for Eng.Kelvin History assignment

1

Niccolo Machiavelli: The Prince (1513)

Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527) was a diplomat in the Republic of Florence during the brief period of time when the de Medici family had been forced out of power. When the de Medici returned to the city and resumed their rule, Machiavelli was arrested, tortured for his role in organizing uprisings against the powerful family, and then exiled. While in exile, he wrote The Prince – known as the handbook for unscrupulous rulers. The book is widely regarded as one of the basic texts of modern political theory, its recommendations representing a radical departure from the traditional expectations on the ideal monarch. Instead of having as central goals the protection of citizens, the promotion of their welfare and the bestowal of justice, Machiavelli argued that rulers should have as principal aim the advancement of their own wellbeing and their own power. He recommended hypocrisy, ingratitude, meanness, cruelty, and treachery as the traits appropriate to a prince who pursed political success. “Machiavellian” quickly became an adjective for political conduct that combines unbridled ambition with shrewd manipulation and callous disregard for moral standards. Some historians, however, believe that Machiavelli’s The Prince is nothing but a satire criticizing the cold-blooded calculations and ruthless, self-serving actions of the de Medici family.

That Which Concerns a Prince on the Subject of the Art of War

The Prince ought to have no other aim or thought, nor select anything else for his study, than war

and its rules and discipline; for this is the sole art that belongs to him who rules, and it is of such

force that it not only upholds those who are born princes, but it often enables men to rise from a

private station to that rank. And, on the contrary, it is seen that when princes have thought more

at leisure than at arms they have lost their states. And the first cause of your losing it is the

neglect of this art; and what enables you to acquire a state is to be master of the art. Francesco

Sforza, a private person, became Duke of Milan by being martial; but his sons, by avoiding the

hardships and troubles of arms, from dukes became private persons. For among other evils which

being unarmed brings you, it causes you to be despised, and this is one of those ignominies

against which a prince ought to guard himself, as is shown later on.

Concerning Things for Which Men, and Especially Princes, are Blamed

It remains now to see what ought to be the rules of conduct for a prince toward subjects and

friends. And as I know that many have written on this point, I expect I shall be considered

presumptuous in mentioning it again, especially as in discussing it I shall depart from the

methods of other people. But it being my intention to write a thing which shall be useful to him

who apprehends it, it appears to me more appropriate to follow up the real truth of a matter than

the imagination of it; for many have pictured republics and principalities which in fact have

never been known or seen, because how one lives is so far distant from how one ought to live,

that he who neglects what is done for what ought to be done, sooner effects his ruin than his

preservation; for a man who wishes to act entirely up to his professions of virtue soon meets with

what destroys him among so much that is evil.

Hence, it is necessary for a prince wishing to hold his own to know how to do wrong, and to

make use of it or not according to necessity. Therefore, putting on one side imaginary things

concerning a prince, and discussing those which are real, I say that all men when they are spoken

2

of, and princes even more, are remarked upon for some of those qualities which bring them

either blame or praise. Thus it is that one is reputed liberal, another tyrannical; one is reputed

generous, another rapacious; one cruel, another compassionate; one faithless, another faithful.

And I know that everyone will confess that it would be most praiseworthy in a prince to exhibit

all the above qualities that are considered good; but because they can neither be entirely

possessed nor realistically observed, for human condition does not permit it, it is necessary for

the prince to be sufficiently prudent that he may know how to avoid the reproach of those vices,

which [if not done properly] might lose him the state.

Concerning Cruelty and Clemency, and whether it is better to be Loved than Feared

A prince ought to desire to be believed compassionate, and not cruel, nonetheless he must be

alert not to use this compassion badly. Cesare Borgia was believed cruel; nonetheless, that

cruelty of his restored the Romagna, unified it, and led it back to peace and to faith. A prince,

therefore, must not care about the infamy of cruelty in keeping his subjects united and faithful,

because if he makes a very few examples, he will be more compassionate that those who,

through too much compassion, allow disorders to occur from which arise killings and robberies.

For the latter usually harm an entire population, but those executions that come from the prince

harm a particular person only.

Upon this a question arises: whether it is better to be loved than feared, or feared than loved? It

may be answered that one should wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one

person, it is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be dispensed with.

Because this is to be asserted in general of men, that they are ungrateful, fickle, false, cowardly,

covetous. As long as you succeed they are your friends entirely; they will offer you their blood,

property, life, and children, when the need is far distant. But when it approaches, they turn

against you. And that prince who, relying entirely on their promises, has neglected other

precautions, is ruined; because friendships that are obtained by payments, and not by nobility or

greatness of mind, may indeed be earned, but they are not secured, and in time of need cannot be

relied upon; and men have less scruple in offending one who is beloved than one who is feared,

for love is preserved by the link of obligation which, owing to the baseness of men, is broken at

every opportunity for their advantage; but fear preserved you by a dread of punishment which

never fails.

Nevertheless a prince ought to inspire fear in such a way that, if he does not win love, he avoids

hatred; because he can endure very well being feared whilst he is not hated, which will always be

as long as he abstains from the property of his citizens and subjects and from their women.

Concerning the ways in which princes should keep their word

How laudable it is in a prince to maintain faith and to live with integrity and not with cleverness,

everyone understands. Nonetheless, one sees from experience in our own times that those princes

have done great things who have held their promises of small account, and who have known

how, with their cleverness, to trick men’s brains, and at the end they have surpassed those who

founded themselves on sincerity.

3

You should know, therefore, that there are two kinds of combat: one with laws, and the other

with force. The first one is proper to man, the second is proper to beasts. But because many times

the first is not enough, one must have recourse to the second. For a prince, therefore, it is

necessary to know well how to use both the beast and the man.

Thus, since it is necessary for a prince to know well how to use the beast, from among the beasts

he should choose the fox and the lion, for the lion does not defend himself from traps, and the

fox does not defend himself from wolves. He must, therefore, be a fox to recognize traps, and a

lion to awe the wolves. Those who simply stick with the methods of the lion do not understand

this. Therefore a prudent lord cannot, nor should he, observe faith when such observance turns

against himself, and when the reasons that made him promise it are eliminated.

If men were all good, this precept would not be good; but because they are wicked, and they

would not remain loyal or keep their word for you, you too do not have to observe it with them.

Nor does a prince ever lack legitimate reasons for painting over his inobservance. Of this one

could give infinite modern examples, and show how many promises have been made void and

vain by the faithlessness of princes. And the one who has known better how to use the fox has

come out better. But it is necessary to know how to color this nature well, and to be a great

pretender and dissembler, for men are so very simple, and they so well obey present necessities,

that he who deceives will always find someone who will allow himself to be deceived.

It is useful to seem compassionate, faithful, humane, honest, and religious - and to be so. But at

the same time you should stay so constructed in your spirit that if it is necessary not to be any of

these things, you would be able and know how to become the contrary. And one must understand

the following: that a prince and especially a new prince cannot observe all of those things for

which men are believed to be good, since to maintain his state he is often required to act against

faith, against charity, against humaneness, and against religion. And for this reason he needs to

have a spirit disposed to change as the winds of fortune and the variation of things command

him, and, as I said above, not to depart from the good if he is able, but to know how to enter into

evil when he needs to.

https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/halsall/source/prince-excerp.asp