H. Machiavelli. The Emperor
MACIAVELLI Niccolo (1469-1527), the most outstanding representative of social philosophy of the Renaissance.
The main idea of Machiavelli's philosophy was the idea of constant crookedness as a result of the natural course of things having "divine" character, influence fortune (fate, happiness). Machiavelli separated politics from theological and religious views. He considered politics only as an autonomous side of human activity. According to Machiavelli, politics is not determined by God or morality, but by practice itself, the natural rules of life and human psychology.
Major works: "The Emperor", "Reasoning", "The Florentine Story", and "Mandragora", "Clement", Belfargor and others
CHAPTER V. How to manage cities or states that, before they were conquered, lived according to their own laws
If, as said, the conquered state lives from time immemorial and has its own laws, that is, there are three ways to keep it. The first is to destroy; the second - to settle there for residence; the third - to give citizens the right to live by their own laws, while overlapping them with tribute and entrusting the board to a small number of persons who would vouch for friendship
To the sovereign. These trustees will support the emperor in every possible way, knowing that they are placed in power and strong only by his friendship and power. In addition, if you do not want to destroy a city that has become accustomed to living freely, it is easiest to keep it through its citizens, than in any other way.
Let's look at the example of Sparta and Rome. Spartans held Athens and Thebes, creating there an oligarchy, but lost both cities. The Romans, in order to keep Capua, Carthage and Numancia, destroyed them and retained them in their power. Greece they tried to keep in almost the same way that the Spartans, that is, established there an oligarchy and did not take away freedom and the right to live by their own laws, however, failed and not to lose all of Greece were forced to destroy many cities in it. For in reality there is no way to reliably capture the city otherwise than by subjecting it to destruction. Whoever seizes a city that has enjoyed freedom for a long time, and spares it, that city will not spare. There will always be an occasion for a mutiny in the name of freedom and the old order, which will not make you forget neither the time nor the benefits of the new government. Whatever you do, no matter how hard you try, but if you do not separate or scatter the city's inhabitants, they will never forget either their former freedom or their former ways, and at the first opportunity try to revive them, as Pisa did a hundred years after she fell under the rule of the Florentines. But if the city or country is accustomed to stand under the rule of the sovereign, and his family was exterminated, then the inhabitants of the city will not easily take up arms, for on the one hand they are accustomed to obey, on the other, without an old sovereign, they will not be able to agree about electing a new one, or living freely. So the conqueror will have enough time to arrange them to himself and thereby ensure his safety. Whereas in republics there is more life, more hatred, more thirst for revenge; in them the memory of the former freedom never dies and can not die. Therefore, the most reliable means to keep them in their power is to destroy them or to settle in them.
CHAPTER X. How to measure the forces of all statesStudying the properties of states, one should also take into consideration this aspect of the matter: can the sovereign, in case of need, defend himself or he needs protection from outside. I will explain that I can call those sovereigns capable of defending themselves, who, having enough people or money, can gather the required size of the army and withstand the battle with any enemy; those who need help I call those who can not come out against the enemy in the field and are forced to defend themselves under the cover of the city walls. What to do in the first case, this is ahead, although something has already been said above. As for the second case, there is nothing to be said, except that the sovereign should strengthen and equip the city with everything necessary, without taking into account the surrounding district. If the Emperor well strengthens the city and treats his subjects as described above and added below, then the neighbors will be careful not to attack him. For people are enemies of all sorts of embarrassing obstacles, and whoever will find it easy to attack the sovereign, whose city is well fortified, and the people are not embittered.
The cities of Germany, some of the most free, have small districts, obey the emperor when they so desire, and are not afraid of either him or anyone else from strong neighbors, since they are sufficiently fortified to capture them to everyone a difficult and exhausting affair. They are surrounded by sound walls and moats, they have artillery as much as necessary and in public warehouses they hold an annual supply of food, drink and fuel; In addition, to feed the common people without exhausting the treasury, they prepare for a year of work in those industries with which the city lives, and in the crafts that feed the common people. Military art is in their honor, and they encourage it with different measures.
Thus, the sovereign, whose city is well fortified, and the people are not embittered, can not be attacked. But if this happens, the enemy will be forced to retreat in disgrace, for everything in the world is changing so rapidly that hardly anyone can hold the army in idleness for a year, besieging the city. It will be objected to me that if the people see how its fields and dwellings burn out of the city, it will not survive a long siege, for its own worries will prevail over loyalty to the sovereign. To this I reply that the sovereign strong and brave will overcome all the difficulties, then inspiring the citizens with the hope for an early end to the calamities, then reminding them that the enemy is merciless, then upsetting those who are too obstinate. In addition, the enemy usually burns and devastates the fields when approaching the city, when people are still hot and full of determination not to give up; when in a few days the heat will freeze, the damage will be done and the evil is done. And when people have no choice but to stick to their sovereign, they themselves will expect him to thank him for protecting him, allowed to burn their houses and loot their property. People, by their nature, are such that they attach themselves no less to those who have been made good by themselves, than to those who have done good to them. So, after considering all the circumstances, I will say that a reasonable sovereign can easily find ways to strengthen the spirit of citizens during the whole siege, provided that he has enough to feed and defend the city.
