Machiavelli The Prince Chapter 6 Summary

One of the three major themes of the Prince would be Hatred. For a prince to remain in power he would have to avoid the hatred of all the people. It wasn’t necessary for a prince to be loved by his people but it’s even better that he is feared by his people, but in fact if a prince is feared by his people it could be the cause of his downfall.

The citizens would be more willing to try and defend the prince, especially if they follow the previous virtue of living with their citizens. Although a prince should maintain a relationship with their citizens, they must also try not to only do what their people want them to do. (87) A prince needs to be able to make decisions that their people do not want, if it benefits their kingdom. This goes back to the initial definition of how a prince must lead with fear and not allow their citizens to hate them. So a prince should make decisions that will benefit the people, even if it is not what is the general interest of the public. If a prince does not make unpopular decisions, their state will weaken. By making unpopular decisions, the prince shows that they are doing what they think is best for the other citizens and is thinking of the future of the

In Machiavelli's work, The Prince, the concept of virtue is different from the standard meaning associated with the word, suggesting good morals. He uses the Italian word virtù, which could not be translated directly to English, but is closer in meaning to the Latin word virtus or manliness. This word is usually translated with difficulty, often expressed with words referring to unethical qualities that

The novel The prince written by Niccolo Machiavelli, points out the key elements of a running successful government ruled by a admired prince, a leader that is not only loved, but also feared by the people that follow him. One of the main aspects the author points out to the reader is the concept of virtù. Referring to the range of personal qualities that the prince need to do, the two main power marks for any prince is to maintain his state, and to achieve great things. Although that the actual definition of the word virtue is: behavior showing high moral standards; Machiavelli almost never talks about moral virtue. The author addresses a different type of government governing in the discourses, however he still points out the same fact that he mentions in the prince, and that is his vision of the requirements of power politics is virtu.

“It is much safer to be feared than loved.” This quotation was just a specimen of the harsh and very practical political annotation of the legendary historian, Niccolò Machiavelli – philosopher, patriot, diplomat, advisor and statesman. He was born as the son of a poor lawyer in 1498, but he never let boundaries restrict him. He still received an excellent humanist education from the University of Florence and was soon after appointed as the Second Chancellor of the Republic of Florence.2 His political importance to Florence would soon give him the opportunity to write what is disputed as one of the most significant works in history, The Prince.

For most contemporary readers, Niccolò Machiavelli is a name synonymous with deceit, cunning, and manipulation, a reputation which stems almost entirely from his authorship of one of the central works of modern political philosophy: The Prince. Given this image, it is incredibly ironic that the Italian word virtù and its derivatives appear no less than seventy-two times throughout the work. While the translator goes to great lengths to adapt this versatile word to the context of the situation, it is nevertheless clear that virtù is closely related to its English cognate virtue. This, along with the political nature of Machiavelli’s work, shapes the discourse about the nature of princedoms into one in which the author explores the more

He used the term virtu’ in his book “The Art of War” which is a dialogue on military affairs. It describes the great ability of a general who is able to adapt to various battlefield conditions as they present themselves. It is said that the most vilified of political thinkers is also the one of whom it has been said that he concentrated all his real and supreme values in what he called virtu’. 6 What he meant by this was that a prince would have to develop a different psychology than what he is used to. The “new” prince is “prepared to vary his conduct as the winds of fortune and changing circumstances constrain him and not deviate from the right conduct if possible, but be should be capable of entering upon a path of wrong doing when it becomes necessary”. 7 Some ninety years ago Villari said that Machiavelli always use the word virtue in the sense of courage and energy both for good and evil. To Christian virtue in its more general meaning, he rather applied the term goodness, and felt much less admiration for it than for the pagan virtue that was always fruitful of glory. 2

When reading Niccolo Machiavelli's The Prince, one can't help but grasp Machiavelli's argument that morality and politics can not exist in the same forum. However, when examining Machiavelli's various concepts in depth, one can conclude that perhaps his suggested violence and evil is fueled by a moral end of sorts. First and foremost, one must have the understanding that this book is aimed solely at the Prince or Emperor with the express purpose of aiding him in maintaining power. Therefore, it is essential to grasp his concepts of fortune and virtue. These two contrary concepts reflect the manner in which a Prince should govern while minimizing all chance and uncertainty. This kind of governing demands violence to be taken, however

While Machiavelli emphasizes power over in relations between the political elite, he discusses a different kind of power in the relations between a prince and the general public. Machiavelli notes that a prince can share power with the people, since a prince can trust the people much more than he can trust the nobles. Nobles "can not be satisfied if a ruler acts honorably but the people can be thus satisfies, because their aims are more honorable than those of the nobles are: for the latter only want to oppress and the former only want to avoid being oppressed" (p.35). The people are not unforgiving and greedy so the prince can place more trust in the people. Since the public can be trusted, the prince can empower the people. An empowered public will protect the ruler rather than overthrow him. Machiavelli suggests providing people with power in terms of arms, since "when you arm them, these weapons become your own" (p. 72). In this way power is an increasing resource, sharing power with the people can result in greater power for the people and for the prince.

