The Prince (Penguin Classics)

Machiavelli based his work in The Prince upon his basic understanding of human nature. He held that people are motivated by fear and envy, by novelty, by desire for wealth, power and security, and by a hatred of restriction. In the Italy in which he was writing, democracy was an un-implemented Greek philosophical idea, not a political structure with a history of success; thus, one person's power usually involved the limitation of another person's power in an autocratic way.

Machiavelli did not see this as a permanent or natural state of being -- in fact, he felt that, during his age, human nature had been corrupted and reduced from a loftier nobility achieved during the golden ages of Greece and Rome. He decided that it was the corrupting influence of Christianity that had reduced human nature, by its exaltation of meekness, humility, and otherworldliness.

Machiavelli has a great admiration for the possible and potential, but finds himself inexorably drawn to the practical, dealing with situations as they are, thus becoming an early champion of realpolitik carried forward into this century by the likes of Kissinger, Thatcher, Nixon, and countless others. One of the innovations of Machiavelli's thought was the recognition that the prince, the leader of the city/state/empire/etc., was nonetheless a human being, and subject to all the human limitations and desires with which all contend.

Because the average prince (like the average person) is likely to be focussed upon his own interests, a prince's private interests are generally in opposition to those of his subjects. Fortunate is the kingdom ruled by a virtuous prince, virtue here not defined by Christian or religious tenets, but rather the civic virtue of being able to pursue his own interests without conflicting those of his subjects.

Virtue is that which increases power; vice is that which decreases power. These follow Machiavelli's assumptions about human nature. Machiavelli rejected the Platonic idea of a division between what a prince does and what a prince ought to do. The two principle instruments of the prince are force and propaganda, and the prince, in order to increase power (virtue) ought to employ force completely and ruthlessly, and propaganda wisely, backed up by force. Of course, for Machiavelli, the chief propaganda vehicle is that of religion.

Whoever reads Roman history attentively will see in how great a degree religion served in the command of the armies, in uniting the people and keeping them well conducted, and in covering the wicked with shame.

Machiavelli has been credited with giving ruthless strategies (the example of a new political ruler killing the deposed ruler and the ruler's family to prevent usurpation and plotting is well known) -- it is hard to enact many in current politics in a literal way, but many of his strategies can still be seen in electioneering at every level, in national and international relations, and even in corporate and family internal 'politics'. In fact, I have found fewer more Machiavellian types than in church politics!

Of course, these people would be considered 'virtuous' in Machiavellian terms -- doing what is necessary to increase power and authority.

The title of this piece -- the virtues of Machiavelli, must be considered in this frame; certainly in no way virtuous by current standards, but then, it shows, not all have the same standards. Be careful of the words you use -- they may have differing definitions.

Perhaps if Machiavelli had lived a bit later, and been informed by the general rise of science as a rational underpinning to the world, he might have been able to accept less of a degree of randomness in the universe. Perhaps he would have modified his views. Perhaps not -- after all, the realpolitikers of this age are aware of the scientific framework of the universe, and still pursue their courses.

This is an important work, intriguing in many respects. Far shorter than the average classical or medieval philosophical tome, and more accessible by current readers because of a greater familiarity with politics than, say, metaphysics or epistemology, this work yields benefits and insights to all who read, mark, inwardly digest, and critically examine the precepts.


More often cited than read   November 28, 2002
Daniel Jolley (Shelby, North Carolina USA)
22 out of 27 found this review helpful

No one can doubt the lasting significance of The Prince, for it is frequently cited in discussions of modern political theory. The work has been often criticized as malevolent, while its original form has been examined less than closely. Such being the case, Machiavelli's intentions are easily misread. His goal was in fact to offer a practical, realistic guide to governing; it is a sad irony that these pragmatic goals have become something philosophically ethereal in the hands of many critics.

The Prince draws from the past and is at the same time applicable to the future. The author was a statesman of moderate capacity as well as member of the social body, a link between the ruler and the ruled. He was driven by a realism that forsook Platonic ideals of justice and virtue, in favor of efficiency, military strength, and power. For Machiavelli, the ends always justified the means. The state's perpetuity was the sole goal to be sought by the ruler. While it is true that Machiavelli voiced a disdain for men, he did not call for their enslavement or complete subordination to the ruler; in fact, he felt that what was best for the state was best for the people.

One must bear in mind the time in which Machiavelli wrote, which was a time of great upheaval in the Italian states. This lack of stability certainly contributed to the author's commitment to strong, lasting government. Nowhere does he condemn democracy nor worship autocracy; in fact, he clearly implies that the particular conditions of any polity best determine the most fitting type of government. He warns the ruler of dangers both from within and without, and recommends in all matters strength of position. When he counsels that virtues, when excessive, can weaken the state, he does not endorse tyranny.

One finds simplicity alongside complexity in this book. Just as he encourages efficiency in the ruler, Machiavelli writes directly, never indulging in philosophical digressions. He defines the state and how it comes to be, as well as the manners by which a prince accedes to power. He then shifts to the practice of warfare, the most important activity of a state, complemented with advice on maintaining internal stability. Finally, he speaks of Italy's present troubles, making clear that it is his ambition in writing this work to return stability to his homeland and protect its future from chaotic affairs.

The Prince is a pioneering work of political science. It is distinguished by Machiavelli's employment of history as a source of applicable knowledge. Machiavelli had no idealistic goals in mind when he wrote The Prince. He was successful in that, although controversial and often misinterpreted, his guide is still a source for knowledge as well as action.


