on this article.
I have never met Sonia Gandhi, I am not in politics or business. I am innocent. Believe, you, me, my good buddy, Subbu-the-idiot from Madras, you.
Just kidding. I love Subbu. He ain't no idiot. Just stupid.
Getting back to Sonia. Sonia learned her politics-101 by observing Indira Gandhi. Not necessarily Sonia was Indira's choice. Indira wanted, very much, to hand over the dynastic rule to Sanjay. Unfortunately, Sanjay jumped the gun and became, ipso facto, the Indian prime minister. So they say in the fish market of Bihar.
I am a great admirer of one another famous Italian. Niccolo Machiavelli. After Indian "arthashastra," a definite book upon the statecraft, I consider Machiavelli's "The Prince" as the last word.
Even other thinkers, philosophers and Niccolo's contemporaries accept his gift to the political science.
"Francis Bacon argued the case for what would become modern science which would be based more upon real experience and experimentation, free from assumptions about metaphysics, and aimed at increasing control."
You did a favor to me by showing your readers the role played by Sonia as a keystone in the current Congress led UPA rule.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli (
Italian pronunciation: [nikkoˌlɔ makjaˈvɛlli], 3 May 1469 – 21 June 1527) was an
Italian historian, philosopher,
humanist, and writer based in Florence during the
Renaissance. He is one of the main founders of modern
political science.
[1] He was a diplomat,
political philosopher, playwright, and a civil servant of the
Florentine Republic. He also wrote comedies, carnival songs, poetry, and some of the most well-known personal correspondence in the Italian language. His position in the regime of Florence as Secretary to the Second
Chancery of the
Republic of Florence lasted from 1498 to 1512, a period in which the
Medici were not in power. Machiavelli's most well-known writing was, however, after this period, during the time when the Medici recovered power, and Machiavelli was removed from all positions of responsibility.
Machiavelli was born in
Florence, Italy, the first son, and third child, of attorney Bernardo di Niccolò Machiavelli, and his wife, Bartolomea di Stefano Nelli.
[2] The Machiavelli family are believed to be descended from the old
marquesses of Tuscany, and to have produced thirteen Florentine
Gonfalonieres of Justice,
[3] one of the offices of a group of nine citizens selected by drawing lots every two months, who formed the government, or
Signoria. Machiavelli, like many people of Florence, was however not a full citizen of Florence, due to the nature of Florentine citizenship in that time, even under the republican regime.
[4]
Machiavelli was born in a tumultuous era—
popes waged acquisitive wars against Italian
city-states, and people and cities might fall from power at any time. Along with the pope and the major cities like
Venice and Florence, foreign powers such as
France,
Spain, the
Holy Roman Empire, and even
Switzerland battled for regional influence and control. Political-military alliances continually changed, featuring
condottieri (mercenary leaders) who changed sides without warning, and short lived governments rising and falling.
[5] Machiavelli was taught grammar,
rhetoric and Latin. It is thought that he did not learn Greek, even though Florence was at the time one of the centres of Greek scholarship in Europe. In 1494, Florence restored the
republic — expelling the
Medici family, who had ruled Florence for some sixty years. In June 1498, shortly after the execution of
Savonarola, Machiavelli, at the age of 29, was elected as head of the second chancery. In July 1498, he was also made the secretary of the
Dieci di Libertà e Pace. He was in a diplomatic council responsible for negotiation and military affairs, carrying out, between 1499 and 1512, several diplomatic missions, to the court of
Louis XII in France; to that of
Ferdinand II of Aragón, in Spain; in Germany; and to the Papacy in Rome, in the Italian states. Moreover, from 1502 to 1503, he witnessed the brutal reality of the state-building methods of
Cesare Borgia (1475–1507), and his father
Pope Alexander VI, who were then engaged in the process of trying to bring a large part of
central Italy under their possession, partly under the pretext of defending Church interests.
Between 1503 and 1506, Machiavelli was responsible for the Florentine
militia, including the City’s defense. He distrusted
mercenaries (a distrust he explained in his official reports, and then later in his theoretical works), preferring a politically invested citizen-militia - a philosophy that bore fruit. His command of Florentine citizen-soldiers defeated Pisa in 1509; yet, in August of 1512, the Medici, helped by
Pope Julius II, used Spanish troops to defeat the Florentines at Prato.
Piero Soderini resigned as Florentine head of state, and left in exile. The Florentine city-state and the Republic were dissolved. Machiavelli was deprived of office in 1512 by the Medici, and, in 1513, was accused of conspiracy, and arrested and imprisoned for a time. Despite torture ("
with the rope", where the prisoner is hanged from his bound wrists, from the back, forcing the arms to bear the body's weight, thus dislocating the shoulders), he denied involvement and was released; then, retiring to his estate, at
Sant'Andrea in Percussina, near
San Casciano in Val di Pesa, he devoted himself to study and writing the political treatises that earned his intellectual place in the development of political philosophy and political conduct.
[6] Despairing of the opportunity to remain directly involved in political matters, after a time Machiavelli began to participate in intellectual groups in Florence and wrote several plays that (unlike his works on politics/political theory) were both popular and widely known in his lifetime. Still politics remained his main passion and to satisfy interest he maintained a well-known correspondence with better politically connected friends, attempting to become involved once again in political life.
[7]
In a letter to
Francesco Vettori, he described his exile:
When evening comes, I return home and go to my study. On the threshold, I strip naked, taking off my muddy, sweaty work day clothes, and put on the robes of court and palace, and, in this graver dress, I enter the courts of the ancients, and am welcomed by them, and there I taste the food that alone is mine, and for which I was born. And there I make bold to speak to them and ask the motives of their actions, and they, in their humanity, reply to me. And for the space of four hours I forget the world, remember no vexation, fear poverty no more, tremble no more at death; I pass indeed into their world.[8]
Machiavelli died in 1527 at the age of 58. He was buried at the
Church of Santa Croce in Florence, Italy. An
epitaph honouring him is inscribed in a small monument. The
Latin legend reads:
TANTO NOMINI NULLUM PAR ELOGIUM ("so great a name (has) no adequate praise" or "no
eulogy (would be) appropriate to (praise) such a great name").
[edit] The Prince
Niccolò Machiavelli’s best-known book,
Il Principe, contains a number of maxims concerning politics, but rather than the more traditional subject of a hereditary prince, it concentrates on the possibility of a "new prince". To retain power, the hereditary prince must carefully maintain the socio-political institutions to which the people are accustomed; whereas a new prince has the more difficult task in ruling, since he must first stabilize his new-found power in order to build an enduring political structure. That requires the prince being concerned with reputation but also being willing to act immorally. As a political scientist, Machiavelli emphasises the occasional need for the methodical exercise of brute force, deceit, and so on.
Notwithstanding some mitigating themes, the
Catholic Church proscribed
The Prince, registering it to the
Index Librorum Prohibitorum, and
humanists also viewed the book negatively — among them,
Erasmus of Rotterdam. As a treatise, its primary intellectual contribution to the history of political thought is the fundamental break between political
Realism and political
Idealism — thus,
The Prince is a manual to acquiring and keeping political power. In contrast with
Plato and
Aristotle, Machiavelli insisted that an imaginary ideal society is not the model for a prince to orient himself by.
Concerning the differences and similarities in Machiavelli's advice to ruthless and tyrannical princes in
The Prince and his more republican exhortations in
Discourses on Livy, many have concluded that
The Prince although written in the form of advice for a monarchical prince, contains arguments for the superiority of republican regimes, similar to those found in the
Discourses. In the 18th century the work was even called a
satire, for example by
Jean-Jacques Rousseau. More recently, commentators such as
Leo Strauss and
Harvey Mansfield have agreed that the
Prince can be read as having a deliberate comical irony. Other commentators have not seen the irony as deliberate comedy, but most commentators agree that the Prince is in any case republican to some extent.
