Abstract The paper looks at Machiavelli's "The Prince" and discusses what was written as a handbook for political leaders. The paper explains Machiavelli's conceptions of political effectiveness, including what makes for a strong or weak leader and examines its continuing relevance today.
From the Paper "Machiavelli's "The Prince" Introduction: Machiavelli's "The Prince" is often regarded as the beginning of political science as we now understand the term. Political theory is much older, at least as old as Plato, but it was static, seeking an ideal of the state based for example on a conception of happiness. Machiavelli introduced a way of thinking about political dynamics, how political leaders can respond to ever-changing circumstances in the real world."
Abstract This paper agrees with Machiavelli's idea that the only distinction between the prince and tyrant is the latter's improper motivation in self-gain. The author uses examples pertaining to World War II such as Churchill and Hitler and to Idi Amin. The paper presents quotations from both "The Prince" and "The Discourses" and commentary on Machiavelli's times and career, which shaped his political thought."
From the Paper "This paper discusses the distinction made between a prince and a tyrant by Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527), a figure often referred to as the father of modern political theory. In his well-known "The Prince" (1513) and the manuscript known as "The Discourses" (1531) which seem to further develop many of the ideas found in "The Prince", Machiavelli made clear the important distinction that he saw. Machiavelli's manner of thinking continues to be visible in the contemporary world, in distinctions that can be made between leaders and ordinary tyrants to have achieved political power."
Abstract In this article, the writer discusses that Machiavelli essentially formulated today's modern concept of the state. The writer examines the elements in Machiavelli's conception of state. The concepts of institutionalized authority and effective monopoly of force exercised through a national military force are discussed in this essay.
From the Paper "What is a state and what does Machiavelli have to tell us about it? In a modern textbook on political science or international relations a definition of a state will often be given. It will usually go something like this: A state is a political unit that controls some region or territory and exercises sovereignty and a monopoly of force over that territory. State also has other meanings in English and so does its ... "
Abstract "This paper claims that "The Education of a Christian Prince" by Erasmus of Rotterdam and "The Prince" by Niccolo Machiavelli provide sharply contrasting views regarding the conduct and purpose of princely rulers. It explains that due to the influence of Christian principles and doctrines, Erasmus took a strongly pacifist view which emphasized that a prince must govern justly and benevolently, while Machiavelli viewed Christianity with contempt and advocated the ruthless pursuit of princely self-interest.
From the Paper "The Education of a Christian Prince by Erasmus of Rotterdam, and The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli provide sharply contrasting views regarding the conduct and purpose of princely rulers. Influenced by Christian principles and doctrine, Erasmus took a strongly pacifist view which emphasized that a prince must govern justly and benevolently, while Machiavelli viewed Christianity with contempt and advocated the ruthless pursuit of princely self-interest. The Education of a Christian Prince was published in the early sixteenth century and was written for the primary benefit of Prince Charles, who later became the Emperor Charles V. Like Machiavelli's The Prince, it became one of the most influential books published during the Renaissance. Both books were widely read by ruling ..."
Abstract This paper looks at Machievelli's "The Prince," and the affect it's mass publication had on the world's impression of European society. The author examines why this work had such an affect, what actually happened, and also looks at the world's fascination with this particular work. The author presents some of the radical ideas presented, including that for the first time, instead of idealizing the prince and his position, Machiavelli looked for what made for effective governance.
From the Paper "To begin with, it would seem necessary that an attempt be made to present a basic definition of what 'idealizing'. The concept of an ideal is contestable to be sure, as there are various definitions of what constitutes an ideal determined depending upon whom the question is being asked. It is also possible though, that people may share the same or similar ideals. The ideal may refer to a maxim, an idea, or the qualities of a leader. When an ideal or idealization is mentioned therefore, it is in reference to the assigning of properties of merit or worth to one of the items mentioned above. In regards to Machiavelli, part of the argument of this paper is that what makes him unique as a political writer is that he does not idealize the role of 'prince' in society. With this very general idea of what an ideal or what idealization is, it is now possible to move on to an examination of what the 'ideal' of the prince was prior to Machiavelli's period."
Abstract In this paper, Machiavelli's "The Prince" and Boccaccio's "Decameron" are compared and contrasted on several different levels. Both works are considered in terms of their historical contexts. Questions of leadership and social change are also analyzed in terms of the authors' works. The paper also compares Machiavelli's philosophy to that of Christine de Pizan. Finally, the author examines both works in terms of their gender roles.
Morality and Virtue in the Society: Social and Political Perspectives from Niccolo Machiavelli and Christine de Pizan
Machiavelli and De Pizan on Gender Role Differences
From the Paper "De Pizan, on the other hand, offered a different way of looking into a political issue, especially if this issue involves an important sector in the society: women. In her discourse, "The Treasure of the City of Ladies," De Pizan contemplated how human society had developed the psyche and perception that females are inherently inferior to males. This issue was borne out of the author's observation how literary and scholarly works portray a common stereotype of women as subversive to men, depicted as uneducated and not able to create decisions for themselves. In the words of Pizan, "learned men" tend depict women through 'wicked insults" about their behavior. This drove her to investigate and know the origin of this perception and wrong portrayal of women in Western societies."
