Machiavelli's The Prince And The Discourse Analysis

764 Words 4 Pages
An explanation that is potentially one of the more conventional validations of the relationship between Machiavelli’s The Prince and the Discourses is reading The Prince as a manual for the founder of what would eventually emerge as a republic. Once the prince has established a foundation of the state, the republic that Machiavelli advocates for in the Discourses will become achievable and desirable. The Prince was written to establish a unified state; the republic in the Discourses will maintain that stable and unified state.
Academic Leo Strauss explains that Machiavelli wrote the Discourses to promote the imitation of ancient republics. Machiavelli longed for the rebirth of ancient republicanism . The Discourses also presents a perspective on both republics and principalities. As an example, Machiavelli explains, “rarely, if ever, does it happen that
…show more content…
However, in inducing the transition to a stable republic, the ruler becomes the founding father and will be recognized and glorified as an important figure. This will continue after his death . This goal remains self-interested because of the significant political capital that the leader would receive.
Machiavelli operationalizes The Prince as a prerequisite to achieve the republic that he endorses in the Discourses. The Prince is the antidote for the restoration of order and the Discourses is the preservation of liberty. A prince can either experience a downfall and thus a republic will be born, or a prince can willingly pursue a republican route once the foundations are set. In both scenarios, the republic from the Discourses is the final means. Although, in the event that the leader experiences a downfall, it is conceivable that Machiavelli was attempting to undermine princes to an extent in The

Related Documents