Machiavelli vs. Castiglione Essay

In between the 14th and 17th century, a time period known as the Renaissance occurred, in which modern literature, art, and music were revived and thrived throughout a large portion of Europe that founded several differentiating ideas and views throughout its time. From the mid-1400s to the mid-1500s several authors arose with varying views on how the government should act; however, views such as these were strictly prohibited by both members of the Catholic church and Protestant reformers, and were often viewed as heretical, which led to threats and attacks from these people as a result. The recorded writings of three Renaissance authors, Niccolò Machiavelli, Desiderius Erasmus, and Baldassare Castiglione, hold both similar and differing ideas, most notably on the politics and government in their time.

In the fourteenth century, the humanist philosopher Francesco Petrarch wrote a letter entitled How a Ruler Ought to Govern His Sate. Nearly a century later, another philosopher by the name of Niccolo Machiavelli wrote a book about governing, The Prince. The two documents show many similarities in content and theme. While the two wrote in similar subject matter, it is clear that these philosophers possess distinctly different viewpoints on how a ruler should govern. In Petrarch’s How a Ruler Ought to Govern His Sate and Machiavelli’s The Prince, both philosophers possess different opinions on how a ruler ought to govern. In particular Machiavelli pays specific attention to the importance of

Machiavelli believes that the foundation of a strong Nation State is a strong army. According to The prince the most important part of being a leader is studying the art of war. Staying in power is a main point in the prince and to stay in power a Prince must conduct a strong army. The Prince proclaims not only do you need a strong army but also you need to be in total control of that army. “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

He explains that, “...a natural difficulty which exists in all new dominions, because men change masters willingly, hoping to better themselves; and this belief makes them take arms against their rulers…” (Machiavelli 6). Hence, in order to be an effective ruler, a prince must overcome the aforementioned challenge. Moreover, he must also be pragmatic, unbound to moral consciousness or traditional scruples, heavy-handed, sleuth, defend his state with a domestic military (as mercenaries only provoke the weakening of a state), and take whatever lengths he must to solidify his strength and capabilities to rule, brutality being a welcomed measure so long as the “ends justify the means”, while also not oppressing the people.

Machiavelli thinks it is better for the prince to be feared than loved. For a prince who is loved will be compassionate towards others, mainly his soldiers. When danger is at bay his men will hold him in the highest regard. Should an attack occur they will very quickly turn their backs on him. He may be viewed as weak and untrustworthy, thus easier to overtake. As he explains, “And men are less hesitant about harming someone who makes himself loved than one who makes himself feared because love is held together by a chain of obligation which, since men are a sorry lot, is broken on every occasion in which their own self-interest is concerned: but fear is held together by dread of punishment which will never abandon you” (p.46). If he is loved rather than hated he can never keep an army of soldiers under his command. However, he must not be so feared to the point he is hated to do so he must not take what does not belong to him, and keep his hands off the wives of his subjects.

The humanist movement brought about the inspiration of both Niccolò Machiavelli and Baldassare Castiglione during the Italian Renaissance of the fifteenth century. Machiavelli and Castiglione shared their beliefs about society in their published writings. The most notorious of Machiavelli’s works was The Prince, a take on the political structure and successes of western civilization. Castiglione’s most known publication, The Courtier, was heavily influenced by the works of Plato and Cicero and contributed heavy sections of dialogue. The writings of these two writers was truly visionary for the time and expressed the various opinions on how a specific faction of people should behave during the time.

A prince should master the art of war and dedicate the entirety of his rule to the mastery of that art or be prepared to lose control of his state. Is it better to be loved or feared? It would appear that Machiavelli would rather be feared than loved but, in my opinion, it seems that he only chooses fear over love due to his mistrust in man and inability to have everyone love him. In order to do what is in the best interests of the state, he believed fear must be instilled in people to discourage any disorder and remind people of the ramifications that follow misdeeds. Unfortunately, this mindset was developed by observing the rise to power of the Borgia family, which was known for corruption, greed, warmongering, deception, and murder. Should a Prince be honest or lie? The text explains that a prince should be honest but only when it is in the best interest of his state. While integrity is an important characteristic it is also unrealistic for a prince to fight a war honestly when his enemies use lies and deceit as a recipe for

