Introduction
Niccolo Machiavelli’s ‘The
Prince’ is one of the most
arguably books about politics. Machiavelli, once as an assistant Secretary to
the State of the Republic of Florence, witnesses some tricks played by
politicians or rulers, which are satirically written in this book. The
political behaviour of fifteen century is very much re-echoing on our modern
politics today particularly in India. Machiavelli gives advice to those heads
of state on a variety of matters- including advantages and disadvantages,
regarding on how to gain power on a newly annexed state, how to deal with
internal rebellions, how to make alliances and how to maintain a strong
military. “Machiavelli is not seeking in The
Prince to give specific
advice for the present situation, but the book is vibrant, nevertheless, with
the conviction that advice
is needed and that he is the one to give it.”1 Machiavelli’s views regarding
human nature and morality on political spheres are disclosed on this book but
not manifested themselves explicitly. For the good of the State or for
the maintenance of the State or for securing power of the State, the appearance
of virtue is more important than true morality, which may be seen as a
accountability. He gives some specific historical contexts about the
disunity of Italy, hopping that Lorenzo de Medici, to whom the book is
dedicated, can restore Italy’s honor and pride.
The secret principle played by
rulers or politicians in order to secure power and to serve their selfish
interests, not to serve society in general, is disclosed by Machiavelli. But
many critiques say that his advices to princes are devilish and which are
indeed inspired by devil. The
Prince was condemned by the
Pope on its viewpoints. ‘Machiavellian’ is now commonly used to describe the
process of being cunning, ruthless, treachery in the pursuit of power and this
diabolic ‘old nick’ is identified with Machiavelli. The Prince is rather confusing whether
Machiavelli is trying to advice to princes, or to gain favour from the prince
to get back his old office, or to criticize the political scenario both in the
Church and the state, or to disclose the secrecy of politics or to take
revenge. But the conclusion chapter gives us clearer notion of his lofty goal-
unification of Italy, which is the silver thread running throughout the book. Is
Machiavelli really a diabolic as he is often portrayed? Is his ultimate purpose
justified?
I am very interested to know
about Machiavelli’s works particularly ‘The Prince’ which I studied a bit during my
graduation. But most of all I am very curious to know, why is this book - ‘The
Prince’ considered as
inspired by devil? The question of a diabolic figure to Machiavelli, who
ventilates the secrecy of politics and who ironically criticizes the political
system and the politics in the church of that time in Italy, inspires me to
choose this book. The writings of Machiavelli have come across to me as
something pertaining to modern political situation as it was in the sixteen
century, where the appearance of morality or virtue was considered more
important than the true morality. Hence I began to look for some of his
classical works. My primary interest is to study and to analyze critically the
political book - ‘The Prince’.
Biography and the context of the
book
‘The Prince’ is one of the greatest works of
the Italian political writer and philosopher Niccolo Machiavelli. He was born
in 3 May 1469 from the old Florentine nobility. His youth was concurrent with
greatness of Florence under of the guidance of Lorenzo de Medici, whose
grandson he dedicated -‘The Prince’. He
was appointed Secretary and Second Chancellor to the Florentine Republic.
During his fifteen years of office, he traveled far and wide of Europe
witnessing different kinds of governments, eye-witnessed the papal election and
many incredible events. The downfall of Florentine led to unemployed man.
Machiavelli's best known works are Discorsi
Sopra La Prima Deca Di Tito Livio (1531, Discourses on the First Ten Books
of Titus Livius) The
Mandrake (1528) a satirical play
and Il Principe (1532, The Prince. From 1521 to 1525,
Machiavelli was employed as a historiographer. Niccolo Machiavelli died in
Florence on June 21, 1527.
Italy was not a unified
country, when Niccolo Machiavelli wrote The Prince, in the sixteenth century.
There was often foreign invasion took place in Italy. The political situation
was practiced immorally both in the state and the Church, which had great
impact in Machiavelli's life. He, though served for the past fifteen
years as a counselor and diplomat for the former rulers of Florence, was not
happy with the situation. He wrote this book partly to win a favour of the
prince for some personal gain from the book and also reveal the secrecy of
politics.
Summary
Machiavelli describes the different types of states, arguing that all states
are either republic or principalities. The principality can be divided into two
namely – new principalities which are either completely new or new appendages
to existing states. A prince can acquire new principalities by fortune or
ability. Machiavelli leaves out any discussion of republic, “since he discussed
them at length on another accession.”2. Machiavelli comprehensively
describes maintaining a new composite principality is more difficult than maintaining
a hereditary state due to familiarity with the prince and love for the ruling
family. In a new principality, people have great hope that a new ruler would be
better than the old one. If a new prince is not able to fulfill people’s
expectation of improvement, they may take up arms against him. “Upon this, one
has to remark that men ought either to be well treated or crush, because they
can avenge themselves of lighter injuries of more serious ones they cannot;
therefore the injury that is to be done to a man ought to be of such a kind
that one does not stand in fear of revenge.”3 A prince must keep control of his
subjects and protect from any foreign invasion. The prince must always act to
solve problems before problems fully manifest themselves. To solve any problem
a prince must be prowess in every field.
