In “The Prince” Machiavelli refers to the people as inhabitants, subjects, private citizens, populace and two years later, writing “The Discourses” he also uses the words: masses, the general public, the plebs, and “have-nots”. Is there a difference between those words or they generally mean the same? Why does Machiavelli in “The Discourses” add new words when he is talking about “the people”? Is it due to the different contexts or the interval of time between writing these two works influenced the thinker and changed his view on the role of the populace in any political system? Answering those questions requires analysis of both books and deep understanding of the purposes of writing them
Table of Contents
1. Introduction to Political Theory
2. The role of the people in the two works of Machiavelli: The Prince and The Discourses
Research Objective and Core Themes
The primary objective of this work is to analyze and compare the role of the populace in Niccolò Machiavelli's "The Prince" and "The Discourses" to determine if his views on the people evolved due to differing contexts or the chronological gap between the two works.
- The influence of political systems on the power of the people.
- The essential nature of public approval for a ruler's stability.
- The fundamental desire of the people to avoid oppression and retain freedom.
- The role of mutual fear and the avoidance of hatred as a key governing principle.
- The consistency of Machiavelli’s political philosophy despite different writing purposes.
Excerpt from the Book
The role of the people in the two works of Machiavelli: The Prince and The Discourses
In “The Prince” Machiavelli refers to the people as inhabitants, subjects, private citizens, populace and two years later, writing “The Discourses” he also uses the words: masses, the general public, the plebs, and “have-nots”. Is there a difference between those words or they generally mean the same? Why does Machiavelli in “The Discourses” add new words when he is talking about “the people”? Is it due to the different contexts or the interval of time between writing these two works influenced the thinker and changed his view on the role of the populace in any political system? Answering those questions requires analysis of both books and deep understanding of the purposes of writing them.
The two prefaces of the books make us alert and suspicious that something has changed with the way the philosopher thinks. “The Prince” is dedicated to the Magnificent Lorenzo De Medici with some kind of flattery and hope to be praised and appreciated, “I am anxious to offer myself to Your Magnificence with some token of my devotion to you, and I have not found among my belongings anything as dear to me or that I value as much as my understanding of the deeds of great men…” (Machiavelli, “The Prince”, p.1) What a great radical change is seeing from the greeting of “The Discourses” to Zanobi Buondelmonti and Cosimo Rucellai when Machiavelli claims, “So, to avoid this mistake [“to dedicate works to some prince, and blinded by ambition and avarice, to praise him for virtuous qualities when they ought to be blamed”] I have chosen not those who are princes, but those who, on account of their innumerable good qualities, deserve to be.” (Machiavelli, “The Discourses”, p. 93,94)
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction to Political Theory: This section introduces the core subject matter and establishes the academic context for the comparison of Machiavelli's two major works.
2. The role of the people in the two works of Machiavelli: The Prince and The Discourses: This chapter provides a comparative analysis of the changing terminology and underlying political consistency regarding the populace in Machiavelli's writings.
Keywords
Machiavelli, The Prince, The Discourses, political system, populace, ruler, oppression, liberty, freedom, state, power, governance, hatred, political philosophy, social stability
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this paper?
The paper examines how Machiavelli defines and perceives the role of the people in his two most famous works, "The Prince" and "The Discourses," and whether his core political views changed over time.
What are the central thematic areas?
The main themes include the relationship between the ruler and the ruled, the impact of various political systems on public power, and the recurring human desire to avoid oppression.
What is the primary research question?
The research asks whether the different terminology and context between the two books signify a shift in Machiavelli's political philosophy or if his view of the populace remains consistent.
Which scientific method is utilized?
The author uses a comparative textual analysis of primary source material, specifically focusing on the prefaces and key arguments regarding the populace in both books.
What topics are covered in the main section?
The main section covers the power dynamics within principalities and republics, the necessity of public goodwill for a ruler's survival, and the inherent tension between the nobles and the people.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
The work is defined by terms such as Machiavelli, populace, political system, liberty, oppression, and power dynamics.
Does the author conclude that Machiavelli changed his mind?
No, the author argues that while the writing purposes and contexts differ, Machiavelli’s fundamental belief in the power of the people and the necessity of avoiding public hatred remains consistent.
How does the author interpret the change in tone between the two prefaces?
The author views the shift from the flattery in "The Prince" to the more egalitarian dedication in "The Discourses" as a catalyst to investigate whether Machiavelli's underlying political beliefs shifted as well.
- Citation du texte
- Irina Wolf (Auteur), 2001, The role of the people in the two works of Machiavelli: The Prince and The Discourses, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/130068