Antonio Gramsci argued that Machiavelli's audience for this work was not even the ruling class but the common people because the rulers already knew these methods through their education.
[edit] Discourses on Livy
The
Discourses on the First Ten Books of Titus Livy (
Discorsi) nominally discuss a classical history of early
Ancient Rome. Machiavelli presents it as a series of lessons on how a republic
should be started and structured. It is a larger work than the
Prince, and it more openly explains the advantages of republics. It includes early versions of the concept of
checks and balances, and asserts the superiority of a republic over a principality. It became one of the central texts of
republicanism.
[9] From
The Discourses:
- “In fact, when there is combined under the same constitution a prince, a nobility, and the power of the people, then these three powers will watch and keep each other reciprocally in check”. Book I, Chapter II
- “Doubtless these means [of attaining power] are cruel and destructive of all civilized life, and neither Christian, nor even human, and should be avoided by every one. In fact, the life of a private citizen would be preferable to that of a king at the expense of the ruin of so many human beings”. Book I, Chapter XXVI
- “Now, in a well-ordered republic, it should never be necessary to resort to extra-constitutional measures. . . . ” Book I, Chapter XXXIV
- “. . . the governments of the people are better than those of princes”. Book I, Chapter LVIII
- “. . . if we compare the faults of a people with those of princes, as well as their respective good qualities, we shall find the people vastly superior in all that is good and glorious”. Book I, Chapter LVIII
- “For government consists mainly in so keeping your subjects that they shall be neither able, nor disposed to injure you. . . . ” Book II, Chapter XXIII
- “. . . no prince is ever benefited by making himself hated”. Book III, Chapter XIX
- “Let not princes complain of the faults committed by the people subjected to their authority, for they result entirely from their own negligence or bad example”. Book III, Chapter XXIX [10]
[edit] Other political and historical works
Peter Withorne’s 1573 translation of the Art of War
- Discorso sopra le cose di Pisa (1499)
- Del modo di trattare i popoli della Valdichiana ribellati (1502)
- Del modo tenuto dal duca Valentino nell’ ammazzare Vitellozzo Vitelli, Oliverotto da Fermo, etc. (1502) — A Description of the Methods Adopted by the Duke Valentino when Murdering Vitellozzo Vitelli, Oliverotto da Fermo, the Signor Pagolo, and the Duke di Gravina Orsini
- Discorso sopra la provisione del danaro (1502) — A discourse about the provision of money.
- Ritratti delle cose dell’ Alemagna (1508–1512) - Portrait of the affairs of Germany.
- Dell’Arte della Guerra (1519–1520) — The Art of War, high military science.
- Discorso sopra il riformare lo stato di Firenze (1520) — A discourse about the reforming of Florence.
- Sommario delle cose della citta di Lucca (1520) — A summary of the affairs of the city of Lucca.
- The Life of Castruccio Castracani of Lucca(1520) — Vita di Castruccio Castracani da Lucca, a short biography.
- Istorie Florentine (1520–1525) — Florentine Histories, an eight-volume history book of the city-state, Florence, commissioned by Giulio di Giuliano de’ Medici, later Pope Clement VII.
[edit] Fictional works
Besides being a statesman and political scientist, Machiavelli also translated classical works, and was a dramaturge (
Clizia,
Mandragola), a poet (
Sonetti,
Canzoni,
Ottave,
Canti carnascialeschi), and a novelist (
Belfagor arcidiavolo).
Some of his other work:
[edit] Other works
Della lingua (1514), a dialogue about the language is also normally considered to be by Machiavelli.
Machiavelli's literary executor, Giuliano de'Ricci, also reported having seen that Machiavelli, his grandfather, made a comedy in the style of
Aristophanes which included living Florentines as characters, and to be titled
Le Maschere. It has been suggested that due to such things as this and his style of writing to his superiors generally, there was very likely some animosity to Machiavelli even before the return of the Medici.
[11]
[edit] Common themes
Commentators have taken very different approaches to Machiavelli, and not always agreed. Major discussion has tended to be especially about two issues, first how unified and philosophical his work is, and secondly concerning how innovative or traditional it is.
[12]
[edit] A coherent philosophy?
There is some disagreement concerning how best to describe the unifying themes, if there are any, that can be found in Machiavelli's works, especially in the two major political works,
The Prince and the
Discourses. Some commentators have described him as inconsistent, and perhaps as not even putting a high priority in consistency.
[12] Others such as
Hans Baron have argued that his ideas must have changed dramatically over time. Some have argued that his conclusions are best understood as a product of his times, experiences and education. Others, such as Leo Strauss and Harvey Mansfield, have argued strongly that there is a very strong and deliberate consistency and distinctness, even arguing that this extends to all of Machiavelli's works including his comedies and letters.
[12]
[edit] Innovator and reviver of ancient wisdom
Commentators such as Leo Strauss have gone so far as to name Machiavelli as the deliberate originator of
modernity itself. Others have argued that Machiavelli is only a particularly interesting example of trends which were happening around him. In any case Machiavelli presented himself at various times as someone reminding Italians of the old virtues of the Romans and Greeks, and other times as someone promoting a completely new approach to politics.
[12]
[edit] Predecessors and probable influences
That Machiavelli had a wide range of influences is in itself not controversial. Their relative importance is however a subject of on-going discussion. It is possible to summarize some of the main influences emphasized by different commentators.
1. The Mirror of Princes genre. Gilbert (1938) summarized the similarities between
The Prince and the genre it obviously imitates, the so-called "
Mirror of Princes" style. This was a classically influenced genre, with models at least as far back as
Xenophon and
Isocrates, that was still quite popular during Machiavelli's life. While Gilbert emphasizes the similarities however, he agrees with all other commentators that Machiavelli was particularly novel in the way he used this genre, even when compared to his contemporaries such as
Baldassare Castiglione and
Erasmus. One of the major innovations Gilbert noted was that Machiavelli focused upon the "deliberate purpose of dealing with a new ruler who will need to establish himself in defiance of custom". Normally, these types of works were addressed only to hereditary princes.
2. Classical republicanism. Commentators such as
Quentin Skinner and
J.G.A. Pocock, in the so-called "Cambridge School" of interpretation have been able to show that some of the republican themes in Machiavelli's political works, particularly the
Discourses on Livy, can be found in medieval Italian literature which was influenced by classical authors such as
Sallust.
3. Classical political philosophy: Xenophon, Plato and Aristotle. The Socratic school of classical political philosophy, especially
Aristotle, had become a major influence upon European political thinking in the late
Middle Ages. It existed both in the catholicised form presented by
Thomas Aquinas, and in the more controversial "
Averroist" form of authors like
Marsilius of Padua. Machiavelli was critical of catholic political thinking and may have been influenced by Averroism. But he cites Plato and Aristotle very infrequently and apparently did not approve of them.
Leo Strauss argued that the strong influence of
Xenophon, a student of Socrates more known as an historian, rhetorician and soldier, was a major source of Socratic ideas for Machiavelli, sometimes not in line with Aristotle. While interest in
Plato was increasing in Florence during Machiavelli's lifetime he also does not show particular interest in him, but was indirectly influenced by his readings of authors such as
Polybius,
Plutarch and
Cicero.
The major difference between Machiavelli and the Socratics, according to Strauss, is Machiavelli's materialism and therefore his rejection of both a teleological view of nature, and of the view that philosophy is higher than politics. Aimed-for things which the Socratics argued would tend to happen by nature, Machiavelli said would happen by chance.
[13] 4. Classical materialism. Strauss argued that Machiavelli may have seen himself as influenced by some ideas from classical materialists such as
Democritus,
Epicurus and
Lucretius. Strauss however sees this also as a sign of major innovation in Machiavelli, because classical materialists did not share the Socratic regard for political life, while Machiavelli clearly did.
