What Are The Causes Of King George III's Downfall

With the third longest reign in Great Britain’s long and illustrious history, King George III’s rule was riddled mishaps, most likely due to the fact that he was illiterate until the age of eleven. The mishaps may also have to deal with the fact that his rule was not considered Machiavellian and were often connected with the fact that they were often exactly contradictory to the writings in The Prince. Due to the way the government was run, the military handled in the wars throughout his reign, and the way he was perceived, King George III of England greatly contradicts Machiavellian’s idea of a great ruler.

As George became the sole ruler of the British empire, he ignored or was ignorant of Machiavelli’s ideas of how to maintain his government and conquered lands. George began to emulate the 3rd Earl of Bute, John Stuart and trusted him as they had very similar opinions without quite thinking twice. Moreover, he also approved the new taxes on colonies that were very heavy

by the request of the Parliament. In theory, King George could have created an opinion for himself, but was launched into the position of King so quick, didn't have time to form own opinions and often had to rely on those in his court. Moreover, he held on very tightly to American colonies and backlash was created when he extended the war. The decisions King George made, especially early in his reign, often created received serious outcry on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean, be it taxes or the extension of a losing war. With ot good at making decisions that benefited his people, whether they be overseas or on the island of Britain. The many ideas expressed in The Prince did not stop King George from ruling according to his own rules, despite the overwhelming negative outcomes.
With the many wars fought during his reign, George used his own tactics to maintain the American colonies and fight against the splintering of his empire in the Americas. He placed guards in the Americas, which Machiavelli viewed “as useless as a colony is useful”. King George also hired mercenaries from Germany to fight in the American revolution even though in The Prince, they are described as untrustworthy. George viewed military as very important and willing to go to great lengths to make sure it was great. Furthermore, he extended the American Revolution and lost, which is seen as a neglect to the art. King George did not oversee army and there is not an easily accessible record that states that he was physically present to fight in any wars that were waged during his time in power.This display is not necessarily anti-Machiavellian, however it is evident that, despite the apparent passion for war he has, King George is not willing to risk his health to fight with his own army. Although Machiavelli states that war is an art that a prince should excel at, the British king squanders his chances by using his own strategies that strike doom in the British army particularly during in the American Revolutionary War.
One of the causes of King George’s downfall toward the end of his life was the way his personality and personal life interfered with his governing.

For one, he was neither feared nor loved throughout the entirety of his rule, rather in colonies, he hated and loathed. George’s popularity was also inconsistent because he was not not true enemy or good friend of people. The Machiavellian ways of how to be popular not evident at all which caused American colonies to break away and his subjects. In addition, the Hanover king “relied on fortune” and his mental health significantly decreased after his daughter died and losing the American colonies. Another factor in the madness of King George in his later years was that he was very clingy with his children despite their growing up and eventual leaving. He was not good at letting go of things whether it be land or children which drove him to madness. Overall, the extent of his personal troubles and quirks stopped him from governing to his full

potential.
Despite his long reign, King George had no clear intentions of being a Machiavellian ruler, as he shied away from many of of the practices mentioned in The Prince. This makes it highly doubtful if he even read this book, considering the many actions that are the complete opposite of what Machiavelli suggests. Between the questionable governing choices, stagnate military, and his overall demeanor, King George III did not fulfill the traits needed to be considered a Machiavellian ruler.