CHAPTER XVII. About cruelty and mercy and what is better: inspire love or fearTurning to the other of the properties mentioned above, I will say that every sovereign would like to be regarded as merciful, not cruel, but one should be careful not to abuse mercy. Cesare Borgia, many called cruel, but the cruelty of this he put order in Rimagne, united it, pacified and led to obedience. And, if you think about it, you showed more charity than the Florentine people, who, fearing accusations of cruelty, allowed Pistoi to destroy. Therefore, the sovereign, if he wishes to keep subjects subject to obedience, should not reckon with accusations of cruelty. Having done a few reprisals, he will show more mercy than those who, in excess of it, condone the disorder. For the disorder, which generates looting and murder, suffers the entire population, whereas from the car imposed by the sovereign, only individuals suffer. The new sovereign is even less than any other, can avoid the reproach of cruelty, because the new government is threatened with many dangers. Virgil speaks through the mouths of Dido:
Res dura, et regni novitas me talia cogunt Moliri, et late fines custode tueri.
However, the new sovereign should not be gullible, hypocritical and quick to punish, in all his actions he must be restrained, circumspect and merciful, so that excessive credulity does not turn into imprudence, and excessive distrustfulness does not enrage the subjects.
On this occasion, a dispute may arise which is better: that the sovereign should be loved or feared. They say that it is best when they are afraid and love at the same time; However, love does not live well with fear, so if you have to choose, it's more reliable to choose fear. For people in general can be said that they are ungrateful and fickle, inclined to hypocrisy and deceit, that they are frightened away by danger and attracted to profit: while you are doing good, they are your whole soul, they promise nothing for you to spare: no blood, no life , no children, no property, but when you need them, they immediately turn away from you. And it will be bad for that sovereign, who, trusting in their promises, will not take any measures in case of danger. For the friendship that is given for money, and not acquired by the majesty and nobility of the soul, can be bought, but can not be retained to take advantage of it in a difficult time. Moreover, people are less careful to offend those who inspire them with love than those who inspire them with fear, for love is supported by gratitude that people, being bad, can neglect for their own benefit, while fear is supported by a threat of punishment that can not be neglected.
However, the sovereign should instill fear in such a way that, if not to gain love, then at least avoid hatred, for it is quite possible to inspire fear without hatred. To avoid hatred, the sovereign needs to refrain from encroachments on the property of citizens and subjects and on their women. Even when the Emperor considers it necessary to deprive someone of life, he can do this if there is a suitable justification and an obvious reason, but he must be careful not to encroach on someone else's good, for people will rather forgive the death of a father than the loss of property. Moreover, the reasons for seizing property are always enough and if you begin to live by predation, then there is always a reason to assign someone else's, while there are fewer reasons for depriving someone of life and the reason for doing it is harder to find.
По when the emperor leads a large army, he especially should neglect what can be known cruel, because, not being perceived as cruel, it is impossible to support the unity and fighting capacity of the army. Among the amazing acts of Hannibal mention the following: having gone to fight in foreign lands, he will keep from the mutiny and strife a huge and diverse army both in days of victories and in days of defeats. What can be explained only by his inhuman cruelty, which, together with valor and talents, instilled reverence and horror in the army; if there were no cruelty in him, his other qualities would not have had such an effect. Meanwhile, the authors of historical works, on the one hand, extol the feat itself, on the other, unreasonably condemn its main cause.
How true is the statement that the commander does not have enough valor and talent, shows the example of Scipio - a man of extraordinary not only among his contemporaries, but among all people. His troops rebelled in Spain because of his excessive kindness, he gave the soldiers greater freedom than is permitted by military discipline. What he accused Fabio Maxim, who called him before the Senate, the corrupter of the Roman army. For the same lack of firmness Scipio did not stand up for the Lockeau, having learned that one of his legates was ruining them, and did not punish the legate for his impudence. It's not for nothing that someone in the Senate, wanting to justify him, said that he refers to the nature of people who are easier to avoid mistakes themselves than to punish others for mistakes. Over time, from this trait of Scipio, his good name would suffer, and glory if he disposed of alone; but he was under the authority of the senate, and therefore this property of his character not only had no harmful consequences, but also served his glory.
So, going back to the dispute about what is best: that the sovereign should be loved or feared, I will say that they love rulers at their own discretion, and they are afraid at the discretion of sovereigns, so a wise ruler should better count on what depends on him, but not from someone else; it is important only in no case to attract the hatred of the subjects, as stated above.
