What do you think?
Rate this book
Educación del príncipe cristiano
Esta obra fue escrita por Erasmo para responder al encargo que el Canciller de Brabante, preceptor del príncipe Carlos, le había hecho en la primavera de 1515 al tiempo que le nombra consejero del futuro emperador. Ante ello, siente la necesidad de orientar al gobernante cristiano frente al príncipe maquiavélico, quien, mediante una razón de Estado abusiva, ofrece un directorio político astuto, amoral y pesimista.
La obra está atravesada por tres ideas clave: su decidida intención pedagógica, el humanismo evangélico que preside todo el tratado, y el pacifismo integral. Así, Erasmo se anticipa a los europeos, mostrando la sensibilidad del intelectual que, con la pluma en la mano, incita a no combatir.
La trascendencia de Institutio Principis Christiani fue enorme, ya que puede decirse que toda la política imperial estuvo inspirada en la filosofía erasmiana. Ésta influyó en la literatura denominada «espejo de príncipes», de suma importancia en el pensamiento europeo posterior.
La obra está atravesada por tres ideas clave: su decidida intención pedagógica, el humanismo evangélico que preside todo el tratado, y el pacifismo integral. Así, Erasmo se anticipa a los europeos, mostrando la sensibilidad del intelectual que, con la pluma en la mano, incita a no combatir.
La trascendencia de Institutio Principis Christiani fue enorme, ya que puede decirse que toda la política imperial estuvo inspirada en la filosofía erasmiana. Ésta influyó en la literatura denominada «espejo de príncipes», de suma importancia en el pensamiento europeo posterior.
224 pages, Paperback
First published June 1, 1516
8 people are currently reading
464 people want to read
About the author
Erasmus
1,406 books451 followersDesiderius Erasmus Roterodamus (28 October 1466 – 12 July 1536), known as Erasmus of Rotterdam, or simply Erasmus, was a Dutch Renaissance humanist, Catholic priest, social critic, teacher, and theologian.
Erasmus was a classical scholar and wrote in a pure Latin style. Among humanists he enjoyed the sobriquet "Prince of the Humanists", and has been called "the crowning glory of the Christian humanists". Using humanist techniques for working on texts, he prepared important new Latin and Greek editions of the New Testament, which raised questions that would be influential in the Protestant Reformation and Catholic Counter-Reformation. He also wrote On Free Will, The Praise of Folly, Handbook of a Christian Knight, On Civility in Children, Copia: Foundations of the Abundant Style, Julius Exclusus, and many other works.
Erasmus lived against the backdrop of the growing European religious Reformation, but while he was critical of the abuses within the Catholic Church and called for reform, he kept his distance from Luther and Melanchthon and continued to recognise the authority of the pope, emphasizing a middle way with a deep respect for traditional faith, piety and grace, rejecting Luther's emphasis on faith alone. Erasmus remained a member of the Roman Catholic Church all his life, remaining committed to reforming the Church and its clerics' abuses from within. He also held to the Catholic doctrine of free will, which some Reformers rejected in favor of the doctrine of predestination. His middle road approach disappointed and even angered scholars in both camps.
Erasmus died suddenly in Basel in 1536 while preparing to return to Brabant, and was buried in the Basel Minster, the former cathedral of the city. A bronze statue of him was erected in his city of birth in 1622, replacing an earlier work in stone.
Erasmus was a classical scholar and wrote in a pure Latin style. Among humanists he enjoyed the sobriquet "Prince of the Humanists", and has been called "the crowning glory of the Christian humanists". Using humanist techniques for working on texts, he prepared important new Latin and Greek editions of the New Testament, which raised questions that would be influential in the Protestant Reformation and Catholic Counter-Reformation. He also wrote On Free Will, The Praise of Folly, Handbook of a Christian Knight, On Civility in Children, Copia: Foundations of the Abundant Style, Julius Exclusus, and many other works.
