The Prince
From Free net encyclopedia
Il Principe (The Prince) is a political treatise by the Florentine writer Niccolò Machiavelli, originally called "De Principatibus" (About Principalities). It was written around 1513, but not published until 1532, five years after Machiavelli's death. The treatise is not actually representative of his published work during his lifetime, but it is certainly the best remembered one, and which caused such terms as "Machiavellian intelligence" to be coined later.
The Book
Short Summary
...The views expressed within The Prince may seem extreme; however, the text was written during a period of continuous conflict in Florence. Accordingly, Machiavelli's views were such that stability was paramount and the only government he believed could achieve this was a tyrannical one.
The views expressed in The Prince are often venerated as the methods an aspiring prince can use to gain power, and/or an existing prince can use to establish and maintain his reign. According to Machiavelli, moral principles must yield entirely to each unique circumstance’s requisites. Therefore, it is imperative that the Prince be willing to do anything necessary to maintain power; however, Machiavelli asserts strongly that above all, the Prince must not be hated.
The opening discourse of The Prince defines effective methods of governing in several types of principalities (for example, newly acquired vs. hereditary). Machiavelli tells the reader, assumed to be a member of the Florentine aristocracy, of the best ways to acquire, maintain, and protect a state. The methods described therein preach war and ruthlessness.
Next, Machiavelli explains the qualities the ideal prince should possess, modeled after Cesare Borgia. These are still cited in modern texts on leadership. The traits of an effective political leader are presented as:
- a willingness to imitate the behavior of great men, e.g. those of Ancient Rome in particular, the book being written in the Renaissance
- the ability to illustrate how government is necessary to the well-being of the populace, e.g. perhaps by demonstrating the consequences of yielding to mob rule by temporarily relaxing one's grip
- a dedication to the art of war — if only for the state's actual survival
- an understanding that apparent cruelties and vice may be essential to maintaining stability and power
- prudence with respect to disbursement of one's own wealth
- making efforts to appear religious to sway the "vulgar." Machiavelli extols King Ferdinand of Spain for using the cloak of religion to invade Italy numerous times — he praises the tactic yet hates the invasion of Italy by other monarchs.
- the wisdom to seek advice and counsel only when it is needed
It seems that Machiavelli disregards the connection between ethics and politics, which disturbed many of his contemporaries. However, Machiavelli actually departs from the classical conception of virtue in altering the connection between ethics and politics by altering the conception of virtue for a prince. The prince should endeavor to be seen as compassionate, trustworthy, sympathetic, honest, and religious. But in reality, the duties of the Prince very rarely allow him to actually be compassionate, etc.
The last few chapters are concerned with the state of Italy at the time of writing (including "an exhortation to liberate Italy from the barbarians").
Reader's Guide
Introduction/Context
Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Prince is widely regarded as the most influential book on Politics ever written. Its observations on the human condition are as relevant today as they were five hundred years ago. In his book Machiavelli writes to gain the favor of the ruling Medici Family by offering advice on how might a prince gain power and how to keep that power. Although the modern connotation of a prince is a majestic man, who is destined to rule his people and is loved by all, the princes of Machiavelli’s time were by no means this romantic and were constantly engaged in wars and struggling to maintain power over their claims. The methods described by Machiavelli in The Prince can still be applied for use today as much as they could during its writing. However, certain principles should be taken into consideration for application in contemporary life, as the advice Machiavelli is offering throughout his book is intended only to serve the selfish interests of the prince and not the needs of the people.
Author's Biography
Born in Florence, Italy on May 3, 1469 to an influential family, Niccolo Machiavelli received a quality, classical education, typical of the humanist traditions of Renaissance Italy. Throughout most of Machiavelli’s life, the Medici family was the ruling class of Italy. However, when the Medici family briefly lost influence in 1498, Machiavelli was appointed a position in the new Florentine Republic. In his new position, Machiavelli was given access to the major political and military leaders of Europe and traveled extensively observing the inner-workings of foreign affairs first hand. He also became close friends with Cesare Borgia of the powerful Borgia family, in which he alludes to countless times throughout The Prince. However, in 1512 the Medici family regained power in Florence and Machiavelli was exiled. He retired to the Florentine hinterlands where he authored many works, including: On the Art of War, History of Florence, Discourses on Livy and The Prince.
