Hellow friend today we will know about the machiavelli.
MACHIAVELLI
is known as the father of modern political science. He is a transitional figure
standing midway between the medieval and modern political thought. He was a historian who laid
the foundations of a new science of politics by integrating contemporary history with ancient past.
He commanded a sinister reputation as no other thinker in the annals of political theory. The initial
reaction to Machiavelli’s writing was one of shock and he himself was denounced as an inventor of
the devil. This was because Machiavelli sanctioned the use of deception, cruelty, force, violence
and the like for achieving the desired political ends. Spinoza regarded him as a friend of the people
for having exposed the Prince. Montesquieu regarded him as a lover of liberty, an image that
emerged in the Discourses and not from the Prince.
Machiavelli was born in Florence in 1469. He was the third child in a family that was neither
rich nor aristocratic, but well connected with the city’s famed humanistic circles. Florence was
economically prosperous but suffered a long period of civil strife and political disorder. His father
Berando, a civil lawyer, held several important public appointments. Besides his legal practice,
Bernado also received rents from his land, making his family financially comfortable’ Bernado
took considerable interest in the education of his son. At the age of 29, Machiavelli entered the
public service in the government of Florence. Later he was sent on a diplomatic mission to several
foreign countries where he acquired firsthand experience of Political and diplomatic matters.
Although not employed on the highest level of policy making, he was close enough to the inner
circles of the administration to acquire firsthand knowledge of the mechanics of politics. In 1512, he
lost his job when the republican government, based on French support was replaced by the absolute
regime of the Medici, who has been restored to power with papal help. Machiavelli was accused of
serious crimes and tortured, but he was found innocent and banished to his small farm near
Florence. It was in such enforced leisure that he wrote the Prince (1513). The book was dedicated
to the Medici family, Lorenzo II de Medici (1492-1519), Lorenzo the Maginificient’s grandson. The
Prince explored the causes of the rise and fall of states and the factors for political success. As
Gramsci has rightly pointed out, the basic thing the Prince is that it is not a systematic treatment ,
but a ‘live’ work, in which political ideology and political science are fused in the dramatic form of a
myth’ The most elaborated work of Machiavelli is the Discourses on the First Ten Books of Titus
Livius (1521). Taking Roman history as a starting point, the Discourses attempts to dissect the
anatomy of body politic, and on a much more philosophical and historical foundation than that of
the Prince.
For all its breadth and elaborateness, the Discourse is of interest primarily to students of political
philosophy, whereas the Prince is destined to remain one of the half dozen political writings that
have entered the general body of world literature. According to William Ebenstein, the Prince is “a
reflection not only on man’s political ambitions and passions but of man himself. The most
revolutionary aspect of the Prince is not so much what it says as what it ignores. Before
Machiavelli, all political writing - from Plato and Aristotle through the middle ages to the Renaissance had one central question: the end of the state. Machiavelli ignores the issue of the end
of the state in extra political terms. He assumes that power is an end in itself and he confines his
inquires into the means that are best suited to acquire retain, and expand power.
CHURCH VS STATE CONTROVERSY
Middle Ages roughly mean the period between the Gregorian movement of the 11th century and the
beginning of the protestant reformation movement. Medieval political theory was dominated by the
ideal of unity as taught by the ancient Roman Empire. There was a general belief in a centralized
secular power and a centralized ecclesiastical power. Even the state and the Church were fused
into one system and represented two different aspects of the same society. The function of the
universal empire was to help the growth of a universal church. When the struggle between papacy
and the Holy Roman Empire broke out, the defenders of both quoted scriptures in support of their
claims.
In the days when the Roman Empire adopted Christianity, the emperor was the head of both the
state and the church; but the church grew more and more strong and began to exercise the right of
excommunication. This right of excommunication was a powerful weapon in the hands of the
church. Thus ecclesiastical authority began to interfere with and control secular authority. When the
Holy Roman Empire was created, no attempt was made to define the relations between the emperor
and the pope. It was impossible to determine whether the emperor derived his authority immediately
from God or immediately through the pope.
The clash between the two began in the 11th century with the reforms of Gregory VIII who decreed
that ‘no ecclesiastic should be invested with the symbols of office by a secular ruler under penalty of
excommunication’. This decree led to a conflict between emperor Henry IV and Gregory. This
contest between the papacy and the empire lasted for about two centuries when at last the papacy
came out victorious as the unrivalled head of western Christendom. The papacy was strongest in the
13th century under Innocent III. By the 14th century the king had become strong, and feudalism, the
main support of the church, had become somewhat weakened.
