• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

To what extent and why did Machiavelli’s views on politics and human nature in his book ‘The Prince’, lead him to be reviled by his contemporaries?

Extracts from this document...


To what extent and why did Machiavelli's views on politics and human nature in his book 'The Prince', lead him to be reviled by his contemporaries? Machiavelli was extensively reviled by his contemporaries because of his views on politics and human nature in his book 'The Prince'. They believed he put forward the principle that the laws of politics and princes were above those of God. This principle frightened them because they did not want to admit that the manner in which religion and politics worked together was in a different dimension, one they were not prepared to acknowledge. However, his philosophies were admired by many, especially rulers of the day. 'The Prince' would probably never have been written if the political situation in Florence had not changed so radically in 1512 when the Republic fell. Therefore, it is necessary to examine the events that led up to Machiavelli writing 'The Prince'. For the 14 years prior to this Machiavelli served in the government in a variety of capacities that included being a member of the Ten of War Committee and carrying out numerous diplomatic missions throughout Europe. These missions brought him into contact with Louis XII of France, Cesare Borgia of Romagna, Pope Julius II, and the Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I of Germany. Machiavelli was able to observe close-up the most prominent leaders of his era. ...read more.


'Machiavelli overturns the Christian interpretation of previous centuries, which turned Fortune into either a blind chance or divine (but unknowable) Providence. He returns to the pagan classical view that Fortune can be influenced, and even mastered, albeit not forever.' 10 Through 'virtu' Romans were more concerned with ensuring the good of the whole instead of just the good of an individual. They believed in patriotism above anything else and used their religion, and pagan gods, to enforce patriotism. The Roman doctrine said that loyalty to the state was loyalty to one's gods - whereas Christianity did not teach 'virtu' and said God should be first and foremost in anyone's actions. The Roman's pagan gods 'provided objects for sworn oaths that men feared to break; and divinatory omens which, when positive, filled armies with the assurance of victory.' 11 The importance to Machiavelli of patriotism and the survival of the State resulted in his writings emphasising how critical it was for a ruler to achieve his goals. Probably the most famous saying that evolved from his writings is that the end justifies the means. This had to be seen as a very unchristian outlook, and would be offensive to any truly pious person, but to Machiavelli, the survival of the State was the primary responsibility of any ruler, no matter what means he took to ensure this survival. ...read more.


The philosophy of Machiavelli was not accepted as pivotal during his lifetime. 'Italy was considered to be a political backwater'21 at the time, which made it more difficult for Machiavelli to spread his theories. However, the relevance of his teachings are apparent simply because they have lasted for more than 500 years and are a cornerstone of political thought today. Although Machiavelli was seen as a realist in his views of how governments work, leaders do not like to be identified as having a Machiavellian approach to leadership. When someone suggested to Henry Kissinger (Secretary of State for President Nixon) that he was a Machiavellian, he was quick to deny it. One of Machiavelli's pious adversaries wrote that 'Out of his surname people had coined a word for knave and out of his Christian name a word for the devil.'22 Machiavelli's contemporaries would undoubtedly be stunned to know that five centuries later that his philosophy on leadership is taught at all levels when teaching leadership styles. They would probably also be shocked to find the word Machiavellian in the dictionary, although they would probably be delighted with the definition: 'elaborately cunning; scheming, unscrupulous.'23 None of these are ways that many of us would like to be remembered. However, many of Machiavelli's contemporaries would probably find great satisfaction in knowing the man that they reviled so greatly went down in history in such a negative context. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE History Projects section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE History Projects essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    To what extent was Custer to blame for the defeat at the battle of ...

    3 star(s)

    As the battle was to commence, Captain Benteen told Custer he was sorry not have taken the other soldiers.

  2. To what extent did the Vikings deserve this bad press? How would you characterise ...

    with it, using tactics of violence that they knew to be reliable. Targets for these attacks were, in all likelihood, chosen based on the ease of conquer and the profit that could be gained from the attack. There is no evidence to suggest that the Vikings were attacking for reasons beyond this.

  1. To what extent were Stalins economic policies successful?

    Even though Stalin will complete his goals, these methods will bring up great hate about him so will bring him make it more likely for a revolution to happen or for another person to take his place as Communist leader. In my opinion the industrialisation of Russia was a success.

  2. To what extent was the Irish Famine merely an excuse for Peel to repeal ...

    One can argue that the repeal was Peel exercising his own motives, his intentions for the country and ideals of the political future.

  1. Were contemporaries correct in blaming Hitler for the Reichstag Fire?

    It would also give Hitler a good excuse to arrest the Communists, paving the way for a Nazi landslide in the upcoming elections. Bullock is suggesting that Goering and Goebbels worked together to stage the fire, without the knowledge of Hitler, in order to 'smash the Communist Party'.

  2. To what extent wasBritain Romanised

    After the Roman invasion, farming remained as the dominant industry, but the production was greatly improved. The area cultivated grew; more crops were grown; and the villa was introduced as a unit of production, serving as a base for the activities of the farm and a home for the workers.

  1. Did England become Protestant in the sixteenth century?

    But his advisors were Protestant so they made the churches Protestant. The advisors were set on making England a Protestant country. Edward's uncle was the Duke of Somerset. The Council appointed the Duke as Lord Protector. The Duke was gaining control over the Government and was becoming the real ruler

  2. Who was the real Custer, and to what extent was he to blame for ...

    Or it could have killed them straight away. However, Bob Murray argues that this gun was " one of the finest military weapons of all time". This source states that the claim of the copper bullets getting stuck and exploding was impossible due to this fine piece of ammunition.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work