Diversity of Everything but Thought

Foxfyre wrote:

I sort of think . . .

I applaud Fox's new found dedication to honesty.

******************************

The entire text of The Prince may be found here

For those of lazy mental habits, excerpts may be found here

The chapters of the work are as follows:

Table of Contents
Chapter I How Many Kinds Of Principalities There Are, And By What Means They Are Acquired
Chapter II Concerning Hereditary Principalities
Chapter III Concerning Mixed Principalities
Chapter IV Why The Kingdom Of Darius, Conquered By Alexander, Did Not Rebel Against The Successors Of Alexander At His Death
Chapter V Concerning The Way To Govern Cities Or Principalities Which Lived Under Their Own Laws Before They Were Annexed
Chapter VI Concerning New Principalities Which Are Acquired By One's Own Arms And Ability
Chapter VII Concerning New Principalities Which Are Acquired Either By The Arms Of Others Or By Good Fortune
Chapter VIII Concerning Those Who Have Obtained A Principality By Wickedness
Chapter IX Concerning A Civil Principality
Chapter X Concerning The Way In Which The Strength Of All Principalities Ought To Be Measured
Chapter XI Concerning Ecclesiastical Principalities
Chapter XII How Many Kinds Of Soldiery There Are, And Concerning Mercenaries
Chapter XIII Concerning Auxiliaries, Mixed Soldiery, And One's Own
Chapter XIV That Which Concerns A Prince On The Subject Of The Art Of War
Chapter XV Concerning Things For Which Men, And Especially Princes, Are Praised Or Blamed
Chapter XVI Concerning Liberality And Meanness
Chapter XVII Concerning Cruelty And Clemency, And Whether It Is Better To Be Loved Than Feared
Chapter XVIII Concerning The Way In Which Princes Should Keep Faith
Chapter XIX That One Should Avoid Being Despised And Hated
Chapter XX Are Fortresses, And Many Other Things To Which Princes Often Resort, Advantageous Or Hurtful?
Chapter XXI How A Prince Should Conduct Himself As To Gain Renown
Chapter XXII Concerning The Secretaries Of Princes
Chapter XXIII How Flatterers Should Be Avoided
Chapter XXIV The Princes Of Italy Have Lost Their States
Chapter XXV What Fortune Can Effect In Human Affairs, And How To Withstand Her
Chapter XXVI An Exhortation To Liberate Italy From The Barbarians

As Walter's ironic response is likely to be seed sown on barren ground, i will state more clearly that those who have read the book would not be obliged to speculate about what proofs might or might not be offered.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

And some who claim to have read the book may have actually missed its main thesis. I sort of doubt the one who wrote an introductory note to the book itself would have missed it, however.

I don't know, whom exactly you mean, but I do think that M's Discorsi (I suppose, 'Discourses on Livy' is the English title) is the better book:
- it describes in more details and length,
- it deals about republic,
- it proves that Machiavelli himself wasn't a Machiavellist at all.

0 Replies

It is usually translated, Walter, as The Commentaries, although it is often translated as The Discourse. I could not agree more with your evaluation of it as being much the more interesting and informative book.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Anyone who has read the book would know that citing passages would be a futility. The book is nowhere a history of his times, for however much it may be contended that it was influenced by his times. The book is, pure and simple, advice to any monarchical ruler.

However, those who have not read the book would not know that, of course, and might delude themselves into thinking that there would be a means of demonstrating the thesis by citing passages.