There are two ways to govern
principality. This first is a prince and appointed ministers who help in
governing the state. The second way is a prince and his hereditary
nobles, who have subjects of their own. The former is better, since he is the
only ruler in the country, though it is hard to maintain control of that.
It is easier to conquer a country ruled by the nobles than by a man because the
corrupted nobles will corrupt his subjects and it is no possible to kill all
the nobles. Their hatred, revenge etc. will ever remain through. Studying the
history, a prince uses ministers maintaining power in a long run.
A
prince must have a lofty goal and learn from the ruler s of the past. Rulers
who rely on prowess instead of fortune are generally more forceful in holding
power over states because they a prince who foresees with his ability can
overcome difficulties. “That is why all armed prophets have conquered and
unarmed prophets have come to grief. Besides what I have said already, the
populace is by nature fickle; it is easy to persuade them of something, but
difficult to confirm them in that persuasion. Therefore one should rightly
arrange matters so that when they no longer believe they can be made to believe
by force.”4 A prince, who comes to power by
criminal acts and wishes to be successful, must only use cruelty in the first
sense like Agathocles and them laying a string foundation like Cesare Borgia.
In this way, his subjects will eventually forget the violence and cruelty and
thus he wins dominion but not glory. A prince can rule directly or through
magistrates, but usually a diplomatic prince rules directly. Some cruelty is
necessary. The prince should always aim to keep a strong army to maintain
defense and fortification from every attack. To do so, he must convince the
people that the hardships are only temporary and thus creating feelings of
patriotism for the states’ defense. “The nature of man is such that
people consider themselves put under an obligation as much by the benefits they
confer as by those they receive.”5
The principalities,
Machiavelli says satirically that, where the Church is governing, require
either unusual good fortune or prowess. The rulers of these states are
much safer because no one is there to overthrow their authority in favour of one
another. “So these principalities alone care secure and happy. But as they are
sustained by higher powers which the human mind cannot comprehend… They are
exalted and maintained by God.”6 Machiavelli
invites us to look at how the Church has obtained her great temporal power by
different popes by using force of arms and other means. “The
main foundation of every state, new state as well as ancient or composite ones,
are good laws and good arms; and because you cannot have good laws without good
arms, and where there are good arms, good laws inevitably flow, I shall
not discuss laws but give my attention to arms.”7
The easiest way to lose a state is by neglecting the art of war, geography,
history and the action of great leaders and he must prepare rigorously during
peacetime for war time. “A prince, therefore, should have no other objective or
thought, nor acquire skill in anything, except war, its organization, and its
discipline. The art of war is all that is expected of a ruler; and it is so
useful that besides enabling hereditary princes to maintain that rule it
frequently enables ordinary citizens to become rulers.”8
A prince, who is crafty, cunning
and able to treat others, is usually successful. There are two ways of
fighting- by law and by force. A prince must be a master of deception.
Men love virtue, but so long as a prince appears to act virtuously, men will
believe in his virtue. Moreover men judge by appearance and results. He should
worry about two things- internal revolt from his subjects and external threats
from foreign powers. Having a strong army and good allies with other states can
solve this problem. He must build a good relation with the rank of the
military. For internal issues he must subtly divide the opposition. People will
admire if you institutionalize a public grand display of reward and punishment
of deeds of the citizens.
The relation of ministers is a
critical task. Wise and loyal ministers contribute to the image of a wise
prince. He must have an ability to understand things and build a confident
relationship with them. He must avoid flattering ministers who lay their eggs
of conspiracy in the blanket of opposition. He must seek advice but take
decision by self. The bad luck has fallen on Italy.
To succeed, Lorenzo must create a national army. A prince best defense is his
own courage. If he succeeds to bring unity he would receive unending
glory. “Nor can one express the love with which he would be received in
all those scourging, with what thirst for revenge, with what stubborn faith,
with what devotion, with what teas. What door would be closed to him? Who would
refuse obedience to him? What envy would hinder him? What Italian could refuse
him homage? To all of this barbarous dominion sinks.” 9
Critical analysis:
The Prince is filled with the renaissance
spirit and ideas. Machiavelli seems trying to separate - Philosophy from
Politics, Ethic from Politics, and Religion from Politics. The earlier
philosophers studied all of them as one discipline- philosophy. The prince is a book on direct response to
the disunity and decay of the Florentine governmental system caused by foreign
domination. Using The Prince as a manual, Machiavelli instructs
Medici on how to acquire and maintain power and for a necessity to reunite
Italy. Yet it is rather confusing, whether Machiavelli tries to give advice to
princes, or to disclose the secrecy of politics, or to win favor from the
prince to regain is old office, or to criticize the political scenario both in
the state and the Church, or to separate politics from others disciplines. He
loves the state more than the republic yet his “dismissed from office when the
Medici returned, he was a lost man, continuing to follow political affairs at
large with fascinated attention, continually denied the chance to participate
in them himself. His loss was gain: he poured out his resentment in his books
and the advice he was lunging to give the politicians went down on paper.”10 When Medici did not give him the
office, he wrote a letter to Luigi Guicciardini- “It no longer charms me to
read of the ancient world, nor to discuss the contemporary one … If you want to
write anything about your love, do so, and discuss other things with those who
value them more, and understand them better, because they have brought me
nothing but loss.”11 He
says that he has not joy of study history not present state. He loses his faith
mankind as a whole saying “I have not one of those who fill their friends with
vain hopes.” 12
The Prince reflects Machiavelli's fifteen
years of experience in the chancery service of the Florentine Government.
