Abstract This paper examines how one character that can rival the complexity and depth of the character of Hamlet, is that of Claudius. It looks at how we soon discover through Hamlet's eyes that Claudius murdered his brother to get to the throne which prompts the opinion of Claudius as a bad man. It analyses whether this opinion is justified and whether Claudius can be considered a good king as has been proposed by critics in the past.
From the Paper "However, much evidence points towards the fact that Claudius may in fact have been a 'bad man'. He can display a malicious nature and manipulate people into doing what he wants them to do. Throughout the course of the play he uses many characters for his own personal gain: Gertrude (to hold power over Denmark); Rosencrantz and Guildenstern (to see if Hamlet's madness was real or just an act); Laertes (to kill Hamlet) and through the exposition, King Hamlet (who is killed so Claudius can get to the throne). Through Claudius' use of Laertes, we see the true immorality of his character with there being no other reason for his twisting of the truth than for personal gain."
Abstract This paper compares Tiberius and Claudius with reference to their dealings with the senate, their civil administration and their provincial and frontier policy. In the first area, Tiberius' reliance on Sejanus and adherence to Augustus is compared to Claudius' development of the civil service at the expense of his freedmen. In the second area, Tiberius' frugality is compared to Claudius' extensive building projects. In the third area, Tiberius' diplomacy and consolidation is compared to Claudius' expansionism. It is eventually concluded that the reign of Tiberius was in the long term more profitable for Rome.
From the Paper "Finally, frontier and provincial policy was an area where the achievements, as well as the impact of each emperor varied significantly. Tiberius, as even Tacitus is prepared to concede, was a tactful and diplomatic administrator of the empire's borders, who focused more on consolidation than expansionism. Tacitus states that he strengthened the eastern frontiers by 'astute diplomacy without warfare.' (Annals, p216) Even in Africa, his suppression of the revolt of Tacfarinas was done with as little bloodshed as possible, and Bradley (p 535) notes that 'in two years peace returned to the province.' For the large part, Tiberius was content to maintain the policies of Augustus, using with slow Romanisation of provinces by installing client-kings."
Abstract In this essay, the character of Claudius from Hamlet is shown as a quintessential Machiavellian character. Niccolo Machiavelli wrote the book entitled The Prince, and is known by some for making the guidelines on how to become the best prince through lies, corruption, evil, and murder. This essay examines how Claudius, the King of Denmark fulfills these guidelines. Claudius' Machavellian character is shown through the way he deceives others about his virtue, his development of schemes, and his belief that rules can easily be broken.
From the Paper " A Machiavellian character is not hard to come by, and ample exist around us today. A person of this characteristic will break rules, pretend to be virtuous, plan schemes, and do anything they must, in order to receive what they strive for. In Hamlet, by William Shakespeare, a perfect example of such a character is displayed in Claudius, the New King of Denmark. Claudius performs many deceptive, and horrifying acts, which make him the quintessential Machiavellian character. Developing schemes, pretending to be virtuous, and proving his belief, through his actions, that rules may be broken, are the deeds he executes, which prove his true character."
Abstract This paper focuses on the Emperor Claudius contribution to the Romanisation of western provinces, focusing mainly on Gaul and Britain. The main methods he used to do this are discussed, including extension of citizenship, the use of Imperial cult, the presence of the Roman army, and conquest. The paper also makes an assessment of Claudius' policy as emperor.
From the Paper "A fundamental aspect of Romanisation which underpinned most emperor's actions was their expansionist nature . With Claudius the most obvious indication of this is his conquest of Britain. However, the process of conquest and colonisation took off under Augustus 'the mere maintenance of order did not fulfil the ambition of the princeps or justify his mandate. There was hard work to be done in the provinces and on the frontiers.' Syme refers to the tendency of Augustus and subsequent Emperors to justify their rule by taking on new territory. There is much emphasis in the Res Gestae placed on the military successes of Augustus. Claudius too used this feature in conquering Britain, and in doing this 'he believed he had carved for himself a niche in the edifice of history.'"
Abstract An analysis of Shakespeare's famous play, "Hamlet", concentrating on the storyline and characters. The author discusses Hamlet's contemplative nature and shows its importance. The author feels that if Hamlet was able to put aside his thoughts earlier, Claudius would have been killed in the second act, and the play would be about forty-five minutes long. But the author of this paper believes that Shakespeare does not make Hamlet's rational thoughts disappear until Act III, at the death of Polonius, making Hamlet one of Shakespeare's longest plays. He feels that Shakespeare uses the death of Polonius to show what happens to a man when he kills another human being. In this play, the author says, the murder of Polonius starts a chain reaction of the rest of the deaths the tragedy has to offer.
