|
The Prince |  | Author: Niccolo Machiavelli
Publisher: CreateSpace
Buy New: $6.95
as of 11/24/2009 01:45 CST details
New (4) Used (15) from $3.75
Seller: Amazon.com
Rating:  305 reviews
Sales Rank: 59314
Media: Paperback
Pages: 72
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.3
Dimensions (in): 8.8 x 5.8 x 0.2
ISBN: 1440428034
EAN: 9781440428036
ASIN: 1440428034
Publication Date: September 24, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
| |
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
| |
| Editorial Reviews:
Amazon.com Review
When Lorenzo de' Medici seized control of the Florentine Republic in 1512, he summarily fired the Secretary to the Second Chancery of the Signoria and set in motion a fundamental change in the way we think about politics. The person who held the aforementioned office with the tongue-twisting title was none other than Niccolò Machiavelli, who, suddenly finding himself out of a job after 14 years of patriotic service, followed the career trajectory of many modern politicians into punditry. Unable to become an on-air political analyst for a television network, he only wrote a book. But what a book The Prince is. Its essential contribution to modern political thought lies in Machiavelli's assertion of the then revolutionary idea that theological and moral imperatives have no place in the political arena. "It must be understood," Machiavelli avers, "that a prince ... cannot observe all of those virtues for which men are reputed good, because it is often necessary to act against mercy, against faith, against humanity, against frankness, against religion, in order to preserve the state." With just a little imagination, readers can discern parallels between a 16th-century principality and a 20th-century presidency. --Tim Hogan
Product Description
This is a beautifully designed, 6"x9" edition of Niccolo Machiavelli's classic, "The Prince." Translated, with an astute introduction, by the leading Machiavelli scholar W. K. Marriott. Hugely influential, "The Prince" is must-reading for all students of political philosophy and history.
Book Description
A new translation of Machiavelli's political classic argues that the work was an attack on the advice-books for princes published by his contemporaries as well as a response to the world of Florentine politics.
|
| Customer Reviews:
Showing reviews 1-5 of 305
 On Mansfield versus Wootton November 6, 2009
Mr Mugwump (Toronto, ON)
I liked the Wootton translation (and "Introduction"), but, after comparing it with Mansfield, it seems inadequate. Leaving "virtu" as "virtue" throughout the text, as Mansfield does, seems much better than translating it according to context and then putting it in brackets, as Wootton does. Also, Mansfield uses "modes" where Wootton uses something natural sounding in English, but seeing where and how Machiavelli uses "modes" is important. Also, Wootton uses "luck," whereas "fortune" seems more elegant and accurate (and is hardly awkward in English). Throughout, Mansfield's word choice seems more evocative and accurate than Wootton's. But Mansfield's is often more awkward and difficult; I assume since he follows Machiavelli's syntax and joyful pithiness. Also, his word choice is often different than any I have read. The famous line which is usually translated as, "By such means one can acquire power but not glory" (Wootton) is "these modes can enable one to acquire empire, but not glory" (Mansfield). Mansfield's helpful glossary reveals that the word in question is "imperio." Again, Mansfield seems more accurate, though he himself later translates "imperio" as "power." Still, I remain a little suspicious that when a word could go either way (eg "crime" or "wickedness") Mansfield chooses the word that better fits the Straussian interpretation (Wootton translates scelleratezza as "wicked" (more normative) and Mansfield as "crime" (less normative)). Wootton's is probably better for undergrads since it is more clear, but it seems insufficient for serious study of Machiavelli. For now, I am reading them together, since sometimes I have to turn to Wootton to get the meaning of a sentence before it becomes apparent in Mansfield's / Machiavelli's more pithy form.
The same goes for their Discourses. Who wants "conflicts" when you can have "tumults"? But to give one example of Wootton' clarity versus Mansfield's accuracy:
"There is one thing that all those who discuss political life emphasize, and that is evident from the history of every state: It is essential that anyone setting up a republic and establishing a constitution for it should assume that all men are wicked and will always give vent to their evil impulses whenever they have a chance to do so" (Wootton 3.92).