Erasmus lived against the backdrop of the growing European religious Reformation, but while he was critical of the abuses within the Catholic Church and called for reform, he kept his distance from Luther and Melanchthon and continued to recognise the authority of the pope, emphasizing a middle way with a deep respect for traditional faith, piety and grace, rejecting Luther's emphasis on faith alone. Erasmus remained a member of the Roman Catholic Church all his life, remaining committed to reforming the Church and its clerics' abuses from within. He also held to the Catholic doctrine of free will, which some Reformers rejected in favor of the doctrine of predestination. His middle road approach disappointed and even angered scholars in both camps.
Erasmus died suddenly in Basel in 1536 while preparing to return to Brabant, and was buried in the Basel Minster, the former cathedral of the city. A bronze statue of him was erected in his city of birth in 1622, replacing an earlier work in stone.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 30 reviews
December 30, 2017
excellent counterpoint to Machiavelli's "The Prince"
Read
December 12, 2020 machiavelli but like with secure attachment and a most positive outlook on human nature
January 6, 2016
In all fairness, I didn't read the whole book, at least not in this edition I'm registering it under. I only got access to the text through this website , because it seemed hard to find in a good PDF. Probably the first hundred pages are an introductory study of Erasmus, and the text itself.
A Christian prince is expected to follow Christ: in judgement, in soul and things of the world. The responsibility is either upon the people who choose him, or their parents and educators. The response to Macchiavelli focuses on the idea that princes should rule for the common good rather than by their own desire to keep power. They shall behave as servants and set example for all people. A well educated prince might deviate by falling into vice. He must be taught to choose good friendships and ministers. To follow in the steps of their counselors until he's able to rule. Never be allowed to "experiment" by trial and error. To abhor sins, and affectation. To never fall for flattery is important, the prince is meant to improve his actions. He only must not seem a religious man, but to be one too.
While Nicolò Macchiavelli work is important historically, and because how it shaped modern politics, this one is valuable beyond the fact that it is the Catholic answer to power hungry, selfishly motivated politics. Because, like its author points out many times, many of the concerns that are highly stressed in this book, also apply to the general principles of education.
With the help of Pagan philosophers and Sacred Scriptures, Erasmus writes a delightful text that has relevance, despite being published more than 500 years ago. The prince must avoid what's exalted by vulgarity, and ask for himself the Wisdom that Solomon begged for. But, while he does take virtuous writings of pagan philosophers, Erasmus considers that taking the example of pagan kings such as Alexander or Julius Caesar, is foolish and undeserving of a Christian prince.
"Whenever the prince picks up a book, he should do so not with the idea of gaining pleasure but of bettering himself by his reading. He who really wants to be better can easily find the means of becoming better. A great part of goodness is the desire to be good; for example, anyone who knows and hates the disease of political ambition, irascibility, or passionate desire, and opens a book [to find something] by which he may cure his malady, easily finds a remedy that will either remove the cause or [at any rate] lessen it.
From no source is the truth more honestly and advantageously gained than from books; but the prince should accustom his friends to believe that they will gain favor by giving frank advice"
The Prince must work the hardest to avoid the need for a war. The Prince should not only know himself but his kingdom. The tyrant does the same, though his intention is up to no good. By superstition and gross indulgence, princes are bound to ruin. Another important point is justice through law: the less laws, and the more benefitial they are for society, the better.
"The best laws under the best princes make a city (civitas) or a kingdom most fortunate. The most felicitous condition exists when the prince is obeyed by everyone, the prince himself obeys the laws, and the laws go back to the fundamental principles of equity and honesty, with no other aim than the advancement of the commonwealth."
"A good, wise, and upright prince is nothing else than a sort of living law. He will make it his effort to pass not many laws but the best possible ones that will prove most beneficial to the state. A very few laws suffice for a well organized state (civitas) under a good prince and honorable officials."
