Machiavelli's Influence On Thomas Hobbes

Niccolo Machiavelli, Also Known as Thomas Hobbes There have been many leaders throughout time that have shaped history in many ways. These leaders influence and rule over their land and people brings many to wonder if there was an absolute way to rule. The leader's role was such a necessity that if the leader was poor then the nation would fall. This brought many scholars, philosophers, and even kings to form ideas as to what the right way to rule is. This brought about Niccolo Machiavelli who created a book called The Prince. While this is a great tool for understanding the role of a nobleman it was not until Thomas Hobbes created the Leviathan was there a full understanding of this duty. This is because Hobbes took Machiavelli’s writings …show more content…
The idea of the power sovereign should have and how they obtain this power is a large part of Machiavelli’s philosophy. Machiavelli justifies the sovereign’s search for power by stating, “The desire to acquire possessions is a very natural and ordinary thing, and when those men do it who can do so successfully, they are always praised and not blamed…” (Page 12). Machiavelli continues by explaining how the stronger the ruler, the more land he may be able to conquer and how he has every right to take more land from weak rulers. However the ability to keep this power comes from the relationship between the sovereign and their people. Hobbes understands this completely and adapts this thought process for his times. Hobbes states that the power of the sovereign stems, “From this Institution of a Common-wealth are derived all the Rights, and Facultyes of him, or them, on whom the Soveraigne Power is conferred by the consent of the People assembled” (pg 229). What Hobbes has done is derived the basics of how Machiavelli sees power and gave an understanding to everyone that the power comes from the people. While Machiavelli is passionate about how important the relationship between a prince and his people is, Hobbes bring this relationship to terms …show more content…
This power is the sole reason that the prince has command, but this power always comes at a cost for both parties. This is seen when Machiavelli talks about life without a prince, “This expectation induceees the to take up arms against him; but they only deceive themselves, and they learn from experience that they have made matters worse” (pg 8). Machiavelli makes a strong case regarding how much the people need their leader. The people while having every right to overthrow a weak leader must understand that living without a prince will fall into chaos and always revert to being ruled by another. Hobbes takes this one step further by creating a social contract. This contract states, “I authorise and give up my Right of Governing my selfe, to this MAn, or to this Assembly of men, on this condition, that thou give up thy Right to him, and Authorise all his Actions in like manner” (Hobbes, 227). What Hobbes does here is create a code that holds all of those who govern people responsible for the protection of their people. If this body fails to uphold their duty then the people have every right to retaliate against their ruler. This is Machiavelli’s code with a more formal title attached to it. It in fact improves upon Machiavelli's original idea because it not only give a clear rule that the sovereign must uphold and explains what is given up in order for this contract to be valid. This clearly