The IS and OUGHT of Niccolo Machiavelli

Undergraduate Review Undergraduate Review

Volume 3 Issue 1 Article 8

1989

The IS and OUGHT of Niccolo Machiavelli The IS and OUGHT of Niccolo Machiavelli

Krista Stearns '89 Illinois Wesleyan University

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/rev

Recommended Citation Stearns '89, Krista (1989) "The IS and OUGHT of Niccolo Machiavelli," Undergraduate Review: Vol. 3 : Iss. 1 , Article 8. Available at: https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/rev/vol3/iss1/8

This Article is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by Digital Commons @ IWU with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this material in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This material has been accepted for inclusion by faculty at Illinois Wesleyan University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ©Copyright is owned by the author of this document.

http://www.iwu.edu/

http://www.iwu.edu/

https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/rev

https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/rev/vol3

https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/rev/vol3/iss1

https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/rev/vol3/iss1/8

https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/rev?utm_source=digitalcommons.iwu.edu%2Frev%2Fvol3%2Fiss1%2F8&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/rev/vol3/iss1/8?utm_source=digitalcommons.iwu.edu%2Frev%2Fvol3%2Fiss1%2F8&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

mailto:[email protected]

!X8J\der Lumber closing." The Daily

re close to boiling." The Sunday

!Shed again in Crain's." The Daily

>per battle, Kankakee loses its own ,farch 1988, 77-78.

wnty Assessment. Chicago: The Fan-

The IS and OUGHT of lr. Chicago Tribune, 9 April 1988, 10. Niccolo Machiavelli

1(ristaSteams

53 1

Stearns '89: The IS and OUGHT of Niccolo Machiavelli

Published by Digital Commons @ IWU, 1989

I

View of Florence. Photo by Susanna Woodard.

Niccolo Machiavell

Notorious for his treatise .

human

historyasa ruthless power and

oppression. Ho

the republican government

greatest work,

The Discour5t

rule by the people in order tc

style of republican govemn

paradox? Only through can

history of renaissance Italy i

twentieth century audience

The politicsof15th j

general, were tumultous. ~

witnessing a crumbling rep

figure Savonarola.

F1orenc~

nornical problems, the resc

regaining Pisa. Pisa was a

1

French occupation. The Fre

to Florentine liberty. Vario

other

cities in the northerr

seemed determined to spli kept in

mind that Europe

..

were just beginning to gair

confusion, Machiavelli, a f1

vation of Florence and It

instrumental in establishin

2

Undergraduate Review, Vol. 3, Iss. 1 [1989], Art. 8


View of Florence. Photo by Susanna Woodard.

Niccolo Machiavelli has long been termed the teacher of evil.

Notorious for his treatise The Prince, he has earned a reputation in

human

history

asa ruthless individualconsumed with the intricaciesof

power and

oppression. However, most overlook his contributions to

the republican government in Florence, as well as,

what is perhaps his

greatest work, The Discourses. In The Discourses he extolled the value of

rule by the peoplein order to attain liberty. He also revered the Roman

style of republican government. How does one reconcile the apparent

paradox? Only through careful evaluation of the nationalistic political

history of renaissance Italy is one able to expose the true Machiavelli to

twentieth century audiences.

The politicsof 15thand 16thcentury Florence,and of Europe in

general, were tumultous. While only in his twenties Machiavelli was

witnessing a crumbling republic under the leadership of the religiOUS

figure Savonarola. Florence was facing other grave political and eco

nomical problems, the resolution of which depended upon Florence

regaining Pisa. Pisa was a valued trading post, as well as a target for

French occupation. The French and other powers were seen as a threat

to Florentine liberty. Various European powers had already captured

other

cities in the northern

part of the peninsula and all the powers

seemed determined to split Italy among themselves. Here, it must be

kept in mind that Europe was still in a feudal state of affairs. Nations

were just beginning to gain a sense of nationality. In the midst of such

confusion, Machiavelli, a Florentine nationalist interested in the preser

vation of Florence and Italy, became active. For example, he was

instrumental in establishing the rural citizen militia. This militia was a

55 3



56

key

factor

in the eventual regaining of Pisa in 1509 after thirteen years

of

warfare.