The Florentine Republic was restored, but Machiavelli was not appointed to his old position because many believed he had too many ties to the Medici Family. Machiavelli later died that same year, 1527. The Prince was published in 1532, five years after his death.
Principalities (Monarchies)
To start, Machiavelli asserts that all states and dominions that have existed and have ever held power over men are either Principalities or Republics. Machiavelli will concentrate only on the principality in The Prince while discussing the republic in one of his other works, Discourses. Of principalities, Machiavelli asserts that all are either hereditary, new or mixed.
Hereditary Principalities
A principality is a monarchial state acquired by either fortune or virtue, whose monarch is a prince. Of the three principalities, the hereditary principality is inherited from past generations through family succession and is easiest of the two principalities to maintain. In a hereditary principality the people are automatically loyal to the prince, because he is of an ancient lineage and has the loyalty of the people instilled into his family name, therefore the people have a natural affection for him. Therefore, if outsiders disturb the throne, power is easily regained because the people have history and loyalty instilled in the former ruling family.
New and Mixed Principalities
New principalities are created through military or civil acquisition. Mixed principalities are new territories that are added to an existing territory. Machiavelli identifies four ways in which a prince may acquire a new principality: by one’s own arms, by the arms of others, by evil means and by civil means. Machiavelli also identifies the ecclesiastical principality as a special case with the pope acting as the prince.
New principalities are more difficult to establish than those of hereditary principalities. When men adopt a completely new ruler they have expectations of better fortune and when the new prince does not meet those unrealistic expectations, hostilities usually ensue. In addition, a new prince is at the mercy of the people, and as Machiavelli states, “No matter how powerful ones armies, in order to enter a country one needs the goodwill of the people” (9).
Newly acquired territories – if have similar customs and languages – are easily established and maintained, in relation to territories with dissimilar languages and customs. All one must to do establish power in a newly acquired territory is to execute all living members of the ruling family and maintain the status quo, specifically the territory’s laws and taxes. After these measures have been taken, newly acquired territories may rapidly assimilate into a prince’s others. In summary, the new prince must not change neither the laws nor the customs of the new appendage state, then as Machiavelli states, “men will live quietly”.
When in the acquisition of foreign territories with dissimilar customs and languages a prince must have both fortune and ability. For in the acquisition of an appendage state of various customs and languages dissimilar from yours “many difficulties arise”. The best strategy in this situation is for the prince to physically reside in the new territory, so that he can quickly put down rebellions and can instill loyalty and fear into his subjects. In addition, a foreign prince would be less inclined to attack a territory when its prince is present. The next best alternative is to establish settlements in the new appendage state. Settlements are cheap and leave the inhabitants of the territory relatively undisturbed, while still asserting a prince’s presence in the territory. However, the worst alternative is to occupy the new territory with troops, which are expensive and causes everybody to suffer.
Importantly, a prince settling a new territory with dissimilar customs and languages must be aware of his surroundings, particularly the relative neighbors in the region. Machiavelli argues that a virtuous prince must protect and ally his weaker neighbors and weaken the stronger. In addition, at all cost, he most not allow a foreign power of equal strength enter into his surrounding territories.
Machiavelli cites the failure of King Louis XII of France in conquering Italy as an example to illustrate the importance of these principles. Machiavelli suggests King Louis made several mistakes:
1. Removed the weaker forces that originally sided with him
2. Strengthened the powerful (The Church)
3. Brought in a strong foreigner (Spain)
4. Did not reside in Italy
5. Did not establish settlements
Machiavelli concludes with a general rule:
- He who causes another to become powerful ruins himself.
It should now be clear that all new principalities, at first, are difficult to control. In his next argument, Machiavelli identifies two ways of governing a principality. One of these ways is the absolute rule over the territory with the help of appointed servants, which was established in Turkey at the time. The other way is for a prince to rule along with barons who have acquired their positions through succession and have their own loyal subjects, which was the case in France at the time. Of the two, Machiavelli states, that The Kingdom of the Turks would be the hardest to conquer, but the easiest in which to maintain. While, in the French case, infiltration would be unproblematic, however controling any influence would be difficult (because of the lack of absolute power). This brings Machiavelli to his next point; there are three ways of keeping a principality that is accustomed to living under its own laws: destroy it, reside in it or collect tribute from it. However, the only sure way is to destroy it because there is always a chance that its inhabitants will rebel in the name of freedom, which once tasted is never forgotten. Thus, a territory that is used to having a ruler will be easier to control than a more liberal territory, such as a republic.
