were taken and “tortured into confessions, rounded up in city squares or their synagogues, and
What would you consider a person to be that would gleefully destroy Christian churches and arrest and imprison people for the crime of being a Christian? Would you consider Saul of Tarsus forever lost; could we call Saul of Tarsus a murder? Was Saul of Tarsus a murder, did he kill Christians? We do know that Saul of Tarsus was arresting Christians, and if they were found guilty of being Christians they could have been stoned to death. The next group of cruel men we would consider lost if they were judged by our present day code of conduct.
He set Rome ablaze and used the Christians as scapegoats. He accused them of arson and persecuted many by burning them alive or allowing dogs to tear them to pieces (Lunn-Rockliffe). Emperor Diocletian (284-305) was also notorious for the persecution of Christians. A fire broke out in his palace which caused him great anger. Like the Romans did to the Christians when Nero was in rule, they blamed them for the fire.