1

The political upheaval that the people of renaissance Italy

witnessed helps to explain the fascination with war and power for

which

Machiavelli is

so well known. He, in fact, became particularly

interestedin the practical aspectofwinning warsand wrotebooks such

as the Arle della Guerra on the subject. This demonstrates two things:

one, that Machiavelli's infatuation with war was a natural reaction to

his world as disarmament is to the peopleof today, and two, that he was

particularly interested in the practical world. J. H. Whitfield in his book

Discourses em Machiavelli, in

support, states

that "before the time of The

Prince.. Machiavelli had never written a treatise without some practical

purpose, and some

special contexl."2

The Prince is no exception. In

writing this treatiseit is clear that Machiavellihad in mind the establish

ment of

a strong leadership

in Florence. This leadership would now

hold

Florence together,

but, eventually, the leadership would gain

considerable strength so as to unify Italyin order for her to reassert her

greatness. Furthermore, The Discourses are a natural progression from

The Prince. In both works he professes many of the same techniques of

rule and

retains his observations

on human nature. He regards these

observations as underlying constants that must be considered in any

regime, autocratic or republican.

The

practical

side of Machiavelli may be best explained by

today's term

realpolitik. This concept

is demonstrated in Machiavelli's

famous phrase from The Prince, "the end justifies the means."3 As Max

Lerner states, Machiavelli distinguishes between what is and what

ought

to

be.'

Machiavelli primarilyconcernshimselfwith empiricalrealm, view

ing

accurate appraisal

of existing conditions as the only way to rule

successfully. He reservesan:

Discourses.

But, despite the

i

republican forms of govenu

to the empirical remains. In

strong military, stresses the

controlling the people, reil

Periclean leader, and, finall,

consent for the longevity II

commonalities will be exp8J

realism and nationalism in I

Nationalism,altholl

that helps

to reconcile the

examination. Not only

was

Italian nation, but, hisbelief

tionary for his time. In lac:

religiOUS, for he placesit as

in The Prince as we see M

preferences which are so pr

was also practiced in Machi

government in Florenceand

despite the formof govemn:

The Discourses

when

he stat;

any

means.

For where upon then

justiceor iJ

ofshame,! allothercc

should

be, of

the cour

.,·,,,iiotr

4



g of Pisa in 1509 after thirteen years

at the people of renaissance Italy

scination with war and power for

m. He, in fact, became particularly

winningwarsand wrotebookssuch

ject This demonstrates two things:

with war was a natural reaction to

IOOpleof

today,

and two,thathe was

cal

world.

J. H. Whitfield in hisbook

1, states that "before the time of The

en

a treatise

without some practical

d."2 The Prince is no exception. In

achiavellihadinmind the establish

lrenee.

This leadership

would now

,tually, the leadership would gain

'Italyinorder forher to reasserther

trses are

a natural progression from

ses many of the

same techniques of

In

human nature.

He regards these

nts that must be considered in any

IUavelli may be best

explained

by

pt

isdemonstrated

in Machiavelli's

eend justifies the means."3 As Max

:J.ishes

between

what is and what

himselfwithempirical realm, view

:onditions as the only way to rule

successfully. He reservesany normativediscussion for the themeofThe

Discourses.

But, despite the idealized

theme applauding the virtues of

republican forms of government, the importance he fonnerly attached

to the empirical remains. In The Discourses he retains an emphasis of a

strong military, stresses the roleof religion as a means of unifying and

controlling the people, reiterates the necessity of a strong, almost

Periclean leader,and, finally, Machiavelli emphasizes the need of mass

consent for the longevity and security of any regime. Many of these

commonalities will be expanded upon more as I discuss Machiavelli's

realism and nationalism in specifics.