ONE OF THE TEN BEST BOOKS EVER   July 25, 2003
alaskadoggie (Boom (near Antwerp), BELGIUM)
18 out of 25 found this review helpful

Here are some BASIC, UTMOST IMPORTANT and UNIVERSAL REMARKS for those that start reading Niccolo Machiavelli, be it IL PRINCIPE or his DISCORSI SOPRA LA PRIMA DECA DI TITO LIVIO, better known as "The DISCOURSES", giving a very original political comment on the first ten books of Titus Livius.
** Machiavelli's IDEA'S are NOT a close-fitting nor a rounded down system: who thinks elsehow will get into overlasting problems.
** The "Secretarius Florentinus" is NOT a SYSTEMATIC philosopher in the scholastic sense of the word: he DOESN'T WORRY whether the question or idea he describes is IN CONCORDANCE with notions or opinions written down elsewhere. Therefore lots of statements can but difficultly be brought in accordance to the former AND can even bring CRITICISM INTO TROUBLE. This is of far lesser importance while these incongruities are merely touching the general points of departure of his work, instead of the distinct parts of his arguments. You can notice this through his LOGIC (as strong as iron!!) and an IRREFUTABLE CONSEQUENCE.
** Machiavelli stays A-MORAL in Il Principe, just as nature is: not judging about good and bad, not influenced by a religion or anything else!! I know people have problems with this last "way of writing, thinking", BUT this is the most important factor that makes his work so IMMENSELY UNIVERSAL ...

There are TWO CENTRAL THEMES in this work: POLITICS and THE PROBLEMS THAT ARE CONNECTED WITH THE NOTION, THE CONCEPT "POWER".

The Prince is a flaming and militant political piece of writing in which the author is not only rationally, but also emotionally 'present' with the full power of his personality. Machiavelli's ideas are closely related to the general philosophical concept of the Renaissance. His vision too is antropocentric: the only right to exist man has, is present in man himself AND in the realisation of the self in this world.
The author is the FOUNDER of the political science(s): nobody before him had considered that politics are a single, separate science, free of any moral or religion.
In his system he isolates the technical bias (read: orientation) on what is politically useful from the moral and theological aspect of kindness and justice. He defines sharply THE PURPOSE that one wants to reach, to achieve and THEN, starting from the situation in which a (the) person stands, WEIGHS UP THE PROS AND CONS (on a rational-technical basis) OF THE MEANS THAT LEAD TO THE PURPOSE, WHICH MEANS THOSE "ARE", DOES NOT MATTER ( = AMORAL). A means of reason that is MORALLY BAD, can be GOOD FOR POLITICS and VICE VERSA ... !

Instead of talking about The Prince, it is only correct to use the word RULER: the crucial person in this work. For Macchiavelli it was Cesare BORGIA, for Nietzsche it was NAPOLEON, who REALLY slept with Il Principe (he understood the book very well).
Too many readers are misled by words as 'fortune, virtue': in the Middle-Italian (very difficult, even for specialists) the author uses the words 'FORTUNA' and 'VIRTU': these two words (f.e.) have NOTHING OF LITTLE IN COMMON with fortune and virtue or virtus. There are about 23 POSSIBLE TRANSLATIONS FOR THE WORD 'VIRTU'...

To be a good ruler is not easy. In 26 short chapters the biggest philosopher of the 16th century, Macchiavelli, describes what the ruler can and/or should do ... to stay 'the ruler', not to lose the power he/she has, in absence of moral and religion: amoral! THAT IS DIFFICULT TO MAINTAIN: JUST LOOK AROUND, LISTEN TO THE NEWS, THINK ABOUT GLOBAL PROBLEMS: EVERYWHERE YOU'LL MEET NICCOLO MACCHIAVELLI, WAVING WITH HIS HAND TO YOU AND TRYING TO MAKE YOU AND US FREE FROM PREJUDICES, WHISPERING WHAT WE SHOULD DO OR NOT.

I have read several editions of 'THE PRINCE', but have only one that stays with me since decades now: I read and keep on reading about our ruler forever, so my book will stay with me too.
LAST NOTE: The saying "The end justifies the means" is NOT from Macchiavelli; it already existed for a few centuries.


The First Business Book I have ever read   July 14, 2000
17 out of 25 found this review helpful

Actually, this book about political theory is applicable to any organization, not just governmental. Niccolo Machiavelli was a very shrewd man. A book full of pearls such as "Whoever believes that with great men new services wipe out old injuries deceives himslef"; "Without opportunity their prowess would have been extinguished and without such prowess the opportunity would have come in vain"; "And here it has to be noted that men must either be pampered or crushed, because they can get revenge for small injuries but not for grievous ones"; "The first opinion that is formed of a ruler's intelligence is based on the quality of men he has around him"; "But as soon as you disarm your subjects you start to offend them" and many many others. I am glad I am writing this review because it has been such a long time since I went back to my small yellow book for reference.


Half historical, half relevant more than a prince of books.   April 12, 2003
Ben Groves
15 out of 22 found this review helpful

The prince is one of those books you must read if you have any interest in political motivation of any period. The book set in historic Italy gives Machiavelli's political thoughts on how a prince should conduct him self in political manors such as the military, alliances and the treatment of his citizens. Machiavelli also puts in a chapter on the age old question is it better to be lover of feared (I wont spoil the answer here) In one sense the book is much more relevant to the historian on such maters as the military and treatment of the peasants after all its not often we are confronted whether to hire mercenaries of use the state militia but these points are still very interesting in context. But the book also has lots of points that are relevant today such as Machiavelli's very realist or cynical (that's up to you) methods of gaining and maintaining power. This is a great book if you are interested in political motives and like to look at this in a historical context. The book is also fairly short and readable so if you are new to reading the books you were told "everyone must read" then this is a good starting place (It was for me anyway)

A lot of relevance to be gleamed from history, readable and perhaps will change a few views on life.