Machiavelli’s Prince and Castiglione’s Courtier, Essay Example

Introduction

In Part I we will compare and contrast the two books, The Prince by Machiavelli (1532) and The Book of the Courtier by Castiglione (1528), taking into account such factors as the similarities and differences between the two authors, the themes, the historical context of each, their geographical locale, their separate world views. In Part II we will take a look at how the Courtier of today might look, including the qualities, characteristics, traits, talents, etc., that would make up the well-rounded man and woman of the twenty-first century.

Part I: Compare and Contrast The Prince and The Book of the Courtier

Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli (1469-1527) was the son of a doctor of law, and a true Renaissance man — in all senses of the phrase: “[an] essayist, dramatist, historian, sketch writer, biographer, dialogist, writer of novellas, and poet” (brandeis.edu). He was taught grammar, rhetoric and Latin — though not Greek — and wrote in Italian. In 1498 he was appointed to the Chancery of the Second Republic in Florence, “a sensitive government agency dealing chiefly with warfare and foreign affairs” (brandeis.edu).

Over the next fourteen years, as he worked as a diplomat, chancellor and secretary to the Republic, he came to know Cesare Borgia, who was his model for The Prince, his most famous work, which has earned him the modern title of Father of Political Science. During these tumultuous years, he saw the papacy warring with the Italian city-states, other European countries, the Holy Roman Empire and even Switzerland, as each struggled to gain control over the others, and various governments rose and fell. When the Spanish invaded Italy, the Medici took advantage of the chaos to seize power. Because of Machiavelli’s close ties to the Republic, he was jailed, tortured and banished to his country residence in Percussina. Although he wrote The Prince during his exile (1513-1517), it was not published until after his death (1532)  (brandeis.edu).

A contemporary of Machiavelli, the nobly-born Baldassare Castiglione (1478-1529), Count of Casatico (near Mantua in Lombardy), was similarly an Italian courtier, diplomat, soldier and a prominent Renaissance author. However, he was allied with the ducal Gonzaga court of Urbino, a cultural center that was then one of the most refined and elegant of the Italian courts, in which art and literature played a more important role in his life than they did in the life of Machiavelli in Republican Florence (britannica.com).

In 1528 The Book of the Courtier was published. It features a series of fictional philosophical conversations/debates — presided over by the Duchess Elisabetta Gonzaga and her sister-in-law, Pia — that took place over the span of four days in 1507. In the Middle Ages, the perfect gentleman was a knight who was a man of arms, distinguishing himself in chivalry and warfare. Castiglione’s book challenged that ideal by describing the perfect Courtier as a classically educated man, based on the ideals postulated by Cicero in De Officiis, (The Duties of a Gentleman), (nndb.com).

In short, these two men came from very different backgrounds and lived very different lives (in spite of both having lived during the Renaissance) and as a result, their ideal men are of very different characters.

Themes of the Two Books

Machiavelli was famously impressed by Cesare Borgia and modeled his Prince upon him, even though he was writing for the ruling Medicis. His Prince might be considered a bit of a cynic today, as “It is essential . . . for a Prince who would maintain his position, to have learned how to be other than good, and to use or not to use his goodness as necessity requires” (Fiero 39).  Nevertheless, “he must be discreet enough to know how to avoid the reproach of those vices that would deprive him of his government” and to avoid inspiring hatred in others (Fiero 39).

Admittedly, a Prince must look at the big picture, as he is working for the good of his state and therefore must stay in power. His most famous statement (Fiero 39), “it is far safer to be feared than loved,” clearly marks the distinction between his Prince and Castiglione’s Courtier. The Courtier, after all, is an individual and Castiglione’s Count Ludovico de Canossa defines him in terms of someone who must please others, as well as himself: “[he must] entertain himself agreeably with everyone, let him do whatever others do, yet never departing from praiseworthy deeds and governing himself with that good judgment which will keep him from all folly . . .” (Fiero 32).

Both Machiavelli and Castiglione agree that the ideal man should be skilled in war: “A Prince, therefore, should have no care or thought but for war” (Fiero 39). However — perhaps because Castiglione’s discourse was monitored by two distinguished noblewomen (who were also lamenting the successful invasion of Italy by the French) — the subject of war does not play a large part in the make-up of the perfect Courtier. Count Ludovico says only that: “‘I am of opinion that the principal and true profession of the Courtier ought to be that of arms’” (Fiero 40); however he defines this quality at great length in terms of esthetics and manly graces rather than in terms of warfare.

Machiavelli saw humanity in general as being governed by self-interest, and The Prince “appeared to Renaissance thinkers . . . as expedient solutions based on a realistic analysis of contemporary political conditions” (Fiero 40). The all-too-human Prince is “being often forced, in order to preserve his Princedom, to act in opposition to good faith, charity, humanity, and religion. He must therefore keep his mind to shift as the winds and tides of Fortune turn . . . [as] the means will always be judged honorable and be approved by everyone. For the vulgar are always taken by appearances and by results . . .” (Fiero 40).  He also stated: “But men are so simple and governed so absolutely by their present needs, that he who wishes to deceive will never fail in in finding willing dupes . . .” (Fiero 40). In short, he trusted absolutely nobody and had little respect for his fellow man of any class, finding them to be, on the whole, greedy, self-centered and faithless.