Nationalism,although referred to earlier, is an important ideal

that helps

to reconcile

the two texts, and requires a more detailed

examination. Not only was Machiavelli a proponent of a sovereign

Italian nation, but, his belief in the importance of the state was revolu

tionary for his time. In fact his conception of the state was almost

religious, for he places it as the highest good. This is blatantly the case

in The Prince as we

see Machiavelli

wavering from his democratic

preferences which are so prevalent in The Discourses. This nationalism

was

also practiced

in Machiavelli's own life by serving the republican

governmentin florenceand by

resolving to

partidpate in publicservice

despite the fonnof

government. Machiavelli

best delineateshis viewin

The Discourses when he

states

that the country should be preserved by

any

means. For where

the

very safety of the country depends upon the

resolution to be taken, no considerations of

justice or injustice, humanity or cruelty, nor glory or of

shame, should be allowed to prevail. But putting

all other considerations aside, the only question should be, What course will save the life and liberty

of the country75

57 5



Here, as in The Prince, Machiavelli is willing to forego morality

and

his convictions

of the superiority of republican rule in order to

assure

the

higher good of the preservation of the state. Government is

not about

preserving individual liberties,

but rather preserving the

existence of the state.

Additionally, it is reasonable to conjecture that these national

istic ideals were an offspring of his realism. In Machiavelli's world

European powers were

consolidating, particularly France

and Spain

which were at

their zenith

at this time. In the interests of protecting

Florence, its citizenry, Italian culture, and the liberty of the future,

Machiavellisaw an Italian nationas theonlymeansof recourse. But this

would

call for order,

and an order that could only be realized through

the leadership of

a prince. A prince

was needed for the people were

weak. Thenew, unified nationsemergingin Europe were the force with

which

to

be reckoned. To survive, the Italians, too, must unify and

practice the ruthless, superficial politics that the rest had already

adopted.

Machiavelli

was not the progenitor of the practice, he just

happened to be among

the first to

put it in writing.

An

analysis

of Machiavelli's reallsmbest explainswhy Machia

velli wrote his little treatise illuminating the immorality of effective,

princely rule. Aside from the bellicose nature of government that

Machiavellicontinuouslywitnessed, perhaps theone thing that had the

most profound

influence

upon him was the diplomatic missions for the

republican government that Machiavelli participated in during the

early 1500s. These missions helped him to view the strife in the penin

sula from an international perspective. He watched the cold, deliberate

machinations of foreign leaders anxious to wield their influence upon

the weak

Italian states.

His visit to the court of Cesare Borgia was

especially enlightening. It was there where his strong beliefs on fortuna

58

and virtu

fully developed.

Under Borgia, Mad

things, is beyond

the conm

ruinous

effects. ButMachia' made

to prevent the winds (

This is best exemplified

in

fortune to a river thatcanbe

and

dykes. For Machiavelli,

Florence.

The series of conJ

power

of the Church had ( citizenry which was only

under

the

hand of strong Ie

could

Florence be saved.

1

needed for the success of a

present. Machiavelli's assUI

was

restored

in Florencein .

years until the ousted Medi

The austere measul

Machiavelli'sgoalofrestom

which

would subsequently of

government.

This isa sim

Lerner. Langton, somewha

The Discourses

as a follow

stabilized

by following dir

then tum

to

The Discourses I

handbook

for a

return to re

be used

most effectively

w

role as a consultant to the I

6



·chiavelli is willing to forego morality

iority of republican rule in order to

!lel'Vation

of the state. Government

is

liberties, but rather preserving the

Ible

to conjecture that these national

his realism. In Machiavelli's world

lting, particularly France and Spain

5 time. In the interests of protecting

lture, and the liberty of the future,

IS theonlymeansof recourse. Butthis

rthat could only be realized through

lCe

was needed for the people

were

terginginEuropewere the force with

>e, the Italians, too, must unify and

. politics that the rest had already

e progenitor of the practice, he just

)put it in writing.

i'srealismbestexplainswhy Machia

linating the immorality of effective,

ellicose nature of government that

ed,

perhapstheone thing that

had the

nwasthediplomatic missions for the

:hiavelli participated in during the

d him to view the strife in the penin

tive. He watched the cold, deliberate

:lXious

to wield their influence

upon

to the court of Cesare Borgia was

re

where his strong beliefs

on fortUnJl

and virtu fully developed.