From the Paper "There are people in this world who are thinkers and dreamers, who think things through completely before anything gets done. And there are people who get things done without thinking too much before hand. In Shakespeare's Hamlet, the main character, Hamlet, is a complex character who thinks about everything to the point where things don?t get accomplished. Throughout the play, the audience can see that Hamlet is a procrastinator, and he cannot kill Claudius, even when he has numerous chances to do so. The key moment in the play when Hamlet's mindset changes is when he mistakenly kills Polonius. Shakespeare decided to include the murder of Polonius to show that by killing a man, Hamlet's mindset has changed and his rational instincts are gone, allowing him to finally avenge his father's death by killing Claudius."
Tags: death, Hamlet, killing, Shakespeare, tragedy, character, Polonius, Claudius
Abstract This paper examines how Shakespeare's "Hamlet" is a play about revenge and indecision and how, because Hamlet's father is wronged, Hamlet himself spends most of the play deliberating on the subject of his revenge against his uncle, Claudius, who has killed his father, married his mother, and assumed the throne. It explores Hamlet's quest for vengeance by looking at the text directly, taking cues from secondary sources, and concludes that Hamlet's delay in taking vengeance is primarily based on his indecision, his self-interest, and his desire to protect Gertrude.
From the Paper "Throughout the play, Hamlet makes his own choices regarding his plan for avenging his father, and these choices are affected by his own personal ideas about fate and what he sees himself as being chosen for (vengeance). Hamlet represents reluctance to carry out what he sees as his destined goal of getting rid of his father's murderer and
his mother's seducer: ?O cursed spite/ That ever I was born to set it right!? (Shakespeare, I,v, 188-9), he cries upon making Horatio and Marcellus swear to help him in his plans to oust Claudius. Hamlet is not just following the orders of his father's ghost; he is struggling with his own goals and ideas about what is right and wrong; his conscience is
at war with his need for vengeance. He passes up many opportunities to either escape his fate of having to avenge his father and quiet his ghost or assure it. He chooses to make his vendetta intensely personal."
Abstract This paper explains that John Updike's novel ?Gertrude and Claudius?, attempts to provide a past history for the Hamlet's mother, Gertrude, but creates a far different woman than the sensual, guilty lady of the drama, ?Hamlet.? The author points out that what is so interesting about Updike's version of the tale is, although the plot of the novel is virtually the same as the drama, Updike takes a completely different view of middle-aged sexuality. The paper relates that, in the Shakespearean play, Hamlet dominates the action, and there are only fleeting glimpses of Gertrude's greater psychology; whereas, in Updike's version, Gertrude is at the center of the drama.
From the Paper "Updike portrays a much more beautiful vision of middle-aged sexuality than young Hamlet's mind can possibly dream of. Updike's Gertrude did not "sink" into moral turpitude, changing from a weeping widow to a lusty bride, as her son tells the audience. "Why she would hang on him/As if increase of appetite had grown/ By what it fed on, and yet within a month". With which she followed my poor father's body, Like Niobe, al tears?. married with mine uncle.? (1.2.144-149) Rather, the carnal pleasures Gertrude enjoyed with Claudius in Updike's vision were her first experiences of a full sensuality. When Claudius and Gertrude first enjoy a night together, Updike writes, ?Surges of sensation in her lower parts lifted her so high her voice was flung from her like a bird's lost call.?"
Abstract This paper examines how William Shakespeare's "Hamlet" is a play about revenge and indecision and how, because Hamlet's father is wronged, Hamlet himself spends most of the play deliberating on the subject of his revenge against his uncle, Claudius, who has killed his father, married his mother, and assumed the throne. It looks at how his father's ghost pushes him to seek revenge, although he does not want to, and how there are many possible reasons for his delay in vengeance, among them Hamlet's own mercurial nature and his desire to protect his mother. It examines Hamlet's quest for vengeance by looking at the text directly and taking cues from secondary sources and concludes that Hamlet's delay in taking vengeance is primarily based on his indecision, his self-interest, and his desire to protect Gertrude.
