Niccolo Machiavelli: The Prince or the Machevil - Annotated Bibliography Example

Niccolo Machiavelli: The Prince or the Machevil? The Italian Renaissance was a period of intellectual and cultural revivalism which gave rise to brilliant minds such as the Italian diplomat, political thinker and artist Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli or in his most popular work, the Prince. Machiavelli became a key figure in the Italian Renaissance which also made him an eccentric historical personality in the 16th century. His significance to Western history was highlighted by his masterpieces on the essence of a ruler or a leader of a state. Machiavelli was an interesting and controversial political icon because of the premises he put forth on the necessity of a ruler to be harsh, cruel and cunning to his subjects. He became well-known for his adages, “It is better to be feared than to be loved” and “The end must always justify the means” (Perry p. 328). Some of the most evil leaders in the history of nations were inspired by the insights and principles of the Prince. Machiavelli’s visions and thoughts were drastically shaped by the political responsibilities of his position as a diplomat and at the same time an ambassador of Florence. Niccolo Machiavelli was born in the flourishing city of Florence in Italy on May 3, 1469. The political environment in Italy during his birth was filled with vigor and intensity. At the age of 29, he became the second chancellor of the Florentine Republic after the downfall of the regime of Savonarola. His appointment to the commanding diplomatic position was due to his gift in espousing the importance of humanism in education. He urged the people to educate themselves on “humane disciplines” of ancient history, moral philosophy, classical studies, Latin and rhetoric. His position as a second chancellor enabled him to travel all over Europe due to his responsibilities in carrying out foreign and diplomatic relations for the Republic (Chabod p. 1). In his travels, Machiavelli became well-aware of the underlying factors governing the rise and fall of sovereigns throughout Europe. His duties as a diplomat and an ambassador gained him much knowledge on the various strategies toward triumphant leadership. His political convictions which were manifested in his works were substantially determined by the experiences he had acquired from his assignments as a diplomat and from the military incidences during his time. The first mission of Machiavelli as a Florentine diplomat was an assignment that bestowed him of a priceless familiarity on the irony posed by his beloved hometown. He was commissioned to visit the court of Louis XII of France to pacify the aggravated French ruler after the tragedy in their treaty against Pisa. During his appointment with the French ruler, Machiavelli realized that Florence own credence on its strength as a civilization was evidently in stark contrast with the realities of its military condition and resources. As an individual who was largely educated in the notions of modern kingship, Machiavelli was humiliated by the thought that the administrative foundations of Florence were shabby and feeble. This fruitful discovery led Machiavelli to a remarkable undertaking which was a political movement towards the understanding of the elements of an effective leadership. He blatantly denounced any form of military weakness, procrastination and indecisiveness while he encouraged the exigencies for courage, fierceness and concrete power. In the year 1502, years later after Machiavelli’s mission to the French ruler Louis XII, he was then summoned to meet with the duke of Romagna who insisted on an official coalition with Florence, Cesare Borgia. The ruler largely impressed Machiavelli because of his show of bravery, ferociousness and limitless execution of power. Machiavelli had observed that Cesare acted on complete secrecy and decided on important political matters promptly. Cesare, for Machiavelli was an epitome of a successful leader who reinforced qualities of valor, physical might and ravenous impulse. Machiavelli’s first-hand investigation of Cesare’s leadership approaches proved to be useful during the time of great political chaos and unrest in Italy. Nevertheless, there was one aspect of Cesare’s leadership that did not appeal to Machiavelli, his extreme self-assurance. Machiavelli criticized the duke’s over-reliance on good luck and fate hence motivating him to brand Cesare as an irrational leader. For Machiavelli, proficient leadership depends on the mastery of one’s own destiny and consciously balancing one’s destiny through self-actualization. Following the fateful communication between Machiavelli and Cesare Borgia, the former was then ordered to interact with the newly elected pope, Julius II. At first, Machiavelli believed that the warrior pope’s leadership strategies were heading toward a catastrophe. But then, he had ascertained that the pope was a successful leader in his own right. The pope’s powerful position coupled with his absolute courage provided great hope for an astonishing triumph. Yet, Machiavelli learned from the pope’s decision-making methodologies and his correspondent actions for the fulfillment of his plans that a ruler must know how to tactically adjust to the constantly shifting circumstances. Moreover, leaders should not purely rely on natural sentiments and dispositions but on the demands of the current political condition. Machiavelli then concluded that the chief reason explaining