[13] 5. Thucydides. Some scholars note the similarity between Machiavellian and the Greek historian
Thucydides, since both emphasized
power politics.
[14][15] Strauss argued that Machiavelli may indeed have been influenced by
pre-Socratic philosophers, but he felt it was a new combination:-
...contemporary readers are reminded by Machiavelli’s teaching of Thucydides; they find in both authors the same “realism,” i.e., the same denial of the power of the gods or of justice and the same sensitivity to harsh necessity and elusive chance. Yet Thucydides never calls in question the intrinsic superiority of nobility to baseness, a superiority that shines forth particularly when the noble is destroyed by the base. Therefore Thucydides’ History arouses in the reader a sadness which is never aroused by Machiavelli’s books. In Machiavelli we find comedies, parodies, and satires but nothing reminding of tragedy. One half of humanity remains outside of his thought. There is no tragedy in Machiavelli because he has no sense of the sacredness of “the common.” — Strauss (1958, p. 292)
[edit] Innovations
Amongst commentators, there are a few consistently made proposals concerning what was most new in Machiavelli's work.
[edit] Empiricism and realism versus idealism
Machiavelli is sometimes seen as the prototype of a modern empirical scientist, building generalizations from experience and historical facts, and emphasizing the uselessness of theorizing with the imagination.
[12] Machiavelli studied the way people lived and aimed to inform leaders how they should rule and even how they themselves should live. For example, Machiavelli denies that living virtuously necessarily leads to happiness. And Machiavelli viewed misery as
one of the vices that enables a prince to rule. [16] Machiavelli stated 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. [17] In much of Machiavelli's work, it seems that the ruler must adopt unsavory policies for the sake of the continuance of his regime.
A related and more controversial proposal often made is that he described how to do things in politics in a way which seemed neutral concerning who used the advice - tyrants or good rulers.
[12] That Machiavelli strove for realism is not doubted, but for four centuries scholars have debated how best to describe his morality.
The Prince made the word "Machiavellian" a byword for deceit, despotism, and political manipulation. That Machiavelli himself was not evil and indeed intended good, is on the other hand generally accepted.
Leo Strauss, an American political philosopher, declared himself more inclined toward the traditional view that Machiavelli was self-consciously a "teacher of evil," (even if he was not himself evil) since he counsels the princes to avoid the values of justice, mercy, temperance, wisdom, and love of their people in preference to the use of cruelty, violence, fear, and deception.
[18] Italian anti-fascist philosopher
Benedetto Croce (1925) concludes Machiavelli is simply a "realist" or "pragmatist" who accurately states that moral values in reality do not greatly affect the decisions that political leaders make.
[19] German philosopher
Ernst Cassirer (1946) held that Machiavelli simply adopts the stance of a political scientist—a
Galileo of politics—in distinguishing between the "facts" of political life and the "values" of moral judgment.
[20]
[edit] Fortune
Machiavelli is generally seen as being critical of Christianity as it existed in his time, specifically its effect upon politics, and also everyday life. In his opinion, Christianity, along with teleological Aristotelianism that the church had come to accept, allowed practical decisions to be guided too much by imaginary
ideals and encouraged people to lazily leave events up to
providence or, as he would put it, chance, luck or fortune. While Christianity sees modesty as a virtue and pride as sinful, Machiavelli took a more classical position, seeing ambition, spiritedness, and the pursuit of glory as good and natural things, and part of the virtue and prudence that good princes should have. Therefore, while it was traditional to say that leaders should have virtues, especially prudence, Machiavelli's use of the words
virtù and
prudenza was unusual for his time, implying a spirited and immodest ambition. Famously, Machiavelli argued that virtue and prudence can help a man control more of his future, in the place of allowing fortune to do so.
Najemy (1993) has argued that this same approach can be found in Machiavelli's approach to love and desire, as seen in his comedies and correspondence. Najemy shows how Machiavelli's friend Vettori argued against Machiavelli and cited a more traditional understanding of fortune.
On the other hand,
humanism in Machiavelli's time meant that classical pre-Christian ideas about virtue and prudence, including the possibility of trying to control one's future, were not unique to him. But humanists did not go so far as to promote the extra glory of deliberately aiming to establish a new state, in defiance of traditions and laws.
While Machiavelli's approach had classical precedents, it has been argued that it did more than just bring back old ideas, and that Machiavelli was not a typical humanist.
Strauss (1958) argues that the way Machiavelli combines classical ideas is new. While Xenophon and Plato also described realistic politics, and were closer to Machiavelli than Aristotle, they, like Aristotle, also saw Philosophy as something higher than politics. Machiavelli was apparently a
materialist who objected to explanations involving
formal and final causation, or
teleology.
Machiavelli's promotion of ambition amongst leaders while denying any higher standard meant that he encouraged risk taking, and innovation, most famously the founding of new modes and orders. His advice to prince was therefore certainly not limited to discussing how to maintain a state. It has been argued that Machiavelli's promotion of innovation led directly to the argument for
progress as an aim of
politics and
civilization. But while a belief that humanity can control its own future, control nature, and "progress" has been long lasting, Machiavelli's followers, starting with his own friend Guicciardini, have tended to prefer peaceful progress through economic development, and not warlike progress. As Harvey
Mansfield (1995, p. 74) wrote: "In attempting other, more regular and scientific modes of overcoming fortune, Machiavelli's successors formalized and emasculated his notion of virtue."
Machiavelli however, along with some of his classical predecessors, saw ambition and spiritedness, and therefore war, as inevitable and part of
human nature.
Strauss concludes his 1958
Thoughts on Machiavelli by proposing that this promotion of progress leads directly to the modern
arms race. Strauss argued that the unavoidable nature of such arms races, which have existed before modern times and led to the collapse of peaceful civilizations, provides us with both an explanation of what is most truly dangerous in Machiavelli's innovations, but also the way in which the aims of his apparently immoral innovation can be understood.
[edit] View about religion
Machiavelli explains repeatedly that religion is man-made, and that the value of religion lies in its contribution to social order and the rules of morality must be dispensed with if security required it. In
The Prince, the
Discourses, and in the
Life of Castruccio Castracani, he describes "prophets", as he calls them, like
Moses,
Romulus,
Cyrus the Great, and
Theseus (he treats pagan and Christian patriarchs in the same way) as the greatest of new princes, the glorious and brutal founders of the most novel innovations in politics, and men who Machiavelli assures us have always used a large amount of armed force and murder against their own people. He estimated that these sects last from 1666 to 3000 years each time, which, as pointed out by Leo Strauss, would mean that Christianity became due to start finishing about 150 years after Machiavelli.
[21] Machiavelli's concern with Christianity as a sect was that it makes men weak and inactive, delivering politics into the hands of cruel and wicked men without a fight.
While fear of
God can be replaced by fear of the prince, if there is a strong enough prince, Machiavelli felt that having a religion is in any case especially essential to keeping a republic in order. For Machiavelli, a truly great prince can never be conventionally religious himself, but he should make his people religious if he can. According to
Strauss (1958, pp. 226–227) he was not the first person to ever explain religion in this way, but his description of religion was novel because of the way he integrated this into his general account of princes.
Machiavelli's judgment that democracies need religion for practical political reasons was widespread amongst modern proponents of republics until approximately the time of the
French revolution. This therefore represents a point of disagreement between himself and late modernity.
[22]
[edit] The positive side to factional and individual vice
Despite the classical precedents, which Machiavelli was not the only one to promote in his time, Machiavelli's realism and willingness to argue that good ends justify bad things, is seen as a critical stimulus towards some of the most important theories of modern politics.