"As all those demonstrate who reason on a civil way of life, and as every history is full of examples, it is necessary to whoever disposes a republic and orders laws in it to presuppose that all men are bad, and that they always have to use the malignity of their spirit whenever they have a free opportunity for it" (Mansfield 3.15).
Only One End, but Many Means August 6, 2009
Matthew Dodd (Virginia, USA)
After many years of hearing and reading about Machiavelli and this timeless classic, I decided to read it for myself. Not only did I instantly appreciate the book's `classic' status, my experience was enhanced by choosing this "enriched classic" version. Being my first "enriched classic," I was very pleasantly surprised with the notes and commentary in the introduction and at the end of the book. They prepared me well for the book, and helped me put Machiavelli's words into meaningful contexts.
The book was organized into twenty-six small chapters, each dealing with a specific situation that a ruler is likely to face: dealing with soldiers and mercenaries; how the strength of regimes are measured; how to govern different types of lands and lands acquired by different means (e.g. lands that are used to governing themselves, lands acquired by force, lands acquired by heredity, lands acquired by the aid of others, lands acquired by treachery, ecclesiastical lands, etc.). Machiavelli provided many historical examples to illustrate his points, and show what happens when rulers did not practice his points. I understand how Machiavelli has earned his "the ends justify the means" reputation - his observations and discussions about rulers maintaining power and control are interesting, logical, and singularly focused.
I believe this book is written in such a way that readers will draw their own conclusions about the author's intentions, and the book's main points or themes. For me, the book was more than just a historical analysis of the rulers and regimes of Machiavelli's time, it was his primer for rulers of all times.
The book's main principle was that rulers are measured by how long they rule, and everything they do should be calculated to strengthening their power and control. While he acknowledged that fate plays a large role in the success of rulers, Machiavelli repeatedly stressed that rulers must be able to adapt their methods to fit the realities of the situations they face. He argued that rulers should willingly be a blend of good and evil depending on when each is best for them. Fate changes, and Machiavelli believed it is best to be bold and aggressive than to be passive - be proactive, not reactive; make things happen vice waiting for things to happen.
I now understand why this book has survived through the centuries, and why so many government, corporate, and civilian leaders have read it and talked so much about it - it is one heck of a thought-provoking book that demands great judgment from its readers. If you want to read this classic book, I strongly recommend you exercise your great judgment right from the start by choosing this "enriched classic" version.
 Pretty damn sad this stuff is being applauded July 28, 2009
Eric
2 out of 15 found this review helpful
It comes as no surprise that those who are looking for power find an excuse to misuse it as a huge relief. After all, if others aren't playing the game, it is so much easier to win, right?
Well, things are changing. MOST Americans are using these tactics today. It's a dog-eat-dog world out there. Everybody is screwing each other over with a smile on their face and their fingers crossed behind their backs.
So while it is fun to envision a glorious future after these techniques are mastered, I for one have first-hand experience of having them used AGAINST me without any knowledge whatsoever of them happening. In only a small amount of time, because of a small number of ruthless people practicing Machiavellian tactics, I lost nearly everything. Several years of my life spent for naught. My reputation tarnished, my fortune and relationships gone.
So you say, I must have been naive, right? You say, that is the purpose of these books, right? These books are good not only for manipulating but also for avoiding being manipulated. On the contrary, if it can happen to me, it can happen to anybody. I'd already read 'The Prince' and '48 Laws of Power,' had them on my bookshelf, referenced them every day and was aware of what others tried on a daily basis. Yet, there are some attacks for which you cannot prepare a defense because you just cannot see them coming.
I find it utterly disgusting to see so many Americans applauding this garbage. Instead of working toward a society in which cruelty is minimized, we are working toward our own destruction.
It is easy for people to applaud amorality (the easy way) until it happens to them. The trend in society right now is to praise this garbage as the answer to all of life's problems, but once its effects become even more pronounced in our society many years from now, I know we will see a turn in the other direction. A corrupted society cannot stand. I cannot wait for that day.
Another Look - Machiavelli Versus Beccaria June 13, 2009
Glenda A Bixler (Pennsylvania)
The Prince by Machiavelli Versus An Essay on Crimes and Punishments by Cesare Beccaria
Two men, living hundreds of years apart, in many ways, wrote with parallel opinions and conclusions. Most well known is Machiavelli's The Prince; however, in many ways, the greater impact came from lesser known Cesare Beccaria, with An Essay on Crimes and Punishments--the latter being the basis upon which many of our governments and laws have been established.