"Plato desired that the laws should be as few as possible, especially on the less important matters, such as agreements, commercial business, and taxes; for no more benefit accrues to the state from a mass of laws than would come [to a person] from a multitude of medicines. When the prince is a man of unquestioned character and the officials fulfill their responsibilities+, there is no need of many laws. Under other conditions, however, the abuse of the laws is turned into the destruction of the state, for even the good laws are perverted into other meanings, due to the dishonesty of these men."
"But since man is the highest of all animals, he ought not to be so much coerced by threats and blows, as led to his duty by rewards. The laws should then not only provide punishments for the transgressors but also by means of rewards stimulate good conduct in the service of the state"
"So a prince should try every remedy before resorting to capital punishment, keeping in mind that the state is a single body. No one cuts off a limb if [the patient] can be restored to health by any other means. The honest physician has only one purpose in mind when he prepares his remedies and that is how to overcome the ailment with the very least danger to the patient; so it is with the good prince in passing laws. He has no other end in view than the advantage of his people and the remedying of their misfortunes with the least disturbance".
"In treating a disease, new remedies are not tried if the malady can be cured by old ones. Just so new laws should not be enacted if the old ones will suffice to remedy the troubles of the state. If useless laws cannot be repealed without causing a great deal of confusion, they should little by little be allowed to fall into disuse or else should be emended."
The idolatry of money is, indeed, a great source of evil for Erasmus, since it helps to scorn poverty. And it's important, among other many things, to avoid the existence of idleness as an attitude of people.
In many points, a lot of this is what's said in Thomas More's Utopia, and applies as well to the goverment of Sancho Panza in the second part of Don Quixote. By having Christ first, he manages to be truly fair and loved, as opposed to the bad ministers who are there with him: the duke and duchess, and his physician. Sancho also did other thing that this book encommends, to restrict the difusion of fake miracles, relics, etc.
There's a chapter dedicated to marriage, and how a wife should be carefully chosen because of her virtue. This is also related to Cervantes' work, since Don Quixote advices Sancho to make his wife a learned woman, since having an otherwise "dumb" woman to his side will be his ruin.
And, most importantly, a critique of the way wars are carried on: "There are literally countless activities in which it would be honorable for a prince, and for a good prince even pleasant, to engage. Consequently, he never will have need to seek a war because of the tedium of idleness, or to waste the night in gambling. In those matters which pertain to public affairs (such as his public buildings or games) the prince should not be extravagant or lavish, but splendid; so, too, in receiving embassies that relate to the affairs of his people. In those matters which pertain to him as an individual, he should be more frugal and moderate, partly that he may not seem to be living at the public expense, and partly that he may not teach his subjects extravagance, which is the cause of many misfortunes."
"The character of the general Epaminondas has been praised by the most learned men. When, because of envy, he had been assigned a magistracy that was lowly and commonly despised, he so conducted himself that after his term it was considered one of the most distinguished and was sought after by the greatest men; thus he proved that the office did not confer dignity on the man but the man on the office"
Erasmus questions the justice and the personal integrity of the persons who deem worthy the idea of just wars when they're not Christian enough, and divided among them, they expect others to convert. In a way, I agree. But the peace of Christ is not of this world, and while the way people waged wars in his era wasn't good, just like it isn't now, I think that this thought differs from being hopelessly pacifist or not arguing for self-defense. While he says that sometimes it's best for a prince to lose than to have a phyrric victory, and I agree with this, Christ himself said that He'd be the cause of division for those who aimed to follow him. I'm not saying war is inherent to human beings, I'm not justifiying any sort of violence in the name of peace, but I'm saying that, like Erasmus argued, a lot more reflection on Christianity, and what it means, might evangelize more effectively, set a better example, and avoid wars.
Christians, and especially Catholics, should not shy away from Erasmus. He remained a faithful Catholic through all of his life and condemned the abuses of Luther, as well as he felt saddened by the destiny of his friend, Thomas More. While probably not all of what he says in this book is entirely agreeable, most of it still is.