Firstly, particularly in the
Discourses on Livy, Machiavelli is unusual in the positive side he sometimes seems to describe in factionalism in republics. For example quite early in the
Discourses, (in Book I, chapter 4), a chapter title announces that
the disunion of the
plebs and
senate in Rome
"kept Rome free". That a community has different components whose interests must be balanced in any good regime is an idea with classical precedents, but Machiavelli's particularly extreme presentation is seen as a critical step towards the later political ideas of both a
division of powers or
checks and balances, ideas which lay behind the
US constitution (and most modern constitutions).
Similarly, the modern economic argument for
capitalism, and most modern forms of economics, was often stated in the form of "public virtue from private vices". Also in this case, even though there are classical precedents, Machiavelli's insistence on being both realistic and ambitious, not only admitting that vice exists but being willing to risk encouraging it, is a critical step on the path to this insight.
Mansfield however argues that Machiavelli's own aims have not been shared by those influenced by him. Machiavelli argued against seeing mere peace and economic growth as worthy aims on their own, if they would lead to what Mansfield calls the "taming of the prince".
[23]
[edit] "Machiavellian"
Machiavelli is most famous for a short political treatise,
The Prince, written in 1513, but not published until 1532, five years after his death. Although he privately circulated
The Prince among friends, the only theoretical work to be printed in his lifetime was
The Art of War, about military science. Since the sixteenth century, generations of politicians remain attracted and repelled by its apparently neutral acceptance, or even positive encouragement, of the immorality of powerful men, described especially in
The Prince but also in his other works.
His works are sometimes even said to have contributed to the modern negative connotations of the words "politics" and "politician",
[24] and it is sometimes thought that it is because of him that "Old Nick" became an English term for
the devil[25] and the adjective
Machiavellian became a pejorative term describing someone who aims to deceive and manipulate others for personal advantage. "
Machiavellianism" also remains a popular term used in speeches and journalism; while in psychology, it denotes a
personality type.
While Machiavellianism is notable in the works of Machiavelli, Machiavelli's works are complex and he is generally agreed to have been more than just "Machiavellian" himself. For example, J.G.A.
Pocock (1975) saw him as a major source of the republicanism that spread throughout England and North America in the 17th and 18th centuries and Leo
Strauss (1958), whose view of Machiavelli is quite different in many ways, agreed about Machiavelli's influence on republicanism and argued that even though Machiavelli was a teacher of evil he had a nobility of spirit that led him to advocate ignoble actions. Whatever his intentions, which are still debated today, he has become associated with any proposal where "
the end justifies the means". For example Leo
Strauss (1958, p. 297) wrote:
Machiavelli is the only political thinker whose name has come into common use for designating a kind of politics, which exists and will continue to exist independently of his influence, a politics guided exclusively by considerations of expediency, which uses all means, fair or foul, iron or poison, for achieving its ends - its end being the aggrandizement of one's country or fatherland - but also using the fatherland in the service of the self-aggrandizement of the politician or statesman or one's party.
[edit] Influence
To quote Robert Bireley:
[26]
...there were in circulation approximately fifteen editions of the Prince and nineteen of the Discourses and French translations of each before they were placed on the Index of Paul IV in 1559, a measure which nearly stopped publication in Catholic areas except in France. Three principal writers took the field against Machiavelli between the publication of his works and their condemnation in 1559 and again by the Tridentine Index in 1564. These were the English cardinal Reginald Pole and the Portuguese bishop Jeronymo Osorio, both of whome lived for many years in Italy, and the Italian humanist and later bishop, Ambrogio Caterino Politi.
Machiavelli's ideas had a profound impact on political leaders throughout the modern west, helped by the new technology of the printing press. During the first generations after Machiavelli, his main influence was in non-Republican governments. Pole reported that the
Prince was spoken of highly by
Thomas Cromwell in England and had influenced
Henry VIII in his turn towards Protestantism, and in his tactics, for example during the
Pilgrimage of Grace.
[27] A copy was also possessed by the Catholic king and emperor
Charles V.
[28] In France, after an initially mixed reaction, Machiavelli came to be associated with
Catherine de' Medici and the
St. Bartholomew's Day massacre. As
Bireley (1990:17) reports, in the 16th century, Catholic writers "associated Machiavelli with the Protestants, whereas Protestant authors saw him as Italian and Catholic". In fact, he was apparently influencing both Catholic and Protestant kings.
[29] One of the most important early works dedicated to criticism of Machiavelli, especially
The Prince, was that of the
Huguenot,
Innocent Gentillet, whose work commonly referred to as
Discourse against Machiavelli or
Anti Machiavel was published in
Geneva in 1576.
[30] He accused Machiavelli of being an atheist and accused politicians of his time by saying that his works were the "
Koran of the courtiers", that "he is of no reputation in the court of France which hath not Machiavel's writings at the fingers ends".
[31] Another theme of Gentillet was more in the spirit of Machiavelli himself: he questioned the effectiveness of immoral strategies (just as Machiavelli had himself done, despite also explaining how they could sometimes work). This became the theme of much future political discourse in Europe during the 17th century. This includes the Catholic
Counter Reformation writers summarised by Bireley:
Giovanni Botero,
Justus Lipsius,
Carlo Scribani,
Adam Contzen,
Pedro de Ribadeneira, and
Diego Saavedra Fajardo.
[32] These authors criticized Machiavelli, but also followed him in many ways. They accepted the need for a prince to be concerned with reputation, and even a need for cunning and deceit, but compared to Machiavelli, and like later modernist writers, they emphasized
economic progress much more than the riskier ventures of war. These authors tended to cite
Tacitus as their source for realist political advice, rather than Machiavelli, and this pretense came to be known as "
Tacitism".
[33] "Black tacitism" was in support of princely rule, but "red tacitism" arguing the case for republics, more in the original spirit of Machiavelli himself, became increasingly important.
Francis Bacon argued the case for what would become
modern science which would be based more upon real experience and experimentation, free from assumptions about metaphysics, and aimed at increasing control of nature. He named Machiavelli as a predecessor.
Modern
materialist philosophy developed in the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries, starting in the generations after Machiavelli. This philosophy tended to be republican, more in the original spirit of Machiavellian, but as with the Catholic authors Machiavelli's realism and encouragement of using innovation to try to control one's own fortune were more accepted than his emphasis upon war and politics. Not only was innovative economics and politics a result, but also
modern science, leading some commentators to say that the 18th century
Enlightenment involved a "humanitarian" moderating of Machiavellianism.
[34] The importance of Machiavelli's influence is notable in many important figures in this endeavor, for example
Bodin,
[35] Francis Bacon,
[36] Algernon Sidney,
[37] Harrington,
John Milton,
[38] Spinoza,
[39] Rousseau,
Hume,
[40] Edward Gibbon, and
Adam Smith. Although he was not always mentioned by name as an inspiration, due to his controversy, he is also thought to have been an influence for other major philosophers, such as
Montaigne,
[41] Descartes,
[42] Hobbes,
Locke[43] and
Montesquieu.
[44]
In the seventeenth century it was in England that Machiavelli's ideas were most substantially developed and adapted, and that republicanism came once more to life; and out of seventeenth-century English republicanism there were to emerge in the next century not only a theme of English political and historical reflection - of the writings of the Bolingbroke circle and of Gibbon and of early parliamentary radicals - but a stimulus to the Enlightenment in Scotland, on the Continent, and in America.[45]
Scholars have argued that Machiavelli was a major indirect and direct influence upon the political thinking of the
Founding Fathers of the
United States.
Benjamin Franklin,
James Madison and
Thomas Jefferson followed Machiavelli's republicanism when they opposed what they saw as the emerging aristocracy that they feared
Alexander Hamilton was creating with the
Federalist Party.