New principalities acquired by prowess or fortune
For men who have become princes by means of their ability (prowess), the hardest difficulty is the acquisition of their territory. Once rule is established a prince’s prudent ability is all he needs for effective rule. A new prince might be tempted to set up new and innovative methods of government; however, Machiavelli warns that in that case, a prince will encounter many enemies who oppose the change and on the other hand, supporters pervasive. Because – according to Machiavelli – generally, people do not take well to change. Therefore, as Machiavelli deduces, the only effective means of establishing rule is by force:
- Force is the most effective and efficient means to do something and the virtuous prince will employ its leverage.
Machiavelli cites as an example Girolama Savaronola, the Dominican friar who held power over Florence with his prophetic sermons, but lost control because he was unarmed when his message was no longer welcomed. Machiavelli observes, "From this it follows that all armed prophets have succeeded and all unarmed ones have failed; for in addition to what has already been said, people are by nature changeable." He notes that princes such as Moses, Cyrus, Romulus, and Theseus could not have succeeded without taking up arms. Hiero of Syracuse is a modern example of a private citizen who used his abilities to rise to power. Although he had to work hard to establish power, once in control, his abilities allowed him to easily maintain it. Regarding men who have become princes due to fortune and put forth no effort, Machiavelli asserts, will effort face endless efforts in maintaining their power. With no loyal army or ancient institutions to stand on, a prince of a new state relying solely on fortune has little chance of survival.
New principalities acquired by evil means
In establishing a new principality by evil means such as crime, a prince may win power but never glory. The road to power by means of crime is very rigorous and dangerous, and when power is established, the people are adverse and there is nobody to trust. Regarding the subject of cruelty, Machiavelli argues that proper cruelty is done early and quickly, so that the deed accomplishes the desired goal without making the citizens feel constantly threatened. Improper cruelty is one that is repetitious, which makes the citizens always wary of danger. As a general rule, harm should be inflicted all at once while benefits should be given little by little. Both harm and benefits should not serve as quick solutions for desperate circumstances:
- Benefits must be conferred gradually so they are appreciated more thoroughly and harm should be inflicted all at once. Both harm and benefits should not serve as quick solutions to problems.
New Principalities acquired by popular support
Another means for a private citizen to become a prince, Machiavelli denounces, is by the popular support of either the common people or the nobles. From the conflicting desires of the people (not to be oppressed) and the nobles (wanting to oppress), comes three possible forms of government: monarchy, democracy and anarchy. A civil principality is born when nobles appoint one from their ranks to rule over the people, or when the people select one of their own to protect themselves against the nobles. He who comes to power through the nobles is less secure than one who comes to power through the people because the nobles will consider themselves equal to the new prince, while the people seek only to be protected from oppression by the prince. A prince must group nobles according to whether they support him or not. In dealing with nobles who are not supportive, the prince should judge whether it is because of their inherent lack of strong character, or because they are ambitious and care more about their own interests. Those of the former character, especially the competent, can be used because they are not a threat. Nevertheless, the ambitious and cunning nobles should be looked upon as enemies to be carefully watched. Whether a prince comes to power through the people or the nobles, he must win the support of his subjects, which is easily accomplished by not doing them harm. Machiavelli stresses the importance of keeping the good will of the people, because they are crucial in times of trouble. He qualifies this statement by saying that a prince should not expect the people to rescue him out of trouble. If a prince is a man of courage and ability, the people will inevitably stand behind him even in times of adversity. A prince must therefore, be closely associated with his subjects and he must not rely too heavily on his advisors to lead, lest the subjects will become too dependent on the advisors, rather than on the prince.