the downfall of the rulers he had the chance to mingle with was the inability to adapt to the changing conditions hence goading Machiavelli to build his political philosophy on the fundamental bases of flexibility and strength. In the renaissance period, Italy became a melting pot of severe political conflict which involved the leading city-states of Florence, Venice, Milan and Naples in addition to the powerful papacy, Spain, France and the Holy Roman Empire. The large cities of Italy fought against each other through warring off their opponents. The outcomes of these unceasing rivalries among the great Italian cities were immense political maneuver, harmful threats, black propaganda and violence. These social disorders and unrest that Machiavelli personally witnessed prompted him to write his infamous masterpiece entitled The Prince. Although Machiavelli proposed a kind of leadership that appears to be out of morality and virtue, the brilliant political philosopher publicized the importance of national unity and autonomy from external influences such as foreign interventions. In the second half of the 16th century, the political works of Machiavelli became popular. Some critics labeled his works as polluting and corrupting which consequently banned the significant writings in 1564. The Prince was denounced by the Pope thus increasing the notoriety of the work. The Holy rejection of the renowned piece of political masterwork added to the misinterpretation of the text by many. The term “Machiavellian” evolved into something which denotes wicked political manipulations. Machiavelli’s outlook between ethical behavior and politics was practical which led some to generalize that he was encouraging politicians to be immoral in their pursuit for power. Modern-day thinkers defended Machiavelli on the ground that the critics did not consider the period wherein it was situated. Moreover, the critics interpreted the work of Machiavelli solely on its surface meanings and not on its more profound implications (Mitchell p. 16-19). Machiavelli’s influence on the contemporary period can be subdivided into two: the one that was promoted under his own name and the one that became popular through the subsequent writings of other political thinkers yet did not give credit to Machiavelli’s ideas. As aforementioned, the name of Machiavelli later on evolved into something negative. Even Shakespeare basically believed that Machiavelli was evil which was shown in his play that characterized a villain named “Machevil”. However, there were several modern philosophers who browsed on his works yet very few had the guts to defend his political inclinations. Francis Bacon, an English lawyer and philosopher, was one of the people who believed in the value of Machiavelli’s ideas. Other famous philosophers such as Spinoza, Harrington and Rousseau wrote treatises supporting Machiavelli’s political claims (Grenville p. 205). On the other hand, there were thinkers who evidently developed on their reflections on Machiavelli’s insights yet deliberately thwart any sign that they were backing up the controversial ideas of Machiavelli. Nevertheless, despite the considerable loathing that the works of Machiavelli received there were few thinkers who regarded him as the founder of modernity. According to Burckhardt and Strauss, Machiavelli himself derided the flaws of modernity save for his belief of a stable republic that could cure the pathological illnesses of the modern day and motivate the existence of a social order that is grounded on rationality and not on the concept of destiny and fortune. Even though people strongly criticize Machiavelli, one fact will always remain unshaken, the gift of Machiavelli in influencing the minds of strong and powerful individuals after his fateful death (Encyclopedia Britannica 2008). Niccolo Machiavelli is indeed an intriguing and eccentric historical figure in the 16th century. His life was consistently subjected to political realities, irony and turmoil. His intelligence did not cease to operate even during the most depressing times of his life. Many detested him because several evil men in history claimed that they were inspired by Machiavelli’s pragmatic and logical perspective toward leadership. It is fitting for many to assume that if Machiavelli was not given a chance to exist the world would be a better place to live in. If Machiavelli did not exist, there will be another individual who will take his place; an individual who is not only witty but is well-aware of the fact that leadership should be resilient or flexible to the changing demands of the political realm. I believe that Machiavelli is not the root cause of all political wickedness, as many believe. Machiavelli was only a victim of misinterpretation. It is he who gave rise to the history of modernity. Machiavelli has the unique talent to champion the political causes he had deemed strategic through stylistic and influential discourses. Works Cited Chabod, Frederico. Machiavelli & the Renaissance. London: Bowes & Bowes, 1958. Grenville, J.A.S. A History of the World in the 20th Century. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2000. Mitchell, Joseph R. World History: Volume 2- 1500 to Present. Dubuque: McGraw Hill/ Dushkin, 2005. Perry, Marvin. A History of the World. Boston, Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1988. "Niccolò Machiavelli." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2008. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 09 Jul. 2008 . Read More