Under Borgia, Machiavelli observed that illness, among other

things, is beyond the control of man; yet, these uncontrollables have

ruinous effects. But Machiavelli also witnessed how preparation canbe

made

to prevent the

winds of fortune from being without redemption.6

This is best exemplified in the passage in The Prince which equates

fortune toa river that canbe tamedwithhurnan ingenuity suchas darns

and

dykes. For Machiavelli,

it was fortune that blew an ill wind upon

Florence. The series of conflicts, of weak leaders, and the continued

power

of the Church

had corrupted the people. These ills created a

citizenry which was only interested in self-aggrandizement. Only

under

the

hand of strong leadership (Lorenzo de Medici in this case)

could Florence be saved. The people were so corrupt that the virtu

needed for the success of a republican form of government was not

present. Machiavelli's assumption proved to be accurate when liberty

was

restored in Florence in 1527.

The new regime only lasted for three

years until the ousted Medici were able to resume power.

The austere measures in The Prince were necessary to achieve

Machiavelli'sgoalofrestoringorderand buildinga basic infrastructure

which would subsequently work to realizehis ideal: a republican form

of

government. This is a similar view to those

of John Langtonand Max

Lerner. Langton, somewhat convincingly, extends his view to include

The Discourses as

a follow

up to The Prince. Once Florence became

stabilized by follOWing directives delineated in The Prince, one could

then tum to The Discourses for guidance. He regards The Discourses as a

handbook for a return to republican rule. This book would, of course,

be used

most effectively with

the assistance of Machiavelli playing a

role as a consultant to the prince?

59 7



--

60

Machiavelli's view of leadership in both texts pronounces the

need

for ruthless,

sometimes unjust measures. He first stresses the

ability to adapt to changing circumstances. This is consistent with his

views on fortuna,

for

it is fortuna that necessitates these characteristics.

Chance can bring good luck or bad

luck.

And, when chance knocks at

the door, the leader must be prepared

to

take action and adapt to

changing conditions. The

ability to act

with the cleverness a fox and to

speak with the

force

of a lion is also vital. To do otherwise, that is to be

neutral,

to

refuse to act or act quickly and with confidence, would be

cruel. It would put the state at risk to aggression or subject it to undue

hazards of

fortune. It is

also

the responsibilityof the leader to establish institutions

and laws that

will

outlive the leader. Machiavelli was counting on this

inboth works. He implores

Lorenzo

to adopt new "laws and measures"

that

will liberate Italy

and immortalize Lorenzoas her savior.8Thus, for

Machiavelli, a leadermust possessflexibility, sagacity, physical strength

(especially in the form of an organized military), and foresight- all

qualities that seem

to

add up to Machiavelli's ideas on virtu. For ifvirtu

truly means

to

do one's duty well, these assets are what it takes to

succeed in

a

principality or a republic. A leader who possesses these

qualities will be able to act as the situation requires yet he will still

maintainappearances that appease the

people.

This ishighly important

in maintaining

the civil

peace and the unity of the people.

Those who criticize Machiavelli for extreme ruthlessness, evi

dence of which can be found in both

texts,

mistakenly evaluate his

thoughts from

a post-Lockeian framework.

What people of today find

problematic is that the state which

Machiavelli

desires to build seems

to ignore that the construction of such a nation may ruin the things that

are beautiful within

it. But,

from a sixteenth century perspective, when

there was no

conception

01

seems

excessive. Ideas

sud

processes, and beliefs of nol

not widely held nor

even

in

to absolute

rulers

who coule

rulers governed

only

in om

What does seem pal

deceit and trickery. A ruler I

appear so; he need notbejust

can do what

a situation

det'l

concern

for humanity. But, sumption that

running a

gal

what separates him from til

knowledge a separation of t:

This position regare

and

Machiavelli

himself, ne:

solely as a response to the UI

upon florence. Rather, Mad

ism, are

viewed

as the onlyE

the time. Dietz's arguments.

example,

she

harps on his

historical data contradictor

smart

politician

or realist,

evidence most

appropriate t as

a

complete historical acee

historian but

a politician

tUI

Discourses, too, are filled wi

Theformer

work, then, isno. ignored or

misconstrued. A 8



ship in both texts pronounces the

1 measures. He first stresses the

tances. This is consistent with his

necessitates these characteristics.

lick.

