Niccolò Machiavelli Notes

Why Machiavelli?

Machiavelli contributed to political theory, history, Italian literature, warfare, and diplomacy.
He didn't consider himself a philosopher and rejected philosophical inquiry.
His writings are unsystematic and inconsistent, relying on experience over logical analysis.
Despite pragmatism, scholarly debate exists on a coherent philosophy in his thought.
Influential thinkers engage with his ideas.
"Machiavellianism" is used in ethical, political, and psychological contexts.
He critiques utopian philosophical schemes like Plato's.
"Neo-Roman" political theorists find inspiration in his republicanism.

Biography

Born on May 3, 1469, in Florence.
Studied under Paolo da Ronciglione and received a humanist education.
In 1498, he became the Second Chancellor of the Republic of Florence.
Engaged in diplomatic activities for Florence for fourteen years.
Florence had a republican government since 1494 after the Medici family was ousted.
Served under gonfaloniere Piero Soderini from 1502.
Produced dispatches (Legations) reporting on European events.
Composed personal correspondence, poetic works, and political analyses (Nederman 2023).
In 1512, the Medici defeated the republic's militia, leading to Machiavelli's dismissal.
Imprisoned and tortured in 1513 on suspicion of conspiracy.
Retired to his family farm and began intellectual pursuits, including writing The Prince.
The Prince was written in late 1513/early 1514 but published posthumously in 1532.
Sought to regain status in Florentine political affairs.
Dedication changed to Lorenzo de’Medici (the Younger) after Giuliano's death.
Wrote verse, plays, prose, The Art of War (1521), and historical sketches.
Authored Discourses on the Ten Books of Titus Livy (written 1514/1515-1518/1519, published posthumously in 1531), an exposition of republican principles.
The Discourses may have been shaped by discussions under Cosimo Rucellai's sponsorship.
In 1520, commissioned by Cardinal Giulio de’Medici to write a history of Florence (Florentine Histories), completed in 1525.
Undertook small tasks for the Medici government.
Died on June 21, 1527, before fully returning to public life.

The Prince: Analyzing Power

Traditional political philosophers linked moral goodness and legitimate authority.
Rulers were advised to behave virtuously to ensure a peaceful reign and succession.
Machiavelli criticized this moralistic view.
For Machiavelli, power and authority are coequal; goodness doesn't ensure power.
The focus is on acquiring and maintaining power ("maintaining the state").
He critiques morally derived theories of politics, arguing legitimate rights add nothing to power.
Machiavelli reflects the political realism that goodness is insufficient for political supremacy.
Successful rulers must know how to use power effectively to ensure obedience and security.
Moral authority and legitimacy are excluded from political decision-making.
Good laws and good arms are the foundations of a well-ordered system.
Coercion creates legality; therefore, force is emphasized.
$Since there cannot be good laws without good arms, I will not consider laws but speak of arms$
Valid law rests on the threat of coercive force.
Fear is preferable to affection in subjects, and violence/deception is superior to legality.
People are ungrateful, disloyal, insincere, deceitful, timid, and profit-driven.
$Love is a bond of obligation which these miserable creatures break whenever it suits them to do so; but fear holds them fast by a dread of punishment that never passes$
No theory of obligation exists separate from the imposition of power.
People obey out of fear of consequences.
Obligation is voluntary, assuming one can do otherwise.
One can disobey if they have the power to resist or risk the state's coercive force.
Politics is defined by coercive power, termed "the orders of violence" by Yves Winter (2018).
Authority has no independent status as a right to command.
Rulers who rely on rights alone will fail; power is more likely to lead to success.
States' laws are acknowledged only when supported by power that renders obedience inescapable.

Power, Virtù, and Fortune

Machiavelli presents a vision of political rule purged of moralizing influences.
Obedience methods vary based on the prince's foresight; training is essential.
Virtù refers to skills necessary for power politics, not conventional moral goodness.
Virtù enables the prince to "maintain his state" and "achieve great things."
No equivalence exists between conventional virtues and Machiavellian virtù.
A ruler of virtù must possess a "flexible disposition," varying conduct from good to evil as circumstances dictate.
Machiavelli also uses virtù in The Art of War to describe a general's strategic prowess.
Politics is a battlefield; the prince needs virtù to apply appropriate strategies.
Virtù is closely connected to power; possessing virtù is mastering the rules of power.
Virtù is to power politics what conventional virtue is to legitimate rule.
Fortuna (fortune) is the enemy of political order and a threat to the state's safety.
Fortuna is a malevolent source of misery, affliction, and disaster.
No man can act effectively when opposed by Fortuna.
In Chapter 25 of The Prince, Fortuna is compared to a raging river:
- Destructive, turns plains into lakes, throws down trees and buildings.
- Everyone flees before it.
Yet, precautions can divert the worst consequences.
Similarly, Fortuna can be resisted if virtù and wisdom prepare for her arrival.
Political success depends on understanding Fortuna's principles.
It's better to be impetuous than cautious because Fortuna is a woman to be beaten and mauled.
Wanton Fortuna demands an aggressive response.
Fortuna is a primal source of violence and antithetical to reason.
Preparation ensures victory against Fortuna; virtù allows responding to fortune in any necessary way.
$She shows her power where virtù and wisdom do not prepare to resist her and directs her fury where she knows that no dykes or embankments are ready to hold her.$
$it is better to be impetuous than cautious, because Fortuna is a woman and it is necessary, in order to keep her under, to beat and maul her$

