The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli
"The Prince" by Niccolò Machiavelli is a seminal work in political philosophy, often regarded as a practical guide for rulers on acquiring and maintaining power. Written during the Renaissance, Machiavelli's insights are informed by his experiences as a diplomat in Florence, where he observed the political maneuvers of influential leaders like Cesare Borgia. The book departs from traditional moral teachings, focusing instead on the realities of governance and the often harsh tactics required for political success. Machiavelli categorizes states and discusses strategies for different types of rule, emphasizing that a ruler’s effectiveness is not contingent on virtue but rather on the ability to adapt and act decisively.
Central to Machiavelli's argument is the idea that it is safer for a ruler to be feared than loved, and that one must sometimes engage in cruelty to maintain authority. He provides historical examples to illustrate his points, notably praising Borgia for his cunning and ruthlessness. "The Prince" concludes with a passionate appeal for political change in Italy, underscoring Machiavelli's desire for a unified state free from foreign domination. Though it has sparked controversy and debate over its perceived cynicism, the work remains influential and is often referenced in discussions about political strategy and ethics.
On this Page
The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli
First published:Il principe, 1532 (English translation, 1640)
Type of work: Politics
The Work:
The Prince is the book from which the adjective Machiavellian is derived. The book is an ingenious and fascinating study of the art of practical politics, composed by a man who never rose higher than the position of secretary to the second chancery in Florence. The success of The Prince can be attributed partly to Niccolò Machiavelli’s wit and partly to his having known some of the most clever and powerful figures of the Renaissance. His model for the “prince” was Cesare Borgia, who used all means of conquest, including murder, to achieve and hold political power.
Machiavelli never pretended that his book was a guide to the virtuous. On the other hand, he did not set out to prescribe the way to wickedness. He meant his account to be a practical guide to political power and through a combination of experience, logic, and imagination, he constructed one of the most intriguing works of Western civilization and political philosophy: a primer for princes.
In beginning a discussion concerned with the manners and attitudes of a prince—that is, the ruler of a state—Machiavelli writes,
"Since it has been my intention to write something which may be of use to the understanding reader, it has seemed wiser to me to follow the real truth of the matter rather than what we imagine it to be. For imagination has created many principalities and republics that have never been seen or known to have any real existence, for how we live is so different from how we ought to live that he who studies what ought to be done rather than what is done will learn the way to his downfall rather than to his preservation."
This passage makes it clear that Machiavelli intends to explain how successful politicians really work rather than how they ought to work.
The Prince begins with a one-paragraph chapter that illustrates Machiavelli’s logical approach to the problem of advising prospective princes. He claims that all states are either republics or monarchies. Monarchies are either hereditary or new. New monarchies are either entirely new or acquired. Acquired states have either been dominated by a prince or been free; they are acquired either by a prince’s own arms or by those of others; and they fall to him either by fortune or because of his own character and ability. Having outlined this inclusive logical bifurcation, Machiavelli first discusses the problems connected with governing a hereditary monarchy, then discusses mixed monarchies.
In each case, as he develops his argument, Machiavelli considers the logical alternatives, and what should be done in each case if the prince is to acquire and hold power. In writing of mixed monarchies, for example, he points out that acquired states are either culturally similar to the conquering state or not, and then considers each possibility. If the acquired state is culturally similar, it is no problem to keep it; but if the acquired state is different in its customs, laws, or language, then there is a problem to be solved. One solution might be to have the ruler go to the acquired territory and live there. As an example, Machiavelli refers to the presence of the Turkish ruler in Greece.
Another possible solution to the problems resulting when an acquired territory differs culturally from the conquering state is the establishment of colonies. Colonies are inexpensive to acquire and maintain, he argues, because the land is acquired from a few landowners of the conquered territory, leading to few complaints. Such a plan is preferable to maintaining soldiers, for policing a new state not only is expensive but also offends the citizens being policed.
Thus, by the device of considering logical alternatives, Machiavelli uses his limited experience to build a guide to power. What he says, although refreshing in its direct approach to the hard facts of practical politics, is not entirely fanciful or naïve. Not only did Machiavelli, through his diplomatic missions, come to know intimately such leaders as Louis XII, Julius II, Maximilian, and Borgia, he also used his time to advantage, noting political tricks that actually worked and building up his store of psychological truths.
It is doubtful that any ruler or rebel ever succeeded simply by following Machiavelli to the letter, but it may well be that some political coups have been the result of inspiration from The Prince. (Shortly after Fidel Castro’s overthrow of the government in Cuba in 1959, a newspaper account reported that among the books on Castro’s revolutionary reading list was The Prince.)
What is inspiring for the politically ambitious in The Prince is not the substance but the attitude, not the prescription but the unabashed, calculating, and aggressive air with which the author analyzes the means to power. For the reader without political ambition, The Prince is a sometimes amusing and sometimes frightening reminder of the realities of political fortune. For example, Machiavelli writes that one who helps a prince to power is bound to fall him- or herself, because he (or she) has contributed to the success either by his cleverness or by his power, and no prince can tolerate the existence of either in another person close to him.