He talks about the importance of war in part because he is writing this in a time of political fragmentation. He says many things about war including that you should rely on your own army not hire mercenaries or militia because they will not have the devotion to your cause like your own people do. Also, that war is important and being a strong military power is paramount to keep power, although he also says its important so seem faithful merciful and sincere he says you do not have to be whatsoever even that it is necessary and okay to act against these things even if it is cruel and violent. He talks about the fact that when you rule you should start out from a position of mistrust because people take advantage of that. He also believes that you sometimes must do evil in order to get what you desire this includes violence which he advocates for but he does think there is such thing as too much violence which is not ideal. One of the most notable points he also makes about a Prince is that he says that it is better to be feared by your people than loved “one ought to be both feared and loved, but as it is difficult for the two to go together, it is much safer to be feared than loved,” (Prince, 60) he goes onto say that he must avoid hatred at all costs even if feared. Machiavelli’s prince must separate statecraft from soul craft which means that your personal feelings may not get in the way of your leadership. His argument though sharply, contrasts Socrates’

Barnett makes sure to approach this article with other peoples' opinions still in mind, telling Machiavelli's story very open mindedly. I understood his doings a bit more when Machiavelli used Agathocles the Sicilian as an example to distinguish between the rights and wrongs of doing something unlawful to "better" yourself or others. If you kill tons of people and take over their city and don't end up bettering it and its' people then it's cruel. If you do end up doing something great for that country, city, or whatever, then you have what it takes to be a great ruler. Power, motivation, and hard skin.

The Courtier and The Prince are two pieces of writing that express different views on what the ideal person and leader should be like. These traits have been debated on since the beginning of time. The Courtier, which was written by Baldassare Castiglione, was published in 1528. It was a very popular book,for it was translated into many different languages. The Prince was written by Niccolo Machiavelli in 1517.

In The Prince, Machiavelli explains what a good and successful prince should be like. He advocates a strong, cutthroat authority figure and encourages the winning of power by any means necessary. The main theme in The Prince is that mob rule is dangerous, for people know only what is good for themselves and not what is good for the whole. The common people, in Machiavelli’s view, “are ungrateful, fickle, liars, and deceivers, they shun danger and are greedy for profit; while you treat them well, they are yours”. He believes that these commoners should be

Much of modern political thought is attributed to Niccolo Machiavelli, and it is easy to see why that is he from his writings and thoughts in the Prince to the Discourses. In his writings, he starts in the prince by suggesting that one person should lead a country. For that, alone many would disregard Machiavelli for saying that an authoritarian leader would be able to govern best. Since in today's world, we find democratic societies in many different forms, and for anyone to say that an autocratic ruler would be best to run a country is heresy. Machiavelli though was not incompetent and put much thought into his writings. He showed evolving views in the Discourses turning to "ancient knowledge and experience as the first step to applying reason to politics (Sellers)."

He wrote, “Here a question arises: whether it is better to be loved than feared, or the reverse. 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… Love endures by a bond which men, being scoundrels, may break whenever it serves their advantage to do so; but fear is supported by the dread of pain, which is ever present.” Machiavelli asserted that to remain in power a prince must remain good in the eyes of the people; he does not have to be loved and it is more effective for him to be feared but being hated will surely lead to a prince’s downfall.

Castiglione supports the idea in, The Book of the Courtier, that a person can be constructed and that people should adhere to an ideal and try to emulate it, even if it is impossible to become. However Machiavelli is more concerned with describing a real model for princes and what they have to do to survive as actual rulers rather than a happy ideal they can try to be, but never will obtain. Both Machiavelli and Castiglione spend a lot of time explaining how important it is for one to

Machiavelli goes on in Chapters Fifteen through Twenty Three to discuss his advice to the reader in the ideal behavior and characteristics of a prince. He mentions that doing good would only lead to the ruin of a prince’s kingdom. He claims that a prince should be stingy and cruel as opposed to generous and merciful. He then, of course, adds in examples of successful rulers who were both moral and immoral alike. A prince should break promises more than he keeps them, according to the author. He also suggests that, while behaving in the aforementioned ways, a prince should do his best to avoid being despised by leaving his subjects’ land and women alone and by undertaking great projects to boost his reputation. As suggested at the beginning of Chapter Nineteen, a prince should not be “fickle, frivolous, effeminate, cowardly, [or] irresolute,” (70). ¬¬¬He should also choose wise, as opposed to flattering, advisors.