And,

when chance knocks at

il"ed

to take action

and adapt to

ct

with the cleverness a fox

and to

rita!.

To

do otherwise, that is to be

yand with

confidence,

would be

)aggression or subject it to undue

the leaderto establish institutions

Machiavelli was counting on this

o adoptnew '1awsand measures"

roe

Lorenzo

asher savior.8 Thus, for

xibility, sagacity, physical strength

red

military),

and foresight- all

riavelli'sideason virtu. For ifvirtu

these assets are what it takes to

lic. A leader who possesses these

.ituation requires yet he will still

!le

people.This

ishighly important

le

unity of

the people.

relli for extreme ruthlessness, evi

th texts, mistakenly evaluate his

~work. What people of today find

lachiavelli desires to

build seems

1a nation may ruin the things that

teenth century perspective,when

there was no conception of inalienable or natural

rights,

he hardly

seems

excessive.

Ideas such as freedom of speech, access to judicial

processes, and beliefs of non-interference from the government were

not widely held nor even in

existence.

People were commonly subject

to absolute rulers who could do as they pleased. Often these absolute

rulers governed only in order to advantage

themselves.

What does seem particularly invidious, though, is his

call for deceit and

trickery. A

ruler must be a fox. He need not be religiOUS but

appear

so;

he need not be justbut must appear to be just.If clever, a ruler

can do what

a

situation demands while convincing the people of his

concern for humanity.

But,

to the reader, this demonstrates his pre

sumption that running

a

government calls for means of its own. This is

what separates him from the

classicists. Machiavelli

is willing to ac

knowledge

a

separation of the public and private domains.

This position regards The Prince, in

relation

to The Discourses

and

Machiavelli himself,

neither as an aberration, nor as a set up, nor

solelyas a response to the uncertainty and unrest that fortuna had laid

upon

Florence.

Rather, Machiavelli's realism,and notably his national

ism, are viewed as the only

effective

means of governing the people of

the

time.

Dietz's arguments against this theory are unconvincing. For

example, she harps on his historical examples and his exclusion of

historical data contradictory to his arguments. I assert that like any

smart

politician

or realist, Machiavelli simply selected supportive

evidence most appropriate to his purposes. The Prince was not intended

as

a

complete historical account. Furthermore, Machiavelli was not an

historian but

a politician

turned writer. As Leo Strauss points out, The

Discourses,

too,

are filled with inconsistencies regarding past events.9

The former work, then, isnot the onlyevidenceofmaterial thathasbeen

ignored or misconstrued.

Additionally,

the fact that Machiavelli only

61 9



62

designed The Prince for the eyes of Lorenzo de Medici. support my

thesis. Again, one notes that history suggests Machiavelli, in every

other treatise he wrote, intended it to address a very specific set of

circumstances such as those we find in The Prince. And, lastly, the final

chapter of The Prince not only serves as a call to action for Lorenzo but

suggests that he truly believed that the action he calls for would be in

the best interests of all. Rule under The Prince would not be as brutal as

the prevailing circumstances. In the closing of The Prince he states,

''What

Italian

would withhold allegiance? This barbarous domination

stinks in the nostrils of every one/'IO

The differences between these two great works are best recon

ciled by viewing the measures for ruling a state called for in The Prince

as

being consistent

with measures described in ruling a republican

government modeled after the great republic of Rome. The underlying

practice of the two governments remains remarkably constant. But,

Machiavelli's effort to sustain Medici rule created a dichotomy which

can only be resolved through evaluating his visions of realpolitik and

a unified Italian state. These are the reflections of the practical politics

that he was

concerned

with throughout his adult life. And, despite his

love of liberty he acknowledged his forceful rules as being more

important than the establishment of a weak republican state. For such

a statewould be incapableof maintainingorderand of creating the new

strength that Italy needed in order to flourish. Italy could not be

extravagant. The Italians were not in a solely epistemological world,

but

rather the empirical, practical world

of feudal 16th century Euro

pean

politics.

