Analyzing Dante and Machiavelli´s Characteristics of a Good Leader

Dante and Machiavelli were both writers who felt that society and leaders were greatly mislead in their approach of operating the state. Yet even they had very contrasting beliefs in their view of what was ideal for a society to function properly. Machiavelli judges religious or political leaders is based there’s ability to maintain order and unity, regardless of whether one or not need these leaders put there morality and ethics aside for this greater benefit of one’s state. This differs greatly from Dante because his evaluation of the leaders of his time is based solely on how true they stay to moral and ethical virtues. He judges the political. Their ideas of human excellence are revealed through these judgments are very different. While Dante idea of human excellence lies merely on morality and achieving unity with God, Machiavelli put more emphasis on practicality which is necessary for the greater good of the state and how to be an effective politician.

One way in which Dante and Machiavelli have opposing views, which are revealed through their evaluation of the leaders of their time, is that Dante belief it is wrong for leaders to use religion as a way to gain power that it is hypocritical and greedy. On the other hand Machiavelli believes that leaders must do what is necessary to be political effective and run the state efficiently. This once again illustrates there overall basic difference in way of view human excellence, that is morality versus administrative success. One example that demonstrates this point is Machiavelli’s commentary on the political success of Ferdinand of Aragon. Although Machiavelli admits that Ferdinand is cunning because he does many unmoral deeds to become an accomplished but he still describes ...

... middle of paper ...

...is can only weaken a leader’s state since money is need for many others tasks in a thriving state. For an example, money is need for the purposes of funding an army in unforeseen wars, and funding projects. Machiavelli claim that although a prince that is frugal might not be well liked, by his subjects, at first but he will be appreciated late when he is able to carry out costly functions of a state without imposing heavy taxes on them. He gives examples of many different leaders of his time. One example Machiavelli lays out is King of France who was able to wage many wars without imposing heavy taxes on his subjects because he been a very frugal ruler for a long time. Another example he gives is the king of Spain, Machiavelli argues that if the king of Spain had been more generous to his subject he would not have been able to win so many campaigns for his state.