Renaissance means rebirth. The Renaissance was a time of renewal as well as of chaos in Europe since it was still recovering. More and more ideas of the ideal prince emerged, as there are many different city-states. One of the most noteworthy political philosophers of the sixteenth century was Niccólo Machiavelli whose book, The Prince, a political handbook for rulers, has brought him recognition. It can be seen that his ideas on politics and overall inspiration for the book mainly came from his views of the political problems that were taking place. However, three years later, in 1516, Erasmus wrote The Education of a Christian Prince, a less popular yet conveys another aspect to the genres of the princes. The Education of a Christian Prince …show more content…
Hence, he uses personal pronouns like “you” and “I” as well as phrases like “My reply is.” This makes it seem like The Prince becoming famous was neither Machiavelli’s first priority nor real purpose; he simply wanted to express his knowledge on the western government and gives advice on how to be a strong leader. Also, some of his words sound like he was in grief. For instance, the sentence that says “But as soon as you need help, they turn against you.” It could be that he was disappointed or was betrayed that he decided to put together The Prince. In the book, Machiavelli believes in the idea of having a strong dominant leader, in order to preserve the benefits to the citizens as a group instead of individually. This strategy clearly shows in chapter seventeen where Machiavelli points out that every prince would prefer to be loved than to be feared. However, the two rarely co-existed. If one had to choose, it is not only better to be feared than to be loved but it is also much “safer” looking at it realistically. By safer, it means that you will not have to worry and watch out as much since people will be less likely to conspire against someone they fear than someone they love. Furthermore, Machiavelli thinks that fear works best because you can’t trust people to always be loyal through affection: “In general men are ungrateful, fickle, false, cowardly, …show more content…
Both were prescriptive in the sense they attempt to solve the conflicts of their era by providing advice along with reasons on how a good and strong ruler should act with hopes of a better future. They were descriptive of the historical development. By that, it means that since both pieces are opinionated, good portions of their works must be inspired by the deeper truth of what had happened. Unfortunately, we do not know enough of the authors’ background and what encouraged them to create these pieces. Though the writings come from primary sources, I think they are too inherently limited in their scope in the way that they present only one viewpoint, one clarification of what happened. At the same time, they truly reveal the point of view of the author that could be biased towards something. Some of my unanswered questions were: Was there a significant political situation that prompted Machiavelli to write The Prince? Why did Machiavelli write the book, whom did it concern? What made Erasmus so disgusted by war and violence? Sadly, the texts do not provide additional information on their backgrounds. As for a comparison between the two texts of all that were given, we could take a look at the text Renaissance Humanist Values and the difference between Machiavelli’s ideologies to that of Pico Della Mirandola 's Oration on the Dignity of Man. According to Machiavelli, human nature is
Machiavelli wrote The Prince in 1513, a time when Italy as a whole had yet to be formed; the Italian subcontinent consisted only of loosely connected groups of independent city states with a constantly evolving political battleground. Thus Machiavelli wrote The Prince to convey his idea of a strong, active, and in his own eyes, perfect ruler to the current ruling family, the Medici, as he wished to impress them and become an eventual political attaché for the family. Machiavelli argues that when given a choice it is better to be feared than loved, and bases the majority of his rhetorical argument on logical cause and effect conclusions that are exemplified through his use of anecdotes, and analogy. The excerpt begins at chapter fifteen with Machiavelli stating that he writes the prince in order to “make something useful for whoever understands it” (Machiavelli ch.15), and he expounds upon this simple purpose by devising clear and logical solutions to many of the problems that a ruler may face.
President Obama echo a leadership of both Niccolo Machiavelli "The Qualities of the Prince" and Martin Luther King Jr. "Letter from Birmingham Jail". Machiavelli point of view to become a successful prince was that you must lead your people. He talks about how a prince should appear to his people for authority. There are different types of principles such as war and is it better to be loved or feared.
In addition, Machiavelli didn 't take the traditional route for supporting his argument of advice. He didn 't bother using any ethical or philosophical principles as the base for his advice he was trying to give. Instead, he used his own political program on real-life examples as his foundation to his treatise. Which is probably one of the reasons why "The Prince" got so much negative criticism. Machiavelli is practically stepping out of line by explaining what a prince should or should not do in pursuit of his
In the early sixteenth century there were two people that wrote about political power and the correct way to rule, both of these people would have great influence on their time period as well as future ones. Machiavelli was a secretary who worked for the Medicis, after the Medici family was expelled from the city he would reflect on what he thought of politics and how he thought they should be by writing The Prince, it would become a very famous book even in the present day. His viewpoint on ruling was that a ruler must do whatever they can in order to improve the state no matter what, or in his words “The ends justify the means”(The Prince). Erasmus was a Dutch intellectual and leader of the Christian humanists who wrote a treatise on political
Then for Machiavelli he talks about how a prince should show no fear instead for him to show that he is the one with power. That a prince's people should fear him. Both authors go on to talk on how their people react based on the prince and princesse act. The authors then go on to explain how they should view and run their people. Both authors also reflect the fact that the way their people are going to act towards them is mainly based off of how they treat them.