From the Paper "Throughout the play, Hamlet makes his own choices regarding his plan for avenging his father, and these choices are affected by his own personal ideas about fate and what he sees himself as being chosen for (vengeance). Hamlet represents reluctance to carry out what he sees as his destined goal of getting rid of his father's murderer and his mother's seducer: ?O cursed spite/ That ever I was born to set it right!? (Shakespeare, I,v, 188-9), he cries upon making Horatio and Marcellus swear to help him in his plans to oust Claudius. Hamlet is not just following the orders of his father's ghost; he is struggling with his own goals and ideas about what is right and wrong; his conscience is
at war with his need for vengeance. He passes up many opportunities to either escape his fate of having to avenge his father and quiet his ghost or assure it. He chooses to make his vendetta intensely personal. This personal vendetta makes Hamlet a dangerous character because he is working on the whims of his own emotions."
Abstract This paper addresses the argument of whether Tiberius Claudius Drusus Nero Germanicus was a success or a failure as an emperor. It analyses his unfortunate childhood as well as his reign and attempts to explain the reasoning behind his actions as emperor. It concludes that he was in fact an intelligent and successful Roman Emperor.
From the Paper "The idea that the power of Rome lies in her Army, has been proven time and time again by figures such as Marius and Sulla. Claudius likewise was no stranger to this fact and, as a result, many of his first actions as Emperor were to secure the loyalty of the army and to establish some much needed military-credentials. Hennessy (1990) explains that following Claudius' rise to power with the support of the Praetorian Guard, he promised each guard 150 gold pieces with the intention of buying their allegiance and hence his protection. Claudius then went to plan and execute a campaign to, as Fagan (2004) argued, secure both military distinction and the respect of the Army. This, of course, came in the form of the famous invasion and annexation of Britain. To keep this strong military image throughout his reign, he added to the Roman Empire: Mauritania, Thrace and Lycia (BBC 2004). By the end of his reign, Claudius had been hailed Imperator twenty-seven times and had won a triumph (Fagan, 2004)."
Abstract This paper examines two of the most infamous villains in all of Shakespearian literature, Iago in "Othello" and Claudius in "Hamlet". The paper points out that both Claudius and Iago are driven by immoral ambitions. It adds, however, that unlike many "evil villains" in literature, these two characters are far more complex than may be seen at first. The paper praises Shakespeare as a master at providing an audience with keen insight into the human psyche through the actions and words of his heroes, and even more so, his villains. To conclude, the paper maintains that Iago and Claudius, although driven by different ambitions, are both villains in the sense that they have a specific target in mind and will stop at nothing until that aim is reached.
From the Paper "Another common aspect of Iago's and Claudius's villainous character is their use of women to further their own goals. It is unclear how much Claudius is driven by lust for Gertrude, but marrying her was definitely a strategic move, and part of his master plan to keep the thrown away from Hamlet. By doing this, he is using Gertrude to advance his scheme, convincing her that her son is insane and must be sent away. Iago, a character who does not seem to plan out his every move, also makes women mere pawns in his game. The woman whose innocence and naivety he exploits the most is Desdemona. Claiming to be driven by lust, as perhaps was Claudius, Iago says he lusts after Desdemona to get revenge for Othello's infidelity with Emilia. As he says, it is "wife for wife." This is not the main reason he harms Desdemona, although he enjoys the pain he causes to all those around him. Rather, he uses Desdemona's sweetness to convince Othello that she is cheating on him with Cassio, whom Iago sent to speak to her. This meticulous orchestration of events proves that he is clearly aware of his villainous behavior and feels no regret for any of the losses suffered by the other characters under his influence."
Abstract A study of Shakespeare's literature, focusing on premeditation and multiple deaths as determining factors in the afterlife. The character Clauduis in the Shakespearean play "Hamlet" dies multiple deaths to atone for his multitude of sins. This paper describes the ways and the reasons behind the "three deaths" of Claudius. The necesity for the multiple deaths and Hamlet's role in those deaths are justified within the context of the play. Also, justification for the death of Hamlet is given in respect to the murders of Claudius.
From the Paper "Drenched in the darkness of death, "The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark" thrusts the reader into the solemn quest of young Hamlet as he agonizes over the life and death of his father. Within the confines of the medieval world, Hamlet attempts to bestow upon Claudius, Hamlet's uncle and the murderer of his father and later his mother, proper retribution while eliminating his inner turmoil surrounding his slain parents. Hamlet was initially weary of killing another person. However, with careful construction, Shakespeare manages to have the protagonist kill off Claudius in three ways: the first to revenge the death of Hamlet's father, the second in retaliation for the pain Claudius caused Hamlet by killing King Hamlet, and the third to avenge the death of Gertrude, Hamlet's mother. All three methods of death happen simultaneously and use distinctly different manners of execution. The reasoning behind Shakespeare's need to kill a character thrice is unclear, but certain theories evidence relevant information to substantiate possible motives."