Tags: The Prince, Decameron, Italy, social, change, Enlightenment, Machiavelli, Boccaccio, De, Pizan
Abstract This paper looks at the similarities between Shakespeare's "Henry V" and Machiavelli's "The Prince", and the concept of the perfect king. The two plays are discussed, and the concept that either Shakespeare is drawing his inspiration for his dramatization from Machiavelli or that both Machiavelli and Shakespeare have similar ideas of what the ideal ruler would be.
From the Paper "In Henry V, Shakespeare presents Henry as the ultimate ideal of kingship. The only question is where does this idea of a perfect king come from, and after reading Machiavelli's Prince and Henry V one begins to note similarities. Not the least of which is the passage quoted above, a true Machiavellian manoeuvre. In this passage, the governor of Harfleur, the French city under siege by Henry's troops, has refused entrance to the army of Henry. As Machiavelli says, "it is wiser to have a reputation for meanness which brings reproach without hatred, than to be compelled through seeking a reputation for liberality". Therefore, Henry, following this advice of Machiavelli, does exactly that, and frightens the innocent people of Harfleur into opening their city gates through the sheer grotesqueness of his command. We frequently see these similarities between the actions of Henry, at least through Shakespeare's portrayal, and the recommended actions of a good prince, as documented in Machiavelli's The Prince. Therefore, one might draw the conclusion that either Shakespeare is drawing his inspiration for his dramatisation from Machiavelli or that both Machiavelli and Shakespeare have similar ideas of what the ideal ruler would be."
Abstract This paper analyzes "The Prince" by Nicolo Machiavelli focusing on the how the author addressed the duty of a prince to win the allegiance of his subjects.
An evaluation of some of the principles stated in "The Prince", and their relation to two leaders of the past: Charles V of the Holy Roman Empire, and Adolf Hitler.
7,350 words (approx. 29.4 pages), 17 sources, 2000, $ 162.95
Abstract This detailed paper provides history on Machiavelli, Hitler, and Charles V. Hitler and Charles V are held to five of Machiavelli's core principles, and for each are measured by how Machiavellian their acts were. Further comparisons are drawn between the teachings of Locke and Rousseau. Machiavelli set forth ideas on how a leader should rule, this paper addresses whether or not leaders should follow his advice.
From the Paper "Through the ages, Machiavelli has been remembered in mostly a negative sense. His book, The Prince, has many controversial opinions in it about how a leader should rule, and it has even been called a book inspired by the devil. The Prince is considered by many to be the Bible of realpolitik, a belief that politics is based on practical and material factors rather than on theoretical or ethical objectives. This paper will evaluate some of the principles stated in The Prince, and their relation to two leaders of the past: Charles V of the Holy Roman Empire, and Adolf Hitler. Charles V lived at a time of change, during the pinnacle of the Protestant Reformation. He spent his life trying to deal with this problem, before ultimately reaching a conclusion shortly before his death. Adolf Hitler is perhaps the most well-known ruler in history. He was a German Dictator whose need for power and glory spawned World War II. He is remembered not only for his excellent leadership skills, but also for the atrocities he committed against his fellow man during the Holocaust. By comparing these leaders to the Prince, one can assess to what degree they are Machiavellian. "
Abstract In four of Machiavelli's best known works, "Discourses on Livy", "The Art of War", "The History of Florence", and "The Prince", we can see a clear influence from such Machiavellian contemporizes as Cesare Borgia, Francesco Vettori, the Medici Family, and general public opinion, which should be a cause for caution in relaying on Machiavelli's writings as an accurate discussion of history or an ethical discussion of politics. The author discusses how the ideas that Machiavelli placed on paper over five hundred years ago still have meaning in the 21st Century.
From the paper:
"While Machiavelli's works lack the modern day standards of documentations, he was ahead of his time in historical philosophy and approach. He was the first historian to acknowledge that the need to explain events leading up a specific event to understand why that event occurred and to understand the results of that event. As for is external influences, they need to be taken into consideration, so we can accurately understand his writings, the period in which he was writing, and the periods in which he was writing about. He may contradict himself in his political belief, but considering the pressures that he was under he manages to give a pretty good analysis of events and history. Machiavelli's works has managed to sustain its ideas from the 1500's to the 21st Century and will continue to be a source of knowledge and debate for centuries to come."
Abstract This paper discusses Machiavelli's political outlooks and specifically the roles of chance and necessity in politics. While necessity is paramount in Machiavelli's political ideology, his life and writings are consistently troubled by the presence of the "supernatural" force of "Fortuna". Although in his writings, especially ?The Prince? he attempts to instruct would-be rulers on how to prepare for, accommodate and tame fortune in order to turn it to their advantage, he concedes that the will of the goddess is sometimes unavoidable. However, Machiavelli's works were written during violent times. Times of conflict and instability. His work principally concedes that the world and society is inherently flawed, and he attempts to devise measures and procedures to somewhat remedy the ills that they experienced.Machiavelli received lots of critisicm and stigma because of his profound ideals with with the author agrees.
