The purpose of this paper is to offer a critical comparison between Shakespeare’s King Henry IV Part 1-2 and the Machiavellian concepts of Chapter 3 of The Prince.
King Henry IV tells his son that his entire reign has been like a scene in which he acts out his struggle with those who had helped him to become a king. King Henry IV Part 1 and 2 follow the rules which are the same as these maxims in Chapter 3 of The Prince.
The chapter argues “you cannot satisfy [those who have helped you to become ruler] in the ways that they expect, [n] or can you use strong medicine against them, since you have obligations to them” (7), “the ruler, because of the rebellion, will be more ruthless in consolidating his power, in punishing the guilty, unmasking suspects, and remedying weakness in his government” (7), and “anyone who enables another to become powerful, brings about his own ruin [, ] for the power is increased by him either through guile or through force, and both of these are reasons for the man who has become powerful to be on his guard” (14).