MACHIAVELLI
is known as the father of modern political science. He is a transitional figure
standing midway between the medieval and modern political thought. He was a historian who laid
the foundations of a new science of politics by integrating contemporary history with ancient past.
He commanded a sinister reputation as no other thinker in the annals of political theory. The initial
reaction to Machiavelli’s writing was one of shock and he himself was denounced as an inventor of
the devil. This was because Machiavelli sanctioned the use of deception, cruelty, force, violence
and the like for achieving the desired political ends. Spinoza regarded him as a friend of the people
for having exposed the Prince. Montesquieu regarded him as a lover of liberty, an image that
emerged in the Discourses and not from the Prince.
Machiavelli was born in Florence in 1469. He was the third child in a family that was neither
rich nor aristocratic, but well connected with the city’s famed humanistic circles. Florence was
economically prosperous but suffered a long period of civil strife and political disorder. His father
Berando, a civil lawyer, held several important public appointments. Besides his legal practice,
Bernado also received rents from his land, making his family financially comfortable’ Bernado
took considerable interest in the education of his son. At the age of 29, Machiavelli entered the
public service in the government of Florence. Later he was sent on a diplomatic mission to several
foreign countries where he acquired firsthand experience of Political and diplomatic matters.
Although not employed on the highest level of policy making, he was close enough to the inner
circles of the administration to acquire firsthand knowledge of the mechanics of politics. In 1512, he
lost his job when the republican government, based on French support was replaced by the absolute
regime of the Medici, who has been restored to power with papal help. Machiavelli was accused of
serious crimes and tortured, but he was found innocent and banished to his small farm near
Florence. It was in such enforced leisure that he wrote the Prince (1513). The book was dedicated
to the Medici family, Lorenzo II de Medici (1492-1519), Lorenzo the Maginificient’s grandson. The
Prince explored the causes of the rise and fall of states and the factors for political success. As
Gramsci has rightly pointed out, the basic thing the Prince is that it is not a systematic treatment ,
but a ‘live’ work, in which political ideology and political science are fused in the dramatic form of a
myth’ The most elaborated work of Machiavelli is the Discourses on the First Ten Books of Titus
Livius (1521). Taking Roman history as a starting point, the Discourses attempts to dissect the
anatomy of body politic, and on a much more philosophical and historical foundation than that of
the Prince.
For all its breadth and elaborateness, the Discourse is of interest primarily to students of political
philosophy, whereas the Prince is destined to remain one of the half dozen political writings that
have entered the general body of world literature. According to William Ebenstein, the Prince is “a
reflection not only on man’s political ambitions and passions but of man himself. The most
revolutionary aspect of the Prince is not so much what it says as what it ignores. Before
Machiavelli, all political writing - from Plato and Aristotle through the middle ages to the Renaissance had one central question: the end of the state. Machiavelli ignores the issue of the end
of the state in extra political terms. He assumes that power is an end in itself and he confines his
inquires into the means that are best suited to acquire retain, and expand power.
CHURCH VS STATE CONTROVERSY
Middle Ages roughly mean the period between the Gregorian movement of the 11th century and the
beginning of the protestant reformation movement. Medieval political theory was dominated by the
ideal of unity as taught by the ancient Roman Empire. There was a general belief in a centralized
secular power and a centralized ecclesiastical power. Even the state and the Church were fused
into one system and represented two different aspects of the same society. The function of the
universal empire was to help the growth of a universal church. When the struggle between papacy
and the Holy Roman Empire broke out, the defenders of both quoted scriptures in support of their
claims.
In the days when the Roman Empire adopted Christianity, the emperor was the head of both the
state and the church; but the church grew more and more strong and began to exercise the right of
excommunication. This right of excommunication was a powerful weapon in the hands of the
church. Thus ecclesiastical authority began to interfere with and control secular authority. When the
Holy Roman Empire was created, no attempt was made to define the relations between the emperor
and the pope. It was impossible to determine whether the emperor derived his authority immediately
from God or immediately through the pope.
The clash between the two began in the 11th century with the reforms of Gregory VIII who decreed
that ‘no ecclesiastic should be invested with the symbols of office by a secular ruler under penalty of
excommunication’. This decree led to a conflict between emperor Henry IV and Gregory. This
contest between the papacy and the empire lasted for about two centuries when at last the papacy
came out victorious as the unrivalled head of western Christendom. The papacy was strongest in the
13th century under Innocent III. By the 14th century the king had become strong, and feudalism, the
main support of the church, had become somewhat weakened.
No comments:
Post a Comment