Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The prince by machiavelli the ends
The prince by machiavelli the ends
Lincoln biography essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The prince by machiavelli the ends
Niccolo Machiavelli was a fifteenth century diplomat and historian. Born in Florence in 1469, he lived during a turbulent time in Italy’s history when the division and rivalry between city-states made Italy vulnerable to external powers such as France and Spain. Although he created many other works such as plays and poems, his most famous work is perhaps The Prince. Machiavelli is primarily remembered for his political works and is known as the father of modern political thinking (Monte, 2013; Wilcox, 1975).
To understand Machiavelli’s work, it is important to understand the times in which he lived and his personal experiences that influenced his work. Machiavelli served in the Florentine republic in several capacities until the Medici
…show more content…
In his dedication he writes “…which work I have not embellished with swelling or magnificent words…nor with any intrinsic allurements or adornments whatever..”(Machiavelli, 1513). We can find support for the reality of what Machiavelli writes in our own modern times. Certainly leaders such as Hitler and Stalin have been described as “Machiavellian” but only in the most negative sense. One example of a great leader that could be seen as following most of Machiavelli’s advice is one of our greatest presidents, Abraham Lincoln. Of course, Lincoln is considered an honest and moral person, and he achieved great things such as emancipation of the slaves. However, he also was a strong leader who was not unwilling to do whatever was necessary to preserve the Union, not just the use of force. The Emancipation Proclamation itself, while morally correct, could be viewed as a political and military tool to undermine the Confederate States. It did not free all the slaves, only those in the territories that were in rebellion against the United States. Also, during the civil war, Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, a basic constitutional right. Lincoln surrounded himself with intelligent advisors and was willing to listen to others council and learn, but made his own decisions in the end. Much as Machiavelli describes Moses and others in chapter IV of The Prince, Doris Kearns Goodwin describes Lincoln in Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln, in this way “It was history that gave him the opportunity to manifest his greatness, providing the stage that allowed him to shape and transform our national life” (pg XIX; Machiavelli, 1513; Goodwin,
Machiavelli was a Florentine Statesman. In 1512, the Florentine Republic collapsed and the Medico's came back into power. Machiavelli was labeled a traitor and was sent to prison where he was tortured and threatened with execution.1 He was subsequently released into exile. He went to the country and wrote “The Prince”. He had wanted to present it to Lorenzo Medici as a show of his loyalty but it did not have the effect that Machiavelli had envisioned.
In fact, Machiavelli’s morals are as questionable as those of Ferdinand II. Because Machiavelli believed that “it [was] unnecessary for a prince to have all the good qualities [he had] enumerated, but it [was] very necessary to appear to have them” (62), Ferdinand II seemed to be an excellent example of the advice given in the book. However, Machiavelli fails to see that Ferdinand II’s actions opposed one of his primary beliefs. Machiavelli specified that princes did not have to avoid cruelty and dishonesty if and only if their actions benefited the state, and that a prince must consider every action he took based on its effect on his country. As previously stated, Ferdinand II’s actions exclusively benefited himself. Considering the fact that this was a principal theme throughout Machiavelli’s book, why he saw Ferdinand II as such a “great and extraordinary” ruler is baffling. His love of the king is as hypocritical as the King’s character. There is a strong possibility that Machiavelli had a bias towards Ferdinand, considering he was the ruler when he wrote The Prince, and Machiavelli did not see his rule’s final outcome. This presents the question of how Machiavelli’s partiality affects his credibility. Provided he did, in fact, have that bias, what does that say about the rest of his work? Since Machiavelli did not have a neutral stance on politics, he may have steered Prince De’ Medici and all other political leaders who read The Prince in the direction of his own opinions, thus singlehandedly shaping history into his
Niccolo Machiavelli lived in Florence, Italy in the 1400’s. The country of Italy was divided into city-states that had their own leaders, but all pledged alliance to their king. In time in which great leaders were needed in order to help the development of a city-state and country, Machiavelli had a theory that man needed a leader to control them. In his book The Prince, he speaks of the perfect leader.
First, Machiavelli’s method attempts to discard discussion of the “imaginary” political world and instead focuses on “real life” (Machiavelli 48). His end goal is to construct rubric for leaders to follow either to rule and unite (in this case Italy) in the Prince or create a powerful republic in the Discourses. His method is derived from comparing contemporary and historical events to illustrate and substantiate his argument. He is critical of how people interpret history (Machiavelli 83). He still believes that his ability to interpret and compare history is superior. Arguing that his methodological approach doesn’t just “chew” on history but actually “tastes” it (Machiavelli 83). Therefore we can understand that he justifies his method approach as not being akin to most because he possesses a much deeper understanding of history. Throughout his two books using ...
