Ferdinand, the heir of Naples, was an intelligent but naive boy. Due to the fact that he has been a prince for all of his life, Ferdinand had learned many things, so he could be one day be fit to rule Naples, but Ferdinand had never actually faced real challenges and hardships like the one he was facing right now. Ferdinand was a proficient swimmer and after their boat capsized was not worried for himself but for the people he cared about. Having a close relationship with his father Alonso, Ferdinand was aware that his father was not the most physically gifted person as he was severely obese. On his way to a nearby island, Ferdinand’s head was lighting up with worry, for his father’s life, and the state of Naples, as without a proper ruler,
King Ferdinand and Isabella are known as one of the most famous couples in the world. Isabella who was the daughter of King John II of Castile and Ferdinand was the son of King John I of Aragon were married to create unity between the two kingdoms. At the time of their marriage the spanish moors were in control of a big chunk of Spain.
In The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli considers Cesare Borgia to be perfect example for princes or whomever, to follow if they wish to apprehend how to secure and strengthen their principalities. Cesare Borgia, for Machiavelli, is an ideal lesson of a prince who had great prowess, gained his principality through good fortune by his father Pope Alexander VI, showed continuous actions by his efforts to secure his state quickly, and then lost it to adverse fortune, which led to his fall and death. Machiavelli uses many events of Cesare Borgia’s to show how and why he was successful, and should me imitated as a model of prudence by ambitious princes.
In the seventeenth century there were different types of leaders in Europe. The classic monarchial rule was giving way to absolutist rule. Absolute kings claimed to be ruling directly from God, therefore having divine rule that could not be interfered with. In 1643 Louis XIV began his reign over France as an absolute king.
In fact, Machiavelli’s morals are as questionable as those of Ferdinand II. Because Machiavelli believed that “it [was] unnecessary for a prince to have all the good qualities [he had] enumerated, but it [was] very necessary to appear to have them” (62), Ferdinand II seemed to be an excellent example of the advice given in the book. However, Machiavelli fails to see that Ferdinand II’s actions opposed one of his primary beliefs. Machiavelli specified that princes did not have to avoid cruelty and dishonesty if and only if their actions benefited the state, and that a prince must consider every action he took based on its effect on his country. As previously stated, Ferdinand II’s actions exclusively benefited himself. Considering the fact that this was a principal theme throughout Machiavelli’s book, why he saw Ferdinand II as such a “great and extraordinary” ruler is baffling. His love of the king is as hypocritical as the King’s character. There is a strong possibility that Machiavelli had a bias towards Ferdinand, considering he was the ruler when he wrote The Prince, and Machiavelli did not see his rule’s final outcome. This presents the question of how Machiavelli’s partiality affects his credibility. Provided he did, in fact, have that bias, what does that say about the rest of his work? Since Machiavelli did not have a neutral stance on politics, he may have steered Prince De’ Medici and all other political leaders who read The Prince in the direction of his own opinions, thus singlehandedly shaping history into his
“The Prince”, by Niccolo Machiavelli, is a series of letters written to the current ruler of Italy, Lorenzo de’ Medici. These letters are a “how-to” guide on what to do and what not to do. He uses examples to further express his views on the subject. The main purpose was to inform the reader how to effectively rule and be an acceptable Prince. Any ruler who wishes to keep absolute control of his principality must use not only wisdom and skill, but cunning and cruelness through fear rather than love. Machiavelli writes this book as his summary of all the deeds of great men.
The subtleties of Lorenzo’s power lay in the fact that Florence remained a republic on its surface. If the Medici ruled the city, they did so by manipulation behind the scenes, not as princes or kings but as leading citizens. Princes could command and expect to be obeyed by their subjects, but Lorenzo could only persuade and hope to be followed. Lorenzo’s age also complicated his authority. Only those over 45 years old could serve in the signoria. Thus, until he died at the age of 43, Lorenzo remained the unofficial ruler of Flo...
Ferdinand is intuitively afraid of individuals, crowds and society as a whole. While en route to the colony, Bardamu experiences this fear of others, when he is condemned to death by his fellow passengers, because he is traveling with an inexpensive fare.