[46] Hamilton learned from Machiavelli about the importance of foreign policy for domestic policy, but may have broken from him regarding how rapacious a republic needed to be in order to survive
[47][48] (
George Washington was probably less influenced by Machiavelli
[49]). However, the Founding Father who perhaps most studied and valued Machiavelli as a political philosopher was
John Adams, who profusely commented on the Italian's thought in his work,
A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America.
[50] In his
Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States, John Adams praised Machiavelli, with Algernon Sidney and
Montesquieu, as a philosophic defender of mixed government. For Adams, Machiavelli restored empirical reason to politics, while his analysis of factions was commendable. Adams likewise agreed with the Florentine that human nature was immutable and driven by passions. He also accepted Machiavelli's belief that all societies were subject to cyclical periods of growth and decay. For Adams, Machiavelli lacked only a clear understanding of the institutions necessary for good government.
[50]
[edit] 20th century
The 20th century Italian Communist
Antonio Gramsci drew great inspiration from Machiavelli's writings on ethics, morals, and how they relate to the State and revolution in his writings on
Passive Revolution, and how a society can be manipulated by controlling popular notions of morality.
[51]
[edit] Revival of interest in the comedies
In the 20th century there was also renewed interest in Machiavelli's
La Mandragola (1518), which received numerous stagings, including several in New York, at the
New York Shakespeare Festival in 1976 and the
Riverside Shakespeare Company in 1979, and at London's
National Theatre in 1984.
[52]
[edit] See also
- ^ Moschovitis Group Inc, Christian D. Von Dehsen and Scott L. Harris, Philosophers and religious leaders, (The Oryx Press, 1999), 117.
- ^ de Grazia (1989) page 5.
- ^
"Niccolò Machiavelli". Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. 1913.
- ^ Guarini (1999:21)
- ^ Maurizio Viroli, Niccolò's Smile: A Biography of Machiavelli (2000), ch 1
- ^ Donna, Daniel, in the introduction to the Bantam Classic edition of The Prince (1966)
- ^ Machiavelli, Niccolò (1996), Machiavelli and his friends: Their personal correspondence, Northern Illinois University Press. Translated and edited by James B. Atkinson and David Sices.
- ^ The Literary Works of Machiavelli, trans. J.R. Hale. (Oxford: 1961), p. 139 D.
- ^ Pocock (1975, pp. 183–219)
- ^ The Modern Library, New York, 1950, translated by Christian E. Detmold.
- ^ Godman (1998, p. 240). Also see Black (1999, pp. 97–98)
- ^ a b c d e f Fischer (2000)
- ^ a b Strauss (1958)
- ^ Paul Anthony Rahe, Against throne and altar: Machiavelli and political theory under the English Republic (2008) p. 282
- ^ Jack Donnelly, Realism and International Relations (2000) p. 68
- ^ Leo Strauss, Joseph Cropsey, History of Political Philosophy (1987) p. 300
- ^ Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince, p. 60
- ^ Leo Strauss, Thoughts on Machiavelli (1957), p 9 online
- ^ Benedetto Croce, My Philosophy (1949), p. 142 online
- ^ Ernst Cassirer, The Myth of the State, (1946) p.136, online
- ^ Strauss (1987, p. 314)
- ^ Strauss (1958, p. 231)
- ^ Mansfield (1993)
- ^ Bireley (1990, p. 241)
- ^ Fischer (2000, p. 94)
- ^ Bireley, Robert (1990), The Counter Reformation Prince, p.14
- ^ Bireley (1990:15)
- ^ Haitsma Mulier (1999:248)
- ^ While Bireley focuses on writers in the Catholic countries, Haitsma Mulier (1999) makes the same observation, writing with more of a focus upon the Protestant Netherlands.
- ^ The first English edition was A Discourse upon the meanes of wel governing and maintaining in good peace, a Kingdome, or other principalitie, translated by Simon Patericke.
- ^ Bireley (1990:17)
- ^ Bireley (1990:18)
- ^ Bireley (1990:223–230)
- ^ Kennington (2004), Rahe (2006)
- ^ Bireley (1990:17): "Jean Bodin's first comments, found in his Method for the Easy Comprehension of History, published in 1566, were positive."
- ^ Bacon wrote: "We are much beholden to Machiavelli and other writers of that class who openly and unfeignedly declare or describe what men do, and not what they ought to do." "II.21.9", Of the Advancement of Learning. See Kennington (2004) Chapter 4.
- ^ Rahe (2006) chapter 6.
- ^ Worden (1999)
- ^ "Spinoza's Political Philosophy". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 19 March 2011.
- ^ Danford "Getting Our Bearings: Machiavelli and Hume" in Rahe (2006).
- ^ Schaefer (1990)
- ^ Kennington (2004), chapter 11.
- ^ Barnes Smith "The Philosophy of Liberty: Locke's Machiavellian Teaching" in Rahe (2006).
- ^ Carrese "The Machiavellian Spirit of Montesquieu's Liberal Republic" in Rahe (2006). Shklar "Montesquieu and the new republicanism" in Bock (1999).
- ^ Worden (1999)
- ^ Rahe (2006)
- ^ Walling "Was Alexander Hamilton a Machiavellian Statesman?" in Rahe (2006).
- ^ Harper (2004)
- ^ Spalding "The American Prince? George Washington's Anti-Machiavellian moment" in Rahe (2006)
- ^ a b Thompson (1995)
- ^ Marcia Landy, "Culture ansd Politics in the work of Antonio Gramsci," 167–88, in Antonio Gramsci: Intellectuals, Culture, and the Party, ed. James Martin (New York: Routledge, 2002).
- ^ Review by Jann Racquoi, Heights/Inwood Press of North Manhattan, March 14, 1979.
[edit] Further reading
[edit] Biographies
- Baron, Hans. "Machiavelli: The Republican Citizen and the Author of 'the Prince'", English Historical Review Vol. 76, No. 299 (Apr., 1961) , pp. 217–253 in JSTOR
- Burd, L. A., "Florence (II): Machiavelli" in Cambridge Modern History (1902), vol. I, ch. vi. pp 190–218 online Google edition
- Capponi, Niccolo. An Unlikely Prince: The Life and Times of Machiavelli (Da Capo Press; 2010) 334 pages
- Godman, Peter (1998), From Poliziano to Machaivelli: Florentine Humanism in the High Renaissance, Princeton University Press
- de Grazia, Sebastian (1989), Machiavelli in Hell, highly favorable intellectual biography; won the Pulitzer Prize; excerpt and text search
- Hale, J. R. Machiavelli and Renaissance Italy (1961) online edition
- Hulliung, Mark. Citizen Machiavelli (1983)
- Ridolfi, Roberto. The Life of Niccolò Machiavelli (1963), a standard scholarly biography
- Schevill, Ferdinand. Six Historians (1956), pp. 61–91
- Skinner, Quentin. Machiavelli: A Very Short Introduction (2000) online edition
- Unger, Miles J. 'Machiavelli: A Biography'(Simon & Schuster 2011)a lively, authoritative account of Machiavelli's life and work.
- Villari, Pasquale. The Life and Times of Niccolò Machiavelli (2 vol 1892), good older biography; online Google edition vol 1; online Google edition vol 2
- Viroli, Maurizio (2000). Niccolò's Smile: A Biography of Machiavelli. Farrar, Straus & Giroux. excerpt and text search
- Viroli, Maurizio. Machiavelli (1998) online edition, good place to start
[edit] Political thought
- Anglo, Sydney, Machiavelli - the First Century: Studies in Enthusiasm, Hostility, and Irrelevance, Oxford University Press, 2005, ISBN 0199267766, 9780199267767
- Baron, Hans. The Crisis of the Early Italian Renaissance: Civic Humanism and Republican Liberty in an Age of Classicism and Tyranny (2 vol 1955), highly influential, deep study of civic humanism (republicanism); 700 pp. excerpts and text search; ACLS E-books; also vol 2 in ACLS E-books
- Baron, Hans. In Search of Florentine Civic Humanism (2 vols. 1988).