A Christian prince is expected to follow Christ: in judgement, in soul and things of the world. The responsibility is either upon the people who choose him, or their parents and educators. The response to Macchiavelli focuses on the idea that princes should rule for the common good rather than by their own desire to keep power. They shall behave as servants and set example for all people. A well educated prince might deviate by falling into vice. He must be taught to choose good friendships and ministers. To follow in the steps of their counselors until he's able to rule. Never be allowed to "experiment" by trial and error. To abhor sins, and affectation. To never fall for flattery is important, the prince is meant to improve his actions. He only must not seem a religious man, but to be one too.
While Nicolò Macchiavelli work is important historically, and because how it shaped modern politics, this one is valuable beyond the fact that it is the Catholic answer to power hungry, selfishly motivated politics. Because, like its author points out many times, many of the concerns that are highly stressed in this book, also apply to the general principles of education.
With the help of Pagan philosophers and Sacred Scriptures, Erasmus writes a delightful text that has relevance, despite being published more than 500 years ago. The prince must avoid what's exalted by vulgarity, and ask for himself the Wisdom that Solomon begged for. But, while he does take virtuous writings of pagan philosophers, Erasmus considers that taking the example of pagan kings such as Alexander or Julius Caesar, is foolish and undeserving of a Christian prince.
"Whenever the prince picks up a book, he should do so not with the idea of gaining pleasure but of bettering himself by his reading. He who really wants to be better can easily find the means of becoming better. A great part of goodness is the desire to be good; for example, anyone who knows and hates the disease of political ambition, irascibility, or passionate desire, and opens a book [to find something] by which he may cure his malady, easily finds a remedy that will either remove the cause or [at any rate] lessen it.
From no source is the truth more honestly and advantageously gained than from books; but the prince should accustom his friends to believe that they will gain favor by giving frank advice"
The Prince must work the hardest to avoid the need for a war. The Prince should not only know himself but his kingdom. The tyrant does the same, though his intention is up to no good. By superstition and gross indulgence, princes are bound to ruin. Another important point is justice through law: the less laws, and the more benefitial they are for society, the better.
"The best laws under the best princes make a city (civitas) or a kingdom most fortunate. The most felicitous condition exists when the prince is obeyed by everyone, the prince himself obeys the laws, and the laws go back to the fundamental principles of equity and honesty, with no other aim than the advancement of the commonwealth."
"A good, wise, and upright prince is nothing else than a sort of living law. He will make it his effort to pass not many laws but the best possible ones that will prove most beneficial to the state. A very few laws suffice for a well organized state (civitas) under a good prince and honorable officials."
"Plato desired that the laws should be as few as possible, especially on the less important matters, such as agreements, commercial business, and taxes; for no more benefit accrues to the state from a mass of laws than would come [to a person] from a multitude of medicines. When the prince is a man of unquestioned character and the officials fulfill their responsibilities+, there is no need of many laws. Under other conditions, however, the abuse of the laws is turned into the destruction of the state, for even the good laws are perverted into other meanings, due to the dishonesty of these men."
"But since man is the highest of all animals, he ought not to be so much coerced by threats and blows, as led to his duty by rewards. The laws should then not only provide punishments for the transgressors but also by means of rewards stimulate good conduct in the service of the state"
"So a prince should try every remedy before resorting to capital punishment, keeping in mind that the state is a single body. No one cuts off a limb if [the patient] can be restored to health by any other means. The honest physician has only one purpose in mind when he prepares his remedies and that is how to overcome the ailment with the very least danger to the patient; so it is with the good prince in passing laws. He has no other end in view than the advantage of his people and the remedying of their misfortunes with the least disturbance".
"In treating a disease, new remedies are not tried if the malady can be cured by old ones. Just so new laws should not be enacted if the old ones will suffice to remedy the troubles of the state. If useless laws cannot be repealed without causing a great deal of confusion, they should little by little be allowed to fall into disuse or else should be emended."
The idolatry of money is, indeed, a great source of evil for Erasmus, since it helps to scorn poverty. And it's important, among other many things, to avoid the existence of idleness as an attitude of people.
