Machiavelli's Critique Of King Richard III

Some people are naturals at chasing a goal, but they do not know how to maintain hold of it. This is Shakespeare’s critique of Machiavelli, using Richard III as his example. King Richard III was not next in line to acquire kingship in England, but through certain Machiavellian actions, such as appearing religious, marriage and eliminating others, Richard quickly became the King of England. Although these actions may have helped him achieve the kingship, they did not however help him in maintaining it. Shakespeare’s use of Richard succeeding then failing is a clear critique of his views on Machiavelli’s teachings in the Prince. Shakespeare’s assessment is that an evil man, such as Richard, can use Machiavelli’s political and moral teachings
First, he had two brothers, Edward and Clarence, who were both older than him. Then, each of those men had children of their own. Machiavelli would agree that Richard is going to have to do a lot in order to have a legitimate claim to the throne. Shakespeare agree’s with Machiavelli in that it is important for an individual to obtain some legitimate claim to the throne in order for them to be granted the power from the people and acquire the kingdom. The subjects of a state are more willing to love a king who had a legitimate claim. Machiavelli says, “For the natural prince has less cause and less necessity to offend; hence it is fitting that he be more loved” (Machiavelli 7). Without the support of the people Richard would not be able to become King of England, therefore he must find a path to acquire a valid claim to the throne. Richard’s actions in the first three acts of the play prove that he is worried about having such an authentic claim. One action Richard carries out in order to advance his progress in acquiring the throne is wooing Lady Anne (Edward’s ex wife). This tactic in finding a legitimate advancement to the throne through marriage was one of Machiavelli’s teachings and it proved to work for Richard in Shakespeare’s Richard
Through King Richard’s dream involving the ghosts of the people he had murdered, Shakespeare is putting forth the idea that the human conscience cannot simply be ignored. An individual may try to put it aside when trying to acquire the principality, but once he does, the harsh deeds he has committed will come back to haunt him, as they did Richard. In Richard’s dream, the ghosts of all the men he has murdered return and tell him he will lose the battle and the crown. For example, the ghost of Buckingham says, “The last was I that helped thee to the crown; The last was I that felt thy tyranny. O, in the battle think on Buckingham, And die in terror of thy guiltiness. Dream on, dream on, of bloody deeds and death. Fainting, despair; despairing, yield thy breath (5.3. 178-183). This was not the only time in which King Richard had a hard time dealing with his conscience. Before this, Shakespeare tells us, through Anne, that Richard is having difficulty sleeping. Though Machiavelli’s ideology may work in theory, according to Shakespeare, they disregard the human factor of the individual actually committing the heinous acts to acquire it. Richard says, “O coward conscience, how dost thou afflict me!” (5.3.192), which shows that Richard could not simply ignore it. Shakespeare’s critique of Machiavelli is that a person’s conscious can affect their ruling ability and negatively affect the ability