Ecclesiastical Principalities
A special exception among principalities is the Ecclesiastical Principality. Machiavelli states that among the princes, the ecclesiastical prince is the only one who, once in power, does not have to defend his power because it is rooted deep in ancient traditions of religion.
Defense and Military
In having discussed the various types of principalities, Machiavelli turns to the ways a state can attack other territories or defend itself. The two most essential foundations for any state, whether old or new, are sound laws and strong military forces. A self-sufficient prince is one who can meet any enemy on the battlefield. However, a prince that relies solely on fortifications or on the help of others and stands on the defensive is not. If a prince cannot raise a formidable army and must rely on defense, he must fortify his city. A well-fortified city is not a likely target for attack and if it is, most armies cannot endure an extended siege. However, during a siege a virtuous prince will keep the morale of his subjects high, while removing all dissenters. Therefore, as long as the city is properly defended and has enough supplies a wise prince can withstand any siege. The main concern for a prince should be war, or the preparation thereof. It is through war a hereditary prince maintains his power and a private citizen rises to power. Machiavelli advises that a prince must frequently hunt in order to keep the body fit and allow the prince to learn the immediate landscape surrounding his kingdom. Through this, he can best learn how to protect his territory and how to advance upon others similar. Likewise, for intellectual strength, it is advised that a prince be given to the study of great military men so that he may imitate their successes and avoid their mistakes. A prince that is diligent in times of peace will be ready in times of adversity. Machiavelli writes, “thus, when fortune turns against him he will be prepared to resist it.”
Mercenary forces are troops that are hired to fight for a wage. Machiavelli takes a strong stance against the use of mercenary forces. He believes mercenary forces are useless to a ruler because they are undisciplined, cowardly, and without any loyalty. Their only motivation to fight is for money. Machiavelli attributes Italy's demise to the use of mercenary armies.
Auxiliary forces are troops that are borrowed from an ally. Machiavelli warns against using such forces because if they win, the employer is under their favor and if they lose, the employer is ruined. Auxiliary forces are more dangerous than mercenary forces because they are united and controlled by capable leaders who may turn against their employers.
Reputation of a Prince
Concerning the behavior of a prince toward his subjects, Machiavelli writes: "Many men have imagined republics and principalities that never really existed at all. Yet the way men live is so far removed from the way they ought to live that anyone who abandons what is for what should be pursues his downfall rather than his preservation; for a man who strives after goodness in all his acts is sure to come to ruin, since there are so many men who are not good." Since there are many possible qualities that a prince can be said to possess, he must not be overly concerned about having all the good ones. Although a bad reputation should be avoided, this is not crucial in maintaining power. The only ethic that matters is one that is beneficial to the prince in dealing with the concerns of his state.
Generosity vs. Parsimony
If a prince is overly generous to his subjects, Machiavelli asserts they will lose appreciation and will only greed for more. Additionally, being over-generous is not economical, because eventually all resources will be exhausted which results in higher taxes and will bring grief upon the prince. Then, if you decide to discontinue or limit your generosity, you will be labeled as a miser. Thus, Machiavelli summarizes that guarding against the people’s hatred is more important then building up a reputation for generosity. A wise prince should be willing to be reputed a miser than be hated for trying to be too generous.
Cruelty vs. Mercy
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.” As Machiavelli asserts, commitments made in peace are not always kept in adversity, however commitments made in fear are kept out of fear. However, a prince must ensure that he is not feared to the point of hatred, which is very possible. Above all, Machiavelli argues, do not interfere with the property of the subjects, their women or the life of somebody without proper justification. Regarding the troops of the prince, fear is absolutely necessary to keep a large garrison united and a prince should not mind the thought of cruelty in that regard. For a prince who leads his own army, it is imperative for him to observe cruelty because that is the only way he can command his soldiers' absolute respect. Machiavelli compares two great military leaders: Hannibal and Scipio. Although Hannibal's army consisted of men of various races, they were never rebellious because they feared their leader. Scipio's men, on the other hand, were known for their mutiny and dissension.
Honesty
History shows that leaders who practiced deceit almost always overcame those that lived by their word. Therefore, in accordance a prudent prince must not honor his word when it places him at disadvantage. A prince should appear to be compassionate, faithful, guileless and devout at all times. In conclusion Machiavelli summarizes, “A prince should not deviate from what is good, if that is possible, but he should know how to do evil, if that is necessary.”