"Machiavelli identifies the interests of the prince with the interests of the state." He felt that it was human nature to be selfish, opportunistic, cynical, dishonest, and gullible, which in essence, can be true. The state of nature was one of conflict; but conflict, Machiavelli reasoned, could be beneficial under the organization of a ruler. Machiavelli did not see all men as equal. He felt that some men were better suited to rule than others. I believe that this is true in almost any government. However, man in general, was corrupt -- always in search of more power. He felt that because of this corruptness, an absolute monarch was necessary to insure stability. Machiavelli outlined what characteristics this absolute ruler should have in The Prince. One example of this can be seen in his writings concerning morality. He saw the Judeo-Christian values as faulty in the state's success. "Such visionary expectations, he held, bring the state to ruin, for we do not live in the world of the "ought," the fanciful utopia, but in the world of "is". The prince's role was not to promote virtue, but to insure security. He reasoned that the Judeo-Christian values would make a ruler week if he actually possessed them, but that they could be useful in dealing with the citizens if the prince seemed to have these qualities. Another example of Machiavelli's ideal characteristics of a prince

What must be understood is that the throne is always in jeopardy and someone is always there to try to knock the prince off his pedestal. This is a prime understanding that a prince must have, and fuels the infamous argument by Machiavelli that it is better to be feared than loved. Machiavelli explains that, for the most part, love is very subjective and eventually will subside unless further concessions are made to appease his subjects. In addition, people only care about their personal conveniences and a prince would have to overextend himself if he were to be loved by all. Fear, however, is not subjective and has a universal effect on all his people. Fear can be attained by sporadic violent acts. One must understand, however, that massive amounts of violence can not be done because it would portray the Prince as tyrant, and might stir up his people to revolt against him. The acts must be calculated, concise, and serve a direct purpose not only to his benefit but to the people’s also. Despite what might be assumed, Machiavelli is really developing a principality based around the people, where the Prince’s actions are merely to save his own head from the chopping block.

Prowess refers to an individual’s talents, while fortune implies chance or luck. A prince who manages to gain power by relying on his own prowess will succeed at maintaining power because his prowess will have built him a firm foundation for ruling. Princes who succeed due to the sway of fortune or the goodwill of others lack a basis from which to rule and will have difficulty building it quickly enough to prevent power from slipping out of their hands. Thus, although princes who rely on fortune reach their position easily, maintaining that position is extremely difficult. Therefore it is commendable that a prince succeeds on their own prowess, which will help build stronger fundamentals for themselves. He will have the loyalty of his army, which is analogous to the allegiance of the boss’ employees and the respect of leaders of surrounding principalities, which is also comparable to the esteem of other companies. Overall, the more self-reliant this authority figure is, the more he will prove capable of success as he will be better equipped to deal with problems and

Virtù is an Italian word used by Machiavelli to denote various terms such as skill, ability, forcefulness, energy, ingenuity, strength, determination, or courage. It is the quality that sets apart successful princes from the others. The author gives examples of well-known founders of great civilizations. When these men came across opportunities, they possessed the virtù required to take full advantage of them. However, Machiavelli points out that virtù is wasted if there is no opportunity to use it. Also, he is of the opinion that violence and use of force is an essential part of the state; and a ruler must utilize it as a tool of government. Machiavelli points out that, if subjects lose faith in a leader’s innovative schemes, he must force it down their throats. Alternatively, the followers must act as if they have faith by obeying the ruler.

Niccolo Machiavelli based his position of individual power on his book The Prince. The Prince extends Machiavelli’s analysis of how to acquire and maintain political power. There are four types of principalities discussed: hereditary principalities, that are inherited by the ruler through fortune and family royalty, mixed principalities, territories that are annexed to the ruler’s existing territories, new principalities, namely the Papal States belonging to the Catholic church, and new principalities, those states that may be acquired by one’s own power, by the power of others or by the will of the people. There is simplicity for a prince that inherits a state through fortune or the efforts of others due to easy ascent to power, but maintaining the power is more difficult. For a prince that conquers a state through force and power has difficulty conquering the state but has an easy time maintaining the state.

Niccolo Machiavelli’s abstract work of The Prince discusses politics and government and focuses in not only acquiring power, but also how to maintain it. Throughout his work, one of the most prevalent yet disputed themes is between the acquirement of states between principalities and republics. The Prince shows a predominant and constant debate on which group will excel in acquiring power. However, despite Machiavelli’s harsh criticisms on principalities, his work does not solely praise or focus on the excellence of republics. In fact, as Machiavelli continues to speak and provide examples about the successes and failures of both republics and principalities, it becomes clearer that the lone purpose of The Prince is to merely provide tactics in political governance, instruction on how to maintain power once it is acquired, and most importantly, advice on how to become a great leader.