In many points, a lot of this is what's said in Thomas More's Utopia, and applies as well to the goverment of Sancho Panza in the second part of Don Quixote. By having Christ first, he manages to be truly fair and loved, as opposed to the bad ministers who are there with him: the duke and duchess, and his physician. Sancho also did other thing that this book encommends, to restrict the difusion of fake miracles, relics, etc.
There's a chapter dedicated to marriage, and how a wife should be carefully chosen because of her virtue. This is also related to Cervantes' work, since Don Quixote advices Sancho to make his wife a learned woman, since having an otherwise "dumb" woman to his side will be his ruin.
And, most importantly, a critique of the way wars are carried on: "There are literally countless activities in which it would be honorable for a prince, and for a good prince even pleasant, to engage. Consequently, he never will have need to seek a war because of the tedium of idleness, or to waste the night in gambling. In those matters which pertain to public affairs (such as his public buildings or games) the prince should not be extravagant or lavish, but splendid; so, too, in receiving embassies that relate to the affairs of his people. In those matters which pertain to him as an individual, he should be more frugal and moderate, partly that he may not seem to be living at the public expense, and partly that he may not teach his subjects extravagance, which is the cause of many misfortunes."
"The character of the general Epaminondas has been praised by the most learned men. When, because of envy, he had been assigned a magistracy that was lowly and commonly despised, he so conducted himself that after his term it was considered one of the most distinguished and was sought after by the greatest men; thus he proved that the office did not confer dignity on the man but the man on the office"
Erasmus questions the justice and the personal integrity of the persons who deem worthy the idea of just wars when they're not Christian enough, and divided among them, they expect others to convert. In a way, I agree. But the peace of Christ is not of this world, and while the way people waged wars in his era wasn't good, just like it isn't now, I think that this thought differs from being hopelessly pacifist or not arguing for self-defense. While he says that sometimes it's best for a prince to lose than to have a phyrric victory, and I agree with this, Christ himself said that He'd be the cause of division for those who aimed to follow him. I'm not saying war is inherent to human beings, I'm not justifiying any sort of violence in the name of peace, but I'm saying that, like Erasmus argued, a lot more reflection on Christianity, and what it means, might evangelize more effectively, set a better example, and avoid wars.
Christians, and especially Catholics, should not shy away from Erasmus. He remained a faithful Catholic through all of his life and condemned the abuses of Luther, as well as he felt saddened by the destiny of his friend, Thomas More. While probably not all of what he says in this book is entirely agreeable, most of it still is.
March 30, 2021
Detta är bland det bästa jag har läst; den förra texten alltså - en furstes utbildning - den senare är inte speciellt intressant. Denna blir den fjärde text jag läst i år (jämte Teresas av Avila, Giordano Bruno och Hayek) som har lämnat mig i vördnad. Den uttrycker på ett kärnfullt sätt allt det som västerländsk civilisation och liberalism borde vara. Erasmus bildning genomsyrar varje sida, och varje påstående förenas med anekdoter som gör det enklare att förstå det. Jag önskar att jag hade träffat på denna text tidigare, för den är en guldgruva.
September 26, 2017
He mentioned the pagans one too many times for this to be for Christians...
March 13, 2018
Playing God against God following the nominalist Revolution.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 4, 2017
I got a lot out of this book. I know this is taught in a lot of education classes, but I also think that a lot of it is applicable to anyone. The advice in here pertains to everyday standards of candor and decorum in different types of relationships, says a lot about what it means to be a Christian, works as a wake-up call to personal responsibility, and has a lot of good thoughts that are applicable to parenting or any position of authority and leadership. It's written in an accessible style, and reads easily (possible by virtue of the translation). It's a little repetitive, but it has a lot of energy that makes up for it.
August 1, 2015
When I found out I had to read this book for a class in college, I was devastated. Who wants to read a book from 1510 during the summer. Believe it or not, when I finished this morning, I was genuinely sad it was over. Erasmus has become one of my new favorite authors simply because he knows how to phrase things effectively and precisely. His metaphors are awesome. Found some great quotes.
