The Prince was written in the 1500’s by Niccolo Machiavelli, whom name became a synonym for crafty plotting. As noted, it is a political and social document, as relevant today as when it first appeared. Machiavelli’s work became thought of as a blueprint for dictators instead of a guide for efficient democratic government. The Prince does not give us all of Machiavelli’s political thinking; however, he devised this reading for the man who seeks power.
It treated the most severe problem of Italy, its inferiority in political organization and military strength to nearby states like Spain and France and was addressed to princes like the Lorenzo “The Magnificent” Medici, to whom it was dedicated. As difficult as it was to read, I did not find it unprincipled because of when it was written and what some of my understanding of Machiavelli’s moral principles were. Actually he only explains tactics to use to maintain power in a kingdom or city state that were realistic for this distinct time period.
Machiavelli’s focus was on principalities because his basic plan was to let people know how principalities could best be governed. There are three types of principalities: hereditary – which passes down through the ruling family; new – which are created through military or civil acquisition; and mixed – which are new territories that are added to an existing territory. There are four ways a new prince can acquire a principality: 1) by one’s own arms; 2) by the arms of others; 3) by evil means; and 4) by civil means. He felt that the principality that is won by his own arms is the most secure.
The hereditary principalities are easier to maintain than new principalities because the hereditary prince does not have to rule much differently than before. They are also easier to control and regain control because the hereditary prince has the advantage of the people’s natural affection for him. New principalities and mixed principalities added to existing ones face difficulties because the residents expect the new ruler to be better than the one before. However, the new ruler has to be wary of those he overthrows and at the same time, please those who brought him to power.
These types of friendships are hard to satisfy because those who helped him come to power expect a lot in return. When a new prince comes to rule over a new principality, he faces the pressure of implementing new ways and ideas of doing things. You see, those who benefit from change are less vocal than those who do not. Therefore, Machiavelli supports the use of force. People like Cyrus, Romulus and Moses maintained power through the use of arms. Machiavelli looked at two ways a prince could attain power – abilities or forced power and good fortune. Francesco Sforza was a prince who rose to power by his abilities.
He was a soldier who rose through the ranks to become Duke of Milan with the help of the Venetians. Machiavelli commends Sforza because he was a great military leader. However, his sons lost the throne because they rejected the life of military discipline. Machiavelli criticizes this because the family’s reliance upon the castle Sforza built kept them insulated from the people, thereby violating one of Machiavelli’s rules: do not be hated by the people. Cesare Borgia, however, inherited power from his father. Borgia had great abilities; however, he lost power because of a bad turn of fortune.
But Machiavelli urged any prince of ambition to imitate the actions of Borgia because his life showed how to utilize one’s abilities to attain success. Machiavelli used many events in which he thought Borgia was a model for all princes. He believed that Borgia would have succeeded in uniting all of Italy if he had not become ill. In the mind of Machiavelli, the belief was that in order for a prince to ultimately succeed, he needs to obtain ability and fortune. Machiavelli states that a prince who comes to power by proper or improper uses of cruelty does not have fortune or ability.
The prince may gain power, but not glory. He gains esteem and glory through his courage. He must have wisdom to choose the least risky venture and act on it courageously and wisdom in picking his advisors. It is extremely important to gain the support of the people because you will need it in times of trouble. It also takes that same courage and wisdom to keep up the morale of his people during those troubled times. That is why a prince needs to relate to his people. He does not have to be loved by the people, but he must not be hated and should always be respected.
However, Machiavelli makes a powerful case that it is better for a leader to be feared than loved. He feels that men respond more strongly to fear than love. Fear is constant, but love of the people can easily change. The prince cannot make people love him, but he has control over his people’s fear of him. Therefore, the course of action that the prince can best control is what he should pursue. In answering the question of whether it is better to be loved than feared, Machiavelli writes, “The answer is, of course, that it would be best to be both loved and feared.
But since the two rarely come together, anyone compelled to choose will find greater security in being feared than in being loved. ” Machiavelli states that in an ideal world, it is honorable for a prince to be good. However, in all actuality, a prince rules best when he does whatever it takes for the benefit of their states, and distance him from ethical concerns. He feels that it is better to be stingy than generous, malicious than loving, devious than honest. His rule was a prince must be willing to resort to any means necessary for the good of the state while being as good as circumstances allow.
It is not important for a prince to have good qualities just that it appears he does. It was presumed that King Ferdinand of Spain was an example of one who swore by faith and peace and did the opposite of both, but that was the way he kept his power and reputation. Machiavelli wrote, “The two most essential foundations for any state, whether it be old or new, or both old and new, are sound laws and sound military forces. ” A prince can either have his own forces or rely on mercenary or auxiliary forces. Mercenaries are useless because they have no devotion.
They are only in it for the money and are not reliable. However, their captains, if capable, should be feared because they seek glory for themselves. Auxiliary forces are just as useless because they fight with their own interests in mind. If they lose, everyone loses, but if they win, the prince is under their favor. For Machiavelli, the main concern of a prince should be warfare: “A prince must have no other objective, no other thought, nor take up any procession but that of war, its methods and its discipline, for that is the only art expected of a ruler. And it is of such great value that it not only keeps hereditary princes in power, but often raises men of lowly condition to that rank. Again, he uses Francesco Sforza as an example. Sforza was a mighty military leader, but his sons rejected the life of the military and therefore lost the throne. Machiavelli believed that a prince should be given to the study of great military men so that he can emulate their successes and avoid their mistakes because he felt that when a prince is hard-working in times of peace, he will be ready in times of difficulty.
Also, a prince must put on the appearance of qualities such as faithfulness, honesty, humanity, compassion and religion – with religion being the most important. Because men judge by appearances, the methods he utilizes will be rendered necessary and even praiseworthy as long as the prince is able to produce results. Machiavelli acknowledges that a prince who honors his word is generally praised by others. But historical experience demonstrates that princes achieve the most success when they are crafty, cunning, and able to trick others. There are two ways of fighting: by law or by force.
Laws come naturally to men, force comes naturally to beasts. In order to succeed, the prince must learn how to fight both with laws and with force—he must become half man and half beast. Here are some points well taken from this: •When conquering a territory, keep the current laws and institutions in place, but eliminate all the family of the defeated prince •When trouble is sensed ahead of time it can be easily taken care of, but if you wait for it to show itself, it may be too late •Whoever is responsible for someone else becoming powerful ruins himself •Men who do you harm either hate you or fear you Build your power through the people •Neglect the art of war and you lose your state There are quite a few more lessons to be learned in this book, and various opinions combined cannot do this book justice.
This reading is full of wisdom and life lessons. I am not that knowledgeable when it comes to the political world, but I am sure that this would be a great guidebook for various leaders and politicians. Many of the things Machiavelli speaks of, you can see repeated or reflected in politics in our world history.