CHAPTER XVIII. On how princes should keep the word
It is superfluous to say how praiseworthy this word is in praise of the prince, straightforwardness and unflinching honesty, but we know from experience that in our time great deeds succeeded only those who did not try to keep the word and knew who to flip around ; such sovereigns eventually succeeded much more than those who betrayed honesty.
You need to know that you can fight with the enemy in two ways: first, laws, and secondly, by force. The first way is inherent in man, the second beast; But since the former is often not enough, one must resort to the second. Hence it follows that the sovereign must learn what is enclosed in the nature of both man and beast. Is not this the allegorical authors who tell us about how Achilles and other heroes of antiquity gave the centaur Chiron for education so that they could join his wisdom? What other meaning does the choice have in the mentors of the half-man-half-beast, than the one that the sovereign should combine in himself both these natures, for one without the other does not have sufficient strength?
So, of all beasts, let the sovereign be like two: a lion and a fox. The lion is afraid of traps, and foxes are wolves, therefore, one must be like a fox to be able to bypass traps, and a lion to scare off wolves. Anyone who is always like a lion can notice a trap. It follows that a reasonable ruler can not and must not remain true to his promise if it harms his interests and if the reasons that led him to make a promise have disappeared.
Such advice would be unworthy if people honestly kept the word, but people, being bad, do not keep words, so you should do the same with them. A plausible excuse to break a promise will always be found. There are many examples of this: how many peace treaties, how many agreements did not come into force, or went to ruin because the sovereigns broke their word, and always had the benefit of someone who had a fox-nature. However, this nature must still be able to cover up, you have to be a fair cheater and a hypocrite, people are so simple-minded and so absorbed in immediate needs that the deceiver will always find someone who will fool himself.
From close examples of time I can not keep silent about one thing. Alexander VI spent his whole life in deceptions, but each time there were people who were ready to believe him. In all the world there was no person who so oath assured, so convincingly promised and so little care about the fulfillment of his promises. Nevertheless, deceptions always succeeded him, as he wished, for he knew a lot about this matter. Hence it follows that the sovereign does not need to have all these virtues, but there is a direct need to look like possessing them. Dare to add that to possess these virtues and steadily follow them is harmful, whereas it is useful to look like possessing them. In other words, it is necessary to appear in the eyes of people compassionate, loyal to the word, merciful, sincere, pious - and to be so in fact, but inwardly one must keep the willingness to display the opposite qualities, if necessary. It should be understood that the sovereign, especially the new one, can not perform all that which people consider good, for the sake of preserving the state he often has to go against his word, against charity, kindness and piety. Therefore, in the soul, he must always be ready to change direction if the events take a different turn or the wind of fortune blows out the other way, that is, as it was said, if possible, not to move away from the good, but if necessary, to escape from evil.
So, the sovereign should be vigilant to ensure that his words do not break from his tongue, not filled with the five named virtues. Let those who see and hear him appear as mercy, faithfulness, straightforwardness, humanity and piety, especially piety. For people are mostly judged by the form, since to see is given to everyone, and to touch with hands - to the few.
Everyone knows what you look like, a little knows what you really are, and these latter will not dare to challenge the opinion of the majority, behind whose back the state stands. On the actions of all people, and especially princes, whom you do not ask in court, you conclude by the result, so let the tsars try to preserve power and win. Whatever means to do this, they will always be deemed worthy and approved, for the mobile is attracted by appearances and success, in the world there is nothing but mobs, and there is no place for the minority in it when the state is behind the majority. One of the present sovereigns, whom I will refrain from calling, only does that preaches peace and fidelity, in fact the same is the worst enemy; but if he followed what he preaches, he would long ago have lost either power or the state.
CHAPTER XXI. How should the sovereign act to be revered
Nothing ns can instill in the emperor such reverence as military enterprises and extraordinary deeds. From the present rulers I refer to Ferdinand of Aragon, the King of Spain. He could be called a new sovereign, for, weak at first, he became, by glory and brilliance, the first king of the Christian world; and all his actions are full of greatness, and some amaze the imagination. The basis for his power was the war for Grenada, undertaken shortly after his accession to the throne. First of all, he started the war when it was quiet inside the country, without fearing that he would be hindered, and dragged the Castilian barons into it so that they, having engaged in war, forgot about the troubles; In the meantime, imperceptibly for them, he concentrated all power in his hands and subordinated them to his influence. He received money from the Church and the people for the maintenance of the army, and, while the war continued, he built an army, which subsequently created fame for him. After this, having conceived even more significant enterprises, he again acted as a defender of religion, created pious cruelty: he banished the Marran and cleared the kingdom of them - it is difficult to imagine a more ruthless and at the same time more extraordinary act. Under the same pretext, he seized the land in Africa, campaigned in Italy, and finally entered the war with France. So he thought about and carried out great ideas, keeping in constant admiration and strain the subjects who were following the course of events in devotion. And all these enterprises so flowed from one another that there was no time to plan anything against the sovereign himself.
