Machiavelli and Renaissance Italy by JR Hale

JR Hale’s Machiavelli And Renaissance Italy was originally part of a Teach Yourself History series, published by Penguin Books in the 1960s. A 21st century reader will be impressed first and foremost by the size of the book, as it appears to be short, and by the its laudable goal of opening specialized knowledge to a wider audience. The same reader, however, will also be surprised, because it is not a small sketch to expand an icon to a mere sketch. On the contrary, this text treats his subject admirably and in some detail. In the end, it is quite a long read due to the intensity of the book and the level of detail presented. The picture he paints of his subject, however, will seem doubly surprising to anyone who might associate Niccolò Machiavelli only with The Prince.

JRHale’s book is a biography first and a history second. In the end, we have a completely complete portrait of Machiavelli, who turns out to be quite a complex conservative, somewhat vulnerable, but also sure of himself. He is best known for a treatise on ruthless politics, which presents a recipe that many others have dissected and some have tried to follow, believing it provides a recipe for success. Machiavelli the politician, however, was only partially successful in pursuing his own career, spending much of his life on the fringes of the highest and most powerful, often frantically trying to force his way through any cracks that might arise. could lead him back into the power structure. The creative or scholarly side of Niccolo Machiavelli’s genius, however, seems to be largely unknown to modern audiences, but Hale’s book addresses all of Machiavelli’s achievements admirably.

Machiavelli was a historian. In fact, he was commissioned to write a history of Florence. He was also something of a linguist, a bit pedantic in the area, to tell the truth. Like all those guys, he was sometimes right. What is less obvious from our distance in time is that he was also a poet and playwright, some of his stage works being well known to contemporary audiences as they received numerous performances.

But it is the political controversy that is The Prince for which we know Niccolò Machiavelli. He wrote the work after analyzing the habits, achievements, and tactics of a certain Cesare Borgia, with whom he served during the prince’s most successful times. Now Cesare was not noted for his negotiation skills. He was undoubtedly a man of action. He was usually ready to fight, in fact, whenever the opportunity arose. To him, it seems that a quick war took up the same space in his life as his next meal. Machiavelli’s own account of a conversation with Cesare relates that: “(Lucca) was a rich city and a fine morsel for a gourmet.” Then, commenting on Cesare’s methods, Machiavelli records that a certain Messer Ramiro had been cut in two and left in the piazza at Cesena for all to see. His death “was the pleasure of the prince, showing us that he can make and unmake men according to his merits.” So Cesare ate cities as sandwiches and half people for dessert. He was moderately successful for a time, it must be said, so it is not surprising that Machiavelli incorporates his policies and practices as a prescriptive method into his own manual on statecraft.

But the methods never transferred easily. To survive, he tells us, states need money, since states are only respected if they have armies. Similarly, political power, it seems, can only increase through wealth and the ability to buy strength. And it was money that ultimately deserted Machiavelli when gainful employment as a diplomat dried up to nothing. The Medici did not trust him, even though his own role had always been that of a writer, a kind of statesman, a civil servant. And so, when the work in politics dried up, he turned his hand to history.

Not, of course, that she had never been separated from him. Machiavelli lived in a time of princes and emperors. Two of the latter invaded the Italian peninsula from the north during his lifetime, one French and the other a variety of Habsburg. Medici came and went and came back again. The popes did the same thing, but not with the same identity, since they came from different families, or even with the same goals, except the advancement of the family interests they represented. In Machiavelli’s time, popes behaved like the emperors they are, and all wars were obviously just, as long as profits were made. And just to underscore the fact that times have hardly changed, Machiavelli saw a religious fundamentalist capture the popular imagination through a puritanical message, only to be destroyed by that same popular imagination when he moved on. At the beginning of the 16th century, it seems that the austerity fueled by a guilt complex had only been temporarily hidden.

JR Hale’s book is thus a shining reminder that within every icon there is a story, and that history is populated by real people, characters who drive events and create the future. These real people, sometimes, become eternal as icons, fixed in their own time, but capable of being transferred to any other to meet the needs of those who need their support. If only those iconic figures had known that at the time, then they might have behaved differently. However, when icons are reduced to mere people again, they again become interesting, well-rounded, and engaging individuals, and this is what we discover through Hale’s book on Niccolo Machiavelli.

And if we feel that Machiavelli has nothing to say about today’s politics, let us reflect on these words of his: “For some time now I have never said what I believe, nor do I believe what I say, and if I do speak the truth, I wrap it in So many lies that it’s hard to get to him.