- Baron, Hans (1961). "Machiavelli: the Republican Citizen and Author of The Prince". English Historical Review lxxvi (76): 217–253. doi:10.1093/ehr/LXXVI.CCXCIX.217. in JSTOR
- Bireley, Robert (1990), The Counter Reformation Prince
- Black, Robert (1999), "Machiavelli, servant of the Florentine republic", in Bock, Gisela; Skinner, Quentin; Viroli, Maurizio, Machiavelli and Republicanism, Cambridge University Press
- Bock, Gisela; Quentin Skinner and Maurizio Viroli, ed. (1990), Machiavelli and Republicanism, Cambridge University Press excerpt and text search
- Chabod, FedericoMachiavelli & the Renaissance (1958) online edition; online from ACLS E-Books
- Donskis, Leonidas, Ed. (2011) Niccolò Machiavelli: History, Power, and Virtue. Rodopi, ISBN 978-90-420-3277-4, E-ISBN 978-90-420-3278-1
- Fischer, Markus. "Machiavelli's Political Psychology," The Review of Politics, Vol. 59, No. 4 (Autumn, 1997), pp. 789–829 in JSTOR
- Fischer, Markus (2000), Well-ordered License: On the Unity of Machiavelli's Thought, Lexington Book
- Guarini, Elena (1999), "Machiavelli and the crisis of the Italian republics", in Bock, Gisela; Skinner, Quentin; Viroli, Maurizio, Machiavelli and Republicanism, Cambridge University Press
- Gilbert, Allan (1938), Machiavelli's Prince and Its Forerunners, Duke University Press
- Gilbert, Felix. Machiavelli and Guicciardini: Politics and History in Sixteenth-Century Italy (2nd ed. 1984) online from ACLS-E-books
- Gilbert, Felix. "Machiavelli: The Renaissance of the Art of War," in Edward Mead Earle, ed. The Makers of Modern Strategy (1944)
- Jensen, De Lamar, ed. Machiavelli: Cynic, Patriot, or Political Scientist? (1960) essays by scholars online edition
- Kennington, Richard (2004), On Modern Origins, Lexington Books
- Mansfield, Harvey C. "Machiavelli's Political Science," The American Political Science Review, Vol. 75, No. 2 (Jun., 1981), pp. 293–305 in JSTOR
- Mansfield, Harvey (1993), Taming the Prince, The Johns Hopkins University Press
- Mansfield, Harvey (1995), "Machiavelli and the Idea of Progress", in Melzer; Weinberger; Zinman, History and the Idea of Progress, Cornell University Press
- Mansfield, Harvey C. Machiavelli's Virtue (1996), 371pp
- Mansfield, Harvey C. Machiavelli's New Modes and Orders: A Study of the Discourses on Livy (2001) excerpt and text search
- Roger Masters (1996). Machiavelli, Leonardo and the Science of Power. University of Notre Dame Press. ISBN 0-268-01433-7. See also NYT book review.
- Roger Masters (1998). Fortune is a River: Leonardo Da Vinci and Niccolo Machiavelli's Magnificent Dream to Change the Course of Florentine History. Simon & Schuster. ISBN 0-452-28090-7. Also available in Chinese (ISBN 9789572026113), Japanese (ISBN 9784022597588), German (ISBN 9783471794029), Portuguese (ISBN 9788571104969), and Korean (ISBN 9788984070059). See also NYT book review.
- Mattingly, Garrett (Autumn 1958). "Machiavelli's Prince: Political Science or Political Satire?". The American Scholar (27): 482–491.
- Najemy, John (1993), Between Friends: Discourses of Power and Desire in the Machiavelli-Vettori Letters of 1513-1515, Princeton University Press
- Najemy, John M. (1996). "Baron's Machiavelli and Renaissance Republicanism". American Historical Review (The American Historical Review, Vol. 101, No. 1) 101 (1): 119–129. doi:10.2307/2169227. Fulltext in Jstor.
- Parel, A. J. "The Question of Machiavelli's Modernity," The Review of Politics, Vol. 53, No. 2 (Spring, 1991), pp. 320–339 in JSTOR
- Parel, Anthony (1972). "Introduction: Machiavelli's Method and His Interpreters". The Political Calculus: Essays on Machiavelli's Philosophy. Toronto. pp. 3–28.
- Pocock, J.G.A. (1975). The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition. Princeton. new ed. 2003), a highly influential study of Discourses and its vast influence; excerpt and text search; also online 1975 edition
- Pocock, J. G. A. "The Machiavellian Moment Revisited: a Study in History and Ideology.: Journal of Modern History 1981 53(1): 49-72. Fulltext: in Jstor.
- Rahe, Paul A. (2006), Machiavelli's Liberal Republican Legacy, Cambridge University Press Excerpt, reviews and Text search shows Machiavelli's Discourses had a major impact on shaping conservative thought.
- Rahe, Paul (1992), Republics Ancient and Modern: Classical Republicanism and the American Revolution online edition
- Schaefer, David (1990), The Political Philosophy of Montaigne, Cornell University Press.
- Scott, John T. and Vickie B. Sullivan, "Patricide and the Plot of the Prince: Cesare Borgia and Machiavelli's Italy." American Political Science Review 1994 88(4): 887-900. Issn: 0003-0554 in Jstor
- Skinner, Quentin. The Foundations of Modern Political Thought, v. I, The Renaissance, (1978)
- Soll, Jacob (2005). Publishing The Prince: History, Reading and the Birth of Political Criticism. University of Michigan Press.
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Niccolò Machiavelli (2005) online edition
- Strauss, Leo (1987), "Niccolo Machiavelli", in Strauss, Leo; Cropsey, Joseph, History of Political Philosophy (3rd ed.), University of Chicago Press
- Strauss, Leo (1958), Thoughts on Machiavelli, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, ISBN 0226777022
- Sullivan, Vickie B., ed. (2000). The Comedy and Tragedy of Machiavelli: Essays on the Literary Works. Yale U. Press.
- Sullivan, Vickie B. (1996). Machiavelli's Three Romes: Religion, Human Liberty, and Politics Reformed. Northern Illinois University Press.
- von Vacano, Diego, "The Art of Power: Machiavelli, Nietzsche and the Making of Aesthetic Political Theory," Lanham MD: Lexington: 2007.
- Thompson, C. Bradley (1995), "John Adams's Machiavellian Moment", The Review of Politics 57 (3): 389–417. Also in Rahe (2006).
- Whelan, Frederick G. (2004). Hume and Machiavelli: Political Realism and Liberal Thought. Lexington.
- Worden, Blair (1999), "Milton's republicanism and the tyanny of heaven", in Bock, Gisela; Skinner, Quentin; Viroli, Maurizio, Machiavelli and Republicanism, Cambridge University Press
[edit] Italian studies
- Barbuto, Marcelo (2005), “Questa oblivione delle cose. Reflexiones sobre la cosmología de Maquiavelo (1469-1527),” Revista Daimon, 34, Universidad de Murcia, pp. 34–52.
- Barbuto, Marcelo (2008), “Discorsi, I, XII, 12-14. La Chiesa romana di fronte alla republica cristiana”, Filosofia Politica, 1, Il Mulino, Bologna, pp. 99–116.
- Barbuto, Marcelo (2008) “Lettere non tanto chiare”, La Cultura, Rivista di Filosofia, Letteratura e Storia, 2, pp. 331–8.
- Martelli, Mario (2004), “Tracce d`una preistoria dell`Arte della Guerra di Niccolò Machiavelli”, Interpres, XXIII, pp. 256–8.