Avoiding Contempt and Hatred
Machiavelli observes that most men are content as long as they are not deprived of their property and women. A prince should command respect through his conduct, because a prince that is highly respected by his people is unlikely to face internal struggles. Additionally, a prince who does not raise the contempt of the nobles and keeps the people satisfied, Machiavelli assures should have no fear of conspirators.
Gaining Honor
A prince earns honor by completing great feats. King Ferdinand of Spain is cited by Machiavelli as an example of a lowly monarch who gained esteem by showing his ability through great feats and in the name of religion, he conquered many territories and kept his subjects occupied so that they had no chance to rebel. Regarding two warring states, Machiavelli asserts it is always wiser to choose a side, rather than to be neutral. Machiavelli then provides the following reasons why:
- If your allies win, you benefit whether or not you have more power than they have.
- If you are more powerful, then your allies are under your command; if you allies are stronger, they will always feel a certain obligation to you for your help.
- If your side loses, you still have an ally in the loser.
Machiavelli also notes, that it is wise for a prince not to ally with a stronger force unless compelled to do so. In conclusion, the most important virtue is having the wisdom to discern what ventures will come with the most reward and then pursuing it courageously.
Nobles and Staff
The selection of quality servants is reflected directly upon the prince’s intelligence, so if they are loyal the prince is considered wise; however, when they are otherwise, the prince is open to adverse criticism. As Machiavelli states, “A prince must have the discernment to recognize the good or bad in what another says or does even though he has no acumen himself".
Avoiding Flatterers
A prudent prince should have a select group of wise counselors to advise him truthfully on matters only that he inquires of. All other opinions and suggestions from them should be ignored. Ultimately, the decision should be made by the prince and carried out absolutely. If a prince is given to changing his mind, his reputation will suffer. A prince must have the wisdom to recognize good advice from bad. Machiavelli gives an example of Emperor Maximilian II, who never consulted with others what he planned to do, and when confronted by his counselors of his plans, would change his mind so that no one knew one day what he would do the next.
Fortune
Machiavelli argues that fortune is only the judge of half our actions and we have control over the other half. He compares fortune to a torrential river that cannot be easily controlled during flooding season. In periods of calm, however, people can erect dams and levees in order to minimize its impact. Fortune seems to strike at the places where no resistance is offered, as is the case in Italy. Additionally, a prince’s rule must be suited and adjusted for the times. A prince should imitate the actions of great men before him but only to a certain extent, then mimic them and adjust certain respectively.
Reaction
Machiavelli's name and the term Machiavellian have long been used as terms of reproach, due largely to incomplete understanding of his method. But there is no division among the critics as to the precision of his thought and the clarity of his style. He is certainly credited with founding a school of thought in Europe that in Asia had stretched back to Sun Tzu and Confucius, the latter emphasizing in particular the value of emulation in forming habits.
Machiavelli, hoping for employment, dedicated The Prince to Lorenzo di Piero de' Medici (grandson of Lorenzo de' Medici). The Prince did not earn Machiavelli a position of power. The book was always listed on the Catholic Church's index librorum prohibitorum (list of prohibited books), in part because it challenged the earlier Christian political theories of Aquinas and Augustine, to which the Church had long been dedicated.
Machiavelli's views on the ideal qualities of a Prince were a particularly controversial, and a particularly modern and relevant, section of the work. Later political philosophy would echo these themes over and over again, especially in the 20th century when his views were more or less standard:
Bernard Crick for instance listed "prudence" as one of his political virtues. Jane Jacobs in her analysis of the moral syndrome of "guardianship" included ostentatious displays of power on the part of the ruler that seem to evoke Machiavelli's "apparent cruelties and vice", in particular the flaunting of wealth as a demonstration of power. Nick Humphrey coined the term "machiavellian intelligence" to describe these traits operating in a smaller, "everyday politics" context, such as a business or family. Rushworth Kidder characterized ethics as a more politics-like tradeoff of multiple rights that could not all be upheld at once. The theory of realpolitik is largely based on a foundation Machiavelli laid.