Machiavelli considers this question: Why did the kingdom of Darius, occupied by Alexander the Great, not rebel after Alexander’s death? The answer is that monarchies are governed either by a prince and his staff, or by a prince and a number of barons. A monarchy controlled by the prince through his representatives is difficult to conquer, because the entire staff owes its existence to the prince and is, consequently, loyal. Once such a monarchy is captured, however, power is easily maintained. So it was in Alexander’s case. On the other hand, a nation like the France of Machiavelli’s day is ruled by a king and barons. The barons are princes of a sort over their portions of the state, and they maintain control over their subjects. It is easier to conquer such a state, because there are always unhappy barons willing to join a movement to overthrow the king. Once conquered, however, such a state is difficult to hold because the barons may regroup and overthrow the new prince.
Sometimes power is acquired through crime, Machiavelli admits, and he cites a violent example: the murder of Giovanni Fogliani of Fermo by his nephew, Oliverotto. Machiavelli advises that the cruelty necessary to attain power be kept to a minimum and not be continued, for the purely practical reason that the prince will lose power otherwise. The best thing to do, Machiavelli says, is to commit one’s acts of cruelty all at once, not over an extended period.
This cold practicality is echoed in such injunctions as those to the effect that if one cannot afford to be generous, then one must accept with indifference the name of miser; it is safer to be feared than to be loved, if one must choose; a prince need not have a morally worthwhile character, but he must appear to have it; if a prince’s military support is good, he will always have good friends; to keep power one must be careful not to be hated by the people; it is always wiser for a prince to be a true friend or a true enemy than to be neutral; a prince should never listen to advice unless he asks for it; and it is better to be bold than cautious.
Machiavelli’s prime examples are Francesco Sforza and Borgia, particularly the latter. The author writes that he is always able to find examples for his points by referring to the deeds of Borgia. Considering the value of using auxiliary arms, the military force of another state, Machiavelli refers to Borgia’s unfortunate experience with auxiliaries in the capture of Romagna. Finding the auxiliaries untrustworthy, Borgia turned to mercenaries, but they were no better, so he finally used only his own troops. Machiavelli’s conclusion in regard to auxiliary troops is that “If any one . . . wants to make sure of not winning he will avail himself of troops such as these.”
After reviewing Borgia’s rise to power (with the remark that “I could not suggest better precepts to a new prince than the examples of Cesare’s actions”), Machiavelli concludes "I can find nothing with which to reproach him, rather it seems that I ought to point him out as an example . . . to all those who have risen to power by fortune or by the arms of others."
This praise follows a description of such acts as Borgia’s killing of as many of the hapless lords he had despoiled “as he could lay hands on.”
Machiavelli praises the actions of other leaders, such as Sforza and Popes Alexander VI and Julius II, but only Borgia wins unqualified praise. Sforza, for example, is recognized as having become duke of Milan “by the proper means and through his own ability,” but later on he is criticized because of a castle he built when he should have been trying to win the goodwill of the people.
The Prince concludes with a plea to the Medici family to free Italy from the “barbarians” who ruled the republic of Florence and kept Italy in bondage. Machiavelli makes a plea for liberation, expresses his disappointment that Borgia is not available because of a turn of fortune, and closes with the capitalized cry that “this barbarian occupation stinks in the nostrils of all of us.” Unfortunately for the author, his plea to the Medici family did him no good, and he died with the republic still in power. Perhaps he himself was not bold enough; perhaps he was not cruel enough. In any case, he left behind a work to be used by any leader who is willing to be both.
Bibliography
Bernard, John D. Why Machiavelli Matters: A Guide to Citizenship in a Democracy. Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2009.
Bondanella, Peter E. Machiavelli and the Art of Renaissance History. Detroit, Mich.: Wayne State University Press, 1973.
Garver, Eugene. “The Prince: A Neglected Rhetorical Classic.” In Machiavelli and the History of Prudence. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1987.
Grant, Ruth Weissbourd. Hypocrisy and Integrity: Machiavelli, Rousseau, and the Ethics of Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997.
King, Ross. Machiavelli: Philosopher of Power. New York: Atlas Books/HarperCollins, 2007.
Machiavelli, Niccolo, and Peter Constantine. The Essential Writings of Machiavelli. New York: Modern Library, 2007. Print.
Parel, Anthony. “The Prince.” In The Machiavellian Cosmos. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1992.
Pitkin, Hanna Fenichel. Fortune Is a Woman: Gender and Politics in the Thought of Niccolò Machiavelli. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984.
Rudowski, Victor. The Prince: A Historical Critique. New York: Twayne, 1992.
Sullivan, Vickie B. Machiavelli’s Three Romes: Religion, Human Liberty, and Politics Reformed. De Kalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1996.
Unger, Miles. Machiavelli: A Biography. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2012. Print.
Viroli, Maurizio. Niccolò Machiavelli: A Biography of Machiavelli. New York: Farrar Straus & Giroux, 2000.
Vivanti, Corrado. Niccolò Machiavelli: An Intellectual Biography. Princeton UP, 2013. Print.