The Prince

Which of the following would be most successful in business today? And what kind of business would they run? Remirro da Orca, Oliverotto da Fermo, Cesare Borgia.

            If the three previously stated men were to live in contemporary times, each one would have a particular trade they would go into. Remirro da Orca would be the leader of an elite organization of shifty characters, namely the mafia or a gang leader. Alexander VI’s son, the duke, trying to rule Romagna, found that it was populated by weak nobles. The duke called upon da Orca to “bring back peace and obedience to authority,” (Machiavelli 7) which he did quite well. Remirro’s downfall was that he was a mighty and a stern man, and the duke knew that the people would not enjoy having this man for a ruler, even though he was the reason for their peace. He ultimately had to be assassinated. Much like a mafia head, da Orca was a good man who many respected for a little while, but could not deal with him for too long for they feared he would become tyrannical. A mafia head’s death, much like da Orca’s, is received with a mixture of relief and horror. He was a good leader and it was a pity that he had to die, but it was inevitable. Remirro da Orca would not be the best in modern business.

            Oliverotto da Fermo would be quite successful as the head of an elite group of bounty hunters. He had the training to fight, as he was trained under Pagolo Vitelli. Da Fermo was also cunning and sly, traits necessary for survival especially back when he actually live and if he were to become a bounty hunter. He knew how to persuade people to give him what he wanted, as shown when he wanted to seize Fermo and tricked Giovanni Fogliani into letting him into Fermo. Da Fermo must have had quite a way with words, not really a necessity for a bounty hunter, but if there ever comes a time that a hunter would need to speak to his target he would need to be extremely skilled. Da Fermo led Giovanni straight to his own doom. While he did order the massacre of Giovanni and the chiefs of Fermo, no actual blood got on his hands, which would make him the organizer of the bounty hunters. But all evil people must meet their end somewhere, and da Fermo was strangled, but not before tasting sweet victory after a savage killing.

            Cesare Borgia and the other two men share the same types of personalities, but they each are very individual people. Borgia, unlike the others, would change with the seasons though always keeping his angry temperament firm. His personality seemed to depend on whether or not he thought he was succeeding. “This duke entered the Romagna with auxiliaries, but afterwards, he turned to mercenaries… whom presently, on handling and finding them doubtful, unfaithful, and dangerous, he destroyed and turned to his own men. And the difference between one and the other of these forces can easily be seen when one considers the difference there was when he had auxilieries, or mercenaries, and when he relied on his own soldiers… he was never esteemed more highly than when every one saw that he was complete master of his own forces,” (Machiavelli XIII). The man knew how he would fare with different people by his side and used that to his advantage. Borgia figured out that he was only as good as the people who represent him and acquired the best people for certain situations. His approach seemed to work to, as the people of Borgia were loyal to him and understanding of him, even of his faults. Cesare Borgia, in today’s career ladder, would be successful as a Major General in an army. His hot temper would keep him level-headed on the battlefield, while his chameleon-like abilities would keep him sharp even if he were to switch platoons at a moment’s notice. Borgia would not be successful anywhere else in contemporary times other than in the army.

_______________________________________________________________

Who is a Prince’s greatest ally?

            In all cases throughout time a prince’s greatest ally is his people. In some cases, the people make the prince what he is, and in other instances, it is the way that the prince treats his people that determine the condition of the governing land. Under any and all circumstances, however, the most important ally a prince needs is people. In Chapter IX of The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli describes how to be a successful ruler of a principality. “One who becomes a prince through the favour of the people ought to keep them friendly… one who, in opposition to the people, becomes a prince by the favour of the nobles, ought, above everything, to seek to win the people over to himself…” (Machiavelli IX). This passage is reinforcing the notion that a prince needs people to stand behind him, and he must make sure that as soon as he is raised to nobility, he gains their trust. Without their support, he will fall, but with their aid, a prince can be made great. A prince is only as good as his people, and if he makes his people great, they will make him great. This process begins with the prince arming his people. “Rather when he has found them disarmed he has always armed them, because, by arming them, those arms become yours, those men who were distrusted become faithful, and those who were faithful are kept so, and your subjects become your adherents,” (Machiavelli XX). By giving his people arms with which to defend themselves and their land, he gains their faith and trust. These people, being given arms by a respectable ruler, will become faithful to him, defending him with the weapons he bestowed upon them. By giving his subjects gifts, a prince secures his own spot as the head of a principality. While it is in good taste to keep a prince’s direct subjects thinking good of him, it is sometimes even better to let it be known that an alliance should be formed between two friendly principalities. “If the party with whom he allies himself conquers… men are never so shameless as to become a monument of ingratitude by oppressing you… if he with whom you ally yourself loses, you may be sheltered by him… you become companions on a fortune that may rise again,” (Machiavelli XXI) By allying with other parties, a prince secures himself protection from the allied party’s people. No matter if the ally wins or loses their battle at hand, they will turn and aid the principality in some way. This directly helps the prince in his quest to retain his throne. His people are appreciative that he would protect them at all costs, and the people of the other party become acquainted with the prince and may follow under him. In every type of principality a prince’s greatest allies are his loyal subjects.

____________________________________________________________

 According to Machiavelli, when is generosity a good thing?