Abstract In this paper, the theme of fate is analyzed in relation to Claudius and his repentance in Act III. By acknowledging a conscious divine inspiration of his deeds in murdering his brother, Claudius invariably is too prideful and arrogant to give back the throne to Hamlet. The paper shows that in this manner, he has gone too far in killing his brother, and does nothing to correct a situation that spirals out of control with the deaths of Hamlet and Ophelia.
From the Paper "The theme of fate plays a strong part in how Claudius must maintain the evil murder he has partaken against his brother, Hamlet's father. In this sense, it is the act of prayer that consciously allows Claudius to become conscious of what he has done. Before this act, he may have been unaware of his evil deeds, since he could have possibly envisioned the after effects of his actions. This provides the foundation for fate to predetermine the doom of this greedy individual, as he finally realizes his own guilt while he commits to prayer. When Claudius seeks a penance for his wrong doing in killing how own brother and King of Denmark, he invariably seeks a confession in a moment of reprieve."
Abstract The paper analyzes how, in "Hamlet", Shakespeare portrays Claudius as a hypocritical two-faced king, one who makes a shift throughout the play from a good and gentle king to one filled with evilness, weakness and immorality. The paper discusses how Shakespeare intended us to see Claudius as a man who he is morally weak and content to trade his humanity and very soul for a few prized possessions.
From the Paper "Claudius, like many of the supporting characters in Shakespeare's Hamlet, is not developed to his full potential. His primary role in the play is to generate Hamlet's confusion and anger, and add to the audience's skepticism about whether or not Hamlet truly is mad or just acting. Nonetheless, Claudius is not at all a static character. While his qualities are not as thoroughly explored as Hamlet's, Shakespeare paints Claudius out to be a hypocritical two-faced king that the audience could side with, relate to, and believe in all while knowing he is a ruthless scheming tyrant. His character does however make a shift throughout the play from a cool collective king to one filled with evilness, weakness, and immorality that will use any means possible to escape discovery which ultimately leads to the revealing of his clandestine nature."
Abstract This paper deals with the protagonist Hamlet, and his inability to complete his task of revenge. Although Hamlet does kill Claudius, who is his uncle and the man who killed his father, the plan for revenge is not properly fulfilled due to elements that cause Hamlet's downfall and his unfortunate demise. The essay discusses how the factors of procrastination, melancholic behavior, and constant indecision stop Hamlet from properly fulfilling the task assigned by the ghost of Old Hamlet.
From the Paper "Hamlet observes how Fortinbras is willing to go blindly to Poland, to fight for a piece of land, which is worthless, all in the name of honor. When he looks at himself, he sees that he is not a man of action. The prince has had months of time to fulfill his act of revenge, which he has all the reason for, but he has not gotten any closer to his goal than the first day. Fortinbras, on the other hand, appears as a foil to Hamlet, highlighting his own quick-acting ability, and contrasting Hamlet's continuing procrastination. The extensive delay of Hamlet's revenge is what creates a tragedy and contributes to his downfall at the end of the play. As well as the stretching of time, Hamlet is also not up to the task assigned to him by the ghost because he is melancholic and too overwhelmed by other surrounding situations."
This paper is an analysis of William Shakespeare's "Hamlet,", and goes into detail about Hamlet's elaborate plan to expose the king as the murderer of his father.
1,185 words (approx. 4.7 pages), 0 sources, 2002, $ 40.95
Abstract This is an analysis of the play "Hamlet" by William Shakespeare. Special attention is paid to the scene where the real murderer of the king is divulged. The author explains how this is a pivotal scene as it solves the mystery that has been building up until that point.
From the paper:
"Act III, Scene II is important for a number of reasons. Essentially, it is the start of the second half of the play. It could be argued that the first half of the play is when Hamlet sets up his strategy to avenge his father's death. Naturally, the second half would then be Hamlet taking the vengeance he so baldy wants. Unfortunately for nearly all parties involved, it does not happen how he planned. In Act III Scene II, Claudius? guilt as well as his moral values had been exposed for all to see. Hamlet's underhanded slyness was also revealed by his non-confrontational means of proving the king's role in the murder of his father. Lastly, the reader also discovers the queen's apparent innocence."
