Classic Works In Modern Language: Machiavelli's The Prince, Chapters I & II
In order to move away from 24/7 election coverage, but because the mainstream media reports nothing except the election 24/7, I have decided to take a tangent from commenting on recent events. I will, instead, re-write some notable works that have formed the foundation of politics, but which tend to be centuries old and use antiquated grammar structures. I hope to make these documents readable, and may build a “political theory” section of this website to organize them (but that is not in the near future). However, I believe this project may also improve my own understanding of these documents, and I can cite them whenever I want to defend an argument.
I will start with, perhaps, the most reasonable source for modern political theory; Machiavelli’s The Prince (link is to table of contents). Written around 1505 in Italy, and translated by W. K. Marriott (whom I believe did a good job). Please note, however, that I am doing little more than paraphrasing Marriott and Machiavelli, and probably not even doing so with great accuracy. I am merely trying to convey Machiavelli’s ideas in a way that modern people can easily understand.
First, some explanation: Machiavelli wrote The Prince not as a timeless work for political theory, but as a guidebook for the Medici family, whom he hoped would unite the many Italian provinces. The Medici family was one of the richest and most powerful in all of Italy, but they had little power beyond their single province. Machiavelli, in Florentine, intended members of this Medici family to obtain and use his book and finally unite Italy. However, the Medici family did not use Machiavelli’s work, and Italy was not united until the 19th century. The Prince remains an example of politics carried out not through morals, but through calculations and cunning to achieve the desired end regardless of what means must be taken.
Note: As I define it, “end” regards the final goal, while “means” are the methods or steps used to reach that goal.
The Prince, Chapter 1; How Many Kinds Of Principalities There Are And By What Means They Are Acquired
All governments are either republics or principalities (similar to monarchies, or ruled by a king).
Principalities have either been ruled by the same family for many generations or the ruling family is new.
The ruling family of principalities is either entirely new, or the principalities may be annexed by a larger nation which has an old ruling family.
The annexed principalities are either accustomed to living under a prince or king, or they may have lived in freedom without a royal family. Also, the principalities were either acquired through military means, or through peaceful means (such as becoming the ruler of the new principality when the original royal family dies out).
Chapter II; Concerning Hereditary Principalities
I will ignore the republics, and instead explain principalities. I will explain, in the order described above, how these principalities should be ruled and maintained.
It is easy to preserve lands that have been ruled by the prince’s family for many generations because the prince needs only to repeat the actions of his predecessors and fix isolated difficulties as they arise. A mediocre prince will, therefore, be able to rule his land easily unless he is conquered by a powerful military. However, the prince can easily regain his land once the conqueror has bad luck and his power is unstable.
An old royal family has little reason to disturb the province, so it will be favored by the peasants. And, unless the ruler has terrible flaws, the peasants will be naturally supportive of him. In generations of rule, the peasants forget their reasons to desire change, because one change always leaves a desire for further changes (this particular sentence is difficult to summarize. It basically says: “without a change in leadership, the population will be accustomed to life without change” The W. K. Marriott translation is “in the antiquity and duration of [a prince’s] rule the memories and motives that make for change are lost, for one change always leaves the toothing for another.”)
That ends chapter 2. Chapter 3, however, is quite long, and may take several posts to fully modernize. Plus, chapters 1 and 2 will likely need some corrections, because translation/modernization is a pain.
I will start with, perhaps, the most reasonable source for modern political theory; Machiavelli’s The Prince (link is to table of contents). Written around 1505 in Italy, and translated by W. K. Marriott (whom I believe did a good job). Please note, however, that I am doing little more than paraphrasing Marriott and Machiavelli, and probably not even doing so with great accuracy. I am merely trying to convey Machiavelli’s ideas in a way that modern people can easily understand.
First, some explanation: Machiavelli wrote The Prince not as a timeless work for political theory, but as a guidebook for the Medici family, whom he hoped would unite the many Italian provinces. The Medici family was one of the richest and most powerful in all of Italy, but they had little power beyond their single province. Machiavelli, in Florentine, intended members of this Medici family to obtain and use his book and finally unite Italy. However, the Medici family did not use Machiavelli’s work, and Italy was not united until the 19th century. The Prince remains an example of politics carried out not through morals, but through calculations and cunning to achieve the desired end regardless of what means must be taken.
Note: As I define it, “end” regards the final goal, while “means” are the methods or steps used to reach that goal.
The Prince, Chapter 1; How Many Kinds Of Principalities There Are And By What Means They Are Acquired
All governments are either republics or principalities (similar to monarchies, or ruled by a king).
Principalities have either been ruled by the same family for many generations or the ruling family is new.
The ruling family of principalities is either entirely new, or the principalities may be annexed by a larger nation which has an old ruling family.
The annexed principalities are either accustomed to living under a prince or king, or they may have lived in freedom without a royal family. Also, the principalities were either acquired through military means, or through peaceful means (such as becoming the ruler of the new principality when the original royal family dies out).
Chapter II; Concerning Hereditary Principalities
I will ignore the republics, and instead explain principalities. I will explain, in the order described above, how these principalities should be ruled and maintained.
It is easy to preserve lands that have been ruled by the prince’s family for many generations because the prince needs only to repeat the actions of his predecessors and fix isolated difficulties as they arise. A mediocre prince will, therefore, be able to rule his land easily unless he is conquered by a powerful military. However, the prince can easily regain his land once the conqueror has bad luck and his power is unstable.
An old royal family has little reason to disturb the province, so it will be favored by the peasants. And, unless the ruler has terrible flaws, the peasants will be naturally supportive of him. In generations of rule, the peasants forget their reasons to desire change, because one change always leaves a desire for further changes (this particular sentence is difficult to summarize. It basically says: “without a change in leadership, the population will be accustomed to life without change” The W. K. Marriott translation is “in the antiquity and duration of [a prince’s] rule the memories and motives that make for change are lost, for one change always leaves the toothing for another.”)
That ends chapter 2. Chapter 3, however, is quite long, and may take several posts to fully modernize. Plus, chapters 1 and 2 will likely need some corrections, because translation/modernization is a pain.
posted by Chris at
9:18 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home