During his office times are the years of war or of an uneasy peace that is
scarcely distinct form war. He has seen and experienced the immoral
practices in politics. “Machiavelli does not simply endorse the use of bad
faith in care of necessity– the lie that diverts the killer from his victim –
but as a natural part of statecraft.”13 He has witnessed on succession of
many princes and even the election of papacy which has lots of malpractices –
immorality. He thus ironically praises the Church. There is no doubt that there
are some malpractices in the Church’s politics too. Beside that he probably
wants to separate politics fromthe Church as he wants to separate politics from
philosophy can be seen, which the spirit of Renaissance is.
Machiavelli says in politics real
morality will not work but the appearance of morality. Besides that, he
gives different ways and means to acquire power and position in the state
politics. Due to this devilish way of advice to princes and notion on men,
Machiavelli is criticized to the extreme that his name becomes a synonym of
evil. But if you examine carefully, Machiavelli is not really advice a prince
but revealing the secrecy of politics. Rulers of that time or even rulers of
today practice different ways of malpractices to acquire power and
reputation. He, being witnessed and experienced during his office
time on how politicians procure political power through immoral conduct, says
about the very nature of politics and its behaviour. Machiavelli says that it
is men nature that they are ungrateful, fickle, deceptive, etc. Here
Machiavelli is talking about the nature of politicians but not to general human
nature. Looking at our modern political scenario, the present politicians
follow the advice of Machiavelli. The sixteen century politics of Italy
re-echoes in the present political scenario. Machiavelli presents the
political reality as it was at that time in Italy; above all, being experienced
in this matter, he knows in and out about politics, and thus he discloses the
secrecy of politics.
Machiavelli has got great concern
for the unification of Italy. To strengthen and to bring unification, Italy
needs a strong national army. He, therefore, advices a prince that he
(prince) must not have other objective, no other thought, nor to take up any
profession, but of war, its method and its discipline, which are the only art
expected of a ruler. Machiavelli concerns for the state is a national army for,
“it is unreasonable to expect that an armed man should obey one who is unarmed,
or that an unarmed man should remained safe and secure when his servants are
armed,”14 He has seen
that the invasion has transformed Florence from a first-rate Italian power into
a second-rate power under the domination of Spain.
We must read The Prince without having any prejudice
before reading. This book declares that a republic is the ideal form of
government, not a state governed by the authority of a prince. And yet,
we must note that Machiavelli never says anywhere in The Prince that he likes the notion of government
by princes. He merely states that if a country is going to be governed by
a prince, particularly a new prince, he has some advice as to how that prince
should rule if he wishes to be great and powerful. In other words,
Machiavelli’s book is absolutely practical and not at all idealistic.
Leaving aside what government is the best in an ideal world, Machiavelli seems
to try to imagine how such a ruler might achieve success. This book after all
is dedicated to Lorenzo to help him be the best prince he can be. The Prince
has a very practical and very specific goal in mind- Unification of Italy.
Conclusion
The prince is full of historical references, yet
the final chapters place the book give a lofty dreams of Machiavelli to unify
Italy. And it is rather a satirical one describing the nature of political
situation of that time. We have got a similar situation in our modern political
spheres particularly in India. “Machiavelli was not seeking in The Prince to give specific advice for the
present situation, but the book is vibrant, nevertheless, with the conviction that advice is needed and that
he is the one to give it.”15 Machiavelli
is glaringly conscious of the weakness and shame of Italy during those years of
division between Italians and foreigners. He does not blame on rulers about her
fall. He says that a prince must learn from history to bring unification of
Italy. And so the sole purpose of writing this book, The Prince, is for the unification of Italy.
This idea of unification can be seen throughout the novel. Moreover,
the final chapters give us some insight into the mind of the author and his
motives for writing the book. They suggest that Machiavelli is not diabolic as
he is often portrayed.
Bibliography
Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince, tran. George Bull. New York, Penguin
Books, 1961.
Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince, tran. W.K. Marriott London, J.M Dent
and Sons Ltd, 1964.
Desbruslais,
Cyril. A Survey of the History of
Western Philosophy – Ancient, Medival, And Modern Periods, Jnana-Deepa Vidyapeeth, Pune, 1979.
Hale, J. R. Machiavelli and Renaissance Italy. Harmondsworth: A Pelican book,
1972.
No comments:
Post a Comment