Niccolò Machiavelli

The confluence of history, nature, and fortune

By Nicholas Arellano

Niccolò Machiavelli, (1469-1527) is well known for his political writings—as well as his motives for political dominance and acquisition of power—but less appreciated are his impact on the writing of history. Machiavelli is known to have an enormous influence on many writers following his time.

Mark Phillips describes Machiavelli as, “a mediating figure in Florentine historiography, a native Florentine and republican, he was also a secretary, commissioned historian, and man of letters” (Phillips, 95). Some of Machiavelli’s greatest works titled The Prince (1532) and Discourses on Livy (1531), which were published after his death, intel most of his deep thoughts and opinions on the way we must view history. He shaped and developed a new outlook of being a leader, creating a state, establishing dominance through power, and how to stay in power.

Three of his main topics discussed are the implications of learning from history, human nature, and fortune. In short, Machiavelli tells us that we must learn from history in order to create and establish a better future. Human nature is one of the many characteristics we share, and we must see how it can be used to create a better state. And fortune: showing that the future is in your hands and that you can shape whether you succeed or fail. Each one builds from the last and establishes his lasting impact through history and politics.

Learning From History

M.C. Lemon writes that Machiavelli’s “primary passion was for the maintained of an orderly governed society – and crucially, he thought that in the pursuit people can, and leaders should, learn from history” (Lemon, 94). And in many contexts Machiavelli states that his goal for his writing was “to encourage people to apply historical context to the decision making of the present and the future. He was writing not because people did not know history, but because they simply neglected the tools that they already had obtained” (McRoberts, 9). Machiavelli continually says throughout his works that we as a people and population have a duty to create a better tomorrow. By creating and structuring the means necessary to what history has given us. To not take the past lightly, but to research, analyses, and structure a plan.

At the time there were two different types of historical writings and each had its own strengths and weaknesses. First we have the Humanistic historian who “concentrated on affairs of the state and composed linear narratives that were classified and augmented by reference to broad moral and political lessons” (Phillips, 86). They believed in the dignity of science, they were never seen as religious, and do not believe in a God or God’s. Second were the Vernacular chroniclers who “wrote to preserve the memory of notable events, both political and nonpolitical, especially those they had themselves witnessed” (Phillips, 86). This type of writing was influenced by the intellectual and cultural distinctions of the Renaissance. During the Renaissance, a period marking the transition from the Middle Ages to Modernity from 1300-1600, both methods had to compete and coexist with each other. And while Machiavelli was not seen as a humanist, his works intel important features of vernacular style, but also works through many humanistic reports to build arguments and create his philosophy on the importance of learning from history.

Machiavelli introduces this idea in his Discourses that were written to show his many thoughts on history and politics. He sees that history in the 16th century, must be used and viewed in a different way. He is upset with contemporaries for consulting the ancient jurists (an expert in writing or law) rather then looking to the actual history. To build his arguments he reviews the policies and procedures from ancient kingdoms, republics, and the ways kings, legislators, soldiers, and citizens displayed wisdom and sacrificed themselves for the greatness of the country. Some examples would include maintaining the state, organizing an army, or to dispense justice. But none of this could be possible if antiquity (the ancient past before the Middle Ages) was out of the picture. During the 16th century Machiavelli accused his contemporaries of a political complacency and inefficacy born of historical ignorance. Yet the ignorance he means is not so much historical fact but ignorance of ‘the true sense’ or ‘the spirit’ of the history they read.” (Lemon, 95)

This ‘true sense’ being that we don’t use our imaginations when we look at historical figures to see their importance due to their actions in getting things done during their times. We see that “Machiavelli thinks people are wrongly overawed by the historico-cultrual gap between their own times and antiquity, such that, out of their failure to understand ‘the new sense’ or ‘spirit’ of history, it appears to them impossible to learn from it.” (Lemon, 96). When pointing to the historical and cultural gap between ‘Antiquity’ and the Middle Ages, and between both and the present, it was correct and beneficial. But what was left after that is, “it was not only incomplete; it was damaging – because if history is viewed solely as a succession of different ‘times’, it can lead to the idea that they are so different that history is no more than an entertaining read” (Lemon, 96). Machiavelli wants his readers to understand that history is not just a meaningful story that is taking place, but a guideline for men to find lessons, and principles that can be applied to benefit mankind.

Introduction to The Prince

Laura McRoberts, who’s a Professor of History at the University of Illinois writes that “The Prince should be read in a different manner; as a manual for daily life and the maximization of opportunity. The mere notion that Machiavelli, a former servant to the Republican government who praises his role of principality exemplifies his belief that adversity can be a blessing that has not been considered or planned.” (McRoberts, 7) In this book he starts by dividing humanity into three groups, the first being the vast majority of ordinary people who he refers to as “the vulgar”, second being “the few”, who are a much smaller group, and finally we have “the individuals”. The vulgar are the people who look and follow the individuals by their appearances, they are “…the great majority of mankind that are satisfied with appearances, as though they were realities, and are often even more influenced by the things that seem than by those that are.” (Lemon, 9) The few are not deceived by appearance and are more educated in knowing what is going on. Lemon confirms that, “He does not mean ‘education’ in the formal sense of schooling, but in the broader sense of the (moral, political, and religious) culture installed in people.” (Lemon, 98) this is the one defining aspect that separates the few from the vulgar. Finally the individuals are the people who are actually in power or known as princes. To Machiavelli, a good man will almost never get into power, and a bad man will never use power for the good of people. Because of this people must be led back to there original virtue, his solution is to let bad men gain power and glory though their actions in order to create good outcomes.

