Power-hungry murder, incest and lies all line the way to the top of power politics in Shakespeare’s Hamlet. These qualities may be condemned by some, but to others like Machiavelli they have been proven to be the successful methods to obtaining the head of a principality. Hamlet underlines the activities that take place during a questionable shift in royal power, and it is the maintenance of that power that depends on just how Machiavellian the character in power is willing to be. It is evident that the vicious new King Claudius is able to manipulate Machiavelli’s techniques, outlined in The Prince, of using evil to obtain the crown from his brother. And though he tries to follow the proper techniques through his reign a slip of judgment in his accomplice, a major mistake in Machiavelli’s eyes, Laertes eventually leads to Claudius’ demise by identifying Claudius’s evil intentions. It is through the employment and errs in Machiavelli’s tactics that the rise and fall of Claudius’s power transpire.

Machiavelli advocates the use of evil in obtaining power as he speaks of Agathocles of Syracuse’s success saying that, “Once [the enemy was] killed he occupied and held the principality of that city without any civil controversy,” (Summary). Claudius certainly follows this advice with rank offense to commit “the primal eldest curse, upon’t A brother’s murder,” (Shakespeare 3.2.38-9). Claudius successfully murders the king and takes the crown from the next in line, being Prince Hamlet. Here is where Claudius makes his first mistake, Machiavelli believes that fortune is like a raging stream to which, “in calm weather, men can make some provisions against them,” (Lawall 25.1958). Claudius was fortunate enough to get away with King Hamlets murder without being caught by anyone living, however he should have foreseen the likelihood that Prince Hamlet, a man of roughly thirty years, would want his chance at the thrown. Whether or not Claudius suspected that Prince Hamlet may one day discern the cause of his father’s death he should not have left things in the hands of fortune, and should have killed the only other living heir to the thrown as well to secure his place of power. It is because he relies on his good fortune to continue that his death eventually ensues.

According to Machiavelli Claudius also has a strike against him as he is not a hereditary ruler. Claudius gains the crown through his marriage to Queen Gertrude, alluding to the fact that power may actually pass down through her family line as apposed to King Hamlets.  Machiavelli says that lands are best acquired through ones own arms and virtue, and although this is actually how Claudius came to be king, to the people it would have seemed to be an act of fortune. Therefore laying his foundations in power would have come with “trouble for the architect and danger to the building,” (Lawall 7.1949). Hamlet also comments on Claudius’ celebrating and generosity with his new kingdom “as he drains his draughts of Rhenish down,” (Shakespeare 1.4.10). Machiavelli warns against being too lavish a ruler as “it is only the spending of your own money that hurts you… [for you]…become poor and contemptible,” (Lawall 16.1953). Already Claudius is poised for hardship in maintaining his rule.

Claudius is able to hold off this hardship for some time, however, employing Machiavelli’s tactics. Claudius is quick to urge the people to forget about their old ruler informing Prince Hamlet that, “to preserve In obstinate condolement is a course Of impious stubbornness; ‘tis unmanly grief,” (Shakespeare 1.2.93-94). Claudius is also able to side-step his own death for a time as he appears a virtuous man even to Hamlet, who knows him for the evil deeds he has committed. Claudius seems to be of virtue when Hamlet catches him praying in the church, but even as he repents he sins, as he knows “That [repentance] cannot be, since I am still possessed Of those effects for which I did the murder, My crown, mine own ambition and my Queen,” (Shakespeare 3.3.54-7). In this way Claudius is following one of Machiavelli’s main instructions that “to those who see and hear him he should seem all compassion, all faith, all honesty, all humanity, all religion…preaches nothing else than peace and faith, and is wholly opposed to both of them,” (Lawall 18.1957). To Hamlet, Claudius appears to be “fit and seasoned for his passage,” (Shakespeare 3.3.82) to heaven and Hamlet refuses to kill him even though in Claudius’ mind he is still committing sin, and is wholly opposed to his true repentance. In this way Claudius is able to delay his downfall.

Claudius displays that he knows that a good king is able to “adapt his mode of procedure to the quality of the times,” (Lawall 25.1958). Claudius knows not to openly punish Hamlet for killing Polonius for it would upset the masses, “convert his gyves to graces; so that my arrows…Would have reverted to my bow again And not where I had aim’d them,” (Shakespeare 4.7.21-3). It is possible that if Claudius had of been the hereditary leader that this would not have been an issue as the people would have be loyal to him instead of the rightful heir, Hamlet. Machiavelli states that it is better to “satisfy the people rather than the soldiers, because the former people can do more than the latter,” (Summary). Claudius is also able to adapt to Hamlet’s return, using Laertes revenge as a way to get rid of Hamlet. Claudius manipulates Laertes to kill Hamlet in a way that will not make either he or Laertes appear to be the villain.

This evil plot follows Machiavelli’s advice of any methods to retain power, however it is in this pact that Claudius meets his end. Claudius chooses Laertes to fulfill his deed, but Laertes is in it for his own interests of revenge for Polonius’ death and not for Claudius’ protection. In this Claudius makes his largest err; Machiavelli warns against choosing a “minister [who] think more of himself than of you, and that he seeks what is useful to him in all actions, someone made that way will never be a good minister, never will you be able to trust him,” (Summary). This choice proves to be mortal to Claudius as it is during this plot that Laertes sells him out upon his death saying “the king, the king’s to blame,” (Shakespeare 5.2.292).  This enrages Hamlet, who then stabs Claudius and forces him to drink the poisonous wine. Claudius should have stayed within Machiavellian guidelines and not chosen a partner who was actually virtuous and seeking justice. Whether or not Hamlet would have finally killed Claudius or not without this direct incentive, spurred on by his just partner Laertes, is unknown.

Claudius suffers the loss of his newly acquired kingdom and his life by the end of the play. It would be evident to Machiavelli that he made many crucial mistakes in his rise to power. He did well to use violence and appear virtuous, adapt to the times and appeal to the masses. These are what brought him to power and allowed him to keep it for the months that followed. His power was not meant to last however as he started out as a new leader without the love of the masses as Hamlet, the rightful heir had. He was frivolous with his expenditures and very foolishly trusted fortune to shine upon him instead of creating his own path by removing both the King and Prince Hamlet. In the end it was his choice in a self-fulfilling just minister to carry out his deed that lead to his demise. Clearly Machiavelli plays an important role in defining Claudius’ ability to gain and maintain rule.