IHale,

J.R. Machiavelli and til. Ian Company, 1960), p.10.

2 Whitfield, J.H. Discourses W. Heffer & Sons Ltd., 196!

3 Machiavelli, Niccolo. The _ tion by Max Lerner (NewY

4 Jensen, De Lamar. Machit (Lexington, Massachusetts:

5 Machiavelli, Niccolo. The _ tion by Max Lerner (New'"

6Hale, J.R. Machiavelli and th Ian Company, 1960), p. 25.

7 Langton, John and Mary I Teaching the Prince,"Ame 1987), p. 1282.

8 Machiavelli, Niccolo. The tion by Max Lerner (New")

9 Strauss, Leo. Thoughts 071 Press, 1958), p. 36.

10Machiavelli, Niccolo.The tion by Max Lerner (New ~

10



Lorenzo de Medid support my

y suggests Machiavelli, in every

to address a very specific set of

in The Prince. And, lastly, the final

as a call to action for Lorenzo but

he action he calls for would be in

Ie Prince would not be as brutal as

eclosing of The Prince he states,

~7nusbarbarousdonUnation

!Ie

two great works

are best recon

ling

a state called for

in The Prince

described in ruling a republican

republicof Rome. The underlying

mains

remarkably constant. But, :i

rule created a dichotomy

which

lting his visions of realpolitik and

reflections of the practical politics

out his adult life. And, despite his

Us

forceful rules

as being more

a weak republican state. For such

ningorder and of creating the new

r to flourish. Italy could not be

na solely epistemological world,

orld of feudal 16th century Euro-

NOTES

1Hale, J.R. Machiavelli and the RenaissanceItaly, (New York: the MacnUlIan Company, 1960), p.10.

2 Whitfield, J.H. Discourses on Machiavelli, (Cambridge, Great Britain: W. Heffer & Sons Ltd., 1969), p. 23.

3 Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince and the Discourses, with an introduction by Max Lerner (New York: Random House, 1950), p. 66.

'Jensen, De

Lamar.

Machiavelli: Cynic, Patriot, or Political Scientist?, (Lexington, Massachusetts: J.e. Heath and Company, 1960), p. 10.


6Hale, J.R. Machiavelli and the RenaissanceItaly, (New York: The MacnUlIan Company, 1960), p. 25.

7 Langton, John and Mary Dietz, "Machiavelli's Paradox: Trapping or Teaching the Prince,"American Political Science Review (December ,

1987), p. 1282.


9 Strauss, Leo. Thoughts on Machiavelli, (Glencoe, illinois: The Free Press, 1958), p. 36.

10Machiavelli, Niccolo.The Prince and the Discourses, with an introduction by Max Lerner (New York: Random House, 1950), p. 98.

63 11



64

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Dietz, Mary. "Trapping the Prince: Machiavelli and the Politics of Deception." American Political Science Review (September, 1986): p. 777

797.

Gilbert, Felix. Machiavelli and Guicciardini. Princeton, New Jersey:

Princeton University Press, 1%5.

Hale, J.R. Machiavelli and Renaissance Italy. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1960.

Jensen, De Lamar, ed. Machiavelli: Cynic, Patriot, or Political Scientist? Howard RcLexington, Massachusetts: D.C. Heath and Company, 1960.

Langton, John and Mary Dietz. "Machiavelli's Paradox: Trapping or Teaching thePrince." American Science PoliticalReview (December1987): Mary

p.1277-1288.

Machiavelli, Niccolo.

The Prince and the Discourses. Introductionby Max Lerner. New York: Random House, Inc., 1950.

Machiavelli, Niccolo. The History ofFlorence. Edited by Hugh R. TrevorRoper. New

York: Twayne Publishers, 1970.

Strauss, Leo. Thoughts on Machiavelli. Glencoe, nlinois: The Free Press, 1958.

Whitfield, J.H. Discourses on Machiavelli. Cambridge, Great Britain: W.

Heffer & Sons Ltd., 1969.

12



Documents

The IS and OUGHT of Niccolo Machiavelli