What do you think?
Discourses on Livy
448 pages, Paperback
Published January 1, 2008
About the author
Niccolò Machiavelli
2,006 books5,421 followers
The Prince
, book of Niccolò Machiavelli, Italian political theorist, in
1513 describes an indifferent ruler to moral considerations with determination to achieve and to maintain power.
Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli, a philosopher, musician, and poet, wrote plays. He figured centrally in component of the Renaissance, and people most widely know his realist treatises on the one hand and republicanism of Discourses on Livy .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niccol%...
1513 describes an indifferent ruler to moral considerations with determination to achieve and to maintain power.
Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli, a philosopher, musician, and poet, wrote plays. He figured centrally in component of the Renaissance, and people most widely know his realist treatises on the one hand and republicanism of Discourses on Livy .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niccol%...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review
October 5, 2024
THE AUTHOR OF "THE PRINCE" SUMMARIZES HIS OWN POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY
Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli (1469-1527) was an Italian historian, politician, diplomat, philosopher, humanist, and writer based in Florence during the Renaissance. He was for many years an official in the Florentine Republic, with responsibilities in diplomatic and military affairs. He also wrote The Prince.
The book forms a commentary on the first ten books of Livy's History of Rome. Machiavelli wrote in the introductory section of this book, "in it I have set down all that I know and have learnt from a long experience of, and from constantly reading about, political affairs." (Pg. 93)
He observes, "No authority more useful and necessary can be granted to those appointed to look after the liberties of a state than that of being able to indict before the people or some magistrate or court such citizens as have committed any offence prejudicial to the freedom of the state. Such an institution has two consequences most useful in a republic. First, for fear of being prosecuted, its citizens attempt nothing prejudicial to the state, and, if they do attempt anything, are suppressed forthwith without respect to persons. Secondly, an outlet is provided for all that feeling which is apt to grow up in cities against some particular citizen, however it comes about... nothing does so much to stabilize and strengthen a republic as some institution whereby the changeful humours which agitate it are afforded a proper outlet by way of the laws." (Pg. 124)
He states, "Nor in fact was there ever a legislator who, in introducing extraordinary laws to people, did not have recourse to god, for otherwise they would not have been accepted, since many benefits of which a prudent man is aware, are not so evident to reason that he can convince others of them. Hence wise men, in order to escape this difficulty, have recourse to God." (Pg. 141)
He also suggests, "He who desires or proposed to change the form of government in a state and wishes it to be acceptable and to be able to maintain it to everyone's satisfaction, must needs retain at least the shadow of its ancient customs, so that institutions may not appear to its people to have been changed, though in point of fact the new institutions may be radically different from the old ones. This he must do because men in general are as much affected by what a thing appears to be as by what it is, indeed they are frequently influences more by appearances than by the reality." (Pg. 175)
He argues, "Let, then, a republic be constituted where there exists, or can be brought into being, notable equality; and a regime of the opposite type, i.e., a principality, where there is notable inequality. Otherwise what is done will lack proportion and will be of but short duration." (Pg. 248)
He asserts, "It is quite true, I think, that seldom, if ever, so men of low position obtain high rank except by force and by fraud, though there are, of course, others to whom rank comes merely by way of gift or inheritance. Nor do I think that force by itself ever suffices, whereas instances can easily be found in which fraud alone has sufficed." (Pg. 310)
But he notes, "For when men are well governed, they do not go about looking for further liberty." (Pg. 396-397) He also points out, "He who reads the Bible with discernment will see that, in order that Moses might set about making laws and institutions, he had to kill a very great number of men who, out of envy and nothing else, were opposed to his plans." (Pg. 486)
Not as cynically fascinating as The Prince, this book is nevertheless a very interesting work of political philosophy.
Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli (1469-1527) was an Italian historian, politician, diplomat, philosopher, humanist, and writer based in Florence during the Renaissance. He was for many years an official in the Florentine Republic, with responsibilities in diplomatic and military affairs. He also wrote The Prince.
The book forms a commentary on the first ten books of Livy's History of Rome. Machiavelli wrote in the introductory section of this book, "in it I have set down all that I know and have learnt from a long experience of, and from constantly reading about, political affairs." (Pg. 93)
He observes, "No authority more useful and necessary can be granted to those appointed to look after the liberties of a state than that of being able to indict before the people or some magistrate or court such citizens as have committed any offence prejudicial to the freedom of the state. Such an institution has two consequences most useful in a republic. First, for fear of being prosecuted, its citizens attempt nothing prejudicial to the state, and, if they do attempt anything, are suppressed forthwith without respect to persons. Secondly, an outlet is provided for all that feeling which is apt to grow up in cities against some particular citizen, however it comes about... nothing does so much to stabilize and strengthen a republic as some institution whereby the changeful humours which agitate it are afforded a proper outlet by way of the laws." (Pg. 124)
He states, "Nor in fact was there ever a legislator who, in introducing extraordinary laws to people, did not have recourse to god, for otherwise they would not have been accepted, since many benefits of which a prudent man is aware, are not so evident to reason that he can convince others of them. Hence wise men, in order to escape this difficulty, have recourse to God." (Pg. 141)
He also suggests, "He who desires or proposed to change the form of government in a state and wishes it to be acceptable and to be able to maintain it to everyone's satisfaction, must needs retain at least the shadow of its ancient customs, so that institutions may not appear to its people to have been changed, though in point of fact the new institutions may be radically different from the old ones. This he must do because men in general are as much affected by what a thing appears to be as by what it is, indeed they are frequently influences more by appearances than by the reality." (Pg. 175)
He argues, "Let, then, a republic be constituted where there exists, or can be brought into being, notable equality; and a regime of the opposite type, i.e., a principality, where there is notable inequality. Otherwise what is done will lack proportion and will be of but short duration." (Pg. 248)
He asserts, "It is quite true, I think, that seldom, if ever, so men of low position obtain high rank except by force and by fraud, though there are, of course, others to whom rank comes merely by way of gift or inheritance. Nor do I think that force by itself ever suffices, whereas instances can easily be found in which fraud alone has sufficed." (Pg. 310)
But he notes, "For when men are well governed, they do not go about looking for further liberty." (Pg. 396-397) He also points out, "He who reads the Bible with discernment will see that, in order that Moses might set about making laws and institutions, he had to kill a very great number of men who, out of envy and nothing else, were opposed to his plans." (Pg. 486)
Not as cynically fascinating as The Prince, this book is nevertheless a very interesting work of political philosophy.
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review