“Of all Machiavelli’s writings,” says Garnett, “ ‘The Prince’ is the most famous and deservedly, for it is the most characteristic. Few subjects of literary discussion have occasioned more controversy than the purpose of this celebrated book. Some have beheld in it a manual for tyrants, like the memoirs of Tibersus, so diligently perused by Domitian; others have regarded it as a refined irony upon tyranny, on the sarcastic plan of Swift’s Directions to Servants, if so humble an analogy be permissible. From various points of view it might alternately pass for either, but its purpose is accurately conveyed by neither interpretation. Machiavelli’s was a sincere though too supple a republican, and by no means desired the universal prevalence of tyranny throughout Italy. . . . His aim probably was to show how to build up a principality capable of expelling the foreigner and restoring the independence of Italy. But this intention could not be safely expressed, and hence his work seems repulsive, because the reason of state which he propounds as an apology for infringing the moral code appears not patriotic, but purely selfish. . . . With all his faults and oversights, nothing can deprive Machiavelli of the glory of having been the modern Aristotle in Politics, the first, or at least the first considerable writer who derived a practical philosophy from History, and exalted statecraft into science.” [/I][/quote]

”Machiavelli in the very last two paragraphs of the ‘The Prince’ ” wrote:

This opportunity then, for Italy at last to look on her deliverer, ought not to be allowed to pass away. With what love he would be received in all those provinces which have suffered from the foreign inundation, with what thirst for vengeance, with what fixed fidelity, with what devotion, and what tears, no words of mine can declare. What gates would be closed against him? What people would refuse him obedience? What jealousy would stand in his way? What Italian would yield him homage? This barbarian tyranny stinks in all nostrils.

Let your illustrious House therefore take upon itself this enterprise with all the courage and all the hopes with which a just cause is undertaken; so that under your standard this our country may be enobled, and under your auspices be fulfilled the words of Petrarch:--
“Brief will be the strife
When valour arms against barbaric rage;
For the bold spirit of the bygone age
Still warms the Italian hearts with life.”

My goodness, whatever could he have meant by that? Shocked

Hmmmmmmm

Is Horowitz ....... Question

..... Naaaah, the castroites simply won't allow even the possiblity of any such parallel to be drawn.... especially not by an adamsite. After all we adamsites are only know nothings and the castroites are know somethings Exclamation

0 Replies

Ah yes, shouting out a passage which clearly does not state your thesis that he had written a history of his times is a wonderful tactic, Ican. And it is so characteristic of you, that you provide the very evidence needed to deflate your silly contention.

0 Replies

Once again, Ican, have you read The Prince? If not, i have provided a link whereby you can supply your deficiency.

0 Replies

There was this time, after I graduated 8th grade, when I actually the read the book that was required for an assignment, but I quickly bored of that finding the readers digest a far more efficient use of my time. Since then I've been amazed that there are people who actually read a book before commenting on that book when in these modern times they can just goggle it and be done. You agree Ican?

0 Replies

Setanta seems to be having a reading comprehension problem today, Ican. I could have sworn you answered that question a short time ago.

0 Replies

I suggest that you have the reading comprehension problem, Fox. Ican has not answered the question in the affirmative, he has only made feeble sarcastic remarks. A simple yes or no would suffice, but he has not found it necessary, apparently, to respond.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Ah yes, shouting out a passage which clearly does not state your thesis that he had written a history of his times is a wonderful tactic, Ican. And it is so characteristic of you, that you provide the very evidence needed to deflate your silly contention.

The large print was not a shout. It was instead only my obviously failed attempt to relieve you of what appears to be a serious case of reading comprehension challenge.

Now for you information and contemplation this is how I shout in my posts:
Mad

It is not, has not, and never will be my thesis that Maciavelli had written a history of his times. That was your thesis about my thesis. It is not my thesis. Don't you read your own posts either?

It is my thesis that like Maciavelli, Horovitz was describing what he perceived to be the behavior of someone and not advocating that that behavior be adopted by anyone. Mad

0 Replies

Well, ican certainly answers louder than you do Set that must be good for something.

0 Replies

In answer to your question, The Commentaries, or, as Walter points out, more correctly described as The Discourses, were written first. The Prince is the direct descendant of The Commentaries. Those who claim, as you attempted to do, that they understand Machiavelli, have read not simply The Prince, but The Commentaries as well.