July 8, 2007
can someone please tell me what the hell to do with this book in the 21st century? I earnestly want to know.
August 16, 2023
Useful edition of the text. The makeweight of selections from Erasmus's panegyric on Philip the Fair are judiciously chosen, though perhaps not entirely for the reasons editor Lisa Jardine offers. Much of it seems selected to support a key theme her introduction and notes tease out of the main work here: The Education of a Christian Prince. That idea is Erasmus's emerging notion that a prince requires consent of the governed. To be sure, this isn't some robust Lockean take. Erasmus seems to mean nothing more by this than the idea that a good ruler (a prince) will naturally win the consent (approval) of his people. If he is a bad ruler (a tyrant), he will naturally forfeit their esteem. But Erasmus doesn't derive from this a view that the tyrant thereby forfeits his position. The text itself is notoriously silent on what recourse the people have in such a case, as well it might be. Erasmus isn't writing a political treatise on how to form society, he's penning his version of a mirror for magistrates. His entry in the genre is in keeping with most of what has come before, with a significantly more vigorous insistence on the formation of the prince's character in accordance with virtue, especially virtue as construed in a Christian context. Jardine's selections from the panegyric tend to chime with the idea of the (good) prince winning the assent of the subject. More interesting is her inclusion of some of the early, more florid passages of praise of Philip. There, Erasmus seems to exemplify the kinds of flattery he so roundly excoriates in his explanation of what kinds of teachers of the prince are to be avoided in the Education. No surprise though: like Machiavelli, Erasmus wrote his political treatises in part to win patronage. So the good advices come packaged with a wish for the monarch to notice the messenger. The notes here are generally solid and the index is helpful.
June 20, 2021
The stars are for the book sans the panegyric which was so bad that he included the two letters making excuses for himself as to why he had used such bombastic language obviously untrue. I thought this work was a great analysis of how to bring up a young person especially in this time and place. There are lots of words of wisdom and he uses many of the best writers of all time in the western Canon repeatedly. With parts of the book I can hear Machiavelli recording. Of course you think that because you won't have been living in universities and do not know the real world. I would certainly like to act and operate as you recommend unfortunately I have dealt with these people in these situations and it simply doesn't work out like that. Either way this is a wonderful book that is so little known.
June 10, 2025
It is an interesting book if you would like to get into the history and politics of the time, and it feels like it was written as a kind of a counter to the Prince by Machiavelli. Perhaps the life conditions of Erasmus and Machiavelli were extremely different, which is why they draw different conclusions, and learn different lessons, from all of the historical events.
It also appears to follow the teachings of Plutarch, and it appears to be frowned upon at the time of the writing of this book, because the characters from Plutarch's Moralia or Parallel lives weren't Christian, so after each example from Plutarch's (or Xenophon's) books, we have several lines criticizing them for their wrong beliefs - the fun and interesting part is that it is in a way positive criticism - "If the pagan ruler has shown this level of justice, then the Christian ruler should do that and so much more".
It also appears to follow the teachings of Plutarch, and it appears to be frowned upon at the time of the writing of this book, because the characters from Plutarch's Moralia or Parallel lives weren't Christian, so after each example from Plutarch's (or Xenophon's) books, we have several lines criticizing them for their wrong beliefs - the fun and interesting part is that it is in a way positive criticism - "If the pagan ruler has shown this level of justice, then the Christian ruler should do that and so much more".
November 17, 2023
I liked reading Erasmus’ political treatise directed to the tutors of Christian princes. While Erasmus’ pacifism and focus on Christianity is refreshing when compared to Machiavelli’s similar treatise, his views are very idealistic. Erasmus tells his Christian prince to avoid wars and to focus on his people, and while this type of prince would be great in a perfect world, this type of prince can exist only in a perfect world. I would definitely recommend any reader of Machiavelli to read Erasmus’ treatise as well.