Machiavelli’s views were drastically different from other humanists at his time. He strongly promoted a secular society and felt morality was not necessary but stood in the way of a successfully governed state. He stated that people generally tended to work for their own best interests and gave little thought to the well being of the state. He distrusted citizens saying, “In time of adversity, when a state is in need of its citizens, there are few to be found.” In his writings in The Prince, he constantly questioned the citizens’ loyalty and warned for the leaders to be wary in trusting citizens. His radical and distrusting thoughts on human nature were derived out of concern for Italy’s then unstable government. Machiavelli also had a s...
Machiavelli is “a crystal-clear realist who understands the limits and uses of power.” -- Pulitzer Prize–winning author Jared Diamond (2013)
Niccolo Machiavelli was born in Florence, Italy in 1469 to a middleclass family. The time in which Machiavelli lived Italy as a country was not united but divide and split into little providences and republics. He latter became responsible for the Florentine militia against the Medici government and rule. When the Medici power reclaimed Florence Machiavelli was arrested for conspiracy he was tortured and then banished from Florence. During his banishment he wrote the book The Prince in 1513 which is dedicated to the new prince of Florence Lorenzo De Medici. The book was a discourse to the prince on how to run a country and also a way Machiavelli can get a job working in politics again.
In recent history, the last fifty years or so, modern businessmen and politicians have given Machiavelli a Renaissance of his own. Professional politicians have written novels they claim to be on the same philosophical level of Machiavelli’s The Prince. Gary Hart, in his book The Patriot: An Exhortation to Liberate America From the Barbarians attempts to update Niccolo to the modern age with his own political philosophies, and attempts to credit Machiavelli by quoting him frequently. “Hart makes an effort to mimic the form, if not the spirit, of the most famous work by his Florentine ‘mentor.’…There is a dedicatory le...
The sections that I will be presenting are 73, 74, and 75. I will discuss the political ideas of Niccolo Machiavelli, Francesco Guicciardini, and Thomas Hobbes during the time of Florence Republic. First, Niccolo Machiavelli was born in Florence, Italy in 1469 at a time when the country was in political upheaval. Italy was divided between four dominant city-states, by which each of them was always at the mercy of the continual changing of princes and governments.
Niccolò Machiavelli was born into a world of drastic change, Renaissance Italy, that would cause his mind to conjure ideas about many political issues transferred into books that the entire world has profited from since. His ideas were incredibly relevant to his time, because they suggested harsh governments, the only kind of governments that seemed to be working. He proposed creating these harsh governments through a separation of personal morality and political behavior. His ideas were so relevant and so universal, that they still influence politics today. Niccolò Machiavelli proposed the creating of strong central government more powerful than anything else, including religion and morality.
Machiavelli once said ‘Because men are wretched creatures who would not keep their word to you, you need not keep your word to them’. Machiavelli is seen in history as one of the most influencing men of all time. Matter a fact, “the name Machiavelli was a synonym for the devil” (Barnett page 6). Machiavelli established a lot of this reputation from his work The Prince, it was written in 1513-1514. But, a lot people thought that he was misunderstood considering he wrote many books and people focus mostly on one. Second you must take the time period into thought and realize how the world was about 500 years ago.
Machiavelli's views have been misinterpreted since his book was first written, people take him in the wrong way, and are offended by what he says. Careless readers take him in a completely wrong way, such as they think that he believes that the end justifies the means, that a leader should lie to the people, and that a ruler has to rule with force. In actuality, Machiavelli means no such thing, he says that there are times when the common good outweighs the means, and the morality of a rulers actions. He also says that you cannot be loved by everyone, so try to be loved and feared at the same time, but of the two, choose to be feared. The Prince is considered to be one of the most important nonfiction literature written in the history of mankind.
The time of the Renaissance is one filled with growth of intellect, beauty of nature, the dignity of mankind, and the rising of artists. It is characterized from the move of scholasticism, a devotion specifically for the theological and philosophical teachings of the Church to humanism, a devotion to the humanities of rhetoric, arithmetic, and other subjects. One example of this movement can be seen in Machiavelli’s The Prince in which describes Niccolo Machiavelli’s ideal ruler and how to obtain stability, which was lacking as during the time of his writing this, there was a power shift from the Mediterranean to Northern Europe. How Machiavelli describes his ideal prince and his leadership is one that in which he is
Although, Machiavelli argues that an ideal ruler must be cruel, feared and unjust in order to maintain power in his paper, "The Prince", this is not necessary true. An ideal ruler must be assertive, just and filled with integrity to maintain power, prestige, and the loyalty of those he governs.
During the time 1469, a child by the name of Niccolo Di Bernardo Del Machiavelli was born. Some may know him as an Italian philosopher, humanist, or an evil minded fellow associated with the corruptness of totalitarian government. In Machiavelli’s home state of Florence, he introduces the modern political theory. Hoping to gain influence with the ruling Medici family, Niccolo wrote a pamphlet called The Prince (Prezzolini). Niccolo lived a nondescript childhood and his main political experience in his youth was watching Savonarola from afar.