More handpicked essays just for you.
Machiavelli and the prince - analysis
Analyzes prince by niccolo machiavelli
Analyzes prince by niccolo machiavelli
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
A saying for a king to understand is “Furthermore, since each part is ordered to the whole as imperfect to perfect, and since each single man is a part of the perfect community, law necessarily concerns itself particularly with communal happiness” (Aquinas). Kings unfortunately lost power and this caused confusion and ruckus in the part of leadership in the Middle
In Niccolo Machiavelli's book, The Prince (1513), he evaluates on how a prince can be a successful leader. Machiavelli’s purpose of this guidebook was to construct his argument to the rising ruler Giuliano de Medici for when he comes to power in Florence. He adopts a casual but authoritative tone in order to convince the prince that Machiavelli’s evaluation on how to be the best prince, is the right thing for the prince to do without coming off as he knows more than the prince or is trying to intimidate him.. Machiavelli’s reference to previous rulers and whether their tactics failed or succeeded helps to benefit his credibility along with his allusion to historic text. He appeals to our logic by simply stating a prince can only do what is within his power to control, and his use of an analogy furthers his argument.
This statement describes how corrupt and cruel men are, and how these terrible actions are also greatly reflected upon royalty. During the 15th century, royalty believed they were all that mattered which when mixed in with Machiavelli caused a lot of controversy with the people during the Enlightenment. An example of this would be King James I in Document 2 who describes all the good things about the monarchy and how it is the best thing in the world. He calls the monarchy the, “supremest thing on earth,” trying to convince people of how great this form of government
In 1513, Niccolo Machiavelli wrote “The Prince,” telling rulers how they should rule. (Document 1) Many of the ideas in his book are shown in the ways these rulers governed their people. King Louis XIV believed if there were multiple people had power more would take advantage of it (Document 3) which is a major idea from “The Prince,” stating “for love is held by a bond of obligation, which, as men are wicked, is broken whenever personal advantage suggests it.” (Document 1).
In The Prince (1532), Machiavelli lists elements a prince should have. The biggest thing Machiavelli cautions against is breeding hatred. He claims that “[…] a wise prince should establish himself on that which is in his own control and not in that of others; he must endeavor only to avoid hatred” (Machiavelli 82). Hatred will lead to loss of control. If the civilians hate the prince, then they have control over him.
The following three centuries would withstand such an eventful and developmental era, and as a result serve as a major turning point in European history. Many of these conflicts arose pertaining to the concept of central and local power. Throughout the Middle Ages and into the modern world, monarchy prevailed. Rulers, specifically princes, were expected to follow and live up to many high standards. “A successful ruler is indifferent to moral and religious considerations” (apparts pg.
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.
Doré and Botticelli’s respective illustrations to two key cantos, Inferno Canto 34 and Purgatorio Canto 1, were chosen in order to comparatively analyze each respective artists’ interpretation of the same canto and across cantos that contrasted in subject matter. Canto 34 of the Inferno is the monumental ending when Dante finally reaches the bottom of Hell and witnesses Satan, the ultimate figure of evil Dante has devised. After Dante and Virgil descend down the flank of Satan and orient themselves oppositely from Hell, they start to climb up “on that hidden path to return to the bright world” (Inferno 541). Inferno ends and the reader must transfer to Purgatorio, the next cantiche in the series. Canto 1 of Purgatorio is a moment of transition,
Moral pluralism is also known as ethical pluralism or value pluralism. Moral pluralism is the idea that there are several values which may be equally correct and fundamental, and yet in conflict with each other. It also postulates that such incompatible values may be incommensurable, in the sense that there is no objective ordering of them in terms of importance. In this essay, I will argue that Moral Pluralism is incorrect because of the objection that it is not consistent with liberalism. I will first discuss some reasons why Moral Pluralism might be an appealing theory.
He also categorized humanity into two categories. Those who want power, and those who are suspicious of the ones who want power. No matter how expertly a prince may utilize prudence, the people will always be suspicious of the Prince. Suspicious people will never be fully obedient. The Prince never has full control and power over their people.
According to Machiavelli, a prince who keeps his promises is generally praised. But history demonstrates that most success is achieved when princes are crafty, tricky and able to deceive others. A prince can fight or succeed by using law or by using force. The use of law comes naturally to men and the use of force comes naturally to beasts. Hence, to achieve success, the prince must learn to fight with a balance between both law and force.
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.
In chapters six and seven of his book, “The Prince”, Niccolo Machiavelli stated that the difficulty in keeping and maintaining new principalities depends on how the prince acquired them. The principalities can be acquired either by one’s own arms and abilities or by the arms of others and by relying on luck or good fortune. Although the two options will both mitigate different problems and issues, Machiavelli argues that those who rely least on good fortune will come out the strongest. In this chapter, the dependent variable would be the difficulty a prince would experience in acquiring a principality. The independent variable then will be the method in acquiring the principality, whether through ability or good fortune.
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.
Instead a vice like miserliness will enable a prince to properly govern (Machiavelli,