The greatness of the sovereign is also promoted by extraordinary orders inside the state, similar to those attributed to Messer Bernabo da Milano, in other words, when someone commits anything significant in civilian life, bad or good, it is useful to reward or punish in this way so that it will be remembered as long as possible. But the most important thing for a sovereign to try with all his actions is to create for himself the glory of a great man endowed with an outstanding mind.
The prince is also respected when he openly declares himself an enemy or friend, that is, when he unhesitatingly stands for one against another - it is always better than standing aside. For when two powerful rulers engage in a fight, they can be such that the possible winner is either dangerous for you or not. In both cases it is more advantageous to openly and decisively enter the war. For in the first case, if you do not enter the war, you will become the prey of the victor to the joy and satisfaction of the vanquished, but you will not be able to get any protection from anybody: the victor will reject the ally who threw him into misfortune, and the defeated will not want to take to him one who does not wished with a weapon in his hands to share his fate. Antiochus, whom the Aetolians invoked in Greece to drive the Romans, sent his orators to the Achaeans, the allies of the Romans, wishing to persuade the Achaeans to non-interference. The Romans, on the contrary, persuaded the Achaeans to join the war. Then, to solve the matter, the Achaeans called a council, the legate Antiochus urged them not to take up arms, the Roman legate said:
"Quod autem isti dicunt non interponendi vos bello, nihil magis alienum rebus vestris est; sine gratia, sine dignitate, praemium victoris eritis .
And always the enemy calls to step aside, while the friend calls to openly speak out for him with a weapon in his hands. Indecent sovereigns, as a rule, choose non-intervention to avoid the immediate danger, and, as a rule, this leads them to collapse. But if you fearlessly take the side of one of the belligerents, and your ally will win, then no matter how powerful it may be and how you depend on it, it is indebted to you, people are not so dishonorable as to strike an ally by showing so obvious ingratitude. In addition, victory is never complete to such an extent that the winner could not reckon with anything and, in particular, could trample on justice. If the one whose side you took will lose the war, he will take you to himself and, as long as he can, help you, so that you will become a fellow-sufferer to someone whose happiness may still be revived.
In the second case, when none of the belligerents have to fear, it is even more prudent to join one or the other. For with the help of one you will smash the other, although to him, if he were cleverer, you should save, and not destroy the enemy, and after the victory you will subordinate the ally of your power, he will also inevitably win with your support.
Here it is appropriate to note that it is better to avoid an alliance with those who are stronger than you, if this is not compelled by necessity, as mentioned above. For if you win a strong ally you are in his hands, sovereigns should be careful not to become dependent on other sovereigns. The Venetians, for example, entered into an alliance with France against the Milanese Duke, when they could avoid it, which resulted in their collapse. But if there is no possibility of evading the union, as was the case with the Florentines, when the Pope and Spain moved troops to Lombardy, then the sovereign must enter the war, which I indicated above. Do not just hope that you can make an unmistakable decision, on the contrary, you should be reconciled beforehand with the fact that any decision is doubtful, because it is in the order of things that, having avoided one trouble, you fall into another. However, that is the wisdom that, after weighing all possible troubles, the least evil is to be honored for good.
The sovereign must also show himself as a patron of gifts, to welcome gifted people, to honor those who distinguished themselves in any craft or art. It should encourage citizens to calmly indulge in trade, agriculture and crafts, so that some will improve their possessions without fear that these possessions will be taken away from them, others open trade without fear of being taxed; moreover, he must have rewards for those who care about decorating a city or state. He must also occupy the people with festivities and shows at a suitable time of the year.Respecting the guilds or tribes to which every city is divided, the sovereign must participate sometimes in their meetings and be an example of generosity and magnanimity, but at the same time firmly guard his dignity and greatness, which must be present in every action he takes.
Also We Can Offer!
- Argumentative essay
- Best college essays
- Buy custom essays online
- Buy essay online
- Cheap essay
- Cheap essay writing service
- Cheap writing service
- College essay
- College essay introduction
- College essay writing service
- Compare and contrast essay
- Custom essay
- Custom essay writing service
- Custom essays writing services
- Death penalty essay
- Do my essay
- Essay about love
- Essay about yourself
- Essay help
- Essay writing help
- Essay writing service reviews
- Essays online
- Fast food essay
- George orwell essays
- Human rights essay
- Narrative essay
- Pay to write essay
- Personal essay for college
- Personal narrative essay
- Persuasive writing
- Write my essay
- Write my essay for me cheap
- Writing a scholarship essay