Morality, Religion, and Politics

Machiavelli's thought has been controversial since the 16th century.
Some denounced him as an apostle of the Devil, while others viewed him favorably as enunciating "reason of state."
Dispute centers on his attitude toward moral and religious standards.
Some see his teaching as immoral or amoral.
Leo Strauss called him a "teacher of evil" for advising leaders to use cruelty, violence, fear, and deception instead of justice, mercy, and love.
Benedetto Croce viewed him as a "realist" or "pragmatist" advocating suspending ethics in politics.
Moral values have no place in political decisions.
Quentin Skinner argues vicious acts are a "last best" option, prioritizing conformity to moral virtue ceteris paribus.
Amoral hypothesis claims Machiavelli adopts a scientific stance, distinguishing between political "facts" and moral "values."
He's seen as a "Galileo of politics" and founder of "modern" political science.
Machiavelli-as-scientist has fallen out of favor, though some see merit in a revised version.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau argued The Prince exposes the immorality of one-man rule.
Garrett Mattingly sees Machiavelli as a satirist, commenting humorously on public affairs.
Mary Deitz asserts Machiavelli aimed to "trap" the prince with advice designed to undo the ruler.
Views on Machiavelli's attitude toward religion and Christianity vary.
He was no friend of the institutionalized Christian Church.
The Discourses suggests Christianity saps vigor for active civil life.
The Prince shows disdain and admiration for the Church and Pope.
Some see Machiavelli as anti-Christian, preferring pagan civil religions like Rome's.
Anthony Parel argues Machiavelli's cosmos is pagan and pre-Christian.
Others see him as conventionally pious, observing worship but not deeply devoted.
Sebastian de Grazia and Maurizio Viroli attempt to rescue Machiavelli's reputation.
Grazia finds biblical themes throughout his writings, conceiving a divinely centered cosmos.
Nederman extends Grazia's insights, showing how Christian doctrines like grace and free will form important elements of Machiavelli's framework.
Viroli considers historical attitudes toward Christianity in Machiavelli's Florence.

The State and The Prince: Language and Concepts

Skinner (1978) credits Machiavelli with formulating the "modern concept of the state."
Weberian sense: an impersonal rule possessing a monopoly of coercive authority within fixed territorial boundaries.
Lo stato appears widely in Machiavelli's writings, especially The Prince, connected with the acquisition and application of coercive power.
Distinct from the Latin status (condition or station).
Scholars cite Machiavelli's influence in shaping debates on "reason of state."
The doctrine that the state's good takes precedence over all other considerations.
Invoked to justify the priority of state interests in the age of absolutism.
Mansfield (1996) argues Machiavelli's use of lo stato doesn't support this interpretation.
Machiavelli's "state" remains a personal patrimony, in line with the medieval conception of dominium as the foundation of rule.
Dominium: Latin term translated as "private property" and "political dominion."
The "state" is owned by the prince in control.
Governance is determined by the ruler's personal qualities and traits.
Emphasis on virtù is indispensable for the prince's success.
Mitigates against the "modernity" of his idea.
Machiavelli is at best a transitional figure in the emergence of the language of the state in early modern Europe.
The prince comes to power through his own initiative, skill, talent, and/or strength (virtù).
Can count on no pre-existing structures of legitimation.
Relies on his personal characteristics to direct power and establish his claim.
A precarious position, vulnerable to fortune and conspiracies.
No stable constitutional regime as reflected in modern political thought.
Doubts whether a prince of complete virtù could exist; needs a different psychology.
Prepared to vary conduct as fortune constrains him.
Does not deviate from right conduct if possible, but is capable of wrongdoing when necessary.
Flexibility yields practical advice to maintain the state.
Machiavelli doubted whether humans were psychologically capable of such flexible dispositions.
No single ruler in The Prince evinced the necessary variable virtù.
Case studies point to princes whose characteristics suited their times but whose consistency would have caused downfall if circumstances changed.
Emperor Severus succeeded because he employed actions necessary for establishing power but is not to be imitated universally.
Evaluation of creating a psychologically flexible character is guarded.
$If it were possible to change one’s nature to suit the times and circumstances, one would always be successful$
Questions whether Machiavelli's advice was so "practical."