- Martelli, Mario (2004), “La Mandragola e il suo prologo”, Interpres, XXIII, pp. 106–42.
- Martelli, Mario (2003), “Per la definizione della nozione di principe civile”, Interpres, XXII.
- Martelli, Mario (2001), “I dettagli della filologia”, Interpres XX, pp. 212–71.
- Martelli, Mario (1999a), “Note su Machiavelli”, Interpres XVIII, pp. 91–145.
- Martelli, Mario (1999b), Saggio sul Principe, Salerno Editrice, Roma.
- Martelli, Mario (1999c), “Machiavelli e Savonarola: valutazione politica e valutazione religiosa”, Girolamo Savonarola. L´uomo e il frate". Atti del xxxv Convegno storico internazionale (Todi, II-14 ottobre 1998), CISAM, Spoleto, pp. 139–53.
- Martelli, Mario (1998a), Machiavelli e gli storici antichi, osservazioni su alcuni luoghi dei discorsi sopra la prima deca di Tito Livio, Quaderni di Filologia e critica, 13, Salerno Editrice, Roma.
- Martelli, Mario (1998b), “Machiavelli politico amante poeta”, Interpres XVII, pp. 211–56.
- Martelli, Mario (1998c), “Machiavelli e Savonarola”, Savonarola. Democrazia, tirannide, profezia, a cura di G.C. Garfagnini, Florencia, Sismel-Edizioni del Galluzo, pp. 67–89.
- Martelli, Mario (1998d), “Machiavelli e Frontino. Nota sulle foti letterarie dell´Arte della guerra”, Regards sur la Renaissance italienne. Mélanges de Littérature offerts à Paul Larivaille, Université de Paris X-Nanterre, Paris, pp. 115–25.
- Martelli, Mario and Bausi, Francesco (1997), “Politica, storia e letteratura: Machiavelli e Guicciardini”, Storia della letteratura italiana, E. Malato (ed.), vol. IV. Il primo Cinquecento, Salerno Editrice, Roma, pp. 251–320.
- Martelli, Mario (1993), “Il buon geometra di questo mondo”, in N.M. Tutte le opere, Sansoni editore, Milano, pp. xi-xlvii.
- Martelli, Mario (1985–1986), “Schede sulla cultura di Machiavelli”, Interpres VI, pp. 283–330.
- Martelli, Mario (1982) “La logica provvidenzialistica e il capitolo XXVI del Principe”, Interpres IV, pp. 262–384.
- Martelli, Mario (1974), “L´altro Niccolò di Bernardo Machiavelli”, Rinascimento, XIV, pp. 39–100.
- Martelli, Mario (1971), “Preistoria (medicea) di Machiavelli”, Studi di Filologia Italiana, XXIX, pp. 377–405.
- Sasso, Gennaro (1993), Machiavelli: storia del suo pensiero politico, II vol., Bologna, Il Mulino,
- Sasso, Gennaro (1987-997) Machiavelli e gli antichi e altri saggi, 4 vols., Milano, R. Ricciardi
[edit] Editions
[edit] Collections
- Gilbert, Allan H. ed. Machiavelli: The Chief Works and Others, (3 vol. 1965), the standard scholarly edition
- Bondanella, Peter, and Mark Musa, eds. The Portable Machiavelli (1979)
- Penman, Bruce. The Prince and Other Political Writings, (1981)
- Wootton, David, ed. (1994). Selected political writings of Niccolò Machiavelli. Indianapolis: Hackett Pubs.. excerpt and text search
[edit] The Prince
- Machiavelli, Niccolò (1961), The Prince, London: Penguin, ISBN 978-0-140449-15-0. Translated by George Bull
- Machiavelli, Niccolò (2006), El Principe/The Prince: Comentado Por Napoleon Bonaparte / Commentaries by Napoleon Buonaparte, Mestas Ediciones. Translated into Spanish by Marina Massa-Carrara
- Machiavelli, Niccolò (1985), The Prince, University of Chicago Press. Translated by Harvey Mansfield
- Machiavelli, Niccolò (1995), The Prince, Everyman. Translated and Edited by Stephen J. Milner. Introduction, Notes and other critical apparatus by J.M. Dent.
- The Prince ed. by Peter Bondanella (1998) 101pp online edition
- The Prince ed. by Rufus Goodwin and Benjamin Martinez (2003) excerpt and text search
- The Prince (2007) excerpt and text search
- Machiavelli, Niccolò. The Prince, (1908 edition tr by W. K. Marriott) Gutenberg edition
- Marriott, W. K. (2008). The Prince. Red and Black Publishers. ISBN 978-0-934941-003
- Il principe (2006) ed. by Mario Martelli and Nicoletta Marcelli, Edizione Nazionale delle Opere di Niccolò Machiavelli, Salerno Editrice, Roma.
[edit] The Discourses on Livy
- Discorsi sopra la prima deca di Tito Livio (2001), ed. by Francesco Bausi, Edizione Nazionale delle Opere di Niccolò Machiavelli, II vol. Salerno Editrice, Roma.
- The Discourses, online 1772 edition
- The Discourses, tr. with introduction and notes by L. J. Walker (2 vol 1950).
- Machiavelli, Niccolò (1531). The Discourses. Translated by Leslie J. Walker, S.J, revisions by Brian Richardson (2003). London: Penguin Books. ISBN 0-140-44428-9
- The Discourses, edited with an introduction by Bernard Crick (1970).
[edit] The Art of War
- The Seven Books on the Art of War online 1772 edition
- The Art of War ed. by Christopher Lynch (2003)
- The Art of War online 1775 edition
- The Art of War, Niccolò Machiavelli. Da Capo press edition, 2001, with introduction by Neal Wood.
[edit] Florentine Histories
- History of Florence online 1901 edition
- Reform of Florence online 1772 edition
- Machiavelli, Niccolo (1988), Florentine Histories, Princeton University Press. Translation by Laura F Banfield and Harvey Mansfield.
[edit] Correspondence
- Epistolario privado. Las cartas que nos desvelan el pensamiento y la personalidad de uno de los intelectuales más importantes del Renacimiento, Juan Manuel Forte (edición y traducción), Madrid, La Esfera de los Libros, 2007, 435 págs, ISBN 978-84-9734-661-0
- The Private Correspondence of Nicollo Machiavelli, ed. by Orestes Ferrara; (1929) online edition
- Machiavelli, Niccolò (1996), Machiavelli and his friends: Their personal correspondence, Northern Illinois University Press. Translated and edited by James B. Atkinson and David Sices.
- Also see Najemy (1993).
[edit] Poetry, Comedy, etc
- Machiavelli, Niccolò (1985), Comedies of Machiavelli, University Press of New England Bilingual edition of The Woman from Andros, The Mandrake, and Clizia, edited by DAvid Sices and James B. Atkinson.
- Hoeges, Dirk. Niccolò Machiavelli. Dichter-Poeta. Mit sämtlichen Gedichten, deutsch/italienisch. Con tutte le poesie, tedesco/italiano, Reihe: Dialoghi/Dialogues: Literatur und Kultur Italiens und Frankreichs, Band 10, Peter Lang Verlag, Frankfurt/M. u.a. 2006, ISBN 3-631-54669-6.
[edit] External links
- Machiavelli: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
- full text books from the Liberty Fund, a conservative think tank
- Site containing The Prince, slightly modified for easier reading
- Works by Machiavelli at Project Gutenberg
- Machiavelli at the Marxists Internet Archive, including some of his works
- Works by Niccolò Machiavelli: text, concordances and frequency list
- Machiavelli on the Net, a Machiavelli webliography with a short introduction.