My statement in no way suggests that Machiavelli advocated the policies which he deplored. He does indeed, however, in The Prince advocate the policies which he believes will most effectively secure the liberty of northern Italy, and in the process, often advocates policies which he appears to have viewed with distaste.

As Walter has pointed out, in The Commentaries, Machiavelli more clearly shows his contempt for mere expedience in policy, and it is for this reason that anyone who claims to understand Machiavelli cannot legitimately make the claim without having either read that work as well as The Prince, or made the effort to read the dozens of histories and political commentaries which comprise the body of his published works, correspondence and manuscripts.

Once again, you shoot your mouth off without knowing the subject matter upon which you comment. This does not surprise me, i have rarely seen such an embodiment of the dictum that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

Well, ican certainly answers louder than you do Set that must be good for something.

Good point, Dys, he must be right, huh?

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Setanta seems to be having a reading comprehension problem today, Ican. I could have sworn you answered that question a short time ago.

Me too

But then what the hell do I know?

0 Replies

Try Google (ican, knows, hell)

0 Replies

I must admit, I don't use google a lot ... but know of better, specialised search engines Laughing

Quote:

There is more to Machiavelli than meets the eye.

Andrew Mousley, De Montfort University, in The Literary Encyclopedia.

0 Replies

This statement . . .

Ican wrote:

Your treatise on this is equivalent to blaming Niccolo Machiavelli for advocating the distructive political tactics he wrote about, when he was not advocating but was actually describing the then lousey tactics of contemporary politics.

. . . and this statement . . .

Ican wrote:

It is my thesis that like Maciavelli, Horovitz was describing what he perceived to be the behavior of someone and not advocating that that behavior be adopted by anyone.

. . . are not equivalent statements. In fact, although he clearly deplores many of the policies in operation in his times, this only becomes clear to the scholar who reads works other than The Prince, or the casual reader who takes it on the authority of an editor.

Machiavelli did not write The Prince to "describe the then lousy tactics of contemporary politics." That was your originally stated thesis, for however you choose now to edit the statement.

0 Replies

Please note that i posted my response to Fox with a time stamp of 3:59 pm. Ican's tortured answer to my question of whether or not he had read the work has a time stamp of 3:53 pm. As i did not type a long response to Fox and put in two links and list the table of contents of the work instantly, a reasonable person can see that i would have been unaware of Ican's response, it having been posted while i was till preparing my response to Fox.

But i would certainly never wish to deprive either Ican, or his sycophantic cheerleader of the pleasure of insinuating or openly stating that i have a reading comprehension problem. I do have a deteriorative vision condition, but that only bodes well, as it suggests that i soon will be unable to read posts by either of them--a consumation devoutly to be desired.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

I suggest that you have the reading comprehension problem, Fox. Ican has not answered the question in the affirmative, he has only made feeble sarcastic remarks. A simple yes or no would suffice, but he has not found it necessary, apparently, to respond.

From post number 1357755:

Setanta wrote:

So you can google a book . . . hooray for you.
I possess the book and transcribed the excerpts from it myself. Indeed, hooray for me!

I really don't like to transcribe, but necessity is a cruel dictator.

Simple question for you Ican, have you read the book?
No! I only read the 90 pages in volume 36 of the Harvard Classics that relate to and contains the entire "The Prince."

Have you read The Commentaries?
No! Is it relevant to Maciavelli's intent in writing "The Prince"? If so, how is it relevant?

The entire Harvard Classic Volume 36 that I own is 397 pages long. I did not read that whole book. I read only the 90 pages that the Harvard Classics seems to allege relates to and is the entire "The Prince". If their allegation is valid, then YES I did read "The Prince." My answer was carefully worded to avoid appearing to exaggerate.

0 Replies

Please see my response, above.

For as much as i am delighted by this playful exchange of contempt, i am in the middle of some rather important online transactions, and will be absent for some time. I do, however, encourage Ican and Fox to blacken my name as much as they are able in my absence.

0 Replies

Diversity of Everything but Thought

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know