It is perhaps more reasonable to ask which 20th century theories are not ultimately "Machiavellian" in their assumptions. Those of polity and political economy in particular seem to owe a particular debt to this Renaissance work. The moral justification of colonization of the Americas in the 16th century may also be due in part to his work, although certainly many colonists' and empire building activities proceeded over a good deal of moral objection.
The Prince challenged Roman Catholic Scholastic philosophy to help found the secular thought of the Enlightenment and thus the modern era. It thus occupies a unique place in the evolution of thought in Europe. Its most famous maxims are widely cited today, usually in criticism of political leaders, among them:
- "It is better to be feared than loved." Although, it is not better to be hated, nor to confuse political virtue and justice when this presents no imminent threat to power.
- "The end justifies the means." It should be noted however, that this quote is actually an incorrect translation of The Prince. The passage in question is more accurately translated as "In the actions of all men, and especially of princes who are not subject to a court of appeal, we must always look to the end. Let a prince, therefore, win victories and uphold his state; his methods will always be considered worthy, and everyone will praise them, because the masses are always impressed by the superficial appearance of things, and by the outcome of an enterprise."
- "Therefore, the wise prince shall seek to make his people, in every action and any possible situation, be in need of his government. Then they will always be faithful to him."
What this means is not whether the Prince is immoral or amoral, but that his morality is framed in terms of how well he fulfills his duty to the state.
Table of contents
- Dedication.
- Chapter I. How Many Kinds of Principalities there Are, and by What Means They Are Acquired
- Chapter II. Concerning Hereditary Principalities
- Chapter III. Concerning Mixed Principalities
- Chapter IV. Why The Kingdom of Darius, Conquered By Alexander, Did Not Rebel Against the Successors of Alexander at His Death
- Chapter V. Concerning The Way To Govern Cities Or Principalities Which Lived Under Their Own Laws Before They Were Annexed
- Chapter VI. Concerning New Principalities Which Are Acquired by one's Own Arms and Ability
- Chapter VII. Concerning New Principalities Which Are Acquired Either by the Arms of Others or By Good Fortune
- Chapter VIII. Concerning Those Who Have Obtained a Principality by Wickedness
- Chapter IX. Concerning a Civil Principality
- Chapter X. Concerning the Way in Which the Strength of All Principalities Ought to Be Measured
- Chapter XI. Concerning Ecclesiastical Principalities
- Chapter XII. How Many Kinds of Soldiery There Are, and Concerning Mercenaries
- Chapter XIII. Concerning Auxiliaries, Mixed Soldiery, and One's Own
- Chapter XIV. That Which Concerns a Prince on the Subject of The Art of War
- Chapter XV. Concerning Things for Which Men, and Especially Princes, Are Praised or Blamed
- Chapter XVI. Concerning Liberality and Meanness
- Chapter XVII. Concerning Cruelty and Clemency, and Whether it is Better to Be Loved Than Feared
- Chapter XVIII. Concerning the Way in Which Princes Should Keep Faith
- Chapter XIX. That One Should Avoid Being Despised and Hated
- Chapter XX. Are Fortresses, and Many Other Things to Which Princes Often Resort, Advantageous or Hurtful?
- Chapter XXI. How a Prince Should Conduct Himself as to Gain Renown
- Chapter XXII. Concerning the Secretaries of Princes
- Chapter XXIII. How Flatterers Should Be Avoided
- Chapter XXIV. The Princes of Italy Have Lost Their States
- Chapter XXV. What Fortune Can Effect in Human Affairs, and How to Withstand Her
- Chapter XXVI. An Exhortation to Liberate Italy from The Barbarians
References
- Opening paragraph based on text from Outline of Great Books, Vol. I published 1937.
External links
Template:Wikisource Template:Wikiquote Links to the full text:
ca:El Príncep cs:Vladař de:Der Fürst es:El Príncipe fr:Le Prince ko:군주론 it:Il Principe hu:A fejedelem nl:De Heerser ja:君主論 no:Fyrsten pl:Książę Machiavellego pt:O Príncipe scn:Lu Prìncipi simple:The Prince sl:Vladar (Machiavelli) fi:Ruhtinas (kirja) sv:Fursten zh:君主论