- Works of Machiavelli: Italian and English text
- Machiavelli and Power Politics
- Machiavelli on the Online Library Of Liberty
- Digitized Italian Letter, Machiavelli, Karpeles Manuscript Library
- Machiavelli on diglossa.org library, 5 parallel translations: ru: Г.Муравьева, en: W.K.Marriott, N.H.Thomson, fr: J.-V. Périès, de: G. Regis
- Machiavelli and the Italian City on the BBC's In Our Time with Melvyn Bragg; with Quentin Skinner, Regius Professor of History at the University of Cambridge; Evelyn Welch, Professor of Renaissance Studies at Queen Mary, University of London; Lisa Jardine, Director of the Centre for Editing Lives and Letters at Queen Mary, University of London
- Wight, Martin. Four Seminal Thinkers in International Theory: Machiavelli, Grotius, Kant, and Mazzini (2005), ch. 1 online edition
| [hide]v · d · eNiccolò Machiavelli |
|
| General |
|
 |
|
| Works |
|
|
View page ratings
Rate this page
Wed,24 Aug 2011
You +1'd this
comment Note: By posting your comments here you agree to the terms and conditions of www.hindustantimes.com 
Are UP rapes being politicised? 
Is civil society usurping the Opposition’s sp … 
Prev
2 lakh (
RSS 
Epaper
Stocks
Today's Paper
Weather
Horoscope
Neeraj Bhushan
Comments:
The news says, “A total of 1,518 people over the age of 18 were interviewed.” Avaaz or Awaz ? The news begins with Awaz and towards the end it is Avaaz.” Can 1518 people selected by AWAZ/AVAAZ represent India ? The answer is no. This is a campaign by the BJP to corner the Govt before the Govt corners the on Religious Fanatism / Religious Terrorism. There was no terror in India before Sangh Parivar (BJP) demolished the Babri Masjid. Modi is almost finished due to his role in Gujarat riots. So they are trying their best to influence the minds of people and cause them to agitate, then cause riots and die for their cause and after that they will come to power and rule India.
Posted on: Aug 13, 2011 at 11:53 IST
Either we Middle classes are completely marginalized in the political
process of this country or the poll is a hogwash.
Posted on: Aug 13, 2011 at 12:50 IST
We the people will verify this poll after elections (Assembly and Lok Sabha). Let Action do the talking. Research merely is a means to that end. Lest we forget.
Posted on: Aug 13, 2011 at 13:45 IST
There are two factors of concern to be addressed by the well meaning public.The masses are to be educated on the factors which affect them. The studies ,the samples selected,to be more educative rather than representative. As pointed out, with these mega frauds committed and shielded,if the popularity increases,wat kind of people we are? However, the project is good.The studies are to be done in a different way.unbiased,non-political experts’ views are to be optained which should be in a position to show directions. T.R.Kallapiran.
Posted on: Aug 13, 2011 at 14:37 IST
India needs freedom from its present day politicians, irrespective of their party affiliation. Also, we, the people of this Republic, want total change in present system of gevernance.
Posted on: Aug 13, 2011 at 14:39 IST
IF the govt had not presented a bill against corruption, then any agitation is reasonable. Let us see what the elected representative do on this bill, because this represent the whole of India. If the approved law to check corruption or decrease it adequately, then India has a chance to elect another party to rule. True that general election is too far but there are state elections that would show people’s desires. It is the opinion and decision of your elected representatives that should peacefully solve tedious problems. Agitations are useless and harmful.
Posted on: Aug 13, 2011 at 17:08 IST
First before talking about corruption, let the political parties elected representative attend parliment without fail and discuss usefully for the development of the coun try. As allowance is paid for attending the parliment/assembly if they are not attending the house, allowances shouild be deducted under the principle of No Work No Pay. All political parties clean their house first, all corrupt/criminal politicians should not be allowed to conduct elections, then fight against corruption nation wide.
Posted on: Aug 14, 2011 at 06:43 IST
Why does the Hindu rely on a poll onducted by the American Media? Why don’t Indian Media conduct their own polls? Don’t our universities have qualified people to help you with designing polls?
Posted on: Aug 14, 2011 at 08:57 IST
I have been following the surveys of CSDS sponsered by IBN and printed by THE HINDU regularly.This time the survey seems to be completely far away from ground realities.First of all you say the rate of satisfaction with BJP government in Madhya Pradesh is as high as 75% and yet you say congress will win more number of seats in lok sabha.Similar is the case with orissa where naven patnaik enjoys rating of 72% but his party is projected to lose lok sabha elections.The worst finding is regarding Andhra Pradesh where the survey claims that the popular sentiment for united andhra pradesh far exceeds the demand for telangana.Do you think not for nothing 600 youth committed suicide in telangana.It seems you have colluded with all types of shady people to do these engineered surveys.I am from Andhra region am can say confidently that there is no such overwelming demand for united state.THE HINDU should not loose its credibility by printing such surveys.
Posted on: Aug 15, 2011 at 10:38 IST
this is non scientific n have to believe this was done only to boost the morale of the party in power.how come anybody vote for the govt which failed on all fronts.be it price rise,corruption n many more issues.whenever there is a problem, people in govt say there is no magic wand.moment the elections r round the corner,magic wand comes in the speeches.India Will Survive,as we r becoming insensitive for all the issues.
Posted on: Aug 15, 2011 at 13:29 IST
UPA-II is worst Govt. as of now because this govt. has failed almost in all the sphere of governance like corruption, inflation, terrorism, overall development of the country. We would say that in the field of corruption this govt. has done PhD. There are about 5 to 6 big scam & corruption cases came to surface that’s why thig govt. is totally shaked and it is understood that govt. is not in a position what to do. On the one hand there is civil society members who are agitating for a stong Jan Lokpal Bill on the other hand Opposition parties are pressing very hard to have discussion on all the burning issues.
At this point of time, a study by the CNN-IBN in which it has been shown that UPA-II government has popularity in 18 states higher than 2 years is a falsehood to overcome this whirlwind of scams which has occurred during the UPA government.
Posted on: Aug 16, 2011 at 15:59 IST
Even now also, if we support this kind of corrupt government then it’s horrible. Either you have not imagined the real impacts of the growing corruption Earlier they had some shame and it was not in public. But now a days we can see the rising corruption openly. If this continues then I seriously worry what will be the situation after 3-4 yrs itself.
Posted on: Aug 16, 2011 at 17:17 IST
A survey is as good as its sample. The size of the sample is not
important. Randomness decides its reliability and validity.
Posted on: Aug 17, 2011 at 15:35 IST
This poll clearly shows that we middle classes really do not matter. This is largely because our turnout is typically below 50%. Unless this increases significantly, things will not change, and we can forget about overcoming poverty. This fact has always troubled me: Middle classes actually get a day off from work on voting day, still we do not vote. The poorer classes don’t get to take the day off (can’t afford to), but they still vote.
This really is time for middle class introspection. Simply blaming Yogendra Yadav’s pro-UPA ideology and picking holes in his methodology will not do us any good.
Thank you.
Your comment has been received and will be moderated.
If you believe in Polls, this must be a good news to the UPA-II. If you are skeptics, like I am, Get out and vote. Either way, it matters very little as people change their mind. They are forgiving.
This tendency to make a Poll result as a magical wand is totally disgusting. The margin of error, in any standard Poll is plus or minus 5%.
Given that fact,an insignificant 2% rise in popularity is a laughable proposition.
It is not a beauty contest. In such charade, the judges decide, ahead of time as to who would win the contest. Congress party cannot put this fig leaf to cover their shame. Their career goals, whatever they may be need an immediate make over, Oops, a face lift.
Congress party has become a shrew. They are not shrewd. They are losing their grip on matters like Anna rebellion. Anna has become a monster due to the lack of Congress party handling him and his co-conspirators.
A stitch in time saves nine.
…and I am Sid Harth@mysistereileen.com