Both men emphasized that the virtue of man should be the basis of our interpersonal actions. Yet they also conceded that man's seemingly instinctual appetite for power prevents that base virtue from ruling our decisions. Given the continued use of military might of one country against another, it is abundantly clear that what Machiavelli wrote in the 15th century and Beccaria wrote in the 18th continues to hold true today.
The Prince was written based upon Machiavelli's observations and analysis of what was happening in his country. His books resulted in his recognition as the founder of political science inasmuch as he was the first to analyze various forms of government.
Many of us may also observe, perhaps evaluate and analyze, and come to the conclusion that somebody has to do something. Machiavelli, in writing The Prince did just that. He wrote and sent his treatise directly to Lorenzo De Medici, Duke of Urbino...as a token of his service. Throughout The Prince Machiavelli constantly refers to the virtues needed to be an effective leader, an effective prince. At the same time, he looks at what actually happened, using events of those days, and effectively explained what was done right or wrong. "So it is that to know the nature of a people, one needs to be a Prince; to know the nature of a Prince, one needs to be of the people." (back cover) Proceeding on, he explained "The main fundamentals that a state...has to have are good laws and a strong army. Good laws do not come without strong security; where the army is strong, one needs good laws." The Prince, p. 76.
One might say that it is on this point that Beccaria started. "In every human society, there is an effort continually tending to confer on one part the height of power and happiness and to reduce the other to the extreme of weakness and misery. The intent of good laws is to oppose this effort and to diffuse their influence universally and equally." (Introduction)
Let's further compare some of the specifics that these two great political scientists wrote, although it should always be remembered that Machiavelli wrote for a specific purpose at a specific time. Beccaria, on the other hand, had a broader history to evaluate and some semblance of lawmaking had already begun.
· There are two ways to fight: one with laws, the other with force. The first is rightly man's way; the second, the way of beasts. --Machiavelli
· Every act of authority of one man over another, for which there is no absolute necessity, is tyrannical. --Beccaria
· The interest of the populace is more honest than that of prominent citizens who want to command and oppress, while the populace only wants to be free of oppression. --Machiavelli
· Laws ought to be conventions among men in a state of freedom and have one end in view: the greatest happiness of the greatest number. --Beccaria
· Cruelty well used (if one can ever say cruelty is good) is when it is practiced suddenly and decisively, but not prolonged. --Machiavelli
· Punishment of a nobleman should not differ from that of the lowest member of society. --Beccaria
· When a Prince rules as a man of valor, he avoids disaster, remains prepared, and serves the universal common good; he can count on the populace, will never be deceived, and will have built on a solid good. --Machiavelli
· Judges and/or juries have the responsibility to ascertain, first and foremost, guilt or innocence; if guilty, then the judges and/or juries should take into consideration the extenuating circumstances to decrease or increase the penalties. --Beccaria
Frankly, I have often asked myself, in viewing today's world, what has happened to that which represented "the greatest happiness of the greatest number." More specifically, is it logical for a nation, a country, or even a smaller state to rule or attempt to pass laws to meet the interests of all that they serve? Can the U.S. for instance continue to respond positively to every single "special interest" group that becomes vocal and powerful? I believe both Machiavelli and Beccaria spoke well to my questions, though stated centuries ago!
Are you involved in today's world? Are you an active participant or watcher of politics? Then reading the treatises of two of the greatest historians of political science certainly must be part of your personal library. Read both The Prince by Machiavelli and An Essay On Crimes and Punishments by Cesare Beccaria before you next vote or participate politically!
G. A. Bixler
Note: This comparative analysis was suggested by Adolph Caso, publisher.
good read for soldiers May 30, 2009
dyl (toronto, canada)
from private to general, really, I suggest at least reading it once. In our professions, they equipment may be different, but the principles-the same.
be cruel, hard and dont hesitate.
Showing reviews 1-5 of 305
|
|
|
|
Return to Math.com | |