From the Paper " Almost all commentators on Machiavelli say that his principal innovation, and the essence of this method, was to "divorce politics from ethics". Thereby he broke sharply with the Aristotelian tradition, which had dominated medieval political thought. His method, they grant, freed politics to become more scientific and objective in its study of human behavior; but it was most dangerous because, through it, politics was released from "control" by ethical conceptions of what is right and good."
Abstract Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527) was a Florentine historian and political advisor, who has come to be regarded by many as the first political theorist. The paper shows that although he has written many books and papers, on a wide range of topics, the two publications that contribute most to political science are "The Prince" (1532) and "Discourses on the First Ten Books of Titus Livius" (1519). The paper discusses the fact that for centuries, the apparently inconsistent and contradictory ideas and arguments presented in these two works have created discussion and debate amongst academics and political scientists. However, when both texts are studied and read within the context of time and place, and taking account of Machiavelli's objectives and aims, it can be argued that the theoretical differences are merely the author's attempt to address two different political situations with the same political philosophy.
From the Paper "It is true that, if studied in isolation, the ideas presented by Machiavelli in The Prince and Discourses appear to contradict and oppose one another. However, if examined as a logical progression, or cycle, of a state's development from chaotic corruption and decay, to one of stability and republicanism, then a link can be constructed between both works. When taking account of the context, in which the two books were written, it can be seen that, in Machiavelli's opinion, a strong state with a strong leader is essential before liberty or democracy is possible. Such was his belief in liberty and republicanism that Machiavelli believed, in order to achieve them, the use of unjust, deceptive, and oppressive means were justified. When viewed separately The Prince and Discourses appear as two completely isolated theories, but when viewed as a single work they support the old proverb of "the end justifies the means"."
Tags: Lorenzo, de', Medici, Rennaissance, Italy, Florence, Republic, The, Prince
Questions whether Thomas Hobbes and Niccolo Machiavelli agreed or disagreed on the foundations of good government through their works "Leviathan" and "The Prince".
Abstract The beginning of the paper talks about the foundations of modern political theory and how much of our understanding evolved from the work of these two authors, Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes, two of the earliest political theorists. The paper takes key arguments from both authors through their texts, "Leviathan" by Hobbes and "The Prince" by Machiavelli, on their views of human nature and how best to resolve the issues that arise from each of the works. Both arrive at the conclusion to allow the existence of an absolute monarch because, ultimately, his arbitrary rule benefits us.
From the Paper "The ideas of good government and stability resonate throughout their works, leading us to surmise that both would favor a strong stable government as opposed to a weak or anarchical society. Government exists to protect its citizens from each other, to ensure their survival and prosperity; government regulates men and their interaction and therefore inevitably stabilizes society. Both men differ in their words alone, but the meaning behind those words are the same. Further, these words resonate in political theory today not as they spoke them but as fancy terms such as "Prisoners Dilemma" or "chaos theory", yet their origins come from political theorists long since deceased."
Abstract This paper studies Machiavelli's logic in his work "The Prince". The paper thoroughly reviews the story and analyzes its moral imperative. The paper also attempts to extrapolate lessons that relate to leadership for the general public. The author's aim is to show that "The Prince" can be applied to leaders today to increase the efficacy of their rule. The paper focuses on benefits of preemption, judicious use of force and finding innovative ways to get the people to accept and embrace your rule.
From the Paper "In such a way, Borgia had managed to circumvent the problems of attaining a state through his own force and he thwarted ill fortune by observing the tendencies of the people who lived there. He studied their sentiments and acted in such a way as to use them to his advantage. He sent a cruel and merciless dictator to rule in his stead to clean up the province, then executed him so as to appear to the public to be the benevolent prince. The hard work had been done for him, and he was able to seem like he had nothing to do with their earlier oppression. It was the ideal solution, and in Machiavelli's mind, a great example of using innovative measures with respect to the "people" to avoid the traditional problems associated with the getting and keeping of a state."
Abstract The paper shows that Machiavelli's famous treatise "The Prince" is essentially a how-to manual for those seeking to gain and maintain power. The paper discusses that while he is not without an appreciation of justice and virtue, Machiavelli doesn't give much consideration to the morality of taking power, but to the nuts and bolts that a leader must pay mind to if he is going to be an effective leader. The paper shows that while Machiavelli considers leaders, including tyrants, from the point of view of the leader, both Plato in his "Republic" and Aristotle in "Politics" looked at them more from a sociological point of view. For them, the question was not about the individual but about the society in which leaders would come and go.
From the Paper "For Plato, the Timarchy is produced by children who value themselves just for their honor along with their ability to apply force as necessary. On the other hand, an oligarchy is produced by greedy children who figure to use their force to become wealthy. A democracy, the most heinous of institutions to Plato, is created by those children who think being citizens gives them a right to wealth and power. Tyranny is produced by those controlled by their impulse and the resulting chaos is over only when power is consolidated in the hands of one. For Plato, a tyrant is one who by the use of forces takes whatever he wants and usually what he wants is more power."