Machiavelli wrote the Prince as a gift for Lorenzo de’ Medici in 1513. The Prince was written as an attempt to get Lorenzo to hire him. Machiavelli was looking to bring himself back into the good graces of the leadership after having been exiled. The Prince is Machiavelli’s advise to Lorenzo based off observations he made while working as a Fluorine diplomat and examples from history. Throughout The Prince Machiavelli lays out his guidelines for effective leadership using human nature to justify his beliefs as to what an effective leader should look like.
Machiavelli argues the perfect prince will be both feared and loved by his people, and if unable to be both he will make himself feared and not hated. Machiavelli believes it is much safer to be feared than to be loved because people are less likely to offend and stand up against strong characters, also people are less concerned in offending a prince who has made himself loved. Accordingly, Machiavelli believes generosity is harmful to your reputation and the choice between being generous or stingy, merciful or cruel, honest or deceitful, should only be important if it aids the prince in political power. All in all, Machiavelli believes the ruler must be a great deceiver and do what is essential to uphold power over the
Being a prince is not as easy as it may seem. There are good and bad decisions a prince can make. Machiavelli has his own standards on how a prince should behave. According to Machiavelli, a prince could be considered a lion, a fox, or a wolf. The lion is fierce but doesn’t have the smarts, while a fox has the smarts but isn 't fierce.
There are many different views regarding how a prince should rule, but in The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli, he advises Lorenzo de' Medici to rule with absolute power and to take extreme measures when necessary to maintain his power. Machiavelli wrote The Prince in 1513 with the intent of convincing Lorenzo de’ Medici to give him an advising position within the Florentine government. Niccolo Machiavelli was an Italian writer and politician who lived from 1469 to 1527. In the dedication of his book, which was written in 1513, he explains that his writing is the most valuable thing that he has to offer. Through his detailed accounts of history and his ruthless approach to ruling Machiavelli explains why he tends to favor the ancients and has
With this control, they could stage a revolt and displace the prince. The prince, with no control, has no option other than to respond with detrimental actions in an attempt to subdue the hatred and his impending removal. Machiavelli argues that this sequence of events can be avoided entirely by preventing hatred from starting in the first place. If the prince does this, then he controls how the civilians perceive him and he can act in ways to limit their desire to overthrow him.
The Prince and the Discourses, by Machiavelli as a gift to the prince. Because it was the best thing that Niccolo Machiavelli could give to him. He was trying to teach the prince ways to stay in power. Machiavelli even stated it himself “I can consider of this subject, discussing what a principality is, the variety of such states, how they are won, how they are held, and how they are lost” (Machiavelli xxiv). The main focus of his work was with monarchies because he did not care for republics.
The Prince, written by Machiavelli, is a candid outline of how he believes leaders gain and keep power. Machiavelli uses examples of past leaders to determine traits that are necessary to rule successfully. Leaders such as the King of Naples and the Duke of Milan lacked military power, made their subjects hate them, or did not know how to protect themselves from the elite, causing them to lose power. He says that these rulers should blame laziness, not luck, for their failures. By looking at these historical successes and failures, Machiavelli is able to develop his own thoughts on how politics and leaders should be in the future.
In Machiavelli’s book, The Prince, he maintains a harsh perspective on reality. His advice on how to maintain power leaves no room for compassion or generousity. While some may believe that these are qualities of a good person, Machiavelli believes these qualities lead to the downfall of rulers. He acknowledges that, in reality, it is impossible for someone to have qualities of a good person and simultaneously a good ruler. Machiavelli’s realistic outlook causes him to emphasize that it is better to maintain power through fear, rather than compassion.
I. Machiavelli In his famous work the Prince Niccolo Machiavelli exposes what it takes to be a good prince and how only this good price and keep control over his state. There are many different qualities that make a man a good ruler but there are some that are more essential than others. In this work Machiavelli stresses the importance of being a warrior prince, a wise prince, and knowing how to navigate the duality of virtù and vices. Without these attributes there was no way that a prince could hold together their state and their people.