Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527) is one of those rare authors whose last name has become an adjective because of this work, published in 1532 and banned in 1557 when the Catholic Inquisition made its first Index of Forbidden Books. This was a gift book.

The 9-pp biographical Preface by John S. Bowman is quite valuable in placing Machiavelli in the context of his era in Italy. The hardback I was given was translated by N.H. Thomson. This “work of the Devil,” as the Catholic Church called it, is described on the front flap: “You hold in your hands one of the most influential books ever written: a detailed guide to acquiring, expanding, and retaining political power, written by a man whose name has become synonymous with unscrupulousness, deviousness, and cruelty. Niccolo Machiavelli was born into a noble Florentine family in 1469 and entered public service in 1494, after the fall of the Medici family; by 1498 he had attained the office of Second Chancellor of the Republic of Florence. When the Medici family returned and overthrew the republic in 1512, Machiavelli was driven out of office, whereupon he retired to his country estate and turned to writing.

“A true man of the Italian Renaissance, he wrote poetry, music, plays, and novels, and translated a number of classical works. But it is for his book on political philosophy, The Prince, that he is best known. He wrote the book quickly in 1513 and dedicated it to the ruling Medici, apparently seeking to regain his status in the Florentine government, as many of his colleagues had done.

“His political philosophy evolved not only from his vast diplomatic experience in Italy, France, and Germany during his government service but also from his comprehensive study of ancient Roman history. In The Prince he presents examples of successful and unsuccessful rulers from the historical record.

“Though the book is generally regarded as a manual for tyrants, Machiavelli’s philosophy is better understood within the context of his era. He lived his entire life in Florence at a time of great political upheaval, both in Florence and throughout Italy. As a result, even though he studied and admired the republican form of government, political stability was the utmost goal to him, and ends justified means in achieving that aim. Private morality was inconsequential; being a good prince, not a good person, was what counted.”

To Machiavelli, being a good prince meant being able to retain your power over your dominion. To do so he says the prince must know whether the strength in his domain belongs to the nobility or to the common people. Once you know which one is stronger, eliminate the leaders in that group. The most effective process of elimination is the most gruesome, thus will be the most effective way to intimidate any group that thinks of overtaking your rule. (The Medici of Florence eliminated many an enemy in very gruesome ways.) Absolute control by a prince is best achieved if everyone is very afraid of the prince. An alternative plan is for the common folk to greatly admire the prince because he is a bit more generous to the people than was the previous prince. This works best for a prince who inherits his role. He gives much detailed advice for any prince who wishes to expand his turf by conquest of a neighboring prince, such as avoiding reliance on a mercenary army that could easily turn on the prince by a better offer from the opposition, so it is best to form your army from loyal nobility and loyal common folk. He justifies all his advice to princes by describing why certain princes succeeded or failed in their efforts to expand their power.

Without using the simple words “ends justify means” no matter how cruel the means used, Machiavelli calmly describes how to win and stay on top, using charm if it works or brutality if it works better. Morality never enters consideration of any tactical or strategic plans. He was wise to have open publication of this book only after his death since it would have certainly led to the Church calling him a heretic and having him killed. For a Church soon to produce the horrible, unchristian era of the Inquisition, his death by such a Church would have been most unpleasant, to put it mildly.

The calm, even scholarly, manner in which Machiavelli writes was enough to give me the shivers when I contemplated the horror, pain, and suffering his advice would lead to. I had been well aware, as have most educated people, of Machiavellian ideas, so I did not learn anything new by reading The Prince. I don’t recommend this book to anyone, except to those who may not have heard of him.