In the early 1500s, Italy was in turmoil, divided into many separate factions and independent kingdoms that perpetually fought amongst themselves. It was incapable of being unified under a single ruler. From this tumultuous environment, Machiavelli- a statesman and political philosopher at the time, read about the power and grandeur of the Ancient Roman Republic and Roman Empire. Upon reading of the former glory of Italy he became consumed with deciphering the secrets that would make Italy great once again. He compiled his findings in several books. In one of his most prominent books, Discourses on Livy, he discusses and promotes a republican style of government. In it he “...argued for a revival of civic life in which public-spirited citizens …show more content…
After agonizing about the decision for a while, he finally received sufficient evidence that Caesar had become a threat to the Roman Republic that needed to be eliminated. Brutus states, “It must be by his death: and, for my part, I know no personal cause to spurn at him, but for the general. He would be crowned..”. He recognized that the general populace wanted Caesar to be their king- they even offered Caesar the crown three times in one day. Each time Caesar seemed to have a harder and harder time refusing the crown. Brutus realized that eventually Caesar would give in to the people and his pride and accept the crown. It was because of this that Brutus knew that he would have to eliminate Caesar. He took no pleasure in the idea of Caesar’s death, but recognized the necessity of it. In his statement, he says he has no personal reason to “spurn” or despise Caesar but that “for the general” or for his nation he must be a part of the plot to kill Caesar. By rejecting his own personal feelings for his friend Caesar and instead acting on behalf of the Roman Republic because of a sense of civic duty he embodies the concepts and core foundations of a civic humanist …show more content…
Nevertheless, he represented a threat to state and Brutus felt a sense of duty to his country to put aside his opinions and beliefs in order to protect his country. An unflinching sense of duty to benefit the state rather than serve the individual is a prime characteristic of civic humanism and is clearly epitomized by Brutus’ words and actions. Through pervading classical republican actions, Shakespeare can express his ideological
Brutus has a vision, and he intends it to work out in every way he plans. In a sense he achieves what he wants, and killing Caesar may have been crucial to his short-lived success.
In Act 3 Scene 2 Brutus said during his speech, “If that friend then demands to know why Brutus turned against Caesar, this is my answer: Not because I cared for Caesar less, but because I cared for Rome more”. Brutus had courage to kill Caesar, not because he wanted to, but for the good of Rome and its people. During the entirety of the story, Brutus
In their introductory scene a discussion is taking place about Caesar's claim to the throne. Through this discussion the audience learns a lot about Cassius and Brutus’s values . It is revealed that Brutus is an honorable man who believes in the general good of mankind. He states, (1.2 84-89)“ What is it that you would impart to me?/ If it be aught toward the general good, / Set honour in one eye and death
At the funeral, both of Caesar’s friends, Brutus and Antony, made a speech. In Brutus’s speech he was very concise and was saying that he did it all for Rome. Brutus used logos and ethos in his speech. To fortify his speech, he used logos which is logic and reason. In his speech, he says listen to my reasons and he goes onto his reasons that Caesar would have become ambitious and enslaved them all.
When Brutus was talking to the conspirators Brutus was going back and forth think if he should help the conspirators kill Julius Caesar. He was going back and forth because he was thinking of the power he could have and could rule Rome. The reason behind Brutus killing Caesar was for the better of Rome. If Brutus would not have killed Caesar, Rome would have turned into a dictatorship, and in turn it would have ruined Rome and all of its people. Brutus did not kill Julius just for the power to rule Rome, he killed Julius to save Rome from Caesar’s dictatorship.
But in the end, Brutus felt he had not made an honorable use of Caesar’s death and realized he made a mistake so he took his own life, and unlike Cassius, he died an honorable death for honorable reasons. “This was the noblest Roman of them all./ All the conspirators save only he/ Did that they did in envy of great Caesar./ He only in a general honest thought/ And common good to all, made one of them”
Brutus believes that Caesar will do more harm than good to the people, and reap benefits for himself. Brutus has already said this, but had said it in his own words, (II, i, 12-14). He has no clue if Caesar will use his power for the good and betterment for the people, or use it for his own needs and other
Brutus realized the great harm Caesar could bring to Rome if the was crowned king. Although Brutus was easily persuaded by Cassius to go as far as committing a murder, Brutus did it because he thought that it was the best for Rome. Brutus does what he thinks is the absolute best for Rome which really shows his great honor and
Is a good deed still a good deed when looked at from an ice cold eye? Was it ever really a good deed at all? It’s all about perspective. In the play The Tragedy of Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare, ethos, pathos, and logos is used to show both sides of a deed that was good in one eye and cold in the other. He uses ethos to show the credibility of the speeches, logos to show facts given, and pathos to show the emotion shown throughout the eulogies.
In Brutus’s speech he used ethos and logos to try and control the people of Rome. He was stoic and blinded of what Antony was capable of. He wanted to change their minds about the conspiracy and the murder of Caesar. Brutus says “Had you rather Caesar were living, and die all slaves, than that Caesar were dead, to live all free men” (III, i, 23-24).
Is it justified to kill someone because they have gained too much power and are going to use it for the worse? Brutus has a very bad circumstance on his hands, he can kill Caesar and possibly be executed for his actions or he can let Caesar become king and watch Rome fall. There are many reasons why Brutus should and should not join the conspiracy. Brutus says, “I know no personal reason to spurn at him But for the general.” (II,i,11).
short, straightforward and simple book explores a variety of matters related to power, warcraft, politics, and goodwill. Machiavelli offers the reader and in turn, Lorenzo de’ Medici an explanation for Italy’s disunity. Throughout the text, Machiavelli further explains his belief that Lorenzo de’ Medici can be a great ruler, given he follows the advice in The Prince, and therefore, restore Italy back into a prosperous country in which they can be proud. Throughout the text, Machiavelli supports his arguments by citing examples of real historical and contemporary rulers of his time. He does this to provide relevant and tangible advice.
Brutus has negatively affected the outlook of Rome and created more harm than good for the situation. Not only did it harm Rome, but it brought his own demise and hallucinations of Caesar’s ghost. Brutus’s speech to the plebeians after Caesar’s death, about his dilemma and his viewpoint towards Caesar, influenced the viewpoints of the plebeians and causes them to believe he is the best roman until Antony speaks to them. Brutus’s idealism led to his own death later on and brought him more misery than his idealism could
Niccolo Machiavelli was a true product of circumstance and of the time period in which he lived. He witnessed first-hand how the bickering and in-fighting among the powerful Italian families, such as the Medici family, lead to poor governing and left them exposed to outside threats. He noticed how a ruthless family, the Borgias, was able to keep control of their territory and expand their power. He understood that a kind, cautious and just leader could not keep power for long. Machiavelli came up with his idea for an effective government in his treatise, “The Prince”.
For today’s reviewers, it is hard to understand the methods that Machiavelli put forward in order to design a more proper and stronger central government. Thus, resembling Galileo’s tragicomic fortune, Machiavelli’s ghost is also criticized as being inhuman, dictatorial and brutal. However, his purpose behind publishing ‘The Prince’, which was instigated after the circumstances of the 15th century in a divided Italy, was to show how to establish a strong and indestructible central state in a very realistic way. Niccolo Machiavelli, who can be described as a political scientist, was born in Florence in 1469, known as the period of Renaissance. Unlike other philosophers and scientists, he had a different approach to politics.