Regarding the papacy, (Fiero 40) asserts: “Machiavelli located the heroic aspects of virtú: imagination, resilience, ingenuity, and canny intelligence. He provided ample evidence to justify his denunciation of the secular ruler as the divinely appointed model of moral rectitude — a medieval conception staunchly defended by Castiglione.” Perhaps because Machiavelli saw so much of the papal wars from a military perspective, and admired the political acumen of Cesare Borgia, he came to value expedience over virtue. Castiglione, on the other hand, as ambassador to Pope Leo X, befriended many artists and writers in Rome (nndb.com) and managed to maintain his respect for both the papacy and the pope who represented it.

Part II: The Twenty-First Century’s “Well-rounded” Man and Woman

In this day and age, the qualities of the well-rounded male and female ideals would probably be identical. While many CEOs and heads of government might agree with Machiavelli that they should embody both “the lion and the fox” (Fiero 40), most people would find the amoral expediency of his Prince to be distasteful. On the contrary, the modern ideal may have been partially contained in such examples as the Olympic athlete, the ideal of physical grace and discipline; or the astronaut, bravely pioneering new frontiers. Over the decades, these paragons have had high expectations placed upon them regarding their moral fiber. For example, both might be expected to live up to certain religious precepts, such as The Ten Commandments; or to the Boy Scout Law: “. . . trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent” (scouting.org). Certainly, none of the Boy Scout values would have been terribly important to Machiavelli’s Prince!

In this age of individualism (at least in the U.S.), we feel closer to the ideals of Castiglione than to those of Machiavelli. In addition, I would add the need for a good education: in the liberal arts, humanities, science, math and (maybe) psychology. Our educational institutions have largely lost their compass, and in an age where we are drowning in information, few people even know the history (recent or otherwise) of their own country, never mind their literary, artistic and musical heritage.

I would, therefore, suggest that the ideal man or woman of today should be well educated (as defined above); adhere to the basic ethical standards of our culture; be physically fit and nutritionally balanced in diet; and be aware of — and willing to develop — their personal talents to the best of their ability to serve the greater community. Oddly, today’s young adults seem ill-prepared to follow this rather simple recipe. If the reader were to doubt me, they need only watch an episode of Jeopardy, in which the questions happen to center around classical music, jazz, fine art or American or English/European literature: the contestants almost inevitably fail in these categories (although they can usually tell you the name of the latest popular song or which movie star was recently divorced).

Unlike Castiglione, I include women when I am listing the qualities of the ideal person of our century. Today, for example, we welcome women to the ranks of female drummers and horn players, which Castiglione’s Courtier would deplore (“how unlovely it would be to see a woman play drums, fifes or trumpets, or other like instruments . . .” Fiero 33). That is because we celebrate (or at least pay lip service to) the right of any individual to develop their innate talents. Yet how many famous women drummers or trumpeters can any of us name, even if we know the names of many of the (male) jazz greats? And how many of us devote our lives to “follow our bliss,” as the late Joseph Campbell had it? I would maintain that that dictum — rather than following the right “career choice” — should rule our lives, if we were to aim to become the ideal man or woman of the twenty-first century.

“Strength, lightness, suppleness” (Fiero 31) are surely fitness goals we all should strive for to maintain optimum health; and no one would be the worse off for being able to — with some degree of competence — play a musical instrument, dance, swim or play tennis. Other values of Castiglione which should still be prized today include not pretending to know more than one does; to speak and write well; to enunciate and avoid slang; to “laugh, jest, banter, frolic and dance, yet . . . always appear genial and discreet” (Fiero 32).  To these could perhaps be added a nodding acquaintance with the skills of cooking, sewing, painting, carpentry and some of the other more Victorian accomplishments that we are in danger of losing altogether in this century.

Yet perhaps I am asking too much. It may be best to boil it down to this: the ideal man or woman today should have an inquiring mind and not be afraid to question whatever they see or hear. This will lead them to find answers and, in so doing, to develop their innate talents and even (one could hope!) to “follow their bliss” for the greater good of our global community.

Works Cited

Britannica.com. Baldassare Castiglione. 2014. Web. 26 March 2014.

Fiero, Gloria. The Humanistic Tradition, Book 3. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2010. Print.

Nndb.com. People. 2014. Web. 26 March 2014.

Oxfordbibliographies.com. Castiglione Biography. 2014. Web. 26 March 2014.

People.brandeis.edu. Machiavelli Personal Information. 2014. Web. 25 March 2014.

Scouting.org. 2014. Web. 26 March 2014.