March 9, 2024
Initial thoughts are that the book could have been even shorter, as it stood out to me as being repetitive. Glad to have read it mainly because it was interesting to see just how much Erasmus believed in the wisdom of the ancient Greeks, and how they could inform “a more worthy prince” he might say, due to him being a Christian. Not something Id linger on more than that. Except a final word that this book seemed a glaring example of an author whose feet longer seemed to touch the ground. Virtually completely idealistic.
April 16, 2021
Interesting historical perspective on leadership from 500 years ago. Makes the case for leading by the consent of the subjects, currently called servant leadership. Also highlights the importance of education of leaders, and the value of high quality feedback, although stated as avoiding flatterers.
Overall, it doesn't hold up so well in modern times as there are many detours. Read only if you want a historical take on leading that is less Machiavellian.
Overall, it doesn't hold up so well in modern times as there are many detours. Read only if you want a historical take on leading that is less Machiavellian.
February 17, 2022
Erasmus stated that teachers should be of gentle disposition and have unimpeachable morals. A good education included all the liberal arts. Like the Roman educator Quintilian, Erasmus was against corporal punishment for unruly students. He stressed the student must be treated as an individual. Erasmus attempted throughout the work to reconcile the writers of antiquity with the Christian ethics of his time.
December 24, 2020
From the brilliant Erasmus, this manual for a renaissance Christian ruler is fascinating in exploring behind the curtain of the instruction that these powerful people were receiving during these tumultuous times. If I’m being honest, this book lacked the same excitement as Machiavellis Prince mostly due to the tame pacifist nature of the advice given by Erasmus.
May 7, 2025
Dang. Despite his sexist views of women, Erasmus’ work is still so relevant. Should be read by every major world leader. Really corresponds, as well, to creating the open and inclusive political institutions that “Why Nations Fail” highlights too, but obviously Erasmus is relating to an ideal monarchy. I found Erasmus very validating, as this is the type of leadership I tend to respect the most.
September 12, 2018
This should be a presidential prerequisite.
December 22, 2019
Reading it with Lymond in mind made it very relevant.
Want to read
December 17, 2023Areopagus
Read
May 6, 2025troche poplynales kolego, to raczej utopia niz rzeczywistosc ale milo jest pomyslec ze mogliby istniec rzadzacy ktorzy autentycznie byliby dobrymi ludzmi i pragneli to dobro szerzyc
October 18, 2022
Read in its entirety.
January 16, 2014
A short and sweet discussion of both how a young prince should be educated and how a ruler in power should act. One of the more interesting themes to me was the tremendous influence a good ruler can have through his example, associates, etc.
As has been remarked elsewhere, this is sort of an anti-Machiavellian perspective. As such, it felt like something of a soul-cleansing reality check after recently re-reading some Machiavelli. It's perhaps not as useful for understanding practical politics or as revolutionary, but rather more satisfying from an idealistic Christian viewpoint.
As has been remarked elsewhere, this is sort of an anti-Machiavellian perspective. As such, it felt like something of a soul-cleansing reality check after recently re-reading some Machiavelli. It's perhaps not as useful for understanding practical politics or as revolutionary, but rather more satisfying from an idealistic Christian viewpoint.
April 14, 2010
Excellent, short book. Lots of good advice on integrity in politics, being a good person, and raising your children to be good people. While what he is specifically addressing is how to raise and educate a future ruler of a country, much of what he says can be applied to anyone who wants to be a force for good in the world, as well as parents who wish to raise their children to be the same.
February 14, 2016
An interesting take on what it means to be an explicitly Christian ruler as contrasted with the standard of ethics and statesmanship set by the pagan Greek tradition and the Biblical traditions. An interesting read, problematically pacifist. School reading
Want to read
January 18, 2010His Enchiridion.
April 22, 2010
Very interesting read, I'd pair it with Machiavelli's The Prince and the Vindiciae Contra tyrannos.
Read
March 4, 2011A great read about how to rise a future ruler.
April 13, 2015
Very average, not my favorite of Erasmus' books.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 30 reviews