If your side loses, you still have an ally in the loser. It also makes it easier for rebels or a civilian militia to attack and overthrow the prince. He believes they are useless to a ruler because they are undisciplined, cowardly, and without any loyalty, being motivated only by money.
However, during a siege a virtuous prince will keep the morale of his subjects high while removing all dissenters. His youthful escapades have taught him a deep understanding of the human nature of the citizens he must rule, making him wise beyond his years.
Indeed, one example is the Borgia family's "recent" and controversial attempts to use church power in secular politics, often brutally executed. The choice of his detestable hero, Caesar Borgiaclearly enough shows his hidden aim; and the contradiction between the teaching of the Prince and that of the Discourses on Livy and the History of Florence shows that this profound political thinker has so far been studied only by superficial or corrupt readers.
He accused Machiavelli of being an atheist and accused politicians of his time by saying that they treated his works as the " Koran of the courtiers".
Ecclesiastical principates Chapter 11 [ edit ] Leo X: Go to live there or install colonies, if you are a prince of a republic.
The attack on France will be a holy war, fully backed by holy church and legal precedent: One cannot by fair dealing, and without injury to others, satisfy the nobles, but you can satisfy the people, for their object is more righteous than that of the nobles, the latter wishing to oppress, while the former only desire not to be oppressed Also a prince cannot afford to keep the common people hostile as they are larger in number while the nobles smaller.
Let them keep their own orders but install a puppet regime. But it is unusual that the Medici family's position of Papal power is openly named as something that should be used as a personal power base, as a tool of secular politics.
Although a bad reputation should be avoided, it is sometimes necessary to have one. Xenophon wrote one of the classic mirrors of princes, the Education of Cyrus. Scipio's men, on the other hand, were known for their mutiny and dissension, due to Scipio's "excessive mercy" — which was however a source of glory because he lived in a republic.
The book had originally been intended for Giuliano di Lorenzo de' Mediciyoung Lorenzo's uncle, who however died in However, he is to a significant degree intimate with the Earl of Cambridge after he reveals knowledge of the plot against him.
So in another break with tradition, he treated not only stability, but also radical innovationas possible aims of a prince in a political community.
Hannibal and Scipio Africanus. Then, if he decides to discontinue or limit his generosity, he will be labeled as a miser. Henry V first presents his court, which include the traitor nobles, with a relatively trivial affair — the release of a commoner who voiced dissent against the king.
However, his bold hostility is backed by his Christian intent. As shown by his letter of dedication, Machiavelli's work eventually came to be dedicated to Lorenzo di Piero de' Medicigrandson of " Lorenzo the Magnificent ", and a member of the ruling Florentine Medici family, whose uncle Giovanni became Pope Leo X in In conclusion, the most important virtue is having the wisdom to discern what ventures will come with the most reward and then pursuing them courageously.
However, the sum of his address to the French defenders is far unlike the Henry that we have seen in all previous scenes. This type of "princedom" refers for example explicitly to the Catholic church, which is of course not traditionally thought of as a princedom.
A Catholic king in the first generation to read The Prince. However, he wished to witness repentance from the nobles, perhaps to lighten their sentences. Since there are many possible qualities that a prince can be said to possess, he must not be overly concerned about having all the good ones.
Differences of opinion amongst commentators revolve around whether this sub-text was intended to be understood, let alone understood as deliberately satirical or comic.
According to Dietz the trap never succeeded because Lorenzo — "a suspicious prince" — apparently never read the work of the "former republican. Using fortresses can be a good plan, but Machiavelli says he shall "blame anyone who, trusting in fortresses, thinks little of being hated by the people".
Additionally, being overly generous is not economical, because eventually all resources will be exhausted. Ruin them, as Rome destroyed Carthageand also as Machiavelli says the Romans eventually had to do in Greece, even though they had wanted to avoid it.
Ultimately, the decision should be made by the prince and carried out absolutely. Thus, as long as the city is properly defended and has enough supplies, a wise prince can withstand any siege.
External fears are of foreign powers. Pole reported that it was spoken of highly by his enemy Thomas Cromwell in England, and had influenced Henry VIII in his turn towards Protestantismand in his tactics, for example during the Pilgrimage of Grace.
Although Hannibal's army consisted of men of various races, they were never rebellious because they feared their leader. In terms of both Machiavellian and Erasmian principle, he makes the right choice.
Eagerly awaiting this response, Henry makes up his mind.The Prince (Italian: Il Principe [il ˈprintʃipe]) is a 16th-century political treatise by the Italian diplomat and political theorist Niccolò Machiavelli.
From correspondence a version appears to have been distributed inusing a Latin title, De Principatibus (Of Principalities).
. The Prince vs. Henry V A comparison of attributes After reading Machiavelli’s The Prince and watching Shakespeare’s Henry V in class, one begins to notice similarities between the authors’ idea of what a “perfect king” should be.
Shakespeare’s Henry V, like the historical Henry V, was an enlightened and effective executive leader. Shakespeare attributes part of Henry’s success to adroit image manipulation and unhesitating decisiveness, presenting him as a proto-Machiavellian prince.
William Shakespeare’s Henry V personifies Henry V as a cunning monarch. Shakespeare imbues him with a dual-political personality that incorporates values from the 16th century political philosopher Niccolò Machiavelli and humanist Desiderius Erasmus. William Shakespeare’s Henry V personifies Henry V as a cunning monarch.
Shakespeare imbues him with a dual-political personality that incorporates values from the 16th century political philosopher Niccolò Machiavelli and humanist Desiderius Erasmus. May 16, · Henry V is a total Machiavellian ruler. He manipulates his friends, toys with his enemies, understands the concept of correctly capturing new territory, and is a master general, something Machiavelli said was what every ruler should be.Download