Human Nature

One main principle Machiavelli focuses on with these groups is human nature, or the many characteristics we as humans share which would include the way we feel, act, and think. People who are living in different areas of the world will always have opinions, laws, and actions that differ from other nations and progressively have changed from earlier to later times. Machiavelli focuses on human nature because of its importance in government and state crafting. Many princes must act on their human nature when looking to direct a nation in the way they feel is necessary. It is important as a prince to know what the vulgar is interested and concerned about. Without understanding your population, it could lead to the failure of the prince’s reign or a nations collapse. Princes may create policies that seem good at the time but will disregard the poison that lies underneath.

A prince has the authority within his power to promote change. Machiavelli explains that “people are by nature fickle, and it is easy to persuade them of something, but difficult to keep them persuaded” (The Prince). We see this in today’s politics during elections. Delegates promote their ideas of ‘change’ on what they hear from the people they plan to represent. Lemon build off this by saying, “this ‘love of change’ makes men fickle and easily influenced, and if they are to be managed, the fundamental principle that ‘men are promoted in their actions by two main motives… love and fear’, must be exploited, fear being the most reliable lever.” (Lemon, 97) His definition of fear is using any means necessary to making sure the secure the political well-being of the state above all else. In his writings torture, cruelty, calculated inflicted, assassinations, lying, the breaking of promises, utter ruthlessness, and moral hypocrisy are all legitimate instruments for state crafting. Overall, it is in this sense that sets the good princes apart from the rest of humankind. Machiavelli does not believe that all princes are great and divine, but in order to be a great prince one must take human nature into account in order to secure the state even if the procedures are too the extreme.

Fortune

Machiavelli’s final and most important philosophy is the concept of fortune. Defined by Lemon, “Fortune determines the times we live in, and can rapidly change them so that those who, by chance or intelligence have prospered by adapting to ‘the times’, can be ruined if then unable to change their ways to meet the new.” (Lemon, 101) Every leader is faced with a new challenge that is different and unique to their time period and situations. There are good times, bad times, prosperous times, threatening times, fast-moving times and slow-moving times. But in the end fortune will decide how one will either succeed or fail. In Chapter 25 of The Prince which is titled How far human affairs are governed by fortune, and how fortune can be opposed, Machiavelli details one of his most famous metaphors to describe the power of fortune. As stated below,

“I compare fortune to one of those violent rivers which, when they are enraged, flood the plains, tear down trees and buildings, wash soil from one place to deposit it in another. Everyone flees before them, everybody yields to their impetus, there is no possibility of resistance. Yet although such is their nature, it does not follow that when they are flowing quietly one cannot take precautions, constructing dykes and embankments so that when the river is in flood they would keep to one channel of their impetus be less wild and dangerous. So it is with fortune.” (p. 130, The Prince)

Many people believe that fortune controls everything, but if that’s the case we as people would have no need to apply action to change the outcome. But what Machiavelli is stating with this analogy is that the other half is controlled by free will. The rivers may rise and destroy everything in their way but when their calm we can prevent and control the river by building dams and dikes. Every person has that ability to disrupt fortune and create a better future. As McRoberts puts it: “While Machiavelli restricts himself to the praise of princes through his writing, he opens the door to making each person’s life meaningful through a healthy perspective of trials and the encouragement to be brave against anything that Fortune may bring. For not all men can prepare to conquer the world, but no one need be deprived of the ability to conquer opportunity.” (McRoberts, 11)

Machiavelli’s works are a true testament of time. To an extent much of his works helped shape and create certain political powers. These three ideas have inspired many great works from other great philosophers. One being the French philosopher Descartes with his works on Dualism, here he demonstrates the existence of God and the distinction between the human soul and body. John Locke the English philosopher and his works expanding on Human Nature, and Karl Marx the German philosopher with his grounding ideas on capitalism and communism. Fascism which was created in Italy developed using the concepts of fortune, and fear to creating the perfect state. Hitler in Germany followed in those footsteps and while the world fought two World Wars to promote and defend Democracy, we still see traits in today’s politics. Machiavelli not only shaped the way we think and write history, but his contributions to a historiographical knowledge promotes constant questioning and presence as it defined history today and in the future. Through his words on Human Nature, Fortune, and most importantly Learning from History Machiavelli has rewoven history and established greater works to come from his writings, which leaves his mark on Historiography to be greatly appreciated and lasting.

Bibliography

Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince, 1961, Penguin Classics.

M.C. Lemon, Philosophy of History A Guide for Students, 2003, Routledge

Mark Phillis, Machiavelli, Gucciardini, and the Tradition of Vernacular Historiography in Florance, 1979, Oxford University Press.

Laura McRoberts, The Personal and Political Implications of Machiavelli’s The Prince, 1996, Illinois Wesleyan University Press.

Waldemar Hanasz, Machiavelli’s Method Revisited: The Art and Science of Modeling, 2010,