            In Machiavelli’s The Prince it is insinuated many times that generosity should never be overused. A good prince, Machiavelli believes, should not be generous to everyone, but rather keep them at arm’s length until they prove their worth. This is not to say that Machiavelli is completely opposed to generosity as a means to help oneself become a prince or a more successful prince. The only way to be generous is to be mildly generous in spirit in order to gain loyal subjects. In Chapter IX, Machiavelli states, “one cannot by fair dealing, and without injury to others, satisfy the nobles, but you can satisfy the people,” meaning that it is a necessity for a nobleman turned prince to win over the loyalty of the people so that he can have their faith in him when he really needs it. A good prince would do this by being generous with his newly acclaimed power. Concerning generosity, Machiavelli stands with the notion that sometimes generosity can be the absence of meanness and that it can ultimately gain you loyal subjects just as actually being generous would. Paraphrasing Chapter XVI, Machiavelli states that anyone wishing to be considered a liberal must be willing to tax his people so that he can gain more wealth. This will cause the people to not like him. Only a few people, nobles with almost the same powers as him, will be rewarded by this system but that is all. But, if the system is worked correctly, “thus it comes to pass that he exercises liberality towards all from whom he does not take, who are numberless, and meanness towards those to whom he does not give, who are few,” (Machiavelli XVI)  a prince will be quite successful in his nobility and his subject will be loyal to him. His generosity was simply the absence of meanness, which is the message that Machiavelli was attempting to convey.

_________________________________________________________________

Use the Beatitudes to argue against Machiavelli.

            The Beatitudes and The Prince are two very separate and distinct works, but they each mention the same basic ideals of human life. The two works, however, do not agree on these subjects. In Chapter VI of The Prince, Machiavelli concerned himself with discussing the best way to become a prince. He stated, “The fact of becoming a prince from a private station presupposes either ability or fortune,” which does not coincide with the Beatitudes in the slightest. The Beatitudes, on the other hand suggest that having ability or fortune does not ensure greatness, but being modest and docile will make one a leader. The Beatitudes say, “Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth,” (Beatitudes 5). This line expresses the Beatitudes’ counter argument for Machiavelli’s statement. Machiavelli tried to tell a prince-to-be that he has a very good chance only if he has spectacular abilities or is of wealth, but the Beatitudes tell God’s truth, that if one is quite and gentle, he will rule over the entire world. Machiavelli constantly turns to the topic of ruling over one’s people. Machiavelli glorifies the notion that a prince is permitted to be mean to his subjects; to instill fear in them, in order to be successful. He wrote, “We have not seen great things done in our time except by those who have been considered mean… ought to hold of little account a reputation for being mean, it… will enable him to govern,” (Machiavelli XVI). The Beatitudes suggest otherwise. Machiavelli’s statement of meanness can be revoked when compared to line 8 of the Beatitudes, “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.” The Beatitudes tell all of God’s people that they should go towards everyone with an open, pure heart and not with the meanness that Machiavelli seemed to think was a given. The Beatitudes and Machiavelli’s The Prince will always be contesting for dominance over such topics.

___________________________________________________________________

Use Machiavelli to argue against The Beatitudes.

            Arguing against the Beatitudes using Machiavelli’s The Prince sheds new light on both subjects. The Beatitudes, while normally thought of as God’s promises to humanity, applied to Machiavelli’s time do not seem all that practical. Machiavelli wrote his book when Italy was in times of strife and he documented his best thoughts for a future prince. He knew his peers and their beliefs, which did not always coincide with the teachings of the Beatitudes. In the Beatitudes, peace is discussed in, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God,” (Beatitudes 9). Machiavelli protests this, saying, “The Romans, foreseeing troubles, dealt with them at once… for they knew that war is not to be avoided, but is only to be put off to the advantage of others,” (Machiavelli III). If Rome provided an example to any other country or principality, then a valid argument between the Beatitudes and Machiavelli ensues. Kingdoms throughout history either wanted to go to war to prove their power, or saw that war was inevitable and went into battle willingly. Ones who try to make peace every time will be destroyed and wiped off of the map by a kingdom that is not fearful or necessarily kind. The Beatitudes tell man, “Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy,” (Beatitudes 7). Machiavelli shows the topic of mercy in a new light with, “A prince, so long as he keeps his subjects united and loyal, ought not to mind the reproach of cruelty; he will be more merciful than those who, through too much mercy, allow disorders to arise,” (Machiavelli XVII). Machiavelli’s view on mercy is much truer than that of the Beatitudes’, given the context of the situation. Of the many problems that arose for a prince, having no power of his subjects was one of the ones that was most feared. A prince needed to instill fear in his people if he wanted them to be faithful to him  and that was a priority of high caliber when an entire principality was on the line.   

Nicolo Machiavelli (1469-1527): The Prince, 1513. (1998). Retrieved October 29, 2010 from Medieval Sourcebook: http://www.fordham.edu/​halsall/​basis/​machiavelli-prince.html.

MATTHEW 5:3-12. (1984). Retrieved October 29, 2010 from Bible Gateway: http://www.biblegateway.com/​passage/​?search=matthew%205:3-12&version=niv.