This is the driving force behind why Ferdinand takes it upon himself to fix the wrongdoings of his sister. Ferdinand himself had affairs and was not penalized for it due to his male body. Men, without the ability to get pregnant, can hide what they have done from the public eye unless the woman gets pregnant. Men are not meant to keep this unrealistic expectation of remaining pure, as they could often save their reputations just by word of mouth if they were clever enough. Even when it came to widowhood, men and women did not have the same results. Should a man lose his wife, remarrying was not seen as shocking or damaging to one’s reputation. Sandra Cavallo and Lydan Warner discussed this idea of widowhood and state how losing a husband changed the woman’s life, while men did not have as much of a change in their everyday lives (3-4). Ultimately, Ferdinand had power due to his body that the Duchess could never
Frederick II, the Great, overcame the resource limitations within Prussia by mastering three aspects of the western way of war: the ability to finance war, possessing a highly disciplined military, and an aggressive mindset toward achieving quick decisive victory, which established Prussia as a major European power. Frederick II accomplished this feat while being surrounded by powerful neighbors that possessed larger populations, armies, and financial excess. His initial assessment on the state of his Prussian inheritance from his personal writings follows:
The reciprocation of salvation, gifts, and promises or contracts that governs Miranda, Ferdinand, and Prospero’s relationship is contingent. In other words, nothing is given freely. Although salvation is often time portrayed as a gift, I suggest that perhaps there is no such thing as a free gift or pure salvation. Prospero gives Miranda as a gift to Ferdinand. However, the reason was not that the gift is free, but that in return Prospero gains from gift-giving. Still, Prospero cannot give the gift until the promise of chastity is fulfilled. He cannot ergo receive the benefit until the fulfillment of the promise. Inversely, Ferdinand cannot receive the gift until he fulfills his promise to Prospero by not violating Miranda’s virginity. The gift is contingent on the promise of saving. I will argue that this saving herself and Ferdinand not violating her virginity is a legal and economical contract. Because both parties, Ferdinand and Prospero, have responsibility and benefit from the promise, this is why there is no such thing as a free gift rather a mutual trade. Prospero and Ferdinand’s pre-contract agreement is a necessary condition for Ferdinand’s taking Miranda’s hand in marriage, another form of legal contract.
I have heard your pleas for help and sanctuary and I have decided not to send help. We greatly appreciate what you have done for us in the past, but the events of this voyage were too much. We have received word of what your men have done under your command and it is by far the most horrific thing I have ever heard. You deserve what you get for what goes around comes around. Ferdinand and I will no longer support you or your men. We won’t aid in your escape nor will give you permission to pursue religion to Rome. Any man that forces others to swim into the depths with man-eating beasts for long periods of time without rest is a despicable one at best.
Once the King of England, Scotland, as well as Ireland, and the second son of James VI and Anne of Denmark, King Charles I was born in Scotland on November 19,1600 and died January 30, 1649 by the hands of execution. Even at a young age King Charles was granted power as Duke of Albany at his own baptism. However he did not stop there soon after in 1605 he was proclaimed Duke of York. King Charles was not perfect though, from and early age he suffered from weak ankle joints which in return affected his physical growth. Not only was King Charles also suffering physically but mentally as well. He was very slow at learning how to speak as a child, however he would some day grow out of all of his small issues and become a powerful King. King Charles was not an only child, he was aided by his older brother and sister who played a huge part in his rise to power. However his power would soon be tested as he engaged in a power tug of war with the Parliament of England which sought out to change his royal ways in which he believed was his divine right.
Living in a tumultuous era, filled with political and religious conflicts, warring city-states, and a continent ruled by a government who used the church to control and conquer, an exiled Machiavelli wrote the book The Prince to give politicians a basis on how to rule a nation and as a way to continue to make a statement in Florence’s politics. The book itself was unlike the regular “mirrors for princes”, in a sense that instead of telling the prince how to be morally sound it told him how to be effective as a ruler. Within the book there were three characteristics that were expressed that can be considered of high importance for every prince/ruler. These three were every prince should rather be feared than to be loved, study war and always be ready for it, and that in the case of two states in war always pick a side and never stray away from it. These characteristics were present in a strong and merciless ruler who used the three features above to govern over an entire country. Joseph Stalin might be seen as a mass murder, but his achievements and contributions to Russia proved that by being feared rather than loved, studying war and perfecting it, and his ability to choose his allies in war, would ultimately lead to the prosperity of his nation.
In fact, her relationship with Antonio is one of the most important aspects of this play in regards to the emphasis of her feminine autonomy. Even in today’s society, it is typical and expected of a man to court – as well as men today can – a woman and take the lead of their relationship. The Duchess, though explicitly told not to remarry by her brothers, chooses a man for herself. She explicitly defies the patriarchal system her brothers have placed upon her immediately after he leaves her when she says “Let old wives report/ I wink 'd, and chose a husband”. This man is of a lower social status than she and is well known around the court as one of her stewards; the male is marrying into higher status. Not only this, but she is rebelling against her brothers’ characters by marrying a man who so strongly opposes them in his very being. Antonio is portrayed as a kind and loyal man whereas Ferdinand’s character resembles that of a possessive snake. Not only is she denying the marital stereotype, but she is defying the wishes of the most prominent men in her life: her
The Cardinal and Ferdinand, the brothers of the Duchess, are very much against their sister’s re-marriage. Ferdinand urges her not to marry again. He condemns it because he thinks that it shows a lustful nature.