In his book called the Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli deals with a wide spectrum of issues, including the interaction of government and authority, military affairs, qualities that should be prescribed to true rulers, historical perspectives of Italy's development, the issues of politics and morale, etc. All the author's reflections, arguments and conclusions constitute a unified logical sequence representing coherent stages of the construction of a durable and powerful state. With that, the state should be headed by a wise and brave ruler - a prince. In his book, Niccolo created a collective image of a ruler. In the author's opinion, a prince is a wise, farseeing, generous person who can act decisively and uncompromisingly (Machiavelli, Skinner, Price, 1988 pp. 17, 98). Courage and honor - these are the qualities separating a ruler from the other mass, the qualities that allow using favorable moments of history to gain power. With that, all the prince's actions must be correlated with common sense and the desire to glory his homeland. Machiavelli was sure that only a person of such character was able to restore order in devastated and abased Italy.
Considering the plot of the Prince, great attention should be paid to the most controversial points surrounding Machiavelli's art. These points comprise the issues of politics and morale. On the grounds of the book, it should be noted that although the author believed that any means could prove useful to reach a certain goal, his actual position was different. Uppermost, Niccolo believed this strategy to be senseless and insane. Trickery and cruelty are allowed solely if they are inevitable and are made for the sake of the state and its citizens. Life imposes various difficulties on people, and their character can be judged by their readiness and the way they face them. At the same time, it is much more difficult for a ruler, since cannot use only his personal qualities and sympathies in his behavior. Taking a certain decision, a ruler should be aware of the state that relies on him.
Machiavelli's political views can hardly be correlated with a certain concept. As any thinking person, he was in search, tried to answer the questions that occupied his mind, and attempted to explain the actual reality. Just like the image of a true ruler appears to be collective in Niccolo's mind, the state itself cannot be composed of one element only. Thus, it is the interaction of three principles: monarchical, aristocratic, and democratic, each bearing its own advantages (Held, 2006, pp. 33, 40-43). Machiavelli wanted to see the surrounding reality just like the one he depicted on the pages of his book.
Being exiled and missing the real political life, Machiavelli created a number of brilliant works, including the Prince. Machiavelli reflected on political system, Italian history, social problems, on the premises of future development. All these issues were in the minds of many pioneering Italian philosophers of that time. However, it were primarily Machiavelli's works that caused so many debates, disapprovals, and even resentments. Therefore, it is crucial to dwell on one of the most prominent work of Niccolo Machiavelli and analyze its nature.
Firstly, the entire background of the Prince is strongly connected with Italian social though that existed in that time. The second half of the 15th century witnessed the bloom of humanism (Humanism – A History, 2016). Writers showed interest towards the human nature. Renaissance established the image of an ideal human secluded not only from history, but also from the surrounding social and political environment. Sooner or later, however, this ideal had to get in touch with the reality, which eventually took place. This contact proved very painful and led to the ideal delimitation among Italian humanists. Some of them decided to move away from reality, the others tried to control the growing political storm. Machiavelli, on his part, remained aloof and avoided interfering with these controversies. He believed sincerely in the final triumph of reason and tried to explain many of the occurring events. In the Prince, Machiavelli analyzes the qualities of an ideal governor and constantly gives according examples from history. With that, it is not a certain detached image, but rather a collective portrait which can be correlated with a specific historical situation.
Secondly, it is important to figure out the meaning of the term Machiavellianism that acquired negative connotations in historiography. Its roots are to be founded in the very Prince, where Machiavelli introduces the activity of the cruel politician Cesare Borgia as one of the historical examples (Machiavelli, Skinner, Price, 1988, pp. 112, 129-131). Niccolo justifies many of the transgressions made by Borgia, considering them as being expedient during the seizure and consolidation of power. Likewise, Machiavelli believes that the governor should ambivalent: he should be able to show his positive qualities, and, if necessary, show trickery, cruelty, and refusal to compromise. Hence, there arises the critical notion that, as stated by Machiavelli, every means proves useful in achieving the goal. However, it is not so, which can be observed through the book's reading. The Prince gradually becomes the symbol of unscrupulous policy, the policy not limited by any restrictions. There is no telling whether Machiavelli could imagine how much disputes and disapprovals his work would excite afterwards.
In his narration, Machiavelli moves from general to specific concepts. At first, the Prince provides the reader with a classification, then each component is analyzed separately. This allows to understand to overall scheme of the analyzed issue, and also helps to follow the author's train of thought. Machiavelli's reflections are often reinforced by historical facts and events. At the same time, there exists a belief that, due to his work, Machiavelli was attempting to return the authorities' goodwill, whereupon the book is addressed to the real Italian governor. Indeed, these intentions might took place, but they can hardly be considered as primary. Firstly, the message genre was very popular in the literature of that period. The Prince belonged rather to the genre of documentary prose. Secondly, though Machiavelli hoped to return to political life, he was well aware of the fact that this possibility is improbable.
Still, it was hard for Machiavelli to get accustomed to the new state of things. He who did his best to do everything for his homeland's sake, spared no effort and connected all his hopes with future changes, was simply erased from political life. As a result, the huge gap encouraged Machiavelli to seek cover in literal activity. Niccolo claimed his life experience as the most precious thing he had, and he was ready to share it with others. The authors hoped that his advice and observations would prove useful for a new ruler. However, Machiavelli was unlikely to imagine that his work would prove to be a standard for personalities of subsequent generations. On the contrary, he was interested in the future of his native Italy.
Although Machiavelli claimed the Prince to be written without the use any peculiar and vivid style, it cannot be accepted. Only after reading several lines of the book, the readers encounter the shaped image of the author's subtle observations. In his work, Machiavelli tackled a complicated task regarding the evaluation of rulers and their actions, and succeeded in it greatly.
References
Held, D. (2006). Models of Democracy (pp. 33, 40-43). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Humanism – A History of the Hijacked Credo of Our Species. (2016, October 3). Retrieved February 7, 2016, from http://humanism.ws/featured/a-history-of-humanism-robert-grudin/
Machiavelli, N., Skinner, Q., & Price, R. (1988). Machiavelli: The Prince (pp. 17, 98, 112, 129-131). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
