Machiavelli Vs. Castiglione
Essay Preview: Machiavelli Vs. Castiglione
1 rating(s)
Report this essay
Ideas on the same topic always seem to differ from person to person. This holds true to the ideas of Machiavelli and Castiglione. The Prince, written by Machiavelli, and The Courtier, written by Castiglione, are both somewhat how-to guides for nobility, royalty, and princes. However, there are many distinct differences among the ideas of Castiglione and Machiavelli. Castigliones philosophy leads down the path of a well-rounded person; a more peaceful manner. Machiavellis philosophy is more straightforward and violent, where you should do anything and everything you have to do in order to achieve your goal. Both books and figures were of great importance to society.
Machiavellis philosophy was that “The end justifies the means.” This meant that the end result is the most important, and how you got there was of no importance. The Prince was a book of advice to rules on how to found a state and how to stay in power. Machiavelli explained in his book the many different ways to gain power. One way was to acquire land. The four methods that he discusses to acquire more land is: Your own arms and virtue, fortune, others arms, and inequity. To Machiavelli, the word virtue meant manliness and strength. Machiavelli also advocates the use of evil to achieve any goals. He gives an example of Agathocles of Syracuse as a proof that this works and will enable the prince to rule the land peacefully through fear. “Born of a potter, this one always had an iniquitous life throughout his years: nonetheless, he accomplished his iniquities with such virtue of spirit and of body that, having joined the militia, he rose through its ranks to become praetor of Syracuse. Being established in rank, and having decided to become prince and to keep with violence and without obligation to others what had been conceded him by agreement …one morning he convened the people and the senate of Syracuse, as if he had had to deliberate things pertinent to the republic; and at a preordained nod he had all the senators and richest of the people killed by his soldiers. Once they were killed he occupied and held the principality of that city without any civil controversy.” Machiavelli then explains what qualities a prince should have so that he can maintain the best control. He discusses that the prince have military knowledge, love and fear, trustworthiness, and good and bad reputations. He deeply believes in the art of war. “…a prince must not have any objective nor any thought, nor take up any art, other than the art of war and its ordering and discipline; because it is the only art that pertains to him who commands. And it is of such virtue that not only does it maintain those who were born princes, but many times makes men rise to that rank from private station; and conversely one sees that when princes have thought more of delicacies than of arms, they have lost their state.” He also writes about whether it is better to be loved or feared, stating that it is best to be feared, but not hated. Love can change in an instant, and it is better to always have control, even if the prince must be feared. Patriotism and dedication to the state was also a very important aspect. In conclusion, Machiavelli strived for power and strength by any means possible. Through violence and fear, the end result would be worth it to him.
Castiglione approached manners in a much different way. Castiglione believed in someone who was strong and perfect. He should be able to skillful in handling weapons and horses, for the art of war. “And therefore will I have him to be of good shape, and well proportioned in his limbs, and to show strength, lightness, and quickness, and to have an understanding in all exercises of the body that belong to a man of war. And herein I think the chief point is to handle well a kind of weapon both for footman and horseman, and to know the vantages in it.” He was also expected to be able to hunt, swim, and play tennis. Hunting was important because it had almost the same nature as war. “And of them methinks hunting is one of the chiefest, for it hath a certain likeness with war, and truly a pastime for great men, and fit for one living in court.” Swimming was another important factor in a way such that if he were to encounter a problem during war, he would able to handle it. “It is meet for him to also have the art of swimming, to leap, to run, to cast the stone; for besides the profit that he may receive of this in the wars, it happeneth to him many times to make proof of himself in such things, whereby he getteth him a reputation, especially among the multitude, unto whom a man must sometime apply himself.” Tennis would allow the person to achieve qualities valuable to war. “Also it is a noble exercise and meet for one living in court to play at tennis, where the disposition of the body, the quickness and nimbleness of every member, is much perceived, and almost whatsoever a man can see in all other exercisesÐ….” He would also have to have high intelligence, along with reserved manners. Castigliones philosophy was more reserved, where the courtier would have to be good looking, intelligent, and physically capable.
The differences between