The Loyalty in the Characters of Titus Andronicus and Medea

Loyalty in Medea and Titus

Loyalty is a virtue that is valued and rewarded in our everyday lives. Therefore, people prioritize their loyalty to one group over another. In the case of family and state loyalty, prioritizing family loyalty is a firm allegiance to the benefit of the family even if that allegiance comes into conflict with the state, and vice versa. In Titus Andronicus and Medea, the characters choose to prioritize their loyalty to either the family or the state because they believe that the state and family are separate.

However, sometimes the boundaries between two groups are unclear, and in the long run, loyalty to one group benefits the other group. In this case, isn’t loyalty to one group loyalty to the other? Loyalty to either the state or family is complex because they often overlap; as a result, prioritizing family loyalty over state loyalty is paradoxical, as the family often ends up benefitting the state.

Medea illustrates the overlapping of family and state loyalty in which marrying into the state is done for the benefit of the family, portraying how loyalty to the state can mix with loyalty to the family.

Get quality help now

WriterBelle

Verified

Proficient in: Loyalty

4.7 (657)

“ Really polite, and a great writer! Task done as described and better, responded to all my questions promptly too! ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

When Medea discovers that Jason is sleeping with the princess of Corinth, she believes that Jason’s loyalties are with the state and not with the family. However, Jason responds to Medea “As for your scurrilous taunts against my marriage with the royal family, I shall show you that my action was wise, not swayed by passion, and directed towards your interests and my children’s” (Euripedes 33) to show that his loyalty to the state is indeed loyalty to the family. While Jason’s tactics are questionable, his strategy is sound because he acquires the potential to use his powerful connections to benefit his family. Jason shows us that sleeping with the princess in the form of loyalty to the state is loyalty to the family because he can use those powers to benefit his family, so we learn that family and state loyalty often overlap. As the lines between family loyalty and state loyalty are blurred, Titus Andronicus portrays how prioritizing family loyalty benefits the state in which vengeance for the family leads to the benefit of the state’s leadership, which is important because it shows how family loyalty results in unintentional loyalty to the state. When Titus discovers that Tamora’s sons raped his daughter Lavinia, he murders Tamora and her sons. Thus, Titus’ family loyalty is symbolized by his act of revenge for the rape of his daughter Lavinia. This event leads to Saturninus murdering Titus, which results in Lucius murdering Saturninus, and Lucius becomes emperor. This benefits the state because Lucius is more of a fit ruler than Saturninus: Saturninus is a man who is blind to the consequences of his actions as he murders Titus, while Lucius is a man who can go over to the enemy, the Goths, who allow him to become their leader. Loyalty to the family in the form of Titus getting revenge paradoxically ends up benefitting the state by opening the opportunity for a fit leader, Lucius, to become emperor; thus, people should be more aware that loyalty to the family may be loyalty to the state.

While Titus portrays how family loyalty results in benefitting the leadership of the state, Aaron the Moor reveals a similar insight as saving the family results in benefitting the citizenry of the state, which is important because it shows how family loyalty benefits the state. Aaron the Moor is originally loyal to the state as he gets revenge for Tamora by plotting the death and rape of Titus’ children. However, when Aaron is confronted with the death of his baby, he gives up his state loyalty by giving up Tamora’s sons to save his baby. Lucius makes a vow not to murder the baby. In the movie, it states that Aaron’s son would become “a royal citizen.” Aaron prioritizes family loyalty over state loyalty by giving up Tamora and her sons to save his baby who would then become a citizen, so prioritizing family loyalty benefits the state as it is the civic duty of a citizen to contribute to the state. While Aaron’s family loyalty benefits the Roman citizenry, in Titus Andronicus, vengeance for the family results in benefitting the leadership of the state, which shows how family loyalty, in the long run, benefits the state. When Tamora becomes empress, there is a moment when Saturninus is about to punish Titus and his family for betrayal. However, Tamora sets Saturninus aside and whispers “I’ll find a day to massacre them (Titus and his family) all and race their family and their faction” (Shakespeare 22). This shows how Tamora has enough influence to use her powers for the benefit of the state, but she doesn’t because she is more concerned with using her powers for revenge after Titus murdered her son, which makes her an unfit empress. Therefore, Tamora prioritizes family loyalty over state loyalty by focusing on family matters. Tamora’s acts of revenge result in Titus murdering Tamora, and with Tamora gone, this benefits the state because it allows the opportunity for a fit empress to take her place who doesn’t focus her attention on getting personal revenge but rather could use her powers to benefit the state. Paradoxically, Tamora prioritizing family loyalty ends benefitting the state by opening the opportunity for a fit empress to take her place, so people in positions of power should not be leading if they are consumed with emotions like the need for vengeance.

Similar to how Tamora’s family loyalty benefits the leadership of Rome, in Medea, loyalty to the family results in the benefit of the state’s leadership, which shows how family loyalty paradoxically benefits the state. Medea details the murder plot by saying out loud “But in my plot to kill the princess they [the children] must help. … If she takes and puts on this finery, both she and all who touch her will expire in agony” (Euripedes 41). Meanwhile, the Nurse eavesdrops and “listens in silence” (Euripedes 41). The Nurse doesn’t bring the details of Medea’s plot to the state, so the Nurse places family loyalty over state loyalty. As a result, Medea successfully implements her plot, and she kills the princess along with the king. However, the death of Creon, the king of Corinth, benefits the state. A fit ruler must not be tyrannical, or he risks making his people despise him. When Medea asks Creon for an extra day to stay in Corinth, Creon responds “I am no tyrant by heart. My soft heart has often betrayed me, and I know it’s foolish of me now; yet nonetheless, Medea, you shall have what you ask” (Euripedes 27). The “I am no tyrant by heart” is sarcastic; Creon knows he is a tyrant. A fit ruler must also not be gullible, or else he risks making foolish decisions that hurt the state. Creon’s gullible decision results in his death, which allows for a less gullible and less tyrannical leader to take his place. The Nurse’s belief to prioritize family loyalty over state loyalty results in a chain of events that leads to the benefit of the state with the removal of Creon, so loyalty to the family benefits the state as it opens the opportunity for a fit ruler to replace a tyrannical and gullible ruler.

Titus Andronicus and Medea have shown that it is difficult to have loyalty to one group without unintentionally being loyal to another. When the characters prioritize family loyalty over the state, they unintentionally benefit the state in the long run because the boundaries of the state and the family overlap. The Bible reads “no one can serve two masters.” In the case of state and family loyalty, this is true in the short term. In the long run, this is false, as serving the family results in serving the state. As a result, loyalty is often blind. By identifying with one group, we tend to become blind to the consequences of our actions; for example, when the Nazi criminals were tried in court, they used loyalty as an excuse and stated they “were just following orders.” Therefore, people should be more aware of how loyalty to one group can have unintended consequences in the long run.