In Shakespeare’s play “Hamlet-The prince of Denmark,” Prince Hamlet is depicted as one of literature’s most intricate and mysterious characters. His greatness and complexity arise from the multitude of facets that define him. Throughout the play, Hamlet displays contradictory characteristics that frequently conflict and ultimately shape his actions.
Hamlet’s inner turmoil is evident in his battle between the desire to seek revenge for his father’s murder and the fear of the eternal consequences that may result from deviating from moral righteousness. This internal conflict is mirrored in the personalities of other characters in the play, highlighting the fragmentation within Hamlet’s own psyche.
In her book ‘Shakespeare after all’, Marjorie Garber explains that Hamlet employs the technique of “splitting” to portray various aspects of a character type. This technique reaches its climax when Hamlet realizes that his rivals and friends are reflections of himself. Therefore, Hamlet’s character shares similarities with his cunning enemy, Claudius, but also embodies the moral integrity of Horatio.
This essay aims to demonstrate that Hamlet has two conflicting sides: one as a ruthless strategist capable of deceit, and the other as a compassionate human opposed to evil acts. Despite possessing the characteristics of a Machiavellian hero, Hamlet’s conscience prevents this aspect of his personality from fully emerging. However, the final act of the play shows a synthesis of these conflicting forces within him.
Niccolo Machiavelli, in his book “Il Principe”, discusses the concept of a virtuous prince and the importance of political shrewdness. He argues that a prince may need to act in ways that go against humanity, depending on the circumstances and changing fortune. Machiavelli suggests that a prince should learn to be cunning in order to avoid traps, while also being intimidating like a lion.
The Machiavellian aspect of Hamlet can be observed in relation to this theory. Hamlet exhibits the traits of a quintessential Machiavellian fox: being cunning, cautious, and deceitful. Regarded as one of the most brilliant literary characters in existence, Hamlet possesses an exceptional sense of judgement, consistently outsmarting his adversaries. His prowess in deception is evident when he chooses to pretend madness and puts on an “antic disposition” to deceive the court and Claudius, making them believe that grief has driven him insane. His exceptional strategic abilities are further exemplified by his orchestration of Claudius’s confession through the staging of “The Mousetrap.” Paying meticulous attention to every detail of the play, he ensures that the actors can outdo King Claudius in order to expose his crime. As Hamlet states, “The play’s the thing, wherein I’ll catch the conscience of the King.” Despite his determination to avenge his father’s murder, Hamlet remains prudent and exercises caution, as described by Machiavelli:
According to Machiavelli, Hamlet should approach his actions with caution and moderation. He should be careful not to become overconfident or excessively suspicious. Instead of blindly following the ghost’s orders to kill Claudius, Hamlet chooses to investigate the truth for himself. He is uncertain whether the ghost is trustworthy or deceitful. Hamlet uses cunning tactics to trap Claudius, but at the same time, he grapples with his conscience. He struggles with the idea of seeking revenge in a calculated and cold manner, as it goes against his compassionate nature. However, Hamlet recognizes Claudius’s true character and views him as a remorseless, treacherous, lecherous villain.
Thus, the constant struggle within the protagonist is the cause of his self-censuring and self-condemnation. Despite knowing about Claudius’s true nature, he calls himself a coward for not avenging his father. Machiavelli describes a true prince as someone who should not be concerned about being criticized for being cruel. According to Machiavelli, a successful prince should not hesitate to use cruelty for self-preservation and to advance their own interests and those of their state.
The ‘Lion’ is a characteristically strong and sudden figure, just like Hamlet’s own inner lion. This lion emerges in the nunnery scene, where Hamlet, pretending to be mad but aware of being watched, mercilessly attacks Ophelia. He accuses her of being a “breeder of sinners” [III. i. 9] and flatly denies ever loving her. In order to continue his facade of madness, he is willing to break Ophelia’s spirit, which contributes to her own descent into insanity.
In the closet scene, Hamlet, who embodies a cold and calculating nature, demonstrates his belief that the ends justify any means. This is evident when he brazenly kills Polonius, an act described by Gertrude as a “rash and bloody deed”. Hamlet, true to the spirit of a Machiavellian hero, shows no remorse for his actions. His final words to Polonius confirm this lack of regret: “Thou wretched, rash, intruding fool, farewell! I mistook you for someone better than you are. Take the consequences of your actions, as you will discover that being too busy can lead to danger” [III. iv. 30-32]. Nevertheless, Hamlet is not entirely dominated by his Machiavellian nature.
Hamlet’s conscience prevents him from avenging himself as he had initially planned. Despite extracting a confession from Claudius, he cannot bring himself to carry out the ruthless act of killing him, contradicting the principles advocated by Machiavelli. In his soliloquy in Act III scene ii, Hamlet expresses his exhilaration at the success of his plan to prove Claudius’s guilt and his determination to fulfill the ghost’s command. He declares, “Now could I drink hot blood, and do such bitter business as the day” [III. ii. 382-383].
Hamlet’s character is depicted as both determined and resolute, embodying the traits of a Lion. However, when presented with the chance to act as a predator by killing Claudius while he prays, Hamlet hesitates. He avoids committing the murder, reasoning that doing so during prayer would send the murderer to heaven. This decision not to act can be attributed to the conflict between Hamlet’s predatory nature and his conscience, which directs him away from premeditated murder.
