The Prince And Castiglione

977 Words4 Pages
Nicocolò Machiavelli’s book The Prince describes the traits and actions believed to constitute a successful prince during the Renaissance era. Similar to Baldesar Castiglione’s portrayal of the “ideal Renaissance man”, Machiavelli’s prince must be respected (if not admired), educated, reasonable and trustworthy. However, while Castiglione emphasizes the importance of performing morally good deeds, Machiavelli seems to believe that morality can be forsaken if they prevent a prince from achieving optimum rule over his domain. While Machiavelli exhibits many of the beliefs popular during the Renaissance, The Prince remains a controversial book today regarding the question of morality. One of the most important values of the Renaissance was…show more content…
“A prince,” he says, “must be shrewd enough to avoid the public disgrace of those vices that would lose him the state (XV),” since having the entire plethora of ideal traits is “impossible…because the conditions of human life simply do not allow it (XV).” A prince must learn to balance his personality in a way that it benefits his rule, especially since seemingly good traits could lead to his demise, and seemingly bad traits can lead to glory. This raises a question that applies not only to The Prince, but also to the ideas of the Renaissance as a whole. Should a person’s ideal characteristics be considered equal or more valuable than his morality? In other words, at what point can morals be overlooked? Machiavelli would say that a prince could forsake morality and do something “evil” if it was for the sake of his country, but we must keep in mind that his definition of “moral” and “immoral” could be very different from ours. The Renaissance followed the Dark Ages, a time when living conditions were poor and the human life was not treasured as highly as it is now. The death rate was so high as a result of the plague that those who became sick disgusted their own families were left to…show more content…
The subject of artworks and writings shifted from religious subjects to individual portraits and secular ideas. However, religion was still a priority in the lives of Europeans, thus Machiavelli reiterates how important it is what a prince “seem” religious. Ironically, under the chapter named “The Way Princes Should Keep Their Word (XVIII)”, Machiavelli explains that “those princes have accomplished most who paid little heed to keeping their promises, but who knew how to manipulate the minds of men craftily (XVIII).” This seems to be the opposite of trustworthy, and once again shows behaviour that are considered immoral. Machiavelli’s idea of a prince is one who is respected by his people for all of his outward characteristics, for what he says he thinks and does and not for what he actually think and does. All actions must be to protect the state, even if one should “enter on evil if he has to (XVIII)” in order to do so. A prince can get away with doing this because nobody would dare oppose him. It seems that Machiavelli himself approves that a prince should manipulate the masses when times call for it, despite the chance that it could mean going against his word and violating trust where morals are concerned. The common people must be so distant from the reigns of nobility that what they know is far from the truth. As long as they are convinced that the prince has the populace in mind, his actions behind
Open Document