The Discourses on Livy: Liberty and Conflict

Discourses perhaps expresses Machiavelli's personal political beliefs and republican sympathies more honestly.
Draws on the same language and concepts as The Prince but leads to quite different conclusions.
Distinguishes between minimal and full conceptions of "political" or "civil" order.
A minimal constitutional order: subjects live securely (vivere sicuro), ruled by a strong government balanced by legal/institutional mechanisms.
A fully constitutional regime: the goal is the freedom of the community (vivere libero), created by participation and contention.
Liberty anchors Machiavelli's political theory.
Only in a republic can this goal be attained.
Machiavelli adopted this position on pragmatic and principled grounds.
Experienced the inner workings of French government, which became his model for the "secure" polity.
Praised (even analyzed) a hereditary monarchy to contrast it with the republic.
Even the best monarchy lacks qualities endemic to republican government.

Popular Liberty and Popular Speech

Greatest virtue of the French kingdom and its king is the dedication to law.
France is moderated more by laws than any other kingdom.
Explanation for this situation: The function of the Parlement.
The kingdom of France lives under laws and orders more than any other kingdom.
Laws are maintained by Parlements, notably that of Paris: by it they are renewed any time it acts against a prince of the kingdom or in its sentences condemns the king.
Parlements are persistent executors against that nobility.
Machiavelli admired institutional arrangements in France.
The French king and nobles are checked by laws enforced by the Parlement.
Opportunities for tyrannical conduct are largely eliminated, rendering the monarchy temperate and "civil."
Such a regime remains incompatible with vivere libero.
Discussing a monarch's ability to meet the people's wish for liberty, Machiavelli notes that a few individuals want freedom simply to command others.
The vast majority confuse liberty with security, imagining that the former is identical to the latter
But all the others, who are infinite, desire liberty in order to live securely (vivere sicuro)

Popular Liberty and Popular Speech (Cont.)

The king cannot give such liberty to the masses, but he can provide the security that they crave.
People live securely for no other reason than that its kings are bound to infinite laws in which the security of all their people is comprehended.
And once a prince does this, and the people see that he never breaks such laws, they will shortly begin to live securely (vivere sicuro) and contentedly
Law-abiding character ensures security, but security ought never to be confused with liberty.
It is the limit of monarchic rule: even the best kingdom can do no better than to guarantee to its people tranquil and orderly government.
One of the consequences of such vivere sicuro is the disarmament of the people.
Regardless of how great his kingdom is the king of France lives as a tributary to foreign mercenaries.
A state that makes security a priority cannot afford to arm its populace.
Any government that takes vivere sicuro as its goal generates a passive and impotent populace.
By definition, such a society can never be free in Machiavelli's sense of vivere libero
Citizens will always fight for their liberty—against internal as well as external oppressors

The Character of Republican Leaders

A republic is better able to adapt itself to diverse circumstances than a prince owing to the diversity found among its citizens
The effect of the Machiavellian dichotomy between the need for flexibility and the inescapable constancy of character is to demonstrate an inherent practical limitation in single-ruler regimes
For just as with individual human beings, it is difficult (if not impossible) to change their personal characteristics, so institutions in republics do not change with the times … but change very slowly because it is more painful to change them since it is necessary to
* wait until the whole republic is in a state of upheaval; and for this it is not enough that one man alone should change his own procedure
Machiavelli thus seems to adhere to a genuinely republican position.
The questions seems irresolvable wether Machiavelli was truly a friend of princes and tyrants or of republics, and hence whether we should dismiss one or another facet of his writing as ancillary or peripheral
Mark Hulliung’s suggestion that “both” Machiavellis need to be lent equal weight thus enjoys a certain plausibility.

Machiavelli’s Place in Western Thought

There is an ongoing debate about what is “modern” or “original” in Machiavelli’s thought and what is Machiavelli’s “place” in the history of Western ideas
The so-called Atlantic world and, specifically, into the ideas that guided the framers of the American constitution where significantly influenced by Machiavelli's republican thoughts
Whether Machiavelli was an ”ancient” or a “modern”, but instead deserves to be located in the interstices between the two,
* Machiavelli resembles the mythical Janus, the Roman god of openings and endings, embodying this transition.