Machiavelli's Civil Principality

581 Words2 Pages

Machiavelli defines a civil principality as “when a private citizen becomes prince of his fatherland, not through crime or other intolerable violence but with the support of his fellow citizens” (The Prince, pp. 38-39). Machiavelli’s asserts that to become the prince of a civil principality doesn’t require all virtue or all fortune, but some of each, which he specifies as “fortunate astuteness” (p. 39). He also says that a man gains power through support from either the great or the people. This is because the great and the people are constantly struggling for power. The great wanting to “command and the oppress the people” (p. 39) and the people wanting “neither to be commanded nor oppressed by the great” (p. 39). Both the people and the great want a prince to protect their interest. If a man becomes prince from the great it’s harder to …show more content…

Nabis obtained support from the people, which was key to securing himself against the great. Machiavelli also tries to disprove the proverb “whoever founds on the people founds on mud” (p. 41). He then provides two examples that disprove his claim, but he blames them for putting too much trust in the people, as well as their lack of command, bravery, prudence, and inspiration. Machiavelli believes that if the prince has those qualities, then the people will provide a solid foundation. He also contends that a principality that transitions to a more powerful form of government is delicate, especially if the prince uses magistrates. This requires putting a considerable amount of trust in others as magistrates, as well as the risk of the people ignoring or overpowering one. This also makes it difficult for the prince to take over control of people that aren’t accustomed to obeying him. Machiavelli stresses that the prince must keep the people dependant on himself and the state because they’re only faithful in favorable times or if it’s

Open Document