The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli, Book Review Example

Machiavelli’s The Prince occupies an important place within political philosophy.  It is one of the first works in modern philosophy to display the use of pragmatic ends.  The book is remembered for the actions which are justified by the ends promoted by Machiavelli.

Purpose of the Book

The purpose of the book is to propose methods for ruling.  The book’s title refers to the prince who is either aspiring or currently seated at the throne, whereby these methods are to come into use.  The methods are more precisely aimed at maintaining the throne in respect to those who are ruled and actions that are to be followed.

The book contains a dedication which sets forth the purpose of the book.  It is clear from the beginning to propose these straightforward views on the subject of ruling.  The theme is centered on various actions and roles assumed by the prince to rule the kingdom.

Organization of the Material

The material is organized into a significant number of relatively short chapters, twenty-six in all.  It is presented in a number of different kinds of material.  For instance, Machiavelli writes upon large issues of rule and other topics, such as current issues in politics.  There seems to be no systematic presentation of the material in the book.

The treatment of the concepts does not seem to take on any clear-defined set of topics.  If anything, it seems to approach the subjects it deals with in terms of casual relationship to one another, such as in the examples in the previous paragraph.  Machiavelli seems to casually approach relevant subjects according to the prince’s rule.

Technical Aspects of the Book

The sources and technical aspects do not appear in the book.  Relative to tables, graphs, footnotes, and maps, there are no such elements in the book.  Machiavelli does not make use of such secondary elements like these.

Machiavelli’s work is largely original.  There seems to be no primary or secondary sources used in the book.  Also, the book seems to be of original thoughts, at least as much that can be made in regards to political philosophy.  The work represents a new and original work in the field of political philosophy.

The Author

Machiavelli holds an interesting place in philosophy.  While he does not consider himself a philosopher, and rejects philosophical inquiry, he is recognized as a valued contributor to political theory, history, historiography, diplomacy, warfare, and Italian literature.  Prior to The Prince, Machiavelli had written a number of works, for instance in poems found dated before the work in question.

Machiavelli is prejudiced towards the role of the prince.  As a work for princes, it is from this aspect in which Machiavelli builds.  As the work is known for advocating any means to accomplish the rule of the prince, the prejudices fall on those outside of the prince.  It would be accurate to say the means are “vicious,” as “Machiavellian” has become a negative term in society from this work.

Significance

The book displays its purpose throughout the text.  If offers a number of ways to respond to various elements within an empire.  Although of course the means are not heralded, this is not considered from the point of view of Machiavelli.

The book is significant in political theory and in philosophy in general.  It is known as a work in which teleological concepts are not the purpose, but rather in the pragmatic ends.  Alternatively, its analysis as a political satire adds to the value of the book.

Comments

Machiavelli’s The Prince can be seen instrumentally within the context of modern philosophy.  Personally I feel this book is extremely significant, as teleological concepts and those along the lines of utilitarian concepts are abandoned in the overall significance of the empire and from the point of view of the prince.  Rather overtly performed in this way from Machiavelli, or intended from the point of view as satirical, these elements add to the lasting value of this work over the centuries.

It is interesting to see this book in context with others in political philosophy.  This work is remembered as one of the more direct treatments of political theories in philosophy than others.  Its influence can be seen, as expressed by such figures as Napoleon, Mussolini, and Stalin.

Personally while the text is not necessarily applicable, it can be appreciated in the “great books” line within history.  It represents one of the major contributions to modern philosophy and political theory, which is significant in itself.  If I may make an analogy, it is kind of like reading Sun Tzu’s Art of War: while the concepts may be out of reach of most of